User talk:Mr. Guye/Archive 18
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Mr. Guye. 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. |
| Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | → | Archive 25 |
| This is a subpage of Mr. Guye's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
0486275574 listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 0486275574. Since you had some involvement with the 0486275574 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:08, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2017 in United States
A tag has been placed on Category:2017 in United States requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. AusLondonder (talk) 16:24, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
Draftifying in NPP
I noticed that you draftified an article today Draft:Mulanthuruthy Padiyola. First, whenever draftifying, it is a good idea to leave a message at the user's talk page, as otherwise they likely will not know where to find the draft to work on it, or know why it has been moved to draft. I recommend installing the script User:Evad37/MoveToDraft as it automates whole process for you. I also recommend requesting the pagemover user right, as it allows you to move pages without leaving redirects, and avoids the issue of having to tag the redirect for speedy deletion. Cheers and thanks for your contributions to NPP. — InsertCleverPhraseHere 05:14, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
I enabled auto-archiving. Everything should clear off the page in about 6 hours, if you don't want to do it manually. Power~enwiki (talk) 19:50, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
Category:People critical of Donald Trump has been nominated for discussion
Category:People critical of Donald Trump, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:37, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
July 2017
Hello Mr. Guye. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that there is consensus that we shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1) and/or content (CSD A3) moments after they are created, as you did at Nathalie Pires. It's usually best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course still be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. Adam9007 (talk) 18:23, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
WikiProject Politics/American politics
- @Jon698: Sure! You can join by adding your name under the section #Participants. It looks like I'm the only name there right now, but I think there are some informal members whose names aren't there. I didn't create the task force, but I think I'm the most active member. But yeah, join! It is a task force of WikiProject Politics. Just saying though, you don't have to be a member of a WikiProject or task force in order to contribute to Wikipedia articles. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 02:29, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Gossberg (Hunsrück): Review
Sir, I realize your concern about sources but let me clarify a couple of points here. First of all, the German version of this article has even less sources and it was accepted regardless. By the way, some information in that German article is inaccurate or incomplete. Secondly, we're talking here about a secret military object with extremely limited access, so don't even hope to find anything about it over the Internet except for some vague mentions on forums and Google Groups. It's not a museum and it's not open for public, thus, obtaining detailed information about it will be nearly impossible. Finally, I know people who own it personally, I've myself been inside, and I had a luxury to look through the (huge) pile of documentation on it. My proposal is to accept the article as it is right now because more "verifiable" sources is simply not going to happen in the nearest future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.96.203.158 (talk) 09:15, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Re reviewing
Sorry for asking but who is in charge of reviewing Wikipedia articles scope on the Talk pages. I am asking for Independent Party of Delaware, Humane Party, Veterans Party of America, United Independent Party and American Delta Party to be reviewed again.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jon698 (talk • contribs)
- @Jon698: Like within the scope of a WikiProject? Anyone, really. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 20:17, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Regunta Yesurathnam
I had already created "Regunta Yesurathnam" whereas there is another one under Draft which you have edited. Is there a possibility of editing the main article and removing the one under Draft.Meher Mansion (talk) 16:54, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Meher Mansion:
Done Redirected the draft to the main article. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 17:21, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Article request for Research Facility
Hello, I saw your request for an article on Research Facility. As the term is vague, can you specify what type of Research Facility you are requesting?--Wikishagnik (talk) 17:02, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Wikishagnik: I want an article on the general concept of a scientific research facility. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 03:31, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, please check if Research center is what you are looking for.--Wikishagnik (talk) 12:06, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Wikishagnik: I wasn't aware that article existed. Ok, I redirected Research facility to Research center. Thanks. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 00:45, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, please check if Research center is what you are looking for.--Wikishagnik (talk) 12:06, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
altleft
look please read the links in the link the altleft is real but the editors keep on saying "there is no altleft" "and, since there seem to be not actual self-identifying adherents," but i found it its real https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Alt-left#irl_altleft_movement 2001:8003:117E:6D00:433:304F:CC39:2D5F (talk) 00:37, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- I didn't say it wasn't real. I agree with you more than those editors. The problem is, your tendency to post unreliable blogs as sources is starting to turn them against you because it looks like you are actually attempting to promote those sites, in violation of Wikipedia's anti-spam policies instead of genuinely trying to prove your point. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 01:07, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
ok 2001:8003:117E:6D00:433:304F:CC39:2D5F (talk) 02:29, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Do not reject pending changes on FIFA articles after matches have occurred. Qualification matches in Europe have completed today. See the reports at http://www.fifa.com/ and http://www.uefa.com/. Please make sure to review all changes and use external sources if you have to while reviewing changes. Thank you. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 00:43, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you!
Thank you very much Mr. Guye for help me to expand my Page that is so nice from you!!, I appreciate, I wish you a nice day!.AlfaRocket (talk) 11:21, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Friendly notification
Hi Mr. Guye,
This is a friendly notification to let you know that I have recently posted a detailed rationale for the decision to revert an edit you recently made to the Environmental racism in Europe article. Please feel free to consult other editors should you continue to maintain a different viewpoint on the matter.
The response can be found on the Environmental racism in Europe talk page, under the heading "Rationale for length of article: organization by region and national jurisdiction."
Thank you for your taking the time to consider this response.
Sturgeontransformer (talk) 00:13, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Vivienne de Silva Boralessa
Hi Mr. Guye. You made a request on WikiProject Sri Lanka on 13 April for an article for Vivienne de Silva Boralessa. Just dropping you a line to tell you it's done :) Thanks for putting the request in!
I am curious though, since I notice you aren't a Sri Lankan yourself- how'd you end up making the request?
- ක - (talk) 12:09, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
- Jesuschristonacamel I don't remember, to be honest. I may have been exploring other language wikis and saw a long article on her in one of them. I will tell you that Vivienne de Silva Boralessa isn't the only time I've requested an article by putting it on the appropriate WikiProject's page. I do that when I discover an obviously notable subject (usually from a country other than the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, India, Nigeria, etc) that, shockingly, doesn't have an English Wikipedia article. Thanks for creating the article, Wikipedia needed it. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 17:08, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
Sorry about that. I was tagging it for CSDG11 about when you moved it, so Twinkle saw you as the "article creator" who needed to be alerted... :-) --Randykitty (talk) 17:27, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Randykitty: It's totally fine. I understand that it was a gadget mistake. No problem. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 17:29, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
New Page Reviewer granted
Hello Mr. Guye. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.
- URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
- Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
- You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
- Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
- Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.
The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Alex ShihTalk 01:27, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Talk:Labor Day etc.
The ClueBot III archiving wasn't working, so I changed the auto-archiving method and removed the 'Archive Now' templates. Wanted you to know why I altered your edits on that article talkpage. Shearonink (talk) 23:00, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Stub sorting
Please don't use the {{Stub}} tag if you can find a more specific stub tag; stub sort whenever you are able. To do otherwise will backlog Category:Stubs. Thank you. (I realize some people aren't able to stub sort very well due to issues surrounding memory or feeling overwhelmed by the unfortunately long list of stub types; sorry if you're one of them). -- I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message (talk to me) (My edits) @ 04:20, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- @I dream of horses: I apologize. I usually use the {{Stub}} template temporarily, then replace it with a more specific template (although, not as specific as it probably could be) such as {{USA-bio-stub}} or {{Theater-stub}}. Could you tell me where I left the general template and didn't replace it? And yes there are a lot of stub types, which is a little overwhelming. I usually use ones where I can safely assume that they exist, similar to the ones I've mentioned already. I wish there was a tool that could help editors find the best ones. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 15:54, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- I've corrected several people doing this. You're not the only one. I can't recall which article caused me to send this message. My apologies. I do recall looking at your contributions, and noticing you were doing this multiple times through page curation.
- I've heard mention of user scripts to do just that; I tried one and kept getting error messages when I tried to save my js, so gave up rather quickly. If you look into the subcategories that the template you're using puts the articles into (like Category:American people stubs for {{USA-bio-stub}}, or Category:Theatre stubs for {{theater-stub}}, for example), it might be less overwhelming and let you stub sort even further. You can even right-click on those stub categories to open a new tab while in preview. I do that a lot, actually. -- I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message (talk to me) (My edits) @ 03:03, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Help me: Citation of government research
 | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
I want to cite research.noaa.gov/News/NewsArchive/LatestNews/TabId/684/ArtMID/1768/ArticleID/12202/Possible-new-threat-to-Earth’s-ozone-layer.aspx, a government website announcing research in what seems to me like a news style (as opposed to a scholarly style). Is there a citation template (like {{cite web}}) intended specifically for citations of government sources, or even of governmental research sources? — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 20:36, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
- In a word, no. Really all of the "cite X" family have the same base params, but if you wanted to be more accurate I suppose you could use {{cite news}} (but it would be window dressing). Primefac (talk) 20:47, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Critics of Donald Trump
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Category:Critics of Donald Trump, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for Deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discusion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. LM2000 (talk) 13:52, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
- @LM2000: For the record, after the other category deletion discussion closed, I tried to get it speedy deleted per G7 creator request, but it was denied because people were adding to it. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 18:34, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Deadly Severe Tropical Storm Noru
That is... oh boy... one heckuva redirect there. Lol. Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Storm TJWtalk 19:51, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Timothyjosephwood:. . .and I just realized I made a mistake. The redirect should be "Severe Tropical Storm Noru". The "deadly" part was the sources's way of informing that it's already killed people. I'll change that. But still, LOL. There are actually scales like that though. "Very Intense Tropical Cyclone" is one of them (see Tropical cyclone scales#South-Western Indian Ocean). — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 19:59, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Class changes
Any reason you have been changing article ratings using a script? I tried changing one only for the script to be overwritten. YE Pacific Hurricane 06:13, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Yellow Evan: I've been making banner edits for a considerable time and only relatively recently did I discover the script. I think that many of these cyclone articles have been underrated. Sorry about that last one. I understand your concern about the Noru article, so I'll revert it myself. I assume by your signature that you are active in articles about tropical cyclones and I must say that they are of decent quality. Perhaps I should raise my standards when it comes to those types of articles. What do you think? — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 18:40, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- I haven't looked at each change yet so I'll review others you've rated later. Partially because we have so many good articles (yay!) and partially since we don't use B class much (most non-current articles written by people like myself get assessed at C and then sent to GAN and possibly FAC, so the B class checklist is more moot point), I think our standards are more often than not a bit higher than most. I do appreciate you adding non-WPTC banners to other articles when necessary though. YE Pacific Hurricane 04:32, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:39, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Excecution of Marie Antoinette listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Excecution of Marie Antoinette. Since you had some involvement with the Excecution of Marie Antoinette redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --Nevé–selbert 08:36, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
United States proposed federal legislation
I noticed that you copied a large number of articles from Category:United States proposed federal legislation into Category:United States federal legislation, but per WP:SUBCAT no article should simultaneously be in both categories because one is a direct parent of the other. Most of these articles should likely remain only in the proposed category. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 23:23, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
September 2017
Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to Kára McCullough. I noticed that when you added the image to the infobox, you added it as a thumbnail. In the future, please do not use thumbnails when adding images to an infobox (see WP:INFOBOXIMAGE). What does this mean? Well in the infobox, when you specify the image you wish to use, instead of doing it like this:
|image=[[File:SomeImage.jpg|thumb|Some image caption]]
Instead just supply the name of the image. So in this case you can simply do:
|image=SomeImage.jpg.
There will then be a separate parameter for the image caption such as |caption=Some image caption. Please note that this is a generic form message I am leaving on your page because you recently added a thumbnail to an infobox. The specific parameters for the image and caption may be different for the infobox you are using! Please consult the Template page for the infobox being used to see better documentation. Thanks! Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 23:53, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Zero Time Exercise
Hi, Mr. Guye,
"Zero Time Exercise" page has been speedy deleted recently, however, I think it is worth to keep as it is a exercise concept covered by many media in Hong Kong, and a academic conference paper. I have tried to "contest this speedy deletion", but resulting in "contest in the wrong place". Shall I contact the deleting administrator instead? Thanks for your help!Bao Bao Leung 0218 (talk) 03:40, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Bao Bao Leung 0218: The reason why the article was deleted was because it is pure advertising, not because it wasn't notable. But I do think you should contact the deleting administrator. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 17:06, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Mr. Guye: Thanks very much for your advice!! Or shall I post the article at "Articles for creation", so that the article can be given a peer review first? Thanks again! Bao Bao Leung 0218 (talk) 11:36, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Bao Bao Leung 0218: Yes, that is a good plan. There, you can work on the article with a reduced chance of having it speedy deleted. Editors may give you advice on how to improve the article. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 15:21, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Mr. Guye: Thanks a lot for your advice!Bao Bao Leung 0218 (talk) 02:10, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Mr. Guye: HI Mr. Guye, I have created a draft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Zero_Time_Exercise) seeking peer review, may I know if other editors can see the draft automatically? Thanks!Bao Bao Leung 0218 (talk) 07:36, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Mr. Guye: HI Mr. Guye, may I know if the draft has to go through "Talk" to reach consensus among editors? (but seems no one is talking about it). Thanks! Bao Bao Leung 0218 (talk) 03:59, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Bao Bao Leung 0218: I've actually already published it. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 04:08, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Mr. Guye: HI Mr. Guye, may I know if the draft has to go through "Talk" to reach consensus among editors? (but seems no one is talking about it). Thanks! Bao Bao Leung 0218 (talk) 03:59, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Mr. Guye: Thanks very much for your appreciation of the topic! But when I search via Google, it still shows it is a draft.Bao Bao Leung 0218 (talk) 08:41, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Bao Bao Leung 0218: Is it working now? I made some changes that should help search engines find it. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 01:18, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Mr. Guye: Yes! I saw it! Hope the article can survive for a long time! Many thanks for your help and guidance! Is it that after a draft is created for peer review, it has to be published by another Wikipedia editor? Thanks again!! Bao Bao Leung 0218 (talk) 02:37, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Bao Bao Leung 0218: Is it working now? I made some changes that should help search engines find it. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 01:18, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Mr. Guye: Thanks very much for your appreciation of the topic! But when I search via Google, it still shows it is a draft.Bao Bao Leung 0218 (talk) 08:41, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Backlog update:
- The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
- Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!
Technology update:
- The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225
General project update:
- On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
- Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
- To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:54, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks!
Hi Mr. Guye, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! ansh666 22:13, 22 September 2017 (UTC)