User talk:Firefangledfeathers/Archive 7

Question re:AE Word Limit

I thought the word limit applied only to requests - if it also replies to comments to, where is that expressed? Should it be added to the "statement by" line (limit 500 words)? LegalSmeagolian (talk) 14:38, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi LS. Right underneath the Discussion concerning Salmoonlight|Discussion concerning Salmoonlight heading it says

Statements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator. Administrators may remove or shorten noncompliant statements. Disruptive contributions may result in blocks.

Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:41, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks I'll go trim! LegalSmeagolian (talk) 14:43, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Also, while I have you online, to go off of Sameboats question at AE - while violations of WP:NPOV and WP:OR are not always vandalism, they can be if they are done maliciously and not as good faith efforts to improve Wikipedia, is that right? LegalSmeagolian (talk) 15:24, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, they can be. Some of the NPOV/OR-style vandalism can live in a grey area. Since the requirement for a 1RR exception is "obvious vandalism", it would be better to steer clear of the grey areas and handle such edits in a way other than multiple reverts (post at a content noticeboard, post at a conduct noticeboard, etc.). Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:31, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Question from Cameron.B27 (15:58, 7 March 2024)

How do I add an image that i have on my photos to a page? --Cameron.B27 (talk) 15:58, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Cameron.B27. If you have a photo that you took yourself, and if the contents of the photo do not infringe on anyone else's copyright, you should upload it at Commons:Special:UploadWizard. You can then insert it into an article here following the guidance at Help:Pictures. Let me know if you have any questions about the specifics of this process. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:13, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Question

Hello Firefangledfeathers. I know you advised me not to make an AE thread for awhile (and this probably doesn't need the entire process anyway), so what would be the best thing to do about an warring account that violated the WP:GA/AA restriction[1] after being notified about it?[2] KhndzorUtogh (talk) 22:19, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I'll be able to look into that in a few hours and I'll get back to you. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I gave them a final warning, and reverted their prohibited edit. Ping me if you see them breach the restriction again. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:32, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

February 2024 WikiProject Unreferenced articles backlog drive – award

		Citation Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to Firefangledfeathers for collecting 25 points during the WikiProject Unreferenced articles's FEB24 backlog drive. Your contributions played a crucial role in sourcing 14,300 unsourced articles during the drive. Thank you so much for participating and helping to reduce the backlog! – – DreamRimmer (talk) 18:25, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for coordinating! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:58, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Question from Dangels1234 on User:Dangels1234 (05:47, 9 March 2024)

Hello How do your edit --Dangels1234 (talk) 05:47, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Dangels1234, and welcome to Wikipedia. You may want to start off with some of the newcomer tasks, which give you some guidance on how to edit. I've also put a welcome message on your user talk page with some helpful links you may want to read, including Help:Introduction. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 21:39, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Question from Starixxgamerrix (21:11, 10 March 2024)

Hi, firefangledfeathers, I just have a question, how do you do tables on your Wikipedia user page because I want to organize my templates that I used for my user page and I used userboxes but It seems that a lot of them don't work except for one that did work. So I wanted to take a different approach by adding tables but I don't know how, so can you help? Thanks! --Starixxgamerrix (talk) 21:11, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Starixxgamerrix! The place to look for guidance on tables is Help:Table. It's a big subject, and I can help if I know more about what you're trying to accomplish. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:08, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Ok I go do that, Thank you! :) Starixxgamerrix (talk) 22:09, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Question from Johnstantine-hellblazering (16:41, 14 March 2024)

Hi I am new to this, I hate seeing typos in names, and wrong info.so I made an account, How do you change pictures? I hate when people use bad pictures when there's obviously a better one that they could use. --Johnstantine-hellblazering (talk) 16:41, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Johnstantine-hellblazering, and welcome to Wikipedia! I like your username. We have a lot of typos that need fixing, so I'm glad to have you joining us. The hardest thing when it comes to images is licensing. I'm oversimplifying, but we can basically only use images that are:

1. Freely released under a license that is compatible with the project (this is a link to a policy at Commons, the main place we store such images)
2. In the public domain
3. Compatible with our non-free content criteria

Our image use policy goes into more specifics, and I'd be happy answer any follow-up questions. If you find a usable image that is better than what's currently in an article, the guidance for how to add it to the article is at Help:Pictures. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:59, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Re-opening RfC

FFF, is it acceptable to reopen the Murray RfC? I replied to your comment in the thread. I will take your advice regarding pings. As I said on the talk page, when I first made the change I noted the change in the RfC (see the comment location [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Douglas_Murray_(author)&diff=prev&oldid=1212566975#Request_for_Comment.) I've seen that done in the past when people try to clarify a RfC or add options. Of course they may have also pinged the editor on a user talk page. Thanks Springee (talk) 01:43, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

I know you commented, and I didn't see a lack of a ping as some great sin, just a missed chance at avoiding some misunderstanding. TBH, I very nearly re-opened it myself, but this isn't a hyper-pressing issue. If FZ won't do it, I'll probably post at AN and see if an uninvolved admin will do the honors. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:46, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Question from DeeTsameret (08:26, 15 March 2024)

Hi! Are you allowed to put in links from other languages? I am editing Rehovot, and most of the source material is in Hebrew --DeeTsameret (talk) 08:26, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi DeeTsameret! Hebrew sources are welcome here. Per Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English sources, we prefer English sources when they're available and equally reliable. But there are definitely times when the best available source is not in English, and we strongly prefer to cite the best sources. Please be responsive to requests for translation, and if the content is controversial, you may want to proactively include a quote in the citation template.

There's a chance you're asking about linking to Wikipedia articles from other language projects. Those are also allowed, when there is no corresponding article on the English Wikipedia. MOS:IWL has info on how to do so. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 11:55, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for your complete answer. The Hebrew source is from the Rehovot archive, so is unfortunately not available in English, but can translate anything relevant if requested. DeeTsameret (talk) 18:42, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

¡Una barnstar para ti!

	La insignia de Administrador
	Your contributions help a lot 12Reaven12 (talk) 09:47, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

¡Gracias! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 11:58, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Question from DLG57 (23:46, 17 March 2024)

Hi Mentor! I made a change in Wiki (Mike Rinder) and changed from "co-founded" to "joined". This has been an ongoing issue since Nov 2023 and multiple people have tried to correct it. How do I make a citation (even though others have already provided)? I can provide screen shots from the foundations website, but not sure how to provide it to Wiki for confirmation.

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

DG --DLG57 (talk) 23:46, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi DLG57. It looks like you already found your way to Talk:Mike Rinder and are discussing the change with another editor. I hope you two are able to reach consensus on the best way forward. If you try for a while and the discussion is deadlocked, you should consider WP:Dispute resolution, such as seeking out a third opinion. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:28, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Question from DeeTsameret (16:25, 20 March 2024)

Hi, I am still working on "Rehovot". In the first paragraph, it says: Rehovot (Hebrew: רְחוֹבוֹת Reḥōvōt [ʁeχoˈvot] / [ʁeˈχovot]) is a city in the Central District of Israel, about 20 kilometers (12 miles) south of Tel Aviv. In 2021 it had a population of 147,878.[1] But there is updated information for 2022, as appears in the table on the right. How can this be updated in the opening text? It won't allow me to make the changes. --DeeTsameret (talk) 16:25, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi DeeTsameret. It's hard to help without knowing more about what's stopping you from making your desired changes. Is it that there's no "Edit source" button by the lead section. If so, there's advice here about what to do. If you're coming across some other warning/message/popup when you try to edit, could you paste it here? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:29, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Template:Israel populations - I am being sent to this template when I want to change the date to 2022.

When I click on the link to where they get the information from - https://www.cbs.gov.il/en/settlements/Pages/default.aspx?mode=Yeshuv I get the 2022 information, but I cannot update the first paragraph from 2021-2022, even though the table on the same entry is updated DeeTsameret (talk) 16:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying, DeeTsameret. I started a discussion at the relevant template talk page and pinged the editor who has been maintaining it. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:40, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! DeeTsameret (talk) 16:49, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Banning procedures

It is pretty clear in normal word to list the reasons for ban isn' t it? There were some complaints about me and it was kind of arbitration so i should know what finally was a reason for ban? it is very mysterious procedure. instead of giving clear evidence of wrongdoing it is all based that it breaches policy x or y. When i look in such policy it starts clear that the one who complains oneself breaches same policy . If you ban you must list exact reasons for ban.( in normal world of course). My students are very interested in case. Currently it 41-0 against English Wikipedia but maybe your explanation will help. I also hope that this text will be not a reason for ban. i see that it is a sport on this Wikipedia to invite someone to discuss and afterwards quickly ban for doing so. Jarek19800 (talk) 23:09, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Non-administrator comment -- @Jarek19800: I saw this and wanted to do a quick message related to your question, which might answer some of your questions and Firefangledfeathers can answer the rest. So you were not truly "banned". You are still able to edit Wikipedia. What you received is called a topic ban. In this case, a topic ban from editing within the realm of Eastern Europe. The topic ban is "broadly constructed", which means the "ban" affects non-direct articles. An example of how "broadly constructed" works: Say you are topic banned from US politics. Hurricane Katrina itself is not an article about US politics, however, certain parts of the article intersect with it, like the Government response section. So you could edit part of the article (things that no one would think are politics like how much rain fell in X location), but that whole section or any section pretaining to US politics is off-limits. Hopefully that examples explains how "broadly constructed" works. For you, if there is even a thought that it might related to the Eastern Europe, don't edit the article.

To explain your exact ban reasoning, you should read Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Jarek19800, specifically the section "Result concerning Jarek19800", where the administrators explain their reasoning. Firefangledfeathers can also explain it in more detail as well. Hopefully that answers a few questions you have. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 23:33, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Jarek, this was a reasonable request, and I've added a comment at your user talk page with some of the reasons for the ban. The Weather Event Writer's breakdown here is useful, and I hope you'll read their comment (and WP:TBAN) carefully. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:05, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

thank you for explanation. it is logical. still in case of Eastern Europe is fully tricky. On one side Eastern Europe is not fully defined due to Wikipedia.We only know it ends east with Ural. In western border it is different. I take as given it concerns former Soviet republics in Europe. Illustrative I can do any edit about Kazakhstan or about Poland. Unfortunately I do not"buy" your approach that" if something might concern, it concerns". it is "marxist" approach not known to civilized world.it is directly opposite to democratic legal concept of " what is not directly forbidden is allowed". I can imagine ban but it shall be more specific like"you made this edit it is breach of this rule" and so through whole list. First fact than rule not only rule. It is clear than how to appeal such ban. Jarek19800 (talk) 19:28, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Jarek19800: As a general rule to follow: Anything related to Belarus, Russia (and Soviet Union), Ukraine, Moldova, Romania, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia is off-limits. If you edit anything broadly in that topic range, you would receive a temporary full-ban due to violating your topic ban. You can appeal the topic ban in six months though if you have not violated it. You might not agree with how the topic-ban works, but Wikipedia is not a democracy nor nor a bureaucracy. Rules are rules. I was also topic banned in my past and I successfully appealed it. If you really do wish to improve Wikipedia for the better, you should continue editing in topics not related to Eastern Europe even remotely (example: Plants or the weather or science, ect...). But again, if there is a chance it relates or someone would relate it to Eastern Europe, do not edit it, or you risk a full temporary block on Wikipedia. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 19:40, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Until now my students voted 41-0 English Wikipedia (Polish is not so totalitarian) is rather marxist one and for sure bureaucracy and banning procedures in this example proves it fully. You are right- i prepare an appeal (my students require that)but for that I must get some non-standard knowledge. Never anyone of them would say that Poland is in Eastern Europe. It is shameful. It is like to say to German that he is from third world. Jarek19800 (talk) 20:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

The ban is intentionally broad in scope. Editing while subject to a topic ban is tricky, and I wish you all the best in navigating it. If you're ever unsure about whether a given edit might violate the ban, you should ask an administrator. The Weather Event Writer is correct about all the areas they listed being covered by the ban. Kazakhstan edits would be fine, presuming they don't intersect in some other way with Eastern Europe matters. One correction to TWEW's points: there is no time restriction on when you can appeal the ban. The instructions for how to do so are here. That said, I do encourage you wait a while, and demonstrate good editing in other areas, before appealing. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

just one question: where it is defined on wikipedia which countries belong to Eastern Europe? the scope is definitively contradictory to what is defined in own English Wikipedia article Eastern Europe Jarek19800 (talk) 20:44, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

The burden is on you to steer clear of any areas that are related to "Eastern Europe, broadly construed". The case that led to this area being considered a contentious topic is here, and you'll see that subsequent developments have considered Poland in scope. For some ideas about what has historically been included, you could look at what Eastern Europe topics come up at WP:AELOG/2024 or the logs from previous years. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:12, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@Jarek19800: This will be my final reply on this topic. After this, if you have further questions about clarifying your topic ban, you can post them Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment. Per the Wikipedia article, every country listed above in in fact mentioned. Most definitions include the countries of Belarus, Russia, Ukraine, Moldova and Romania while less restrictive definitions may also include some or all of the Visegrád group, the Baltic states, the Balkans and the Caucasus. A majority of nations situated in Eastern Europe are former socialist republics of the Soviet Union...Another definition was created by the Cold War, as Europe was ideologically divided by the Iron Curtain, with "Eastern Europe" being synonymous with communist states constituting the Eastern Bloc under the influence of the Soviet Union. Per just those few sentences, it is clear what constitutes "Eastern Europe". However, like I said, if you wish for more exact clarification, you can post a clarification request to better define "Eastern Europe". Once again, the restriction is classified as "broadly constructed", meaning it is more or less discretionary depending on what exact topics are considered "Eastern Europe" to that person. Post a clarification request if you are unsatisfied with this explanation. Noting I am not an administrator, so I am attempting to answer your question (which Firefangledfeathers, an administrator seems to agree with) and directing you to the place where you may request more specific clarification. Cheers! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 21:06, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Death of Nex Benedict page protection

Hi Firefangledfeathers - fyi, soon after the page protection you had added expired [3], an IP made what appear to have been test/null edits [4], which took some time to review to check for whether any disruption to the article happened. Also, as general context, contentious related news has continued to develop, so perhaps further page protection can be considered. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 22:42, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

also fyi, I've added a request at RFPP after this [5]. Beccaynr (talk) 23:54, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Protected for 3 months. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:48, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Beccaynr (talk) 02:12, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Question from GraeCSi (03:45, 23 March 2024)

Hi there, Firefangledfeathers, When editing a scientific or math page, how similar is the markup to something like LaTex or TexMacs? --GraeCSi (talk) 03:45, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi GraeCSi. For math, editors frequently use LaTex embedded in math tags. There's a good breakdown of the options at Help:Displaying a formula. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:12, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Question from Anirudhauttamseolekar (07:17, 24 March 2024)

How to post my article --Anirudhauttamseolekar (talk) 07:17, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Anirudhauttamseolekar, and welcome to Wikipedia. It looks like you have a draft article at your sandbox. It also looks like it may be about yourself. We generally discourage people from writing an article about themselves (see WP:AUTOBIO). If you're really committed to doing so, let me know and I'll tell you what comes next. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 00:50, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Question from WXYZ2468 (23:32, 24 March 2024)

Hello I have submitted two articles to Wikipedia, one has been declined and reviewed multiple times but the other and more significant of the two has not been reviewed once. I understand that it says to wait up to two months for review but it has now been over two months and my article on Franjo Krsto Delisimunovic has not been reviewed once. Just wondering if there's something I can do to have it reviewed or speed up the process. Thank you. --WXYZ2468 (talk) 23:32, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi WXYZ2468. I'm sorry to have to deliver the bad news, but there's nothing you can do to speed up the review process. The backlog is large right now. Maybe while you're waiting, there's more to add to the article? The version at Croatian Wikipedia has a bit more info, though I can't say if it's reliably sourced or not. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Gender-critical feminism

I’m asking for your help because you are an admin who I see around on gensex articles. There is an edit notice on the Gender-critical feminism article saying that it should only be edited by users with 500 edits and an account age of 30 days i.e. editing is restricted to extended-confirmed users. I don’t know who added the restriction.

However, the article is not E-C protected. Should the page be E-C protected? Sweet6970 (talk) 16:21, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

It looks like El C created the edit notice in 2019 with the content about a 500/30 restriction. As far as I can tell, the article (then a redirect) has never been EC protected. I don't see anything in the AE logs. El C, would you object to replacing the edit notice with one that doesn't mention ECP? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:40, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Sure np, whatever you think makes sense. El_C 20:27, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Sweet6970, the editnotice is now just the generic one that mentions the contentious topic. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for clearing that up. Sweet6970 (talk) 20:53, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the explanation, my bad. Jeppiz (talk) 21:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

No worries! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:25, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Question from Delbertasueeklund on Midwestern worm snake (02:58, 27 March 2024)

I have had these worm snakes in my yard. I live in a timber in Central Illinois Stark County, Illinois. Every spring they come out. I usually see at least 2 to 3 of them . They are a tarnish color and maybe 14 to 18 inches long an about 3/8 inch in diameter at the most. The underside is lighter than the top and kind of very light pink. I play with them for a minute and release them. My timber is unmowed even around my house. Plenty of dew worms because I do not spray any pesticides or herbicides. I have been finding these little snakes for many years. --Delbertasueeklund (talk) 02:58, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Question about Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Balkans or Eastern Europe

Hi Firefangledfeathers! I should have asked this here [6] but does this topic apply to Turkey-related articles fully or only partially? I'm asking because it says "broadly construed" there, given Turkey is partially in Balkans? Would all Turkey related articles be covered? There is Category:Wikipedia_controversial_topics but I think it only goes by talk page templates put by editors. Bogazicili (talk) 07:32, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

In my experience, and based on a quick glance at the AE logs, Turkey mainly comes up in enforcement actions when the misconduct overlaps either with other Balkan nations (usually Greece) or Armenia/Azerbaijan (usually Armenia, and usually genocide-related). I wouldn't rule out Turkey being covered by ARBEE, but I don't think it would be helpful to tag Turkey topics as being fully covered. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 11:49, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Geographic places seem routinely vandalized though. For example, count how many Smyrna's are in the lead of İzmir in this version [7] (there's one extra in the footnote as well). Btw, there's also Smyrna and Old Smyrna articles. I remember fixing the lead long time ago and now it's a mess again. Everything requires constant watch. Bogazicili (talk) 16:15, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

If you notice an article getting disruption tied to Eastern Europe–related nationalism disputes, I'd definitely recommend tagging the talk page with Template:Contentious topics/talk notice. Editors involved in such edits should get the alert, and AE would be amenable, I think, to enforcement requests about disruption in those topics. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Good to know, thanks! Bogazicili (talk) 18:31, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Death of Nex Benedict

As a heads-up, I've upgraded to full protection for 72 hours due to edit warring/content dispute. I noticed that you've added a 3 month semi as a CTOP, so this is a courtesy note to restore the semi-protection when the full protection expires. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:36, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Layered protection couldn't come too soon. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:23, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Ethics Workshop Participation Request

Hi! We're conducting a series of participatory workshops with Wikipedia editors, administrators, researchers, and Wikimedia employees to discuss, and hopefully improve, Wikipedia's structures for online research (see meta research page). In an effort to get the right people in the room to discuss these topics, I'm reaching out here to see if you are interested in participating as an active administrator. We'd work with you to ensure this workshop can fit into your schedule, but are targeting end of April/early May. I'm happy to discuss any of these topics further here or on our talk page. Zentavious (talk) 16:29, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

nice Naragetsit (talk) 22:23, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024

Hello Firefangledfeathers,

New Page Review queue January to March 2024

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

New legal article

I have finished enough of Consciousness of guilt (legal) to go public with it. Further development and improvement will be appreciated. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 19:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from Al Saint James (21:47, 2 April 2024)

Hi, thamks for your help offer. I am a great believer and supporter of free access to information. Wikipedia is a common repository of public knowledge. I have always wandered how do you edit or complement info in Wikipedia, but had never been invited to do so until today. There are several topics that interest me, one specific area in which I have studied in depth and have experience is water treatment, both for potable water as well as domestic and industrial wastewater. Another area in which I have expertice is in agricultural irrigation. I am a mechanical engineer with a Ph.D. in Thermodybanics and Fluid Mechanics and have worked all my life around water use, water conveyance, distribution, control and reuse in agricultural irrigation and water treatment. I shall get back in touch with you once I have reviewed what is already published in Wikipedia. Al --Al Saint James (talk) 21:47, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Al Saint James, and welcome to Wikipedia. Sounds like you'll be a great fit. There's some good advice for editors with subject-matter expertise at Wikipedia:Expert editors. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:29, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Sockpuppet tip

FYI, 172.59.97.132 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) seems like another sock of Belteshazzar. Llacb47 (talk) 17:32, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Llacb47. Blocked. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:30, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from Iam2bar+1a (21:37, 4 April 2024)

Hello, I am new to this. I found the information at West Virginia Encyclopedia and another source. Do I add that? Thanks for your help. --Iam2bar+1a (talk) 21:37, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Iam2bar+1a. Yes, please! When you find a good source, we encourage you to be bold and use it to improve any relevant articles. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from TheSupremeMoron (00:28, 5 April 2024)

Hiya, I was just wondering: I made some edits on a wiki page but they were removed because of lack of sources. I didn't know what appropriate sources to use so I was wondering, what are the appropriate sources? --TheSupremeMoron (talk) 00:28, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

It looks like some were reverted because they added dates of birth for living individuals. There's a special policy in place, WP:BLP, to make sure we get things right for living people. Some consider their exact date of birth private, so we only include it if it's mentioned in multiple reliable sources. You can read more about the restriction at WP:BLPDOB and more about what counts as a reliable source at WP:RS. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:40, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

ah, got ya TheSupremeMoron (talk) 01:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from Vikrant Singh patyal on Talk:Sukhmani Sahib (00:27, 8 April 2024)

ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਦੀ ਕਿਰਪਾ ਸਦਕਾ ਸੁਖਮਨੀ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਦੇ ਜਾਪ ਅਤੇ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਸ਼ਬਦ ਚ ਹੀ ਪ੍ਰੋ ਕੇ ਸਾਰੀ ਸੁਖਮਨੀ ਸਾਹਿਬ complete ਹੋ ਗੲਈ ਹੈ ਦੀਨੇ ਹਸਤ ਪਾਵ ਨੇਤ੍ ਕਰਿ ਰਸਨਾ। ਗੁਰੂ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਨੇ ਨਾਮ ਤੇ ਬਹੁਤ ਜ਼ੋਰ ਦਿੱਤਾ ਹੈ। ਪਹਿਲਾਂ ਜਪੁਜੀ ਸਾਹਿਬ , ਫਿਰ ਆਨੰਦ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਬਾਣੀਆਂ ਦੀ ਲਿਖਤ ਸੇਵਾ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਨੇ ਲੲਈ।ਆਪਿ ਜਪਾਏ ਜਪੈ ਸੋ ਨਾਉ ,ਨਾਨਕ ਜਾਪੁ ਜਪੈ ਜਾਪੁ ਸੋਇ ਦੇ ਮਹਾਂ ਵਾਕਾਂ ਅਨੁਸਾਰ ਕੀ ਇਸਨੂੰ record ਦਰਜ਼ ਕਰਾ ਸਕਦੇ ਹਾਂ । ਪ੍ਰੇਮੀ ਜਨ ਰਾਏ ਦਿਉ ਮ --Vikrant Singh patyal (talk) 00:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Vikrant Singh patyal. It looks like you're interested in working on the Sukhmani Sahib article. If you're proficient in English, please use it while you communicate here (see WP:ENGLISHPLEASE). If not, you might prefer to contribute to another language's Wikipedia. For example, you might work on the Punjabi Wikipedia article about Sukhmani Sahib. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Request Page

I can create a page called: Fundamental Paper Education?.

Fundamental Paper Education is an animated YouTube webseries created by Kaaatie. It centers around a group of students and teachers in a school made of paper, where the consequences for misbehavior are fatally extreme. Du Cong Alliance (talk) 03:09, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Du Cong Alliance! It looks like you've already gotten started at your sandbox page. The thing that you most need for the article are secondary, independent sources that cover the webseries. Has it been covered in any news media? Just a couple such sources will go a long way toward the article sticking. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:40, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

"Wikipedia:Wretched hive of scum and villainy" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Wikipedia:Wretched hive of scum and villainy has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 9 § Wikipedia:Wretched hive of scum and villainy until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 18:54, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from Sirromdivad (23:54, 13 April 2024)

G'day, I want to add more detail about a battle we fought in Vietnam in 1971. The Battle of Nui Le has been covered and mostly centres on D Coy. I was in B Coy and we also took casualties and fought a numerically superior enemy force. I now have the official reports that detail the involvement. How do I include them in the report? Dave --Sirromdivad (talk) 23:54, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Dave. Wikipedia is a tertiary source, meaning it primarily summarizes what is already covered in secondary sources. We generally prefer to use books, news articles, and articles in journals as our sources, even if the primary sources (like battle reports) are more official. There's room for some limited use of primary sources, but you may want to bring those up for review at Talk:Battle of Nui Le or ask for some help from WikiProject Military history. There are already two books in the reference section and some other usable stuff in "Further reading", so it might also help to check those secondary sources out first to see if they have more info on B Company. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 11:59, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

February 2024 situation

I know it's long over, but I was wondering how could've I handled it better. Basically, the guy kept making false allegations of WP:UCR against me just because he disagreed with my edit summary (as you said, it's not UCR if an edit summary makes sense but the reverter disagrees) so I had to scream at him in all caps because he didn't listen to me. I know that was quite inappropriate, so how else could I have gotten him to understand that disagreeing with an edit summary for removal is not UCR? 35.141.142.199 (talk) 16:20, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey IP35. Hopefully you don't run into that issue anymore, and you're welcome to ask me for help if you do. It's rarely worth to get into all-caps shouting matches, and those situations are usually better resolved by (neutrally) seeking out some input from other editors. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:25, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Also I forgot to say, he called our attempt of dispute resolution an "unwanted conversation". That is very rude. Methinks he was trying to shove his argument down my throat without letting me voice my opposition. 35.141.142.199 (talk) 16:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

It was rude. I hope it doesn't happen again. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:31, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Gambia disambiguation

Hey Firefangledflame. To follow up on our discussion at User_talk:ZeroAlpha87#FYI, I used PetScan and a tool to filter and see the disambiguations used for The Gambia and The Bahamas.

"(the Gambia)" and "(the Bahamas)" are not used in any article titles. Thought this was interesting and something we should probably get sorted out for consistency. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:25, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

It is interesting. Though I've advocated for "the Bahamas" in running prose, I'm not sure I'd push for lowercase "(the ...)" in title disambiguators. As I said at the other page, "(Bahamas)" seems like the move here: natural, concise, etc. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I might go ahead and do that at some point, but I thought I'd put it out there in case there was some obvious reason I shouldn't be :P Hey man im josh (talk) 16:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

The obvious reason is that there might have to be a whole fight about it. You know how capitalization debates go... Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:36, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Yep, I'm aware of the drama that can occur 🙃! Thanks for chiming in on that user talk page by the way :) Hey man im josh (talk) 16:38, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 62

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 62, March – April 2024

• IEEE and Haaretz now available
• Let's Connect Clinics about The Wikipedia Library
• Spotlight and Wikipedia Library tips

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Women in Green GA Editathon June 2024 - Going Back in Time

Hello Firefangledfeathers:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in June 2024!

Running from June 1 to 30, 2024, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Going Back in Time! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 20 centuries by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Grnrchst (talk) 10:56, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Far-right politics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Public Eye.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Good bot. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 11:46, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from TriosLosDios (23:19, 17 April 2024)

Hello firefangledfeathers my awesome Mentor 🏆 I have a question. On Wikipedia location for Milton,Florida ... I wanted to update photo of new court house and new location of GPS coordinates and brand new building address physical location and address. However, I am unable to edit or update this info. I have attempted this several times in different ways. Also, I created a new Draft: Santa Rosa County Court House. However, that was denied as update for this information as well. Thanks for any assistance here TriosLosDios 😀 --TriosLosDios (talk) 23:19, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi TriosLosDios. Looks like you're trying to do a few good things and running into some common and understandable errors. The courthouse image you uploaded looks to have been copyrighted by the Florida government, and it should probably be deleted. While uploading, you said that it was published before 1929, but I'm reasonably sure that's mistaken. Let me know soon if you know something I don't, as deletion is probably imminent. If you are able to take your own image of the courthouse, I can help you get it into the right place.

Starting a brand new article is tough, and it's very common to have your first attempt rejected a few times. I'd encourage you to get more familiar with editing practices before you spend more time on your draft. If you'd rather focus on the draft, there's some good advice on Help:Your first article. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:32, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions and encouragement. TriosLosDios (talk) 04:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I sent you a message regarding a previous discussion.

Hello, Firefangledfeathers. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Omar Jabarin (talk) 18:57, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Omar Jabarin. I've seen your email and will try to get back to you in the next couple days. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers

Thanks a lot for listening. I am hoping to hear your input before I proceed with the situation. Omar Jabarin (talk) 00:48, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from Captain sparrow199 (05:53, 20 April 2024)

Hello ‪Firefangledfeathers‬, i'm iso user, so in iso, there is no any suggestion contribution section in app,, can you tell me how to do suggestion contribution from app --Captain sparrow199 (talk) 05:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Captain sparrow199. I tried a few different ways and was unable to access that feature using the iOS app. You may need to use your device's browser (e.g. Safari) to get to the homepage where the newcomer tasks are. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 00:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey, after adding citation, can i remove "Multiple issues more citations needed" tag from article? --Captain sparrow199 (talk) 08:49, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Maybe! If there are still many statements in the article that are unsourced, you should leave the tag. If there are just a few, you might remove that tag and individually tag the unsourced statements with Template:Citation needed, if those aren't already present. I would encourage you to WP:BEBOLD and trust your judgment, and be ready to talk with others if your de-tagging is undone. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 00:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from Riddles42 (18:40, 20 April 2024)

Hello! And thanks for the welcome :) I was wondering how to know whether to mark something as a "minor edit" or not. --Riddles42 (talk) 18:40, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Riddles42! The best page to look at for an answer is H:MINOR. The short answer is that you never have to mark an edit minor, and it's only useful if your careful to use it for truly minor edits. If I'm just fixing an obvious typo or adding a wikilink, I'll sometimes use the minor tag. Even then, I often forget to do so. If you engage in some repetetive and rapid minor fixes, you might get someone reach out to you and ask you to check the box, but in most cases it'll bother very few people if you forget. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 00:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy note

Informing you about the SPI I just filed, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Souniel Yadav since it's outcome can influence at least 2 reports on WP:ARE one of which you are already handling. Thanks Srijanx22 (talk) 12:22, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:30, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

OJ Simpson: how should we treat his (almost certain) guilt now?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:O._J._Simpson#How_should_we_treat_Simpson's_%E2%80%9Cculpability%E2%80%9D_in_the_murders;_neutral_or_adamant?

I have raised the discussion as to whether how we should reflect's Simpson's culpability for the "crime of the century", much like LHO is named "guilty". Discussions open here. 92.17.198.220 (talk) 21:23, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

The talk section is "How should we treat Simpson's “culpability” in the murders; neutral or adamant?" 92.17.198.220 (talk) 21:33, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Redir full protection for Where is Kate?

You're right, create protection doesn't seem to be the right protection level for that redirect... but I think the kerfuffle has died down after multiple discussions and everyone is OK living with the results. I don't think full protection is needed for the redirect--I'd check with The Anome to verify that, but I think create protection should have been removed after the closure at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 14#Where is Kate?. Not an urgent issue, as no one has edited the redirect in over two weeks. Jclemens (talk) 04:07, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Jclemens: I've dropped it down to semi-protection,. and I'm willing to be persuaded to remove the protection entirely. I notice, however, that there still seems to be a non-trivial amount of traffic to the redirect, which was slowly tending to zero but has oddly ticked back upwards in the last couple of days: see [8] — The Anome (talk) 06:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

No objections from me. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:09, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from Helper Wikibot (13:27, 25 April 2024)

Hello *Firefangledfeathers*. How can I protect an article from a text that looks like an advertisement? --Helper Wikibot (talk) 13:27, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Helper Wikibot. If you see some text that looks overly promotional, you are encouraged to be bold and reword or remove it. If an entire article consists of advertisement-like language, it may be eligible for speedy deletion (see WP:G11).

On another note: I highly recommend that you request a username change. Usernames that suggest you might be a bot are prohibited by the Wikipedia:Username policy. You can request a new name at Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers Thank you for your help. Helper Wikibot (talk) 13:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers. Wikipedia:Username policy Can you help me change my username to "HelperWik25"? new name at Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple Helper Wikibot (talk) 13:44, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Helper Wikibot, that name is available. At Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple, click on #5 "Click here to place your request." Put HelperWik25 right after "NEW=", and right after "REASON=" explain that you don't want a bot-like username. Click the blue "Publish changes" button, and then wait! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:48, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from Cibus Mission (16:57, 30 April 2024)

Hi! Thank you for helping! My name is Denise and I am the Founder of the nonprofit Cibus Mission. I just want to write an article about our organization. We are a 501c3 nonprofit and have all our paperwork and website in order. We have been approved Google Ad Grant for a few months now. Can I just write the article or do I need to do something else before I can get started? Also how long does it take to get published? How long does it take for an update or edit to go through? thank you --Cibus Mission (talk) 16:57, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Denise. Before I get to your questions, I should tell you that you need to change your username. Our username policy does not allow for names of organizations/companies, as they can imply shared use and be overly promotional. Please head on over to Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple to request a new name. Let me know if you run into any issues. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:31, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks for the fast reply, I figured out that I can't write the article about the organization because of conflict of interest. So, I guess that's that. I had no idea. I will ask around to see if anyone wants to write an article for us. Thankyou so much for your time! Have a good day :D I'll change my username later on today. Cibus Mission (talk) 17:41, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I knew you were going to be nice so I only gave the username template instead of a block. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:49, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

🤪 Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:59, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from TriosLosDios on 2011 Uzbekistan Cup final (18:18, 30 April 2024)

Hello Firefangledfeathers 👋 ... If you don't mind I have a question. The page "2011 Uzbekistan Cup final" needs a reference added and also a citation. What's the process to accomplish this task ? Can you help please?

Thanks 😊 --TriosLosDios (talk) 18:18, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi TriosLosDios. Do you already have a source in mind, or are you looking for help in finding sources? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:20, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I do have several sources in mind to contribute to wherever needed to be applied. However, dont know how to add inline [1] ... next to paragraph example where citation to reference is to be applied. TriosLosDios (talk) 18:29, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Let's start with one at a time. If it's an online source, can you paste the url here? If not, could you give me a title and tell me the format (book, magazine, etc.)? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:31, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Re: page reference

I have added content now. Hope I applied correct process. The reference/citation used was from a specific website Fifa.com. Is this OK? TriosLosDios (talk) 19:25, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

A good start! I made some changes that you should check out. The next step is to add more information about the source. Using a template like Template:Cite web can help. Just the url, title, date, and website parameters would be enough. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:30, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Question from Chris Quiñonez (03:33, 4 May 2024)

Hola 👋 soy Chris Quiñonez, ¿ como publico una cita? --Chris Quiñonez (talk) 03:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Hola Chris Quiñonez! You may be asking about how to add a quote to an article (there's some info about that at our Manual of Style) or about how to add a citation to an article (see Help:Citations). Either way, I'd urge to you to write in English here if you're able. If you are mainly comfortable writing in Spanish, we could use your help at the Spanish Wikipedia.

(Esto se hizo usando Google Translate, así que lo siento si hay errores): Hola Chris Quiñonez! Quizás te preguntes cómo agregar una cita a un artículo (hay información al respecto en nuestro Manual de Estilo) o cómo agregar una cita a un artículo (ver Help:Citations). De cualquier manera, le recomiendo que escriba aquí en inglés si puede. Si principalmente se siente cómodo escribiendo en español, nos vendría bien su ayuda en la Wikipedia en español. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 00:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Question from Krk1971 (15:28, 7 May 2024)

Hi there. Can you please advise on adding mentions for people that have been involved in projects that are on Wikipedia? For eg, a major civil engineering project that involved many different people eg client, main contractor, sub contractor, designers etc. Some of our projects are on Wikipedia but only the main contractors are credited, rather than including designers etc. I am able to provide links to verify our involvement. I look forward to hearing from you. --Krk1971 (talk) 15:28, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Krk1971. Wikipedia is a tertiary source, meaning we mainly function as a summary of what's been published in reliable, secondary sources. When deciding what information about a civil engineering project to include, we look to such secondary sources to find information and then use our editorial judgment to determine what makes it into the article. If secondary sources mention the sub-contractors, designers, etc., there's a good reason to add them to the article. If not, it's unlikely that a mention is warranted.

Since you mention "our projects", it's possible that some of the articles you're considering editing are ones with which you have a conflict of interest. If so, it's important that you read and adhere to our conflict of interest guideline. If you read it and have any questions, please let me know. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:11, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your input, I appreciate it 81.107.195.70 (talk) 13:09, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

WP:ARE response

In the WP:ARE against me, user Cossde has now repeatedly accused me of WP:Votestacking which I believe are unwarranted. Since you have notified me of word limit, I'm unsure how to proceed. Am I allowed to respond? --- Petextrodon (talk) 17:59, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Petextrodon. In your section at AE, you should request a word limit extension. Think about how many words you think you'll need to respond and say something like "I'm requesting an extension of XXX additional words to respond to Cossde's statement." I may be able to consider such a request in half a day or so, but other responding admins might get to it sooner. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I've done just that now. --- Petextrodon (talk) 18:50, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Granted. 105 is reasonable. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:51, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Turkish6

Hi Firefangledfeathers, thanks a lot for taking the time to try to help Turkish6 get on the right track. I'm afraid that I have far less patience than you do when dealing with this problem user, but I'll wait to see if they give a reasonable response before I do anything rash. Kiwipete (talk) 14:40, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Hey KP. You've been more on the front lines of this issue than I've been, so I'm not in a place to judge your patience! I do think it's worth giving them one more shot before we take a trip to ANI. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:51, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:No queerphobia

Do you have a reference that supports someone who identifies as transgender making an unconscious choice to be that way? As written, the wording "being LGBT is a conscious choice" can be read differently. I agree with people having no control over their sexual feelings. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:01, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that being trans is a choice, conscious or unconscious. Various sources exist to address that myth. See, for example, this piece in Slate or this explainer from GLAAD.

(I'm using trans as an umbrella term here. I do think there's choice involved for some people in what terms you use to describe your gender and trans status.) Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:33, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the information =) I made a topic on the essay's talkpage about adding references to the points made if you are curious. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:39, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

AfD question from your mentee

Hello. You've been assigned to be my mentor. I wanted to get advice on Pledgie that I would like to put up for AfD. I'm not asking for permission, nor for you to join in the discussion. I don't need any help with WP:AFDHOWTO, but as I've recently joined, I want to know if I'm missing anything regarding the spirit of WP:GNG and to ask: Is AfD the right thing to do, or not?

Here's what I plan to open the AfD discussion with:

(I've recently joined Wiki). I'm unable to deorphan this article and upon closer inspection, the article doesn't seem to pass any of the points of WP:GNG. The sources are mainly self-published sources (WP:RSSELF), and the secondary sources are blog posts (possibly falling under WP:USERG), with the only news coverage being hyperlocal. Sources 1 and 2 are blog posts. Sources 3, 5, 7, and 8 are self-published blog posts (with source 3 being a Tweet). Source 4 is from KC Free Press, which seems to be a hyperlocal news organization (but I would say it's closer to a blog). Source 6 links to the topic's GitHub page. Sources 9 and 10 link to the home page to websites, so are not even sources for anything in the article.

BlueSharkLagoon (talk) 14:39, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi BlueSharkLagoon. As an AfD opener, that's looking pretty good. The main improvement would be to conduct your own search for GNG-compliant sources and mention in your comment if you didn't find any, or not enough. This is a critical part of the AfD process, and it's laid out at WP:BEFORE. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 00:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll research the topic before I run the AfD.

If you feel it appropriate, would you also be able to close the AfD I opened Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gladerberg, so I can reopen it as 'proposed deletion' instead? Based on what's posted, I don't think it would be necessary for it to be discussed and would waste community time (and I didn't know what 'proposed deletion' was before it was mentioned). BlueSharkLagoon (talk) 01:52, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Glad to hear it. I would recommend letting that AfD run its course. Looks like a discussion worth having, and it's likely that no community time will be wasted. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Question from Hereditzimms (18:45, 12 May 2024)

Hello, how do I find an article I might want to edit and how would I cite a source once I do? --Hereditzimms (talk) 18:45, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Hereditzimms. There are lots of good places to start. You could begin at your homepage, which can guide you toward topics you're interested in and suggest some edits for you. If you find a useful source to add to the article, there's guidance for how to cite it at Help:Citations. If you run into any issues, let me know! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:44, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Happy

Fire-colored feather

I saw your name in my watchlist, and it made me happy, so I am bringing you a little bit of a fire-colored feather. I hope you have a happy day. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:48, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for reaching out WAID! Your kind message caught me at time where it was much needed. Hope you're well. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:45, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm doing well. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:14, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Hounding concerns

To avoid bothering ScottishFinnishRadish with another question about this topic area I was hoping it would be OK to ask you, as I have seen you had some activity at AE in regards to the topic area? If not, please say and I'll find someone else.

For a while I have been concerned that Kashmiri has been hounding me; they have had a habit of turning up at articles shortly after I make an edit, to revert me or argue against me, but I haven't had proof and arguably some of these could fall under "correct use of an editor's history".

However, that changed yesterday, when an hour after creation they nominated two pages I was using (Wikipedia:Move test page 1 and Wikipedia:Move test page 2) to test enhancements to the rmCloser script (rmCloserExpanded). I asked them to explain how they found them, and their explanation was routine monitoring of Wikipedia, after which they declined to explain further. As such, the only explanation I can see is that this routine monitoring consisted of tracking my contributions.

So long as this behavior was within ARBPIA it was tolerable, though unwelcome, but now that they have expanded it outside the topic area - and to areas of true triviality - it is no longer tolerable. However, I'm not sure how to deal with it; most of it occurred within ARBPIA, but the "smoking gun" occurred outside of it, so I'm not sure if AE would be the correct place, and I'm not certain AE wouldn't be an overreaction? I am hoping you can provide some guidance. BilledMammal (talk) 21:09, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Jokes on you, I watch this talk page. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:13, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

I actually typed this out on your page, before deciding you deserved a break and moving it here - so much for that idea! BilledMammal (talk) 21:39, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi BilledMammal! Having just confronted the other editor, I think you have an opportunity here to take no action and see how things develop. If hounding continues and it stays mostly ARBPIA-related, I do think AE would be the spot, and that one bit of relevant non-ARBPIA evidence would still be useful. For the record, I'm speaking with my involved admin hat on here, having been in disputes with both you and K. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:06, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you; that sounds like a good idea, I will do that. BilledMammal (talk) 02:13, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Happy to help. Monotremes are always welcome here! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

I would like to start discussion for Rename or move for Hindutva to Hindutva Politics

I have reason s, can you start discussion? EntrepreneurPedia (talk) 22:12, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi EntrepreneurPedia. The instructions for what you're trying to do are at Wikipedia:Requested moves#Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves. If you'd like assistance in getting through those steps, I'd be happy to help. If so, let me know, and please explain here what reasons you have for proposing the move. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:15, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/narendra-modi-concerns-muslims-bjp-logic-winnability-9336855/lite/ EntrepreneurPedia (talk) 22:25, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

I must point out in the recent events Hindutva phrase is used in 90% in politics even shirt description of the current title says its more about politics than just Hindutva. EntrepreneurPedia (talk) 22:28, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

EntrepreneurPedia, could you write a couple sentences that make your points? Newcomers will come from other parts of Wikipedia to decide whether the title should change. What would you like them to read first? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

I will write but the article is pretty good I got to know about Hinduva Politics from this article only, but I feel the Title is irrelevant. Ill write some points in few hours let me read some sources. And get myself on right track since I have no problem with content inside the article because its really informative. EntrepreneurPedia (talk) 22:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Question from Fahim Ibn Malek (07:14, 24 May 2024)

give me something for editing --Fahim Ibn Malek (talk) 07:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Fahim Ibn Malek! I see from your userpage that you are from Bangladesh. Category:Bangladesh articles needing attention includes high-importance Bangladesh articles that need some improvement. For example, maybe you could help add sources to Geology of Bangladesh and improve its quality? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:17, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Question from Captain sparrow199 (10:43, 24 May 2024)

Hello, Can you share some wiki tools, where i can check the authentication of article --Captain sparrow199 (talk) 10:43, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Captain sparrow199. I'm not sure what you mean by "authentication of article", but it's possible you're referring to whether the content is verifiable and supported by reliable sources. One tool I like is User:Headbomb/unreliable, a script that helps distinguish generally reliable sources from generally unreliable ones. It's just a tool, and you still have to use your best judgment! I hope this helps answer your question, and please let know if I've misunderstood. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:25, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Question from Captain sparrow199 (10:49, 24 May 2024)

Hey, i got the article suggestion name "Richard Saunders (skeptic) " someone comment on advertised content, so can i remove the part, where i feel that this content is look like promotional --Captain sparrow199 (talk) 10:49, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi again Captain sparrow199. If you're able to rewrite content so that the tone is less promotional, that would be preferable to removal (see WP:PRESERVE). That said, if you think removal is the best way to address the issue, be bold and go for it; make sure to leave an informative edit summary explaining the reasons for your removals. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Question from Captain sparrow199 (06:45, 27 May 2024)

Hey Buddy, recently i created 2 article, can you tell me who will review the article? --Captain sparrow199 (talk) 06:45, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Hey again @Captain sparrow199. Newly created articles are reviewed by New Pages Patrollers, who review the queue of creations, add tags for improvement, and nominate articles for deletion if there's some issue with their notability. I can't say who exactly will review yours, but you'll get a notification when they are marked as reviewed. It can take some weeks/months, so please be patient. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:29, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for information Captain sparrow199 (talk) 01:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you so much Captain sparrow199 (talk) 11:48, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar, Captain sparrow199. Always happy to help. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:24, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Question from DeeTsameret (15:25, 31 May 2024)

Looking at the introductory paragraphs of the following:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Yellin_College_of_Education

It seems to me that the 3rd paragraph includes historical information that doesn't belong there. Can you suggest a college description that would be an appropriate model for this type of item? --DeeTsameret (talk) 15:25, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi DeeTsameret. As you may already know, since the paragraph you're referring to is focused on the Arab-Israeli conflict, you should not edit it directly (per the WP:ARBECR applied to that whole topic area). In general, I would say the major problem with that article is that it does not cite any sources. It's hard to know which aspects of history are integral to an understanding of the college. Only by finding and summarizing reliable sources could we decide what is or isn't worthy of inclusion. I might look to an article like Pomona College, a featured article, for broad guidance on what a high-quality college article looks like. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your guidance and suggestion, I will read the Pomona College article. I wasn't thinking of deleting the paragraph from the article, just moving it to the history section, because the past history of the Arab-Israeli conflict (War of Independence, and 1967 War) is not relevant to the general college description, correct? Is it a problem for me to move it down to the appropriate section?

DeeTsameret (talk) 15:47, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome. It would indeed be a problem for you to move the paragraph or edit it directly in any way. If you see the current placement as a problem, you should start a talk page discussion requesting a specific edit to it (like moving it to the history section). Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

WP:TRUMP - From your mentee, Svampesky

(I've changed my username from BlueSharkLagoon since we contacted because it was just three random words) Hey. I have noticed that Donald Trump has... a lot of articles. The talk page for Talk:Donald Trump even says or dozens of other places, as listed in {{Donald Trump series}}. Thanks!. The essay Wikipedia:Not every single thing Donald Trump does deserves an article talks about this specifically. I was considering moving the shortcut of WP:TRUMP from WikiProject Donald Trump to the essay I linked above. I'm not asking for permission, nor blessing. Would this be a disruptive edit that would cause drama? If so, please let me know and I won't do it. Currently, only 15 pages use the WP:TRUMP shortcut, so there wouldn't be much change. The essay is most often cited in deletion discussions about Trump-related articles, so it would help editors to quickly shortcut, to save time. Is it a bad idea for me to change the shortcut?Svampesky (talk) 16:02, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

I do think it's likely to be challenged, and I would say generally that the culture here seems to prioritize WikiProjects over essays when it comes to shortcuts. If you try to change the shortcut target and that change is reverted, you could try WP:RfD for a wider discussion. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:19, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

 Done I did a carefully worded edit summary too. I'll go ahead and change the links to the places that used the shortcut to WikiProject Donald Trump. Thanks! Svampesky (talk) 16:23, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm going through changing the link to the 15 previous uses (but preserving the text). What do I do when a page says this at the top: This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page., as it does on this page? I'm assuming that 'edit' is in the spirit of adding comments, not doing maintainence edits like fixing links. I allowed to edit this page? Svampesky (talk) 16:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

You should be fine to fix those links. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:38, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

 Done. I've kept it all clean, so can be easily reverted if it is to be challenged. I'll make a note here to say again that my intention was to make discussions, such as deletion discussions, easier. Thanks for the advice! Svampesky (talk) 16:50, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

No problem! Interested to see what happens next. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:53, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

At worst, it'll be a 'fake news and phoney witch hunt hoax' against me on some admin noticeboard. Trump is covered very uniquely on Wikipedia, so the reaction will be interesting. I think Trump supporters will want the shortcut to go to the WikiProject and the opponents will want it to go the the essay (but me changing it was not indicative of being on either side). The discussion yesterday about whether 'convicted felon' should be in the Donald Trump lede was interesting to read. Thanks again! Svampesky (talk) 17:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Follow-up question

Is what I did best practice? That is to act boldly, but make it easy to revert. If it is challenged, then have a discussion. The intention was to save community time by not initially opening up a discussion, but is this usually perceived as 'shoot first, ask questions later'? Svampesky (talk) 17:28, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

In most cases, we encourage editors to be bold and improve the project as they see fit (see the guideline Wikipedia:Be bold). Ease of reversion is definitely a factor, so I'd be more likely to discuss first if undoing the work would take more than a half hour or so. We urge a bit more caution when editing outside of articles, as you were, but that caution can just mean careful consideration. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Okay thank you. I opened it up on the talk page here, and listed the subsequent edits I made. (I used Special:Diff as I saw it being used on the admin noticeboard, I hope it isn't an admin tool that I wasn't supposed to use). Svampesky (talk) 17:46, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Reverted without any trumpets or fanfare. I'm not going to open up a discussion, as I don't think it's a big enough issue to even discuss. Svampesky (talk) 12:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

I meant to say a few days ago, Svampesky, that this is a great attitude that will get you far here! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:35, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Captain sparrow199 (11:49, 1 June 2024)

Hey, I'm thinking of starting a project related to unicorn companies in India. Please share your valuable feedback

here is source https://www.forbesindia.com/article/explainers/unicorns-india-list/85309/1 --Captain sparrow199 (talk) 11:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Sounds like an interesting project, Captain sparrow199. I don't have feedback for you yet, but I do have some advice:

1. Be careful about selecting only reliable sources: check out for ones that have received lots of prior discussion, and reach out to WP:RSN if you're unsure about a source's reliability
2. List of unicorn startup companies is a good place to start
3. If you're considering creating new articles, read WP:NCORP carefully, especially the criteria for what sources count toward notability

Hope this helps! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:30, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Not single "List of Unicorn startup companies", I'm planning to start individual company pages Captain sparrow199 (talk) 11:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I assumed as much! I was suggesting starting with the list—since then the companies will at least have some coverage—and then branching out from there. Corporation articles are tough to write. Good luck! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 11:49, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

) sure, i'll start with list page. thank you so much

Captain sparrow199 (talk) 11:24, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Suspected Sockpuppet

Hello @Firefangledfeathers. I hope you are doing well. I am sure you know by now that user @35.141.142.199 has been consistently targeting me for errors that I have made months ago. A few days ago, a fresh account with zero edits created five hours ago at the time named @Proposer of Solutions pinged me on IP 35's talk page, claiming that I was "wrong", and that they are on IP 35's side. A day later, this account replied to your comment that told IP 35 to get therapy saying they have evidence that IP 35 is right, which was just IP 35's threatening message that he sent me. Today, this same account added a new topic on my talk page, demanding that I stop accusing IP 35 of personally attacking me, even though IP 35 is evidently bullying me and continues to despite knowing that this is not allowed and promising to stop. They later claim that the unconstructive good faith edits that I made are part of my "digital footprint" and that they will come back and bite me. This is just unacceptable. IP 35 is going out of their way to damage my public reputation and has resorted to making false claims, personally attacking me, and making an alternate account with an official looking name all just to humiliate me. Please do something to resolve these disputes. Thank you. ItsCheck (talk) 03:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi ItsCheck. The sock account has been blocked indefinitely and the IP temporarily. I am sorry that the soft approach I was pursuing was unsuccessful, and not blocking earlier meant continued harassment for you. Please ping if disruption continues. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:46, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from TriosLosDios (11:06, 5 June 2024)

Hello Firefangledfeathers. Good day to you my mentor.

I have a question and a favor. I hope you can HELP me. My questions is about editing or adding citations, sources or references (I'm confused which is which here); I need a wee bit more instruction or redirection with this subject.

OK, now for a much needed favor. I was practicing my very first ever "Practice Article" within sandbox and ... I'm NOT sure what happened. The 'Article' that I started in my sandbox is Re: Census of Scotland or 1891 Census of Scotland ... Is there any way you can see what went wrong or what happened ?

P.S. I started getting notifications within my practice Article about Templates & adding sources ... etc. As far as I'm aware I added a reference ... but to be honest the Template notification was a surprise 😮

Thanks, TriosLosDios --TriosLosDios (talk) 11:06, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Good day to you too, TriosLosDios. We use "sources" for all the books, news articles, academic papers, videos, tweets, etc. that we use to get encyclopedic info. When we summarize info from one of those sources, we need to inform the reader where that info came from. Generally, we recommend that you do so with a "citation", which usually shows up as a little superscript number after the text it supports, like this. The information about the source that you get to by clicking the number (e.g. author, publisher, date) is sometimes also called the "reference", and they generally show up in a section called "References". Sometimes, rather than placing an inline citation, one immediately adjacent to the text it supports, we add sources used to a list of general references. Readers will know that the sources in this list were used to build the article, but they won't know which bit of text corresponds with which source. I'd say the new culture here is to avoid that style, and it's not permitted in our highest-quality articles. I recommend reading Wikipedia:Citing sources for guidance on how to add citations. Hope this is clear enough, and please let me know if you have clarifying questions.

It looks like you created two articles this morning (in mainspace, not in a sandbox): one called "Census of Scotland" and one (with a typo) called "Cesnsus of Scotland". The first was draftified by a new page reviewer and is now at Draft:Census of Scotland. The second was moved to the corrected "Census of Scotland" and then moved again so it's now at 1891 Census of Scotland. If

I think the templates you are referring to were Template:Refimprove and Template:Unreferenced. As the 1891 census article currently stands, the Refimprove template would be a good fit, but the Unreferenced template should probably be removed. More citations are needed, as we generally want articles to lean on more than just one source. Since you added the NRS source, it's not true that the article is entirely unreferenced. I'd recommend starting a talk page discussion and pinging the person who added that tag.

Also, I'm making some changes to the citation and reference section in that article. Hope you follow along. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:13, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (01:53, 7 June 2024)

I'm writing a piece for The Signpost about the deleted article Kalloor. Admins can see deleted pages, but I can't. Can you give me confirmation on the date the article was originally created, as there are two different sources which differ? If you reply in this thread, I can notify the copyeditors. Thanks. --Svampesky (talk) 01:53, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi Svampesky. The article was created on 31 August 2005. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:57, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

That was quick! Thank you very much. Svampesky (talk) 02:00, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

No problem! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:02, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Re: Restriction

I don't agree with your assessment, but I've deleted my comment. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:01, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:05, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

The user who posed that rather strange question might bear watching. As to pronouns, it's whatever someone wants to use, and it's about politeness. If you watch Jeopardy!, there's a trans woman named Amy Schneider who prefers she, and there's a gay woman named Mattea Roach who prefers they. The host, Ken Jennings, when speaking of them in the third person, refers to them by their preferred pronouns. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:14, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I knew about Schneider, but Roach is new to me. No great surprise that Jennings handled it well. Thanks for the brief discussion, and thanks for erring on the side of caution. I'd prefer not to discuss this with you further, since my belief is that this sort of discussion is proscribed by your TBAN. I hope you understand, even if you disagree, and I'd be happy to talk to you about literally anything else! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

You could just delete this entire conversation if you want. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:45, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

And it turns out my suspicions about that user were correct. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't have a good radar for that LTA yet! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:12, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't either, but there just seemed to be something "off" about his contribs. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from TriosLosDios (01:51, 8 June 2024)

Hello again my Amazing Mentor Firefangledfeathers. Again I have several questions for you. I am drafting a 'practice article' Re: Blackwater Heritage State Trail in my sandbox. My question here is am I doing the process of creating an article correctly this way ?

Also, can you look at my new draft maybe to see if I have followed your previous suggestions in an appropriate manner ?

I'm not completely lost here only beside myself trying to learn and implement a better writing skill and refreshing qualities I already know & enjoy. Thank you again for your mentorship. --TriosLosDios (talk) 01:51, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Looks like a good start! A few notes:

1. The draft/article will be much stronger if you can find more reliable sources. There's no rule against having just one, but a basic guideline is that three really good sources make for a solid article. I searched a bit and ran into an issue where most of the books I could find on it are travel guides or trail guides, which don't tend to be the most reliable or in-depth. I may have time soon for a newspapers.com search and I'll send stuff over if I find any.
2. Try your best to turn that one source into an inline citation, using the guidance at H:CITE or that series of edits I did on your other draft/article. Let me know if you run into any trouble.
3. The draft needs some copy edits, as all drafts do! If you find that the wordsmithing/grammar/spelling aren't your strong suits, you can ask for help from the Guild of Copy Editors. They only take requests for published articles, so this would have to wait until you're done drafting and the article is in mainspace.
4. You can make talk pages for userpace drafts, but chances are no one will see or respond to them. I wouldn't recommend it. The question you asked there is best answered by yourself, with some searching, or by the friendly folks at the WP:TEAHOUSE.

Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, again my cherished Mentor ! You are a fantastic guide for WP . TriosLosDios (talk) 09:06, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Aww, thanks TriosLosDios! I found at least one newspaper source. I've formatted the citation using Template:Cite news, and you can copy and paste the wikicode if you edit this page.

Roberts, Mike (October 24, 2017). "Right This Way". Pensacola News Journal. pp. 1C, 2C – via Newspapers.com. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

re: Phillip Jeong article

After I composed Phillip Jeong article, I asked for copy editing at Wikipedia:Teahouse. An editor left a Notability tag on the article, and I left a message on the Phillip Jeong talk page and the editor's talk page to address his questions; User talk:Theroadislong#re: Phillip Jeong article

Am I doing alright? Or do I need to do anything more? Rosuacamus (talk) 12:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi Rosuacamus. It looks like you're getting some constructive feedback, and I like your open-minded attitude! Instead of posting both at the article talk page and the user's talk page, I'd recommend just posting at the article talk and pinging the other user. It looks like the other user has already removed the notability tag. If you ever run into that issue again, I'd suggest pulling out the three strongest sources and pasting them into the article talk page. You'll want to explain how they're independent and reliable and how they contain significant coverage of the topic. Those terms are all defined at WP:GNG. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

I thought I had read and understood the rules, but I guess not. I will use the talk page from now on. I do not want the articles I write to be filled with garbage and want them to undergo scrutiny. Thanks for responding so promptly! Have a good one. Rosuacamus (talk) 00:15, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Your article is not and never has been filled with garbage! There are a lot of rules here, and no one knows them all. Scrutiny from those who know a few more of the norms here is a good thing. It certainly helps me! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:16, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

What heartwarming words! This means a lot to me. I am not afraid of critical comments and welcome them. The discussion was actually fun and taught me a valuable lesson. I am rewriting the text to remove some of the tables. I will post a comment on the article talk page and ping it. Thank you so much! Rosuacamus (talk) 10:21, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Of course! Happy editing. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from TriosLosDios (20:18, 8 June 2024)

Hello, again my Mentor. Yes, I also reviewed a PNJ article related to this subject. For some reason I was never able to access pg # causing an (error code). I'm uncertain the proposed uses of inline citations or non inline citations. There must be different reasons whichever types are used/ referenced pertaining to context or content. This is maybe my issues Re: Blackwater Heritage State Trail 'article'. What am I missing here with what, how and when to use inline citations or in text citations or other ? And in what way or purpose are these applied ?

I appreciate your effort of encouragement as a mentor. --TriosLosDios (talk) 20:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

There's more than one right way to do this, so please know that I'm oversimplifying while you get used to at least one method. Here's a step by step for what you have currently in your sandbox:

1. First, recognize the problem: you have urls for the sources right there in the body text. If the reader clicks them, they go right to the source. You have those same urls in the reference section, where you've added the citations. What we want to happen is that a reader finishes a sentence and clicks on the citation number. That click should take them to the reference section, where they can see the details about the source and click again to see the source if they want to.
2. Now we want to fix that problem. Instead of having the citation information in the reference section, we're going to put it right after the text it supports, replacing what's currently there. See what I did here?
3. Make sure that Template:Reflist is in the References section (it is). It collects all the citation information, no matter where it is in the article, and organizes it for the reader.
4. Can you try and do this with the second citation in the sandbox? I don't mind showing you another example, if you'd prefer that.

Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:26, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Firefangledfeathers. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 05:18, 9 June 2024 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 05:18, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the email, LilianaUwU. I think this is a "great minds think alike" situation. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 05:20, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Captain sparrow199 (12:42, 10 June 2024)

Hey Can you guide me in this, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Vaidam_Health give your suggestion --Captain sparrow199 (talk) 12:42, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi Captain sparrow199. Sorry to see one of your articles at AfD, but I hope you'll see it as a positive thing. Articles about businesses are tough, like I mentioned earlier, and it's good that we have a healthy amount of scrutiny. AfD is all about notability, so don't worry about cleaning up the article or anything like that. Focus on the best three sources. They might be in the article already, or you may want to search for more strong sources. Make a concise argument for how they meet all four criteria in WP:ORGCRIT.

You should also prepare for the possibility that the article will be deleted. Copy and save the wikitext somewhere offline. If new, stronger sources on the topic are published, you might recreate the article. Best practice would be to create it as a draft and let it be reviewed at WP:Articles for creation. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:01, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

you already told me earlier, but i tried to create and failed. can you check or is there is any way to check the sources trustfulness and is this possible, can you participate in this discussion and share your suggestions? Captain sparrow199 (talk) 14:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm here to help you out, but I won't get directly involved with the AfD. If you want to ask me about the reliability of one or two sources, feel free to copy them over here and I'll give you my thoughts. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:16, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

1. https://web.archive.org/web/20240419194612/https://www.businesstoday.in/magazine/health-care/story/start-ups-are-disrupting-the-medical-tourism-space-heres-how-341811-2022-07-18

2. https://www.dhakatribune.com/business/263461/visa-eases-access-to-medical-care-in-india-for

3. https://web.archive.org/web/20240605111610/https://healinindia.gov.in/facilitator/vaidam-health-pvt-ltd

4. https://web.archive.org/web/20240523080256/https://health.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/health-it/ivey-business-school-publishes-case-study-on-vaidam-health/66935551 Captain sparrow199 (talk) 06:03, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi Captain sparrow199. I'm doing the first three:

1. The content about Vaidam is not independent, since its based on an interview with a co-founder.
2. Some of the content is non-independent, but those middle two paragraphs are debatable. It's possible that's actual analysis/reporting from the paper. If so, it's enough to count as in-depth coverage
3. Not independent

Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:41, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

So what should I do now? Should I join the debate, but I don't think it's enough and I tried to create Template:Source assessment table, but it's all manual because I have to choose the source whether it's independent or in-depth coverage Captain sparrow199 (talk) 13:45, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the source assessment table still requires you to form your own opinion on whether the source is independent and in-depth. There's nothing that does so automatically. It's up to you whether you join in on the AfD. If you don't think you have a strong case for keeping it, it's ok to let it go and move on to other editing projects! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:16, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

sure thanks, better to move on to others projects and one think i want to share you, yesterday i moved this article into draft and did some changes and added in-dept sources then submitted through {{subst:submit} }, its reviewed by reviewer and moved to main-space by reviwer, due to AfD voting is not closed that's why still pending, and again added note of afd in article Captain sparrow199 (talk) 05:20, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

? Captain sparrow199 (talk) 17:46, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Sorry I missed this comment. If you're referring to the Vaidam article, it was moved back to mainspace because article shouldn't be draftified during an AfD. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:52, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

how to use Template:Source assess table to check the Source assessment --Captain sparrow199 (talk) 14:04, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

I recommend using a script that makes it easier to create those tables.

1. Go to User:Captain sparrow199/common.js
2. Paste {{subst:Iusc|User:DannyS712/SATG.js}} on the first blank row. Hit publish changes.
3. Bypass your cache
4. When you're at the AfD page, you should get an option, either in your sidebar or top menu (maybe in a dropdown) that says "SA Table Generator"
5. The script helps you using input boxes and dropdown choices
6. Let me know if you run into any issues!

Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:16, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

SPAs and AA

Hello there, I hope you are doing well. I wanted to ask two related questions. Would the Armenia-Azerbaijan extended confirm restriction cover this article and its AfD discussion? There is a particular user, who has created their account 6 minutes before commenting on there, and up to this point, all of their edits are to that AfD. This topic area receives the attention of a lot of sockpuppets, so I am extremely suspicious of this new account who closely follows the AfD, leaves walls of text repeating the same erratic arguments, and made no edits to any other page. However, due to the lack of connecting evidence, I have no clue whose sockpuppet this could be. WP:SPA suggests tagging single-purpose users, but I'm not sure what the best action would be in this case. Thank you, Aintabli (talk) 11:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

If that article or the AfD is connected to the AA general sanctions topic area, I can't yet see how. I would encourage you to tag the SPA, possible using Template:Spa. That feeling of being sure someone is a sock but having no idea which one is tough, been there before! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 11:49, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (18:11, 11 June 2024)

Probably an insignificant question. Have I violated any policy about advertising and spam with my comment on Wikipedia talk:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia#Ahmed Farah Dualeh saying which I'll shamelessly promote here: The lore of Kalloor? It was intended to be a light-hearted comment, but I can edit it out. --Svampesky (talk) 18:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi Svampesky. No. Our policies/guidelines on spam and promotion are focused on off-Wiki interests. You are free to point editors toward your Signpost article, being bounded there mainly by common sense and some due modesty. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:48, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (19:05, 12 June 2024)

Hello. The article I created, Præsidenten fra Nordvest, has recently been reviewed and accepted. About the the title: should it be in English or Danish? For instance, Menus-Plaisirs – Les Troisgros retains its French title. My concern lies with the use of the character 'æ' in the title; however, Æthelred the Unready includes this character. What would be the most suitable approach, considering the film has never been officially released in English? --Svampesky (talk) 19:05, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

If it hasn't seen an English release, and there isn't an English title firmly established by English-language sources, I think it would be better to leave it in Danish. See WP:NCFF. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:19, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (20:23, 12 June 2024)

On canvassing, I want to withdraw the AfD I ran, but I'm prevented from doing so by the singular delete !vote. It was made at a time where there wasn't any sources, but sources have been found. Is it canvassing if I drop this on the delete !voter's talk page?

I want to withdraw the AfD I ran, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahmed Farah Dualeh, but your singular delete !vote is preventing me from doing so. It cites "there are no sources", but sources have now been found. Would you be willing to review your !vote? I'm NOT asking you to change your !vote. If you still think the article should be deleted, that's fine. It's not the end of the world if the AfD runs for seven days.

I also have the non-admin AfD closure ready to publish

Nomination withdrawn. The rationale behind the only delete !vote was There are no sources. However, as the discussion progressed, this initial reasoning was rendered invalid when sources were discovered. I also created an article for a documentary which features this subject Præsidenten fra Nordvest after finding a lot of Danish sources that cover the documentary and Dualeh. There is a clear consensus to keep the article. It is likely that this article falls under a type 4 hoax (false or unreferenced and dubious statement that may or may not be a hoax, as it could arguably have been added mistakenly or in good faith). If this non-admin closure is deemed to be out-of-policy, please feel free to reverse it.

Svampesky (talk) 20:26, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

I'll ping Liz into this (I hope you don't mind!) as she has closed all my other AfDs, so is active in this specific area of Wikipedia. Svampesky (talk) 22:16, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

It wouldn't be canvassing, since the person you're addressing is already involved in the discussion. We want discussion participants to engage with each other! I would suggest commenting at the AfD and pinging them, to keep the discussion in one place. If you do end up closing the discussion as withdrawn, I'd recommend the closing statement be just "speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn." Closing statements should as briefly as possible summarize the outcome and the reason why, and they shouldn't contain new information or analysis. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:22, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Captain sparrow199 (06:06, 13 June 2024)

Hey, sorry again i'm disturbing you, can you tell me, how to invite others contributors into draft for better article? --Captain sparrow199 (talk) 06:06, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

You're not disturbing me at all, Captain sparrow199! One of the best places to get support for a draft is from a related WikiProject. If you let me know which draft you're talking about, I can help tag the relevant ones. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:03, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (17:20, 15 June 2024)

I'm planning on contacting a Danish newspaper for a free copy of this article, for Præsidenten fra Nordvest. In the email I'll make clear the the sole purpose is to use it for Wikipedia. Is it within policy to do this, with regard to original research, COI, primary sources? Do I need to declare that I've done this somewhere like my userspace, perhaps User:Svampesky/Declarations? --Svampesky (talk) 17:20, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

It's absolutely permissible to reach out to publications and authors to try and access materials. You don't need to note or declare that anywhere. If you ever have trouble accessing a source, the helpful folks are Wikipedia:Resource exchange are always taking requests. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:05, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (17:32, 17 June 2024)

Hey. Making no reference to any active cases, could you clarify what ArbCom actually is? Additionally, what is the difference between ArbCom and ARBCA? Am I right in assuming ArbCom like the Supreme Court of Wikipedia? --Svampesky (talk) 17:32, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom, the committee itself, is a sort of "court of last resort" for conduct disputes on Wikipedia, and the Supreme Court comparison is a good one. Generally, we try and work out disagreements through normal discussion, escalating sometimes to a place like Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. If that still can't resolve conflicts, ArbCom can accept a case, collect evidence, and make a decision. Once ArbCom has published a final decision, editors can request clarification or amendment at WP:ARCA. ArbCom has some other functions, so I'm simplifying a bit. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:55, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Comment

I can see you've reverted the user you reverted on David Reimer before, however the seems to be misrepresenting sources on a number of articles:

• here they misrepresented sources claiming prayer yields positive results.
• here they misrepresented a source and deleted mention of Zucker, despite the original source saying "Susan Coates and Kenneth Zucker.

• They did the same on another article here and then reverted me again for correcting it, again falsely claiming the source doesn't mention Zucker.

There is also some POV pushing, disputing credibility of RS, and inaccurate edit summaries:

• here they removed large pieces of while mislabelling this as "added source".
• here they changed a sentence to say the exact opposite, claiming a "book is not evidence", and replaced it with a primary source.
• here they deleted a number of WP:RS reviews, claiming they were "unreliable sources" and mislabelled the edits.
• here they deleted WP:RS sources claiming that economists cannot comment on this topic.

Zenomonoz (talk) 01:49, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

I agree there's a problem, and it's also been bad at Detransition and Intelligence (journal). The Race & Intelligence and Gender & Sexuality topic areas seem to cover much of the disruption, so AE is an option. The lack of communication and unexplained reverting mean my hopes for improvement are low. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:31, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

I engaged in good faith and explained the distinction between primary and secondary sources... but I see this user actually made an edit back in 2016 in which they: "Replaced primary sources with a secondary source". So they already know how it works. They then went and deleted secondary sources as a "primary source", after I explained that meta-analyses are secondary sources.

Looks like a WP:NOTHERE, who is intentionally trolling / disruptive?

Edit: oh, I see that in an early edit they removed RS content critical of Culture of Critique... it all makes sense now. Lol. Zenomonoz (talk) 00:50, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure about intentional disruption, but their actions are effectively disruptive either way, and discussion/warnings don't appear to have helped. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:01, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (12:22, 18 June 2024)

My vote in the RfA was struck out because I am not "extended confirmed." I'm not sure what this means, but it said I needed 500 edits. I'm working on my next Signpost offline, so I moved a few things around with my work on WikiProject Orphanage. My aim to address the orphan backlog was already noted on my user page, do these edits count as "making unconstructive edits to raise your user access level", per WP:PGAME? Can I still participate in the RfA? --Svampesky (talk) 12:22, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Pinging Bbb23 into this because of your reply to me on the RfA talk page. Am I all good to proceed with reinstating my !vote? Svampesky (talk) 13:53, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

The rule is you have to be EC to vote. There's no analysis of how constructive your 500+ edits have been. You are entitled to vote now. My only question is a bit of a nit: should you literally reinstate your vote in place with a comment and updated timestamp, or should you just vote "again" in chronological order. Not sure there's a right or wrong way to do this - it's kinda new.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:58, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

I'll copy it over with a new timestamp, leaving the old one struck out. It is not a valid !vote with that timestamp. Svampesky (talk) 15:01, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Can you also check that the bot that counts the !votes hasn't counted my striked out !vote? Svampesky (talk) 15:06, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

The bot handled it correctly. Congrats on EC! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:10, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Svampesky (talk) 15:29, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (15:28, 18 June 2024)

Another question related to RfA: How do editors find the percentages for the main/user/Wikipedia space contributions? Is it an admin tool or an extension that needs to be added in preferences? --Svampesky (talk) 15:28, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

It's the edit count tool. This is what happens when I run it on you.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:31, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Is XTools third-party? If not, it looks to be a valuable dashboard that isn't spoken about in any welcome pack, nor any part of the Help: space. Do mentor questions get assessed to build the welcome packs, to ease the work from newbies all asking the same questions? Svampesky (talk) 15:40, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

It is third-party, though the package of tools it's part of is about as closely affiliated with, and vital to, Wikipedia as anything could possibly be. A link to the tool is present at the bottom of every user's contributions page. I think the goal of the welcome messages is to point new users to the most fundamental resources first, and I don't think the XTools edit counter is one of them, as great as it is. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:48, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (20:07, 18 June 2024)

Would I get blocked if I say someone's RfA !vote rationale is Total WP:BULLSHIT? --Svampesky (talk) 20:07, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you'd get blocked, but I highly recommend against it. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:11, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay. I'll turn off my computer and enjoy the rest of my evening then. Svampesky (talk) 20:12, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Category:Politicization of science

Hey FFF, wondering if you have an opinion on whether this category is workable. If not, do you know of someone here who could offer an informed opinion?

I'm not particularly knowledgeable about categories but it seems to me it will end up including either an arbitrary or a tendentious collection, since the number of articles which could arguable fall within its scope is so massive. I tried to engage with the category's creator on the talk page but haven't received a response.

Cheers, Generalrelative (talk) 23:11, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey Generalrelative. One rough rubric I have for my time spent here is to avoid category disputes wherever possible. I sometimes get tempted, and it almost never works out. I often wonder if even 1% of our readers ever use the categories. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 00:30, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

That sounds like very sane advice. Thank you :) Generalrelative (talk) 17:54, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Captain sparrow199 (12:38, 19 June 2024)

Hey hope you are doing well. Can you suggest me some bots to check pages issue or auto fix bots? --Captain sparrow199 (talk) 12:38, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

The only bots I've ever used are Citation bot, for automatically collecting reference info from urls, and InternetArchiveBot, for creating/finding archive urls and adding them to references. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:44, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Ogonshoku (23:38, 20 June 2024)

Hello, firefangledfeathers. How do I find pages that need editing? --Ogonshoku (talk) 23:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi Ogonshoku, and welcome to Wikipedia! It looks like you've already tried some of the newcomer tasks. If you'd like to keep going with that, you'll learn more about how things tend to work here. You can also focus on topics you're experienced with or passionate about. Maybe you want to join an editing even like Wikipedia:WikiProject Reliability/June 2024 Drive? It's focused on resolving "citation needed" tags. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 23:52, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Closure of Talk:Israel and apartheid#RfC: Wikilink to Weaponization of antisemitism

Hello FFF. As a note, I've processed your closure request. Cheers! — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 17:49, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for closing! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (12:08, 27 June 2024)

Hello. I've noticed some tables where items are shaded in green with a checkmark for yes, and in red with a cross for no. I know how to do the "done" with the tick. Is there a place that lists all the available options? I need it for my userpage to track my article contributions. Thank you. --Svampesky (talk) 12:08, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Hiya Svampesky. I think you might be looking for Template:Table cell templates. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:14, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. That's partially what I was looking for. Is there something for the article assessment classes? Svampesky (talk) 12:22, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm not quite as sure about this one. Template:Class will get you most of the way there, and the templates listed under See also may be better. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:26, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, that's exactly what I was looking for. Svampesky (talk) 12:36, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (13:53, 27 June 2024)

The AfD I ran Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahmed Farah Dualeh was closed as "nomination was withdrawn". I initially requested to withdraw it, but then amended my !vote to merge it. It's not something that I feel strongly about. Can you have a look at it and see if everything was done properly? I'm not requesting that any action should be taken over it. Is the only issue is the closing rationale? I think the article would've been kept regardless. --Svampesky (talk) 13:53, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

I am unsure why the closer did what they did. First step here is to talk it out! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:32, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (17:12, 27 June 2024)

Hey. Apologies that I'm asking a lot of questions, I'm trying to avoid causing issues. Is it considered poor conduct to run an AfD with the opening, "I'm on the fence, what does everyone else think?" On one hand, it seems a good way to gather consensus, but on the other, it could seem disruptive. Are AfDs only meant to be run by someone who can provide good reasoning for the article to be deleted? --Svampesky (talk) 17:12, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

No apology needed! I would say the culture here is to be reasonably sure that deletion is warranted before starting an AfD. If you're looking for thoughts on notability, you might ask at a related WikiProject or the Help desk. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:31, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (10:20, 28 June 2024)

Hey, I am in the final stages of my Signpost and am currently fact-checking everything. Is there a way to view a comprehensive log of all the titles a page has had, not just the requested moves, but every single move/title? --Svampesky (talk) 10:20, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Svampesky, I use the script User:Nardog/MoveHistory. If you suspect your pages are affected by the limitations listed here, you may just need to comb through the page history and Ctrl-F "moved page". Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 11:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

How do I set it up? Is there a web page for it like XTools? Svampesky (talk) 13:38, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

If you don't already have the script installer gadget, go to your gadgets page and check the box for "Install scripts without having to manually edit JavaScript files", then save. You should then have a blue install button on the right side of the script page. Once it's installed, you go to the history of any page and you'll get a "Move history" option in one of your sidebars/toolbars/drop-downs. For me, it's on the left sidebar. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:44, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

I got a warning about the code potentially being edited to contain malicious code. If it is edited with code to compromise an account, would that code go onto my account, or will it stay with the version I installed with? Svampesky (talk) 13:50, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

If someone edits the script, it will affect your version as well. The script is protected so that only its author and the interface administrators can change it. There's a risk, but it's low. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:55, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (12:38, 1 July 2024)

Hey. I'm treading with caution into article space, so I'll have more questions to avoid getting in too deep. Reading the policy/guidelines has been my first step, but I've been stuck over WP:NOTNEWS and WP:SIGCOV. To me, they seem to directly contradict each other. If an event is getting significant news coverage, should it be included on Wikipedia or not? --Svampesky (talk) 12:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

I have now seen that in your contributions that you've discussed NOTNEWS on the talk page about an extremely contentious topic. Would you like to respond over email, as my query is only a general one, and might not be reflective of specific contentious topics if taken out of context? Svampesky (talk) 14:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

I generally prefer to discuss things here, and I don't imagine this will get too sensitive. SIGCOV doesn't make any statement on whether topics or notable, but WP:GNG, the guideline it's part of, does say that topics with SIGCOV are presumed to be notable if they have the other four factors. The specific notability guideline WP:Notability (events) has narrower criteria for stand-alone articles about events; it's based in principle on NOTNEWS.

If an event is getting significant news coverage, that's a good sign that it should probably be mentioned somewhere on Wikipedia. Even if NEVENTS suggests that it shouldn't have a stand-alone article, it might fit in an article like 2023 in Finland or an article focused on the subject of the event. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:14, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (18:49, 3 July 2024)

I was about to ask about the RM initiated, as the notice was not on the article; the issue has now been resolved by the bot. I looked at your contributions to see if you were active. Was the pronoun remark made by the IP address a violation of WP:NPA? I could not find anything specific on the policy page. If the comment had been, for instance, "Black", it would clearly constitute a violation. This is a general query, and I'm not asking for any action to be taken. --Svampesky (talk) 18:49, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

My gut tells me it was a personal attack, but I'm exercising my WP:AGF muscles. The remarks will either stop, continue, or intensify, and we'll go from there. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:53, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

My gut and everything listed here tells me that it was bad faith. Is there not a policy on clear instances of bad faith? Another example is that vandalism isn't treated as good faith. Maybe I need to train my AGF muscles a bit more, before I get hit with a "bad faith accusation of bad faith"... Svampesky (talk) 19:04, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Lol. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:09, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Re: My Mistake on the Don't Say Gay bill link

My apologies for doing things a bit wrong with sourcing and such when making my changes recently to Transgender rights in the United States. I'll try and keep in mind what you ended up changing back and why for the future, and I admit that the operating factor here is a lack of knowledge of Wikipedia policy and procedure on my part. Nerdy314 (talk) 20:25, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey Nerdy314! No need to apologize. There are too many rules/guidelines/norms/quirks here to learn, so we all do our best and then watch what others fix up. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

IP35

Hello @Firefangledfeathers,

I encourage you to participate in or at least look at my report on IP35 located here.

Thank you for your help. ItsCheck (talk) 18:05, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

A terrible turn. Sorry ItsCheck. I blocked the IP for 3 months. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:31, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Firefangledfeathers, do you think there is enough evidence that User:DementiaGaming is an account that belongs to IP35? Even though DementiaGaming has 1000 edits, they possess the same defensive behavior as IP 35 and make edits on similar articles if not the same ones, almost like they are a mirror of IP 35. I'll let you know if IP 35 starts bothering me again, but there could be something deeper going on. Anyway, I'm not asking you to do anything. I just want to know what you think of all this. Would a Check User be necessary? Thank you, ItsCheck (talk) 05:27, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

This is undeniably, laughably untrue. It is based on a few threads related to or on the 2006 talk page which got out of hand, starting with you putting a complaint on my talk page about a video game that I didn't even knew existed being released to the public, which will never be a notable enough event to be on the page. You also do not have nearly enough evidence to prove I am that IP. My real IP is vastly different from that one, even if I "mirror" or "possess the same defensive behavior" as them. So please, do not bring me into this and figure out the children's video game argument on 2006. DementiaGaming (talk) 19:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

ItsCheck, I don't think so. There are a lot of editors whose main focus is date/year articles, and it would be hard to see overlap as evidence of sockpuppetry. I don't get the sense that the behavior is a match. CheckUser would not be helpful here, as they will not publicly connect a user to an IP. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:21, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

ItsCheck, I got a ping from IP35, and they're suggesting that you've been going through and reverting a bunch of their changes. It does seem like maybe you've done that at least a couple times. Since there's so much to improve on the years and date pages, it would be very helpful if you would focus on other things. Please be careful also about calling things "vandalism". Like "unexplained removal", we have a very specific definition of it, and accusations that don't hew to the definition can themselves be personal attacks. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 11:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers Yes, I have been going through their old edits and cleaning up the unconstructive ones, as well as bringing back events that IP 35 removed because they were uncited and adding citations to them. As for calling them vandalism, this is simply false. I even called some edits good faith and explained why I removed them, but I left most of the edit summaries empty. Unless twinkle labeled my reverts as vandalism, I’m not sure why IP 35 thinks I’m trying to attack him. Besides, 90% of their edits that I reviewed were good, so I left them alone. As for the others, I had a good reason to revert them, like the one mentioned above. If leaving them alone would help, I would be happy to stop reverting edits from them and also stay away from the year articles in the near future. Edit: I just noticed that I did call an edit vandalism, one that did not necessarily condone it. I’m sorry about that. ItsCheck (talk) 16:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

ItsCheck, I was referring to this edit. I don't think you need to stay away from year articles. If you're looking to remove uncited entries, there are hundreds to work on, though it would be better to attempt to find sources, which are frequently available at the linked article. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:26, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Just saw your edit. Thanks. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:27, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers Yeah, I’ll just stay away from IP 35 so I don’t make myself look bad. ItsCheck (talk) 16:28, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I did acknowledge that in a edit I made to my reply before you added that. ItsCheck (talk) 16:27, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

More

I opted not to open another discussion for GS/AA in ANI because these are fairly straight forward, I hope you don't mind me posting on your page: two other users who were warned about GS/AA continued editing articles covered by it, [9], [10] Can you take a look? KhndzorUtogh (talk) 08:37, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi KhndzorUtogh. I don't think the first edit is AA related, but you

may want to warn them about WP:GS/KURD. For the second , I think the best next step is for you to discuss with them at both their user talk (why was their edit problematic) and the article talk page (why do you oppose their change). Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 11:59, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I reverted both users because of the restrictions (I think first article might also be under GS/AA if you see this section but it's covered by GS/KURD regardless as you pointed out. I didn't know about the latter). I also made comments to both users like you suggested [11], [12]. Will let you know if there are further developments, if you don't mind. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 08:59, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

The user you've topic banned and blocked for a week, soon after the block has expired, they've gone on reporting IPs in AA. Isn't this another violation of their topic ban? [13] KhndzorUtogh (talk) 09:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

WP:WITCHHUNT Göycen (talk) 10:04, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

KhndzorUtogh, it's possible some of those IPs edits are covered by GS/AA, but Göycen's report doesn't mention or inherently rely on any particular edit. Göycen, you should expect that editors will be reviewing your upcoming changes to ensure you aren't violating your TBAN. This edit was close to the edges, so I urge more caution. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 11:53, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

What makes a page GS/AA? Is there a distinction? For example, can I create a village page for a location in Turkey near the Armenian border? Can I create a page for a food from eastern Turkey, which shares cultural elements with Azerbaijan? Does the GS/AA designation apply to any page containing text about Armenia and/or Azerbaijan, or is there a specific list? Göycen (talk) 11:58, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

There's no specific list. The general guidance is at WP:TBAN, and you should ask questions if you're unsure. A village near the Armenian border would probably be fine, as would a village within Armenia or Azerbaijan, unless the village is related to politics, ethnic relations, or conflicts. If it's part of a disputed area, that would definitely not be permissible. The food might be fine, as long as the page and the specific edits you're making are not tied to some Azerbaijan–Turkey cultural conflict. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

One of the users I mentioned here that was warned of GS/AA and GS/KURD [14], BaharatlıCheetos2.0, has been sockpuppeting with a new account named BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı (talk · contribs) ("devamı" at the end translates to "sequel”). They went against GS/AA again several times in spite of the warning on their first account’s talk page [15], [16], [17], and they have created a bunch of articles that are at least broadly covered by GS/AA (see these sections for instance: [18], [19], [20]). There is also a sockpuppet investigation [21]. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 15:37, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I commented at the SPI, and I think it's too soon to say if something bad-faith is going on. I'll give a formal warning about the GS/AA violations. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:30, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

FYI, they've violated GS/AA once again [22]. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 12:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

They've violated GS/AA once more [23]. The article is about Armenian genocide perpetrators' party, and they're specifically editing the name of the main perpetrator, Tallat Pasha. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 19:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi KhndzorUtogh. This is not one I want to act on, administratively. Consider seeking enforcement from another active admin or bringing it to WP:ANI. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:53, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

No problem. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 22:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Minneapolis

Hi, FFF. I believe that you considered reviewing the Minneapolis FAR at one time. Can you possibly consider that again? The FAR is stalled, and has gone on almost a year. One keep vote but nothing since then. Thank you. -SusanLesch (talk) 15:47, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi SusanLesch! Hope you've been well. It's on my to-do list, and I'll focus on it once I finish an outstanding GA review. Hopefully later this week or next weekend. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:15, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Much obliged! -SusanLesch (talk) 16:20, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Re: Possible 'article' about the Pensacola Historical Society.

Hello Firefangledfeathers my amazing mentor. My inquiry is about a possible 'article' about the Pensacola Historical Society. It Looks like there was a specific page associated with this topic (maybe). There is no article however it seems that there is a near/topic 'redlink' subject. It seems that there (maybe) once was such a 'society'. However, it became defunct & later regained recognition ... As well, this same 'society' has since been renamed. So, here is my question. For 'historical reference' can I write an article about this subject ? TriosLosDios (talk) 09:30, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Setting aside notability for a moment, yes, you could definitely write an article about the organization. Even if it hadn't regained recognition, an article about a defunct historical society would be fine. The question as always is: will it meet any notability criterion? The specific notability guideline for organizations, WP:NORG, is fairly strict about the need for independent sources. I would read and re-read all the sections of WP:ORGCRIT and refer back to it frequently while evaluating sources. I might be able to help. The society seems like the kind of thing that could get newspaper coverage, and I can check out Newspapers.com—one thing you can look forward to in September is access to the Wikipedia Library, which includes the free use of many high-quality research tools, including Newspapers.com. I have a chunk of other work on my plate right now, but if I haven't gotten back to you in a week or so, you should ping me a reminder. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Revoke TPA

User:2600:1006:B065:70C8:0:0:0:0/64? They’re not so good. Myrealnamm (💬pros · ✏️cons) 20:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Discospinster did it. Myrealnamm (💬pros · ✏️cons) 20:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Question

I wonder if we can ask for an acceleration of the check user because of the daily conflicts. (is it common? is it permitabble?) Surely its implementation would give a different, the right, direction to things. D.S. Lioness (talk) 19:39, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, but SPI is really backlogged right now. Hopefully a CU will be along soon. Again, your filing will be more attractive if you convert those revision links into diffs. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:43, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

You've told me this before, but the point is that I want to show the participation in the same topics. It's not a matter of edits within the same article. Unless I don't understand exactly what is meant. D.S. Lioness (talk) 19:47, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

You don't think there's any similarity between their edits to those articles? If not, overlap on two Greek political parties and the practice of blanking talk page notices (which is very common) do not constitute enough evidence for a CU check. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:53, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

you mean to point out similar edits within the same articles; that is more important; D.S. Lioness (talk) 19:58, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Definitely. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:02, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, very much. I will change it as soon as possible. D.S. Lioness (talk) 20:11, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, the strongest evidence I have is because of our personal acquaintance on Greek Wikipedia. The alleged, new user knew some details about me, which he could not have known if he had not participated in our discussions in the Greek WP, as deepfriedfeta and as Nikolaos Fanaris. But does that count as an argument capable of triggering user check? D.S. Lioness (talk) 01:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (21:40, 8 July 2024)

Hey. How do I link articles to Wikidata and other language Wikipedias? I need to do it on the article I published, Holger Rosenkrantz. --Svampesky (talk) 21:40, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Once you log in to Wikidata, use the search bar to find the right person. There's a section on his page for "Wikipedia", which you can edit to add "en" and the name of your article. That change will mean that the article here will automatically link to the other language versions. If you know of other language versions to add, keep adding to the "Wikipedia" section at the Wikidata page. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:25, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

I didn't provide translation copyright attribution on Præsidenten fra Nordvest or Holger Rosenkrantz. I have the wikicode for both. Are you able to delete both of the pages and I'll recreate them with the correct copyright attribution. For both pages I'm pretty much the sole contributor in terms of content. If so, can you delete Præsidenten fra Nordvest first, then I recreate it. Then I'll reply to this for you to do Holger Rosenkrantz after. Svampesky (talk) 22:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

No deletion needed. In your next edit summary on each article, use the message provided at WP:RIA in addition to your explanatory edit summary. If you're not planning to edit again soon, use a dummy edit. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:30, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Cool. Done and done. Thanks! Svampesky (talk) 22:39, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Niki (Greek political party)‎

Hi, I assume you intend to actually semi-protect the article? Don't mean to be pushy.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Done! Feel free to be pushy when it comes to slips like that! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:47, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I could see you doing all the paperwork and just wasn't sure if you hadn't gotten to it yet. Thanks!--Bbb23 (talk) 17:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (17:06, 9 July 2024)

Question on copyright and translation. On articles, when I use sources that are in different language, what's the legal stance on copyright with providing a translation? WP:ENGLISHPLEASE says Do not expect readers to translate your content themselves, not even when modern browsers have machine translation built-in., however, if I provide a translation of an extract I will be infringing on the copyright of the source. --Svampesky (talk) 17:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Svampesky. When you provide a translation, it should be clear that it's quoted material. Use quotation marks or a block quote template. Make sure the citation makes it clear where the text originates, and consider in-text attribution. As long as the quoted material isn't excessively long, you'll be fine. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Let me clarify, I mean in the references, not the actual body of the article. On Holger Rosenkrantz some of the refs are in Danish and there isn't a parameter for 'translation' in the citation. What's the legal/copyright stance on this in providing a translation in the ref? Svampesky (talk) 17:16, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Most citation templates include quote= and trans-quote= parameters to include quotes and translated quotes. Inclusion of a quote is not necessary, but if you do include a quote, you should provide a translation. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:25, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

What about using quotes from sources that are not publicly accessible? I borrowed a book from the state-owned national library and the collection is only accessible to citizens and residents. The library permits the use of its materials for research purposes (including Wikipedia) but clearly states that only citizens and residents have access to the actual content. Svampesky (talk) 17:50, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

First of all, thank you so much for doing that research work! It's nice to include a quote if the material is hard to access. At the very least, keep a transcribed version with you so you can justify the content later if questioned by another editor. A quote is still not required. One other bit of unsolicited advice: make sure all the sources you use were published. See WP:OR for the importance of using published material. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Every single book that is published in a country is available in its respective national library. Is there anywhere where I've done original research, so I don't do it again? I don't think I have access to research material like academic papers or journals. Svampesky (talk) 19:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't think you've done any OR. I just know some people get into the national library and are seized by research mania. Access to things like unpublished letters, diaries, etc., can tempt even the best of us into OR! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:10, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay cool. I don't even think I have access to academic papers or journals (and I'm assuming they have all the non-peer-reviewed work too), or anything that would require me to wear those white archivist gloves. I do have a question about the reliability of books though. Most national libraries are legal deposits, so any book that is published in a country has to be in the collection. This includes books that are unverified. Theoretically, I could find a book full of lurid conspiracy theories and cite it. For example, in Holger Rosenkrantz, I cited a book published by Christian Focus Publications; I think they could be biased on certain topics so I only extracted the factual information. But Oxford University Press and University Press of Liverpool I would deem them reliable as they are academic institutions. I know about WP:RSP for online sources, but does Wikipedia have any assessment scale for book publishers? Svampesky (talk) 19:32, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Not really. RSP is not just for online sources, but it does not weigh in on very many book publishers. If you don't trust your own judgment—which you should in most cases—you could ask at WP:RSN. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:35, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Question from Regoregitated (14:53, 11 July 2024)

Hello hope you are well. I’m not sure if you’re the right person to ask but I’d like to create a page. Could you give me some info on how to do this? I’ve checked the notability guides and the person I want to create a page is all good.

Thanks :) --Regoregitated (talk) 14:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Regoregitated. There's some good guidance at Help:Your first article, which advises that you use draft space for your first article. If you'd like to skip that recommended step, there's Wikipedia:How to create a page. If you're writing an article about a person, there are also some guidelines at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Question about special:redirect/logid/163138137

Hello, I have seen that you blocked Special:Contributions/2409:4085:2E19:0:0:0:0:0/48. Do you think simple:Special:Contributions/2409:4085:2E19:0:0:0:0:0/48 is the same editor, and can you explain why? Any kind of information will be appreciated. Thank you for your attention and assistance. MathXplore (talk) 06:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi MathXplore. I'll have some time to look into this later today. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 11:58, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi MathXplore. I'm confident it's the same user. I sent you an email with my explanation. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:34, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. MathXplore (talk) 14:08, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Question from TriosLosDios (04:49, 13 July 2024)

Hello my amazing mentor @Firefangledfeathers:. Good day to you. I hope you can take a look at my sandbox. There's an 'article' draft that I started in hopes to create a new 'article' Re: Dubose Oil Products Company. If you can take a look at it let me know what you think. I am open for any suggestions of improvement here. Thanks! --TriosLosDios (talk) 04:49, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey TLD! You're catching me just before I have to log off for a while. Will get back to you as soon as I can. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:52, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

TriosLosDios, an interesting read! The first thing you'll want to do is collect some independent, non-government sources. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I do agree {ping|Firefangledfeathers} this is definitely an interesting read. Now that the government sources have been applied to draft. I looked into locating a non-government source. I'm still not upto par w/ ... even using visual editor to add Cite source ... I'm still having some (possible) difficulty. Also, if there is any way you can explain the purpose or similarity between what topics are used in references & see also sections ? Think I'm almost there but looks can be deceiving. Thanks, for your phenomenal inspiration 💯 TriosLosDios (talk) 18:32, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't use Visual much, but maybe we can try an example together. Looks like you want to cite an epa.gov source right after "... protect people and the environment." You should

1. Delete the url and brackets you currently have there
2. Have your cursor right where you want the citation to be, just after the period after "environment".
3. Click the "Cite" button in the top menu. It has a quotation mark icon.
4. Stay on the "Automatic" tab
5. Paste the url
6. Click "Create"
7. Click "Insert"

If that works, I can help you with the next couple steps. The "See also" section is just for links to other Wikipedia articles, not for sources. Sources that aren't used in any citations but that might be interesting to the reader go in a "Further reading" section. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes & think I messed up my references & see also sections of the article. Overall the article turned out to be pretty interesting. As for your additional suggestions for using Visual editor; I will keep those tips for future use. However, I mainly use source editor. Thanks, for being an Amazing Mentor ! TriosLosDios (talk) 00:46, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I misunderstood! I only use source editor. Would you like some help formatting the references? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes there's an obviously learning curve here that I am interested in participating. Help, with formatting the references will be greatly appreciated. Thanks! TriosLosDios (talk) 01:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 63

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 63, May – June 2024

• One new partner
• 1Lib1Ref
• Spotlight: References check

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Category deletions

Hello, Firefangledfeathers,

Please use Twinkle to delete pages like categories that are deleted as the result of a CFD, in this case, Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Category:Tourism in the Republic of Artsakh. Right now, the page's deletion notice says that they were deleted as the result of CSD G6 "Housekeeping" when the deletion tag on the page actually linked to the CFD discussion where it was decided to delete them. Then editors will know not to recreate them because of the deletion discussion but G6 doesn't refer to this at all If you just use Twinkle, select CSD, it will have the field all filled out with the link to the CFD, please do this rather than just doing a page deletion and selecting CSD G6 that provides no information on why they were deleted. This also works with PRODs as well. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:30, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Good advice. Thanks Liz! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:32, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wladekimperialny

I don't think I ever thanked you for relisting the above SPI on July 16 to get an answer to my question. With Spicy's helpful response today, I was able to act and close. Belated thanks!--Bbb23 (talk) 15:19, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

No problem, Bbb23! Glad it helped. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:23, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (16:58, 23 July 2024)

Hey. I'm copyeditng one of my Signpost reports with a recommendation in the comments, and I'm going to link to this this page https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Fair_use. Is there a way of linking to it as an internal-wikilink, and not as a external-hyperlink? --Svampesky (talk) 16:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Never mind. I worked out how to do it! Svampesky (talk) 18:24, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

GS/AA violation

Hello Firefangledfeathers, hope you're doing well. Sorry for bothering you. User:Hew Folly has already been told of WP:GS/AA at least twice [24] [25], but today they once again violated it through WP:TENDENTIOUS editing [26]. Would greatly appreciate if you could deal with this. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:48, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Gave a formal warning. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:28, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Firefangledfeathers! HistoryofIran (talk) 15:40, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

The Qajar Iran is related neither to the Republic of Azerbaijan nor to the Republic of Armenia. hence, i edited it. Hew Folly (talk) 17:19, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

More AA concerns

Hello Firefangledfeathers, sorry for bothering you again. But this user is still causing trouble, and I think they're bad news. Not only do they seem to be farming easy edits (eg [27] [28] [29] [30] [31]) to get those WP:GS/AA rights, but they also blatantly misrepresented a source [32] (I've linked a older idiff on purpose to make it more reader friendly, they do try to defend their actions afterwards but it makes absolutely zero sense), taking part a text out of context and then giving their own personal interpretation to push a view only supported in the widespread historical revisionism in Azerbaijan [33], in other words, WP:TENDENTIOUS. This is just scratching the surface. There also seems to be WP:CIR/WP:IDHT issues. Despite being told several times that we rely on WP:RS, not our own personal deductions/opinions (eg [34] [35] [36] [37]), they still recently sponsored their own WP:SYNTH/WP:OR yesterday [38], as if it had any meaning (and the "note" barely makes sense as well). HistoryofIran (talk) 06:53, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Firefangledfeathers!

If the topic is not related to the GS/AA violation, I propose to add a new topic. Hew Folly (talk) 14:11, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

It's not related to GS/AA violation, it's related to disregard of countless policies - I just put it here instead of creating a new thread. And I assume you're referring to the distorted, cherrypicked, seemingly Russian [39] to English Google Translated WP:TLDR you created? [40]. Also, I find it odd that you refer to me as "HoI", it's an old name I am rarely referred by, and you are quite new here. The last new user who did that was exposed as a sock and meatpuppet [41]. HistoryofIran (talk) 14:18, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Hew Folly, in case it helps, I've made this a new subsection. I'd prefer to keep this whole discussion together for later review in the archives. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:45, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Simply put, the entire debate was exclusively on the Talk page. @HistoryofIran accused me of violating WP:No original research,[42] although the policy doesn't apply to talk pages and other pages which evaluate article content and sources, such as deletion discussions or policy noticeboards[43]

For more details: [44] Hew Folly (talk) 22:12, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I've made a response [45] to these distorted claims. Hopefully it should be enough proof. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:18, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi HistoryofIran. I won't have time to look into this for another day or so. If it's urgent, consider filing at WP:AE. If not, I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:45, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Hew Folly, the community is very sensitive to possible permissions gaming when it comes to topics covered by extended-confirmed restriction. The diffs provided by HistoryofIran are concerning, but not damning. Expect some scrutiny, and consider avoiding minor changes and sandbox edits until you are extended confirmed.

Still looking into the other matters. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:20, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

HistoryofIran and Hew Folly, I'm not going to take any action here except to give some advice:

1. We have a source that HistoryofIran praised and that Hew Folly has criticized. It's common argumentation to say something like what Hew Folly has here, along the lines of "even this source that you prefer supports my side in these ways". I don't see this as straightforward misrepresentation, and since Hew Folly had previously quoted the intro to the numbered list, I don't think the cherry picking charge is quite right either.
2. HistoryofIran, you're running into the classic problem of uninvolved admins tending to be less informed than the involved editors. I can't appropriately evaluate, for example, your claim that Hew Folly's view is "only supported in the widespread historical revisionism in Azerbaijan". I can't rely on the Wikipedia article you've linked, and I wouldn't care to read the books you could likely cite supporting that point. Consider raising your threshold for seeking sanctions.
3. Hew Folly, you now have a pattern of line-crossing and borderline conduct in the AA topic area. Consider radical changes to your approach and conduct, or a topic ban is likely. If you're not sure what policy-compliant editing looks like, spend some time in less contentious topic areas.
4. Hew Folly is right that the OR policy has a specific exemption for discussion on talk pages and other discussion venues. HistoryofIran, consider rephrasing similar warnings in the future. I'd say something like "We have to engage in some critical evaluation of sources in order to create a quality encyclopedia. That said, it's rarely productive to engage in lengthy argument with expert sources. Unless there are some obvious falsehoods, we are prejudiced in favor of the reliable experts and against the opinions of anonymous non-experts. If you have an equivalent level of expertise to the subject, please publish your analysis in a reliable source and we can then consider your points on equal footing here." Hew Folly, please consider that moving forward.
5. HistoryofIran, you need to find a more restrained way of criticizing Azerbaijani sources. Statements like "Azerbaijani "sources" are not WP:RS because they engage in historical falsification/negationism" are overstated and inflammatory.
6. Hew Folly, there are many sites on the internet that post copyrighted material without permission. Do not link to them on Wikipedia.
7. Hew Folly, this is not the most important issue, but you're creating a lot of improperly formatted links. You can link to Wikipedia pages using double brackets and to external sites using single brackets. Formatting like ":~:text=HoI vs Hew Folly[,to HoI and created tables." when appended to the end of your links does nothing except complicate and confuse.

Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:49, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

We have a source that HistoryofIran praised and that Hew Folly has criticized. It's common argumentation to say something like what Hew Folly has here, along the lines of "even this source that you prefer supports my side in these ways". I don't see this as straightforward misrepresentation, and since Hew Folly had previously quoted the intro to the numbered list, I don't think the cherry picking charge is quite right either.

But that's the issue. The source does not even support their side in another way. This is what was omitted right before the quotes; "Although the overwhelming number of nineteenth-century Russian and Iranian,2 as well as present-day European historians view the Iranian province of Azarbayjan and the present-day Republic of Azerbaijan as two separate geographical and political entities, modern Azeri historians and geographers view it a single state that has been separated into “northern” and “southern” sectors and which will be united in the future.3 This unsubstantiated claim rests on a number of factors:" So Bournoutian does not even support those claims.

And thanks for your whole response, I will try to do better. HistoryofIran (talk) 05:55, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

I do understand how that intro to the numbered list recontextualizes the following items. I may be reading him wrong, but it does seem like Bournoutian is stating that those factors are factual. His conclusion appears to be that the factors do not fully support the claim you've underlined. It's not clear if Hew Folly is making that same claim, or one adjacent to it, but if Bournoutian's factors are factual, it's not overly tendentious to cite them as evidence. it seems like it brings you both back to the administrative vs. geographical debate, which is not addressed by the Bournoutian quote, at least not explicitly. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:15, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

But Bournoutian refers to the claims of the Azeri historians as "unsubstantiated" and describes what WP:RS actually says just before that. Moreover, Bournoutian literally uses the word "administration/administrative" in b) and d). And in c), he simply says "Following the Treaty of Gulistan, the khanates of Nakhichevan and Yerevan and their khans were subordinate to `Abbas Mirza, the commander-in-chief of the Iranian forces in Tabriz (Azarbayjan)." [46]. So never does Bournoutian say that "the toponym of Azerbaijan was used in reference to the territory of the contemporary Republic of Azerbaijan long before 1918" as claimed. Heck, in a) which was also omitted, Bournoutian says "Hence, after the rise of their national consciousness at the start of the twentieth century, it was convenient for the Muslim Tatars living in the South Caucasus to refer to themselves as Azeris and to their newly formed independent republic (1918) as Azerbaijan." Following pages after, Bournoutian goes into even further depth in criticising historical rewriting by Soviet and Azerbaijani historians. HistoryofIran (talk) 14:05, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Speaking, again, from a place of ignorance, I can't tell if he means "unsubstantiated" in the sense of "everything I'm about to list is false" or "everything I'm about to list is true, but it doesn't prove the claim". I suspect it's the latter. Good point on "administrative". I hope you don't feel you need to convince me further. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:05, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers thanks for your time, comprehensive response and helpful advice! Hew Folly (talk) 08:22, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Firefangledfeathers, sorry for barging in, but I would also like to comment here, as I also had a dispute with HistoryofIran at Talk:Karabakh_Khanate#Language a while ago. I made no actual edits to the article, I just proposed at talk some improvements and sources, and was not particularly impressed by HistoryofIran accusing me of violation of pretty much every rule in existence and threatening to report me to AE over a content dispute. We had a lengthy debate, but failed to reach a consensus. I would appreciate if you could provide a third opinion or advise on the best way of dispute resolution. I will present below my vision of the situation. The main dispute is about the line "The administrative and literary language in Karabakh until the end of the 19th century was Persian". That is not accurate, as every literary encyclopaedia writes about rich Azerbaijani literature flourishing in the region (Azerbaijani Khanates/khanates of Caucasus, the territory of modern day Azerbaijan Republic), describing the most prominent figures. I have collected relevant sources at User:Grandmaster/Literature. These are specialist sources on the Azerbaijani literature written by the top international experts on the subject. HOI presented a number of sources that state Persian was the main literary language in the region. However those sources are mostly one-liners that do not elaborate what kind of Persian literature existed in the region, and who were the Persian language writers/poets. The fact is that all known literary figures from Karabakh and other khanates were Azerbaijani Turkic poets/writers, such as Molla Panah Vagif, Molla Vali Vidadi, Khurshidbanu Natavan, Gasim bey Zakir, etc. I'm not aware of any 18-19 century Persian poets from the region, the sources do not mention any, and HOI also failed to name any either. Another thing is that many Azerbaijani literary figures would occasionally write some Persian poetry too, which would make them bilingual. My proposal was to simply mention that both Persian and Azerbaijani Turkic were the literary languages in the region, as we have sources supporting both. HOI wants to state that Persian was the main literary language, and Azerbaijani was secondary, as some sources appear to make such claim. But there are also sources that say otherwise. For example, encyclopedia Iranica states that "writing is almost exclusively in Azeri Turkish" to the north of Araks in the 18th century. If we are unable to name any more or less well-known exclusively Persian language literators from the region, and sources conflict on what was the main literary language of the region, isn't the most reasonable solution just to state that both languages were literary? Sorry if this is too long and hard to read. I'm just interested in an outside opinion to resolve the dispute by consensus. Grandmaster 07:50, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey Grandmaster. If you'd like to restart that discussion, a request for a WP:Third opinion would probably be wise. Since the discussion was so lengthy, it might be helpful for both of you to provide a one-paragraph summary of your position and the strongest bits of evidence. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:57, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

@Grandmaster:, we were getting closer to reaching an agreement but you stopped replying. There many errors here, two of the poets you are mentioning were not even active in the Karabakh Khanate, you already know that yet you still used this argument, which is WP:SYNTH (the Karabakh khanate did not even exist during Khurshidbanu Natavans lifetime). I’m taking this to AE, where I can show everyone what you are doing more clearly. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:05, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

The article in its present version says that "The administrative and literary language in Karabakh until the end of the 19th century was Persian". If we talk about the period from the 18th until end of the 19th century, then those later poets are relevant. If not, then Vagif was the one who wrote in the khanates times. I'm alright with requesting a third opinion on this. Grandmaster 14:06, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

But we’re not. Its as if you forgot everything that was said (and thats me trying my utmost to have WP:GF, because you consistenly did similar during the discussion). Both our proposals had nothing to do with the 19th century, heck this is the first time you’re making this claim. I’ll be sure to include this as well. See you at AE. HistoryofIran (talk) 14:25, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

WP:AE is not for content disputes. WP:DR is. Grandmaster 14:29, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey

@ActionHeroesAreReal keeps removing sourced info from the article Tupac Shakur, he keeps saying the sourced info is original research. He keeps randomly removing info from the article, and Everytime in his edit summary he says "see talk page" when other editors disagreed with his edits on the talk page, so he's basically lying about what other editors are saying. This has been going on for a very long time, and he keeps getting the article locked because of edit warring and content disputes, but he's not really getting any warnings from administrators telling him to stop. Can you tell him to stop, because of his actions now I'm checking the Tupac Shakur article every 5 minutes, and it gives me a headache because I'm usually outside. Someone just have him stop this is extremely annoying. You're an administrator, right? HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 00:41, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi HumansRightsIsCool. I'm an administrator, but I've been involved in disputes with AHAR, and I couldn't be the one to act administratively. They've already been blocked once for edit warring, and they previously were warned about edit warring at the Tupac article by Swatjester. Swatjester, AHAR did not engage at the talk page a single time during the full protection period, then they restored their preferred version the day after the protection expired. Enough for another block? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:19, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Yep, that'd do it. Blocked them for a week, given their recent edit-warring block. Next one should be indefinite. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 02:02, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. Thanks for the quick attention. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:14, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Question from Rjmnijman (09:29, 25 July 2024)

Hello, thanks for welcoming me!

I've been asked to make some alterations and additions on account of outdated and/or incomplete information on an existing Wiki page. However, all of yesterday's edits were overturned. Perhaps it's best that I redo them in a sandbox environment. Can I create a copy of an existing page there to test out my proposed edits? --Rjmnijman (talk) 09:29, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Rjmnijman. It looks like the edits were undone because they contained some copyright violations. Even in a sandbox, we can't host such material here. I would suggest keeping it offline while you find a way to put it all in your own words. Be aware also of close paraphrasing, which is also not permitted. If you are the copyright holder, you may want to republish the material somewhere online with a compatible license (see WP:COMPLIC for some suggestions). Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:35, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! I've placed the desidered alterations in a sandbox environment as a mirror, [47] and will look into the appropriate permissions (as I am allowed to used the supposed copyright protected bits). What are the appropriate channels to offer the sandbox version as a desired new version of the page it is mirroring? Rjmnijman (talk) 07:46, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Firefangledfeathers, would it be possible for you to have a look at the sandbox @ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rjmnijman/sandbox? Thanks very much in advance! Rjmnijman (talk) 08:18, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Rjmnijman. Unfortunately, it looks like you copied and pasted material from copyrighted sources, including the company's history page. I deleted the revisions that contain copyrighted material. You need to be very careful moving forward. Continued copyright violation after multiple warnings frequently leads to a block. Have you read WP:COPYVIO? Do you have any clarifying questions? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:59, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I did check the links for how to create and edit a sandbox, the page had notations at the beginning and the end; it said "content copied from 1 on 30 July 2024 for purposes of testing and proposing changes to original page." so I don't understand why the text would be changed back?

Also i have permission from the source as I was asked to propose these changes to their original page; how and where can i show that it's not a copyvio but rather a permitted use of text? Rjmnijman (talk) 12:06, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Rjmnijman, it's okay to copy material from other Wikipedia pages, provided you note that you've done so (see WP:COPYWITHIN for best practices). You can't copy material from copyrighted sources, even if it's for testing and proposal purposes.

If Avery Dennison is willing to freely license the parts of the website you're pulling from, they can edit their site to remove the copyright symbol from the bottom of those pages. They should replace it with one of the free licenses that are compatible with Wikipedia (see WP:COMPLIC). I tend to remind people in these cases that the license means that others can re-use the content however they want, including for commercial purposes.

When you say you were "asked to propose these changes", it makes it clear you have a conflict of interest with the company. Please declare it and follow the other guidance provided at WP:COI. If you are being paid to make these proposals, you must declare per WP:PAID and follow that policy scrupulously. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:40, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks again for your valuable insights. It is greatly appreciated. I will add the full disclosure to my User page as well as inform the company that they have to remove the copyright limitations if we wish to add the new information as is. Rjmnijman (talk) 10:34, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı

Hi,

I just wanted to let you know that BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı has a complaint against them in ANI. I was hoping you might be able to take a look and render judgment on the matter considering you've had some experience with this user in the past. I'm a bit concerned by Special:Diff/1236829027 considering their history of violating WP: GS/AA. Insanityclown1 (talk) 20:02, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

You must be literally obsessed with me. BaharatlıCheetos2.0'ın devamı (talk) 20:19, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

I commented there to say I don't have time for this matter. Hope it works out. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:45, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

No worries. Looks like everything got sorted out. Thank you for all of your hard working making the encyclopedia better. Insanityclown1 (talk) 22:23, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (15:26, 29 July 2024)

Hey. I'm tidying up my userspace, but I can't work out how to delete User:Svampesky/testcode move and User:Svampesky/testcode.css. I tried moving it should it wouldn't have '.css' at the end, but it didn't work. Can you delete both pages for me? Thanks. --Svampesky (talk) 15:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

 Done Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:51, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Deadpool & Wolverine uncredited cast

Ayesha Hussain as Betsy Braddock/Psylocke

Chloe Kibble as Callisto

Jade Lye as Yuriko Oyama/Lady Deathstrike

Eduardo Gago Muñoz as Azazel

Daniel Medina Ramos as Mortimer Toynbee/Toad

Curtis Rowland Small as Lester/Bullseye

Jessica Walker as Philippa Sontag/Arclight

Nilly Cetin as Quill (female for some unknown reason)

Billy Clements as Ivan/Russian

Also btw Rob's minuteman is in the movie, in the cage, the scene from the trailer where Alioth grabs him is cut sadly Swordjetska (talk) 19:34, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Swordjetska. I'm not sure why you're mentioning this to me. If you're looking to include this in the article about the film, I suggest considering the guidance in MOS:CASTLIST. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:24, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (01:16, 31 July 2024)

I !voted delete in an AfD and fell into a hole researching the topic. Is it bad-form for me to nominate another article for deletion in that same topic while the one I !voted delete is still running? --Svampesky (talk) 01:16, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey Svampesky. I don't think it's bad form. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:25, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Svampesky (talk) 01:40, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

re: Miraclass article

Hello, Firefangledfeathers. An IP user added an advertisement tag to the Miraclass article. I made some changes to the article, and the IP user commented that it had improved but still needed more work. I edited the article again and replied to the user's topic on the talk page, but it seems that the user is no longer active or may have changed their IP. Is there a way to get a review of the revised article? Rosuacamus (talk) 10:14, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Rosuacamus. Try leaving a message at the IP user's talk page. It's the best way to leave them a notification. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:31, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I left a message at the talk page. Rosuacamus (talk) 14:47, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Question from Ygscr (05:14, 3 August 2024)

Hello, I noticed there was some vandalism on the heart and greed television series page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_and_Greed

I have removed the vandalism. Looking at the edit history it seems to have been done by DramsCatte on October 21, 2021. How do I report this user? --Ygscr (talk) 05:14, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Ygscr. Thanks for catching that vandalism. Looks like it was actually added by an unregistered user in May and June 2021 (link to the changes). The user you mention just moved it around. Either way, we don't normally report vandalism that old. If you notice some recent vandalism, you should warn the user. If they continue past a few warnings, report them at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Both the warning and the reporting are easier with WP:TWINKLE, which you'll be able to install once you're a little bit more experienced. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:42, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (16:14, 5 August 2024)

In the AfD for Vivian Jenna Wilson, I checked to see if the article needed to be de-orphaned and noticed a redirect using her deadname. I checked other articles about trans people, and found the same redirect issue with Death of Nex Benedict. This seems odd since the deadname is redacted on the talk page. WP:DEADNAME says it should not be included in any page (including lists, redirects. Should these redirects be deleted? It's a contentious matter, so I don't want to be blundering about it. --Svampesky (talk) 16:14, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

There's definitely a solid case for deletion. I don't think it would be a blunder to start RfDs. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:21, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

RfD as in Redirects for discussion? I think it would be a blundering, or perhaps even unwise to draw attention to things that have been redacted elsewhere on Wikipedia. WP:DEADNAME is a guideline, so is there a speedy deletion for redirects that would be more appropriate? Svampesky (talk) 16:32, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Hmmmm. I don't think there's a speedy deletion criteria that fits. There's a downside to spreading the deadnames, but RfD is a fairly low-profile place, and in both those cases the deadnames are somewhat widespread on the internet. If you come across a more sensitive case—for example, one where the subject is not out as being trans—there might be reason to tag with WP:G10. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:36, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I'll start by saying I was previously unfamiliar with RfD, so I might be misunderstanding it. WP:RFD#DELETE #3: The redirect is offensive or abusive, such as redirecting "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" to "Joe Bloggs" (unless "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" is legitimately discussed in the article), or "Joe Bloggs" to "Loser". (Speedy deletion criterion G10 and G3 may apply.) See also § Neutrality of redirects.. How is this not a case of WP:G10 as deadnaming is considered both offensive and abusive? Would the redirect fall under the scope of being redacted anyway, per the talk page? Svampesky (talk) 16:51, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I was WP:BOLD and nominated it for speedy deletion (this is not a request that you action it). A similar redirect, with a middle name, was unopposed to being deleted, citing WP:DEADNAME too. Svampesky (talk) 17:19, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

It was successful. The redirect was deleted as an attack page. Should this be written in black-and-white on the WP:G10 page for future reference? Svampesky (talk) 18:24, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I stand corrected! I'd suggest asking the deleting admin. She's one of our most experienced when it comes to deletion policy. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:44, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (18:29, 7 August 2024)

How do discussions on Commons work? I was tagged in some nonsense, but how do I discuss this on Commons? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:This_Is_Called_Emotional_Abuse.jpg --Svampesky (talk) 18:29, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

What's the equivalent of WP:AN on Commons? I tried searching, but the search results were the Commons media. Svampesky (talk) 18:34, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Svampesky, their equivalent is Commons:Administrators' noticeboard and its subpages. It looks like the issue may have been resolved already. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:22, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Question from Newsoup11 (16:26, 8 August 2024)

hello, how do i create a citation? --Newsoup11 (talk) 16:26, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Newsoup11. The full guidance is at Wikipedia:Citing sources, especially the section §How to place an inline citation using ref tags. You were very close in this edit. You got the ref tags right, and you just needed to remove the curly brackets around the url. Had you done so, you'd have successfully made a bare url reference. It's not the most informative citation, but it's something. If you'd like to step it up, I just using Template:Cite web. The formatting would be something like {{cite web|last1=Kuehl|first1=Tyler|title=Former NHL defenseman Oscar Klefbom announces retirement|url=https://www.dailyfaceoff.com/news/former-nhl-defenseman-oskar-klefbom-announces-retirement|website=Daily Faceoff|access-date=8 August 2024}} Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:17, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Question from Svampesky (19:22, 8 August 2024)

Can you walk me through the steps of reporting COI please? A BLP for a relatively unknown person Benji Krol was created by a single-purpose account 'User:Joshbanana'. I was going to take it to WP:COIN, but it says I have to discuss with them. --Svampesky (talk) 19:22, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Can I have some surveillance on my edits to Benji Krol please? I've removed all the poorly sourced content, but now the sexual misconduct allegations section is the largest, which might be disproportionate. I feel like I've turned it into an attack page. Svampesky (talk) 23:54, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey Svampesky. You have more experience with the body of sources on that subject than i do. If your instincts are telling you the current section is disproportionate, it's time to cut. We prefer not to remove material during an AfD, but BLP concerns trump that norm. As a courtesy to AfD participants, you may want to copy over any sources that you remove, so it's easier to analyze notability. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:58, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

I've never heard of this person before coming across the article on AfD. Based on the sourcing, the only reason they're notable seems to be due to sexual misconduct allegations, which makes it come across as an attack page. Svampesky (talk) 02:09, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

If they're only notable for a single incident, we're in a WP:BLP1E situation, and the article should probably be deleted. It seems like that's the way the AfD is heading. If that's the main focus of coverage, the current section is probably not disproportionate. Anything that isn't sourced to high-quality sources should be removed. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:15, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Noted here. Svampesky (talk) 02:22, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't think there's really much to do now about the COI angle. We have reasonable suspicion, one piece of evidence, and the pattern of editing. It's hard to distinguish for now between someone with a COI and someone with enthusiasm and little knowledge of our rules and practices. If the AfD goes against them and the problematic editing continues, a sanction is likely with our without confirmation of COI. FWIW, I'm not very experienced with COI as either an editor or an admin, so you may want to seek out a second opinion. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:03, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

DRN Rules

Thank you for pointing out the omission. I will check and compare the rules to see if anything is missing from any of them, within the next few days or so. As you saw, what is specific about DRN Rule D is that it reminds the participants that the subject is a contentious topic, and Riley Gaines is a gender and sexuality dispute. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:29, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

No problem! Thanks for moderating. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:18, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

TBAN appeal: Dympies

Hi Firefangledfeathers,

7 months back, you replaced my existing Rajput topic ban with a broader ban (that includes editing in India, Pakistan and Afghanistan related topics) after a discussion here. The primary reason cited for sanctions was the violation of existing Rajput Tban. For last seven months, I edited pages which are unrelated to India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. I made 325+ edits including creation of 6 articles. My editing in the duration was quite peaceful and I didn't receive further sanctions. The more I edited, more I learnt further about Wikipedia guidelines. Today, I find myself much more competent in editing Wikipedia than before. I feel that I can constructively contribute in the areas to which I don't have access presently; therefore I wish to appeal my TBAN here. I assure our community of following :

• I will keep adhering to my one-account restriction as I have been doing for last 7 months.

• Before adding any content, I will give more care to WP:DUE.

• I will try my level best to avoid edit warring. In accordance with the WP:BRD, I will discuss the matter first with fellow editors and take them into trust before making edits which can invite contentions.

Regards, Dympies (talk) 17:14, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Dympies, I don't see any major red flags in your recent contributions, and your appeal seems to hit about the right notes. Based on the history here, I'm not willing to unilaterally unban at this time. I suggest appealing at WP:AN or WP:AE. Based on what I've seen so far, I anticipate at least being neutral on the appeal. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:45, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Controversial moves?

Sure, I'd like to hear your take on the situations and opinions raised by Josh. Dicklyon (talk) 15:44, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

My main thought is that it's certainly not something worth losing a josh-level contributor over, so I appreciate you stepping away from his talk page, at least for a little while. I disagree with him about how the rcats say they should be used, though I agree with him about how I think they should eventually be used: other cap for uses that are WP-wrong but not real-world wrong. Both should populate the database of linked errors, since both should be fixed. I thought SMcCandlish's point at the last discussion—that there's no such thing as an unambiguous error—was interesting, but I think it's likely that most people will agree on most categorizations, and the grey areas can be resolved by normal discussion.

I'm pretty sure he's not the sensitive insecure type who would quit over a disagreement. I'm not even hassling him or reverting any his changes, or anything that should annoy him. Just started a discussion to try to understand him better; and him me. Dicklyon (talk) 16:49, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

There's a view held my many that you should know by now that moves to lowercase are controversial, and that you should therefore use RMs for all of them. I strongly disagree, and I don't think it's legitimate to say "I object to all potential capitalization changes", especially since it's provably true that the vast majority of them are uncontroversial. If people holding that view want to change NCCAPS, more power to them. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't think anyone has gone so far as to say that all such moves are controversial, or need to be discussed. I've continued to ask people to make objections or reverts if they think I've got something wrong, or controversial, but I get very few takers. Why is that? Dicklyon (talk) 16:49, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I haven't seen anyone say "all", but I've seen people use categories as broad as "sports articles", which is still obviously over-inclusive. I think you get very few takers because I think very few of your moves are actually controversial. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:11, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Exactly. I try not to do moves that might be controversial, without first discussing. Dicklyon (talk) 21:53, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that's actually an accurate statement. I am not the only person who has pointed out that you've made moves in areas you should have reasonably known were controversial; Andy Dingley's hostility issues aside, his points were valid here. You are mass-decapitalizing articles in a way that has inflicted catastrophic damage to the integrity of our coverage of military topics, based solely on your misunderstanding and misapplication of what constitutes a proper name, and without any regard for the differences between an error or sloppiness in a source vs. actual intentional usage of a proper name. You've never once sought prior consensus on a broader, systemic name change; not with the Wikiprojects, not as a general RFC or through any other organized process. You're just mass individually moving tons of articles, which has the effect of instituting a systemic change as a fait accompli and making it extremely tedious and tiresome to contest them. I've personally asked you several times to stop making such moves without prior discussion. Your arguments that you didn't think the moves would be controversial frankly don't hold a lot of water with me -- for instance, in the midst of the RM discussion on Talk:All-purpose Lightweight Individual Carrying Equipment -- which is so far trending towards "no consensus to decapitalize" at this point -- you took it upon yourself to immediately make decapitalization moves on practically every other linked article that was raised as a comparison or similarity to that one, something you absolutely should have known would be controversial. I think Josh's points on his talk page were very valid, and your absolute refusal to listen to them is verging on WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT territory. And this absolutely exhausting refusal to listen to other viewpoints is precisely why you're not getting the takers you're asking for -- nobody wants to waste their time talking to a brick wall. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 22:31, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I think this exchange highlights the problem with you stating: I have a hard time predicting that "potentially" thing that may seem obvious to you. When I see things that are not consistently capped in sources, and I move them to lowercase, I don't generally anticipate any pushback, and I don't often get any. So we'll have to just agree that we different perceptions of all that. and Josh stating I threw WP:PCM at you dozens of times, but you continue to make moves that are OBVIOUSLY going to be contested, seemingly in the hopes that nobody notices or cares enough to fight about it.. WP:PCM is pretty unambiguous here that if *anyone* potentially would disagree with the move -- including me, Josh, Andy, or any of the others who have repeatedly objected to *very similar* moves in the past -- you should discuss first. And yet, that does not happen, even after people have raised precisely this same argument with you. "But I think I'm right" is not an exemption. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 23:12, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm pretty fed up with such complaints when they're not coupled to specific examples of moves I've made. I know I make a lot of moves, and have done so for many years, most without specific discussion, due to lack of likely controversy. I know Andy had a problem with M40 gun motor carriage, and I coached him on how to ask for it to be reverted, or to do an RM to move it back. And I responded at several discussions he started about it, which he then failed to respond to; anyone else seeing those discussions could have helped, or supported him, or reverted my move, but nobody did any of that. If you think that one might be better off capitalized, in spite of all the RM discussions about such things and the clear evidence that it's not consistently capitalized in sources, please follow up. What else is on your mind? What has Josh pointed to as an error or bad move? We were just discussing redirect tags; we don't always agree, but he seems pretty reasonable,. and I trust he would speak up if he saw an inappropriate move. I've opened a number of RMs in recent months, and a few are still open. An RM is a slow tedious process that sucks down a lot of time from a lot of editors and closers, but sometimes it's necessary, and sometimes it doesn't go my way. Asking for a move I made to be reverted is an easy way to get us down that path when it's necessary, yet it's seldom done. So why the whining? Dicklyon (talk) 03:06, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I've literally provided an example above, but OK. We just had this discussion on my talk page at User_talk:Swatjester#Re_RIM-161_Standard_Missile_3 -- after being reverted you even admitted that you weren't sure whether "Standard missile" or "Standard Missile" was correct, but you had moved it to "standard missile" which would have been wrong either way. Your source was, as I pointed out, not a dispositive source and riddled with other errors that make it clear they were not attempting to be consistent in stylization. And yet, you still stated that you intend to, in the future, start a RM to push that change. Pointing out that Andy had problems with the M40 gun motor carriage article and that nobody complained isn't really applicable, and actually a pretty good counterargument here: the reason that Andy's complaint didn't go anywhere was because his RM was malformed, but it was only malformed because it was launched to start the discussion without having actually reverted the spelling back. Well yeah, nobody's going to revert a move that's actively under discussion. And if you think that RMs are a slow, tedious process, try reverting a large number of moves and then cleaning up the messes afterwards of redirects, updating backlinks, etc. You're making a very excellent argument for why these things should be discussed first. As for Josh, he oppose the move at ALICE, but either way, whether the opposition is to redirects or moves are irrelevant -- it's the over-aggressive attempts to decapitalize articles that don't need decapitalization is the problem. But you know what? I'm done with talking to a brick wall. You win. We're all just "whining", we just need to let you have your fait accompli and if we don't revert literally everything; it's our own fault and clearly there can't possibly be any culpability on your part. Because that's how Wikipedia works right? ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 08:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I acknowledge that those two, from a month ago and a week ago, were reverted and are under discussion. And no you don't have to do a bunch of cleanup to revert or challenge a move. Dicklyon (talk) 21:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Question from Stephen Austinian (17:41, 5 September 2024)

how do i edit articles --Stephen Austinian (talk) 17:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Stephen Austinian! Welcome to Wikipedia. I'll drop a welcome notice at your user talk page with some suggestions about how to get started. A lot of people have a good experience with the "Suggested edits" that you can see on your homepage. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:44, 5 September 2024 (UTC)