User talk:Scope creep

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13

The Signpost: 10 January 2024

• From the editor: NINETEEN MORE YEARS! NINETEEN MORE YEARS!

• Special report: Public Domain Day 2024

• Technology report: Wikipedia: A Multigenerational Pursuit

• News and notes: In other news ... see ya in court!

• In focus: The long road of a featured article candidate

• In the media: What is plagiarism? Oklahoma Disneyland? Reaching a human being at Wikipedia?

• WikiProject report: WikiProjects Israel and Palestine

• Obituary: Anthony Bradbury

• Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2023

• Crossword: everybody gangsta till the style sheets start cascading

• Comix: Conflict resolution

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:50, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

UPE at Ernest & Celestine: A Trip to Gibberitia?

Hey, is there evidence beyond the page history that there's been UPE at Ernest & Celestine: A Trip to Gibberitia? As much as I'm surprised to see the IP editor add a reception section claiming 100% approval on Rotten Tomatoes this late in the game, the citation appears legit and with 23 critics' reviews, it meets WP:GNG. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:48, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rosguill: It perhaps legitimate now after the editor was forced to update the article. Before that it was a complete mess. The editor has all the signs of being UPE, readying the film for the American Blue-ray release market, which is the main driver of film profitability, after the cinema. If you think it is notable, please remove the G11 tag. scope_creep^Talk 16:52, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Cool, I've restored the pre-speedy-tag version and added pov/UPE tags per your underlying concerns, which seem valid. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:58, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Lisa Hochstein - Illegitimate reasons for move to draftspace

This page was recently moved to draftspace by you, with the reason being "it has no sources and Refs are clickbait, interview and social media.." Can you please identify which sources are categorized as "clickbait" or originate from social media? And to say that this article "has no sources" is an assertion that lacks any basis. The Miami Herald and New York Times are unquestionably regarded as credible sources. While I can recognize that some of the sources used in this article may not be of the highest journalistic standards, this is commonplace within the domain of television personalities like the one under discussion. To illustrate, you can refer to other individuals in similar roles, such as Jacqueline Laurita, Dina Cantin, Carlton Gebbia, Gizelle Bryant, Ashley Darby, etc. You'll notice that these pages cite numerous sources that are considerably less reputable compared to the ones utilized in this article. With that said, moving the page to draftspace is not an appropriate measure, as it is on par, if not more qualified, compared to that of its peers. The move appears to be an unjustified exercise of authority, as the reasons cited for the move are completely unfounded. I have submitted the draft however, the most suitable course of action at this point would be for you to re-publish the page. CityLimitsJunction (talk) 17:49, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

@CityLimitsJunction: Comparing one article against other as though if one is present the others should be present is both disengenous and unhelpful. The articles references are really poor and until they are fixed, it will remain in draft. The Miami Herald newspaper article is about the house, not her, as is the New York Times, both of them don't prove the person is notable. This is a WP:BLP. Add valid WP:SECONDARY sources and it will go back in mainspace. scope_creep^Talk 07:06, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

@Scope creep: My intention in drawing comparisons was to illustrate that subjects in this particular industry are often reported on in similar publications, which appear to be acceptable for some but not others. Nevertheless, I have cited additional newspaper articles from the New York Daily News, the South Florida Sun Sentinel, and the Palm Beach Post. An additional reference from the Miami Herald has also been added. Given the introduction of aforementioned credible sources, the article should be ready to reenter mainspace. CityLimitsJunction (talk) 22:56, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Scope creep: Have you had a chance to re-review the Lisa Hochstein article? As previously mentioned, several additional credible sources, reinforcing the subject's notability, have been referenced. With that said, is there anything else preventing the article from moving to mainspace? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. CityLimitsJunction (talk) 19:32, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

@CityLimitsJunction: It needs reviewed by an uninvolved independent editor so I can be sure it is notable and written properly. It shouldn't take that long for somebody to review. Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 19:36, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

CS1 error on Sha Shtil

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Sha Shtil, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "generic title" error. References show this error when they have a generic placeholder title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 11:07, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Rachel Dübendorfer picture ?

Hello Scope creep,

I have come across that picture of Rachel Dübendorfer you uploaded : File:Rachel_Dübendorfer.jpg.

I have checked the source you provided (https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C11190827) and I have not found that picture in the file.

By the way, there are several copies of a photograph of Dübendorfer in the files https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C11190819 and https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C11190820, but she doesn't look much like this one.

Are you sure you there is no mistake ?

Regards, Rob1bureau (talk) 13:18, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rob1bureau: No. I could have been looking at several documents, searching and selected the wrong one as the source, so it could be somebody else. Human error maybe. It certainly not the ideal picture. I'll do an image search and see if I can find the url for that. If not then any one from those two documents above would be ideal. scope_creep^Talk 17:24, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rob1bureau: I just looked at the National Archives at https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C11190820. She doesn't look like her at all. There seems to be several images named Dübendorfer but they are nothing like the image in the archive document. It will need to come out. scope_creep^Talk 18:20, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Janusirsasana

Hi! I noticed you moved the Janusirsasana page I created to Drafts, citing "more sources needed" as the reason. I'm a bit confused. According to Wikipedia's general notability guideline and based on WP:3REFS, the Janusirsasana page would have notability & enough sources since I've used more than 3 reliable, in-depth references that are independent of each other. Additionally, there are many pages currently in existence that use 5 or less reliable sources. For example, Matsyasana is a C-class article with 5 sources. Pasasana is a start-class page with 4 sources. Split gymnastics is a start-class page with 3 sources. I plan to move the page out of drafts if there is nothing else wrong with the page. Thanks! Whitestar12 (talk) 16:12, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Whitestar12: How goes it? I hadn't seen that. It normal to put the square brackets around wp links so we can follow on it without actually doing a search. Its not number of sources that count, its the quality. You have two reference, to commericial organisations, one which is selling product, making them effectively spam links. Yoga is a very old practice. There should be plenty of sources on gbooks and other academic archives. Never use this types of spam references, ever, particularly since the average web page is only up for six weeks. Hope that helps. Once its fixed, please submit it for review. scope_creep^Talk 16:25, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

@Whitestar12: I sincerely hope your not adding these spam links in to other article. I see you have already been warned by Hipal for adding promotional material. Are you being paid to add this stuff? scope_creep^Talk 16:27, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for the quick reply back.

Sounds good, I'm adding the square brackets for WP links here. Thanks for letting me know.

Firstly, I had no intention of using promotional material and I am not being paid. As for the insistence with Hipal, that was one time & I was unaware it was promotional in nature. That was not my intent and I corrected it immediately.

Secondly, your comment for reverting to draft specifically said "more sources needed," which can be interpreted as more quantity. Thanks for clarifying.

Which sources are you referring to in specific as spam? 3 out of the 5 references are books. 1 reference is the yoga journal which is used in every single yoga asana page on wikipedia (including "good article" status asana pages such as virabhadrasana, siddhasana, and more) and is reliable. The 4th reference (website), I can see how this one may be questionable, and I am happy to remove it and replace with another reliable source. I can remove this one until I find something else.

Overall, I see only 1 reference that may be questionable. What is the second reference " to commercial organization?"

Thanks! Whitestar12 (talk) 18:27, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

@Whitestar12: I suggest you don't use any of these commercial sources again. I notice that on the Siddhasana, the GA reviewer is blocked, which doesn't imbibe confidence in me, that the article are genuine GA articles. On the virabhadrasana, there is a reference to https://bahiranga.com/the-history-and-meaning-of-warrior-pose/ which is selling product. That is straight spam link. This is selling product [1] I will need to talk to an admin for advice. scope_creep^Talk 19:02, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi - I agree with both your points, and with that in mind I removed the website.

Every single asana page on wikipedia uses the yoga journal (quite literally) as a source. You are welcome to search and check. I believe yoga journal is a reliable source and is not promotional according to WP:RS; it is a national publication. If you search any yoga asana from the list of asanas you will see yoga journal being used, including the yoga page itself. I'm happy to loop in other editors who have been editing yoga pages for their input.

Aside from the website, which I already removed, which other references are you referring to as "spam?"

Whitestar12 (talk) 21:32, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap - Hi! I know you're always editing yoga pages & have given input on my edits previously. What are your thoughts on yoga journal as a reliable source (if it's used in compliance with WP:MEDRS)? Would love your input. I wonder because majority of the asana pages I've seen reference it - I went down the list of the first 20 asanas in list of asanas & I found that 18/20 used yoga journal, see below.

Adho Mukha Shvanasana

Akarna Dhanurasana

Anantasana

Anjaneyasana

Ardha chandrasana

Astavakrasana

Baddha Konasana

Bakasana

Balasana

Durvasasana

Bharadvajasana

Bhekasana

Bhujangasana

Bhujapidasana

Bidalasana

Chaturanga Dandasana

Dandasana

Dhanurasana

Most pages I've seen including the yoga page itself references it. If it is not reliable, then perhaps we should open a discussion in WP:Yoga.

Thanks in advance!

Whitestar12 (talk) 22:18, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

YJ is the journal of record on modern postural yoga. It takes great care to be accurate, and its articles on the asanas are explained and illustrated with precision. From its foundation, it had serious and scholarly yoga teachers like Judith Hanson Lasater editing. It has a glossy side but it's also extremely responsible. You may find it helpful to read Yoga as exercise to grasp the relationship between all this and classical yoga.

As for Janusirsasana, it has long been a redirect to Paschimottanasana where it is discussed. We have the major asanas as articles, with similar asanas treated as variants: here, the sitting in stick pose is the root asana, and sitting like that with one leg folded is a variant. We don't need another article on the same thing. If someone has deletedthe redirect, we need it back!

All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 01:59, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch! I figured YJ was reliable, but thank you for providing the background & confirming.

As for the janusirsasana page - I will reinstate the redirect.

Whitestar12 (talk) 15:06, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

@Whitestar12: I don't this is settled. The relevant entry at Reliable Source Noticeboard is potentially this: [2] and seemed to be driven by Chiswick Chap. The consensus seemed seems to be clear it was a commerical site and as such is breaks Terms of Use. I intend to open a coin entry on this and let other have a look at it. scope_creep^Talk 16:22, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

@Scope creep I believe you are mistaken. The conversation in the RS noticeboard is discussing Yoga International which is different from Yoga Journal. If you are taking this to others for discussion, please ensure you are referencing the correct site - we are talking about Yoga Journal here in this thread NOT Yoga International. Also, a good option would be to post on WP:Yoga [3].

Thanks!

Whitestar12 (talk) 16:27, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

@Whitestar12: Yes, I think coi noticeboard is the wrong location. I will take a look at the Wikiproject. I'll post a message and see if I can get a view on it. scope_creep^Talk 16:42, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

@Scope creep Hi again! I reinstated the redirect but the "submit for draft" is still there. Do you by chance know how to submit this for speedy delete? Or if there's a way to remove it? Help would be appreciated.

Also, I'm planning to post this topic on the reliable sources noticeboard to solicit input from others.

Whitestar12 (talk) 01:20, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks

Just thanking you for the review of my page Travelling North. There was originally an article by the same title but it referred to the later film of the same name, derived from the play; I thought the play deserved its own official article! It turned out to be an interesting one to write (David W. is a good author with a lot to say, behind its apparently simple premise...) Anyway hi from Australia, where "north" means warm, south cold; the (e.g. UK or US.) equivalent would be relocating to the Mediterranean maybe, or Florida! Cheers - Tony Rees Tony 1212 (talk) 17:25, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

bare urls

Please don't add bare url template to the pages where there's no bare reference such as Kamaksha temple. Thanks, Egeymi (talk) 18:53, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

@Egeymi: They don't have publishing details in there, which means they are quite close to being bareurls. Having just the name of the web page and the organisation isn't enough to identify it later. It essentially makes it unfindable, unless its in an archive. Also can you add a trans-title property to the references so folk know what the say in English. scope_creep^Talk 19:04, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

What? There's no bare url so the template is unfit. You request, "Also can you add a trans-title property to the references so folk know what the say in English", is totally irrelevant as an answer to my statement.--Egeymi (talk) 19:08, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

@Egeymi: They are close to bare urls. I guess your not interested in fixing either of these problems. scope_creep^Talk 09:51, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

(drive-by comment) @Egeymi: neither of those requests is at all unreasonable. Elinruby (talk) 20:15, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Request writing article about Henk Pelser (Q110847318)

Hello Scope_creep, Would you like to write the article about Henk Pelser (Q110847318) for the English wikipedia? It'll be appreciated if it is done. Boss-well63 (talk) 09:44, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Boss-well63: I will add it to my todo list for the moment. Righteous Amongst The Nations honour for his work in the resistance makes him an ideal candidate for an article. It looks as though he is notable but it will be some time before I can get around to doing it. Thanks for bringing it to my notice. scope_creep^Talk 09:19, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Section (technical)

Hello, Would you mind amending the section heading you inserted here? It breaks the listing of the listed Afds. Maybe ";" is enough (instead of ==)? Thank you very much. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:50, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

@Mushy Yank: It will be gone by Sunday. Its just there so its easier to navigate the Afd. I will come out, I can assure you. scope_creep^Talk 19:14, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Fyi

ToBeFree extended-confirmed protected Elinruby (talk) 20:12, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Arbcom modification request I was talking about in the thread. A bit hard to find, so here:I think this link nk will work. Correct me if I am wrong but it looks to me like it passed for Holocaust in Lithuania, and they are cautiously interested in extending it to Eastern Europe, but it might be the wrong kind of hammer, in other words how do you get peer reviewed sources on the War in Ukraine? Please let me know if you think I am reading that wrong. Ta. Elinruby (talk) 22:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

From Perennial sources: The Independent, a British newspaper, is considered a reliable source for non-specialist information. In March 2016, the publication discontinued its print edition to become an online newspaper; some editors advise caution for articles published after this date.

Gonzalo Lira seems specialized to me. I am going to take a serious look at new sourcing now. Elinruby (talk) 07:26, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Kurt Selchow

Hi Scope creep,

Just wrote an article about Selchow in the German Wikipedia. While studying Weierud's & Zabell's brilliant Cryptologia article "German Mathematicians and Cryptology in WWII" spotted the footnote #38 on page 125. From that Selchow's first name was Curt (not: Kurt).

Best wishes --OS (talk) 17:45, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi @OS: How goes it? Sorry I missed this, of all things which are important. Well done for spotting it. A bit of a lucky strike. I move the article now to its new name. scope_creep^Talk 16:38, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Mark Ginzburg moved to draftspace

Greetings!

Can you help with advice on what information has an advertising flavor and should be removed from the article? What else needs to be changed to return the article to the main space? The remarks in the title, unfortunately, seem too general.

Best regards. Yevrowl (talk) 19:29, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

@Yevrowl: I think you will probably need to rewrite it. It needs a chunk of work. scope_creep^Talk 20:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

@Scope creep:, the article was rewritten, sources from interviews in one publication were removed. Yevrowl (talk) 02:41, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@Scope creep:, I removed paragraphs that you consider unnecessary. With all due respect to your arguments, I don’t see any advertising here. There is a list of facts: held a competition, gave lectures, invested, declared, etc. And is it necessary to be a professor or academician to give lectures? There are links to the universities themselves, where he gave lectures on robotics. Yevrowl (talk) 01:14, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

@Yevrowl: I made an assumption he perhaps was an academic when you give lectures, otherwise its just generally a talk, although he is the president. The article was written in a promotional manner, thats why the tag has been put on it. Its still WP:PUFFing him up when there is no need for it, although there is less of it now. Yevrowl, I don't have time available to take you through rewriting this article, in a step by step manner. Its going to take weeks and I don't have time to rewrite it myself. The whole thing still needs rewritten and removing certain text isn't going to fix it. It currently not fit for review. For example the references are all still WP:BAREURLS. Take a look at WP:REFB which is a small tutorial on how to do full citations. I would suggest doing two things. Take a look at a good biographical article that has passed WP:GA to see how the language flows, how it is descriptive. Second thing is to join the Wikipedia:Teahouse. They are more orientated to new editors and can provide step by step on how to correct the article. For example, the following "He was born in the Jewish family of Zinoviy Meirovich and Nina Borisovna Ginzburg. Engaged in sambo". You would usually say something like "Ginzburg was born into a Jewish family. His father Zinoviy Meirovich was a <employee subject> and his mother nee <put her previous name> was a <subject> As a child he became interested in the martial art known as sambo that eventually led him to winning the .... in <date>. The point i'm trying to make is text is very dry and not very readable. Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 08:33, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red February 2024

Women in Red | February 2024, Volume 10, Issue 2, Numbers 293, 294, 297, 298 Online events: New: Alphabet run O & P | Black women Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcement Please let other wikiprojects know about our February Black women event. Tip of the month: AllAfrica can now be searched on the ProQuest tab at the WP Library. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk 20:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Devin Millar in Other languages

Hey,what about Devin Millar in other languages? There is 2 languages Español and Francis,can you help or find whoever remove them?Thank you 2001:EE0:5005:81A0:ACD3:2F49:4492:2C82 (talk) 14:50, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@2001:EE0:5005:81A0:ACD3:2F49:4492:2C82: Let me check. scope_creep^Talk 14:56, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@2001:EE0:5005:81A0:ACD3:2F49:4492:2C82: It seems to have been deleted after a Afd discussion found it to be non-notable, here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Devin Millar. The English Wikipedia has a higher standard of sourcng requirements, particularly for WP:BLP's than other language Wikipedia. Folk often bring across articles which they think are notable in the source language and then when it gets here, they find its not notable and attempt was made to delete it. I sent it to Afd because I didn't think she was notable and I would do it again. You can ask for it be undeleted. In that case article will be sent to WP:DRAFT where you can work on happily for several months. Here is the noticeboard Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. You might not get it back. If you do and you move out of draft when its not been reviewed, I will send it back to WP:AFD and it won't be coming back the third time. scope_creep^Talk 15:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks,Devin Millar is just a fraud person,he whatever he can make himself show up in this wiki or other language just to promote himself freely (Such as official Wikipedia),even also break these rules freely,beware that person,i heard that person botted himself just to get more fans or clearly for hoax and lair all over years(Due to lack of his fans),he also make nsfw for kid or some stuff did similar to other person named EDP445 did,so careful this person,he also make alt accounts just to record himself up without being noticed.If you want know more,maybe you can ask some peoples in NFS or other community for better information,proof.I can't talk more about that person here and i'm stick of it.Thank you for reading and hope you know a bit about that person,bye. 2001:EE0:5005:81A0:ACD3:2F49:4492:2C82 (talk) 16:14, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

DOK.fest

Hello @Scope creep, I saw that you moved DOK.fest to draftspace. This article has been on Wikipedia for many years, on Internationales Dokumentarfilmfestival München. DrUtrecht (talk) 10:44, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@DrUtrecht: I reviewed the article. It was redirected and then it was recreated so it is valid move, I think. The article is complete mess. I will need to send it to Afd due to the state of it, if it appears back in mainspace. scope_creep^Talk 10:48, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree that the current article is a complete mess. DrUtrecht (talk) 10:50, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@DrUtrecht: Once you fix it, ping me and I will review it for you. scope_creep^Talk 10:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you!

		The Guidance Barnstar
		Thank you so much for your consideration and for taking time to review my articles and provide constructive, positive feedback. Much appreciated! 💚🤍💚🤍 TheEagle107 (talk) 22:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@TheEagle107: Thanks for that. That was really nice. scope_creep^Talk 09:14, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2024

• News and notes: Wikipedian Osama Khalid celebrated his 30th birthday in jail

• Opinion: Until it happens to you

• Disinformation report: How paid editors squeeze you dry

• In the media: Katherine Maher new NPR CEO, go check Wikipedia, race in the race

• In focus: The long road of a featured article candidate, part 2

• Recent research: Croatian takeover was enabled by "lack of bureaucratic openness and rules constraining [admins]"

• Comix: We've all got to start somewhere

• Traffic report: DJ, gonna burn this goddamn house right down

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:14, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Drhuv Sharma in Simple English

Hello, thank you for correcting the writing errors in the article in English Dhruv Sharma (singer), could you give it a linguistic review in simplified English where it currently maintains a deletion query. Regards and thanks again https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhruv_Sharma 57ntaledane9 (talk) 20:32, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

The guilty have no pride

Why discogs is non-rs if many articles list it as a source and there are no problems with it(example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burial_(Death_in_June_album) )? Ezoteric bimbo (talk) 07:22, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ezoteric bimbo: It is not a reliable source and the fact that other mistakenlys use it, doesn't mean you use it. Take a look at entry for discogs on this list WP:DISCOGS.scope_creep^Talk 07:49, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Is the band's site(http://deathinjune.net/index2.htm) considered a reliable source? Ezoteric bimbo (talk) 07:52, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

No, generally not. Take a look at WP:MUSICRS. These are the magazine sites and other journals and so on, which are considered reliable sources bassed on a consensus decision at the reliable sources noticeboard. The bands own site would be considered an WP:SPS source, i.e. self-published and WP:PRIMARY. Any sources from out of MUSICRS would be ok. These sites have editorial teams that strive for intellectual honesty and published genuine researched fact-checked articles. They are journalists essentially. Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 07:59, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for help! Ezoteric bimbo (talk) 08:04, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Help

Hello, could you explain to me in more detail why this user User:Drmies is deleting links to the singer placed in the right place Dhruv Sharma (singer), he also deleted references and is committing arbitrary acts if many users had already reviewed it and there was no problem, I'm afraid. is committing an editorial war. Help 57ntaledane9 (talk) 17:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, links to social networks and YouTube, Spotify and Soundcloud channels are allowed, which violates that space there. deleted links 57ntaledane9 (talk) 17:45, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

What is not allowed is a slew of promotional/commercial links, which is basically what those are. I cited WP:EL in my edit summary; maybe you should read it, 57ntaledane9. I'm going to revert your most recent edits, again, and drop yet another warning for improper sourcing, which by now adds up to a violation of the WP:BLP. Drmies (talk) 18:21, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Scope creep, there's a decent article hiding in the sources, particularly the articles from Harper's Bazaar and NME, but it needs decent writing for it to come out. Drmies (talk) 18:26, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, absolutely. @57ntaledane9: I suggest you attend the Wikipedia:Teahouse. Its for new editors who have joined Wikipedia recently and it provides guidance and mentorship. It is worth knowing that Wikipedia is not a social media site in any shape or form. Its not a webhost, nor a forum, nor a blogging site, where anything goes. There is clear rules on what can be included in a WP:BLP and what can't be included. Promoting the singer with social media links is deeply uncool and illegal. You cannot promote or advertise on here. There is a legal basis to this, defined in the Wikipedia Terms of Use. Advertising and promotion is strict illegal. I hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 18:58, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents - Creation of articles without sources, not acknowledging user talk page discussions

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Creation of articles without sources, not acknowledging user talk page discussions Shazback (talk) 23:33, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Wilhelm Gimmler

Hi Scope creep,

Just wrote an article about Wilhelm Gimmler in the German Wikipedia and spotted yours in the English one. As far as I see it, he was born in Kontschwitz in 1890, a village in Lower Silesian, which was a part of the German empire when he was born. In 1936 the name was changed to Hohenlinde, and then to Kończyce after 1945.

In your article however the village is linked to Hohenlinden in Bavaria, which is a completely other community and has nothing to do with the Hohenlinde in Silesia. Best wishes --OS (talk) 17:46, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@OS: I didn't think Gimmler was ever going to be expanded, but here is a full article. Nice one. I'll check that Gimmler article. scope_creep^Talk 20:15, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Referencing an Updated Draft

I shared a reference evaluation on the talk page of Draft:Ravi Ahuja based off your comment related to the submission decline. The sources are from credible platforms, most of them are widely used on Wikipedia. Additionally, upon reevaluation I didn't find them to be or similar to press releases or paid promotions.

Regards,

Keithmurban (talk) 06:31, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Keithmurban: You seem to have went in the opposite direction since the review by loading up in refences and its now firmly within WP:CITEKILL. I would find the best reference for each sentence and take out the rest as they are not needed. I would do it before the review as its likely to get declined again for citekill. One good reference per sentence is enough really. If there is several WP:SECONDARY sources that prove then he will go into mainspace. scope_creep^Talk 09:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

January 2024 NPP backlog drive – Points award

		Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to Scope creep for collecting more than 200 points during the January 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions played a part in the 16,070 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 22:33, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

January 2024 NPP backlog drive – Streak award

		Worm Gear Award
		This award is given in recognition to Scope creep for collecting at least 7 points during each week of the January 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions played a part in the 16,070 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 23:03, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Contact center as a service

Hey! Not sure if you saw, but it looks like Contact center as a service got recreated after your initial Contact Center as a service BLAR. I don't have the full background, but it looks like a new version cropped up after disappearing, without attribution, which seems to be a problem. Unsure about the status between the two. (The second person also created Artificial intelligence in customer experience.) Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 09:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

@Utopes: It looks like at least a couple of spam links on it to call centre companies created by a WP:SPA. There is a big Call Centre article which is well developed so I don't think there is any need for it. scope_creep^Talk 12:08, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 February 2024

• News and notes: Wikimedia Russia director declared "foreign agent" by Russian gov; EU prepares to pile on the papers

• Disinformation report: How low can the scammers go?

• Gallery: Before and After: Why you don't need to touch grass to dramatically improve images of flora and fauna

• In the media: Speaking in tongues, toeing the line, and dressing the part

• Serendipity: Is this guy the same as the one who was a Nazi?

• Traffic report: Griselda, Nikki, Carl, Jannik and two types of football

• Crossword: Our crossword to bear

• Comix: Strongly

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:36, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

WPMED assessments

About this: Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Assessment#Importance scale says that the Low-priority rating "includes most of the following: very rare diseases, lesser-known medical signs, equipment, hospitals, individuals, historical information..."

Joseph Lister is an individual, and (having been dead for over a century) arguably "historical". Therefore I think it is proper to rate him as low-priority. (Also as being a person, which is what that |society=yes parameter is about.) Do you think the scale justifies a different priority for the group? WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:33, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing: I don't know. They say there is two periods in medicine, before Lister and after Lister. Before Lister, if you were cut i.e. wound and it became septic you were done for, after Lister you had a chance of surviving and is still celebrated to this day. I think it is quite absurd to set the rating so low, although I've no confidence in talk page banners and don't know if it means anything. The values seems to be arbitary. scope_creep^Talk 09:01, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

It sounds like you're thinking about real-world importance. The |importance= or |priority= ratings for WikiProjects are about how interested the group is in improving the articles, which often have nothing to do with real-world importance. We used to tag Leonardo da Vinci as low importance (i.e., to us), and eventually someone apparently decided the subject was so unimportant to us that we don't tag the article at all any longer. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:13, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing: I never knew that. I've never looked it in detail probably. I shouldn't have reverted. scope_creep^Talk 23:07, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Eh, no harm done. If I'd done that by mistake, then I'd have appreciated being reverted. We all have to look out for each other. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:11, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Kirkus Reviews on Counterparts (novel)

I came across your edit here and wondered how you concluded that this review was written by the author himself. I also first thought so seeing the "by Gonzalo Lira" tagline, but couldn't this be a book review page mentioning the author of the reviewed book, rather than the author of the review? I am also sceptical of the reliability of Kirkus reviews but would like to see whether I missed something. AncientWalrus (talk) 10:51, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

The first problem I have with it, is the fact there is no byline, so you don't know who has done it. According to RSN its a reliable source, a traditional pre-print review site that has been on the go since 1933. But with no bylines, how to do you verify the validity of the author. In the internet age there is simply no reason for it. The whole thing is opaque. In almost every other professional or literary journal the author is always provided, so they can be checked. When there is no checks and balances, the system is open to abuse. I suspect they have a really cosy relationship with the publisher, who are they're lifeblood and that is problematic. On the particular review, it was the language in the review that didn't look right, it is very similar to the books. I bought one of them to see what the furore was about. I can't be 100% sure but felt better removing it. Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 12:01, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Lenta.ru

Concerning this edit, please note that lenta.ru is only unreliable after 12 March 2014. Before that date, it is not considered unreliable. Ymblanter (talk) 17:51, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: Why does the script show them as blacklisted? It the only reference I've ever seen that has been blacklisted. Are all the lenta.ru references in the article before 12 March 2014, are they all before that date? scope_creep^Talk 17:54, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

I do not know, I did not write the script, but Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources is pretty clear on the reasons as why the resource is blacklisted. I did not check all the references in the article, but it has been blacklisted quite some time ago, I would expect the "bad" references to have been already removed. Ymblanter (talk) 18:10, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, they are before that date and all the refs source seem to archived. It will be a quality article when finished. There is still ton of bad references in the article, including dodgy newspapers, excessive social media links, livejournal and other non-rs refs. I was driving-by and thought I would help this other editor to clean it up a bit. It still under quite heavy development I see, so I'm not worried if its left. I don't mind leaving it as it will get done eventually. Those lenta.ru references probably need whitelisted somehow, although I'm not sure to do it, so somebody else doesn't remove them. scope_creep^Talk 18:17, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Question on image

I'm wondering why you removed File:Rachel Dübendorfer.jpg from Rachel Dübendorfer in this edit? The image looks to be okay as a fair use image of her. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:09, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Joseph2302: Apparently it wasn't her. I made a mistake. There is another conversation further up the talk page, for reference. User:Rob1bureau was checking the images I think on the Red Orchestra folk and noticed it wasn't her. When I looked it, and examined the docs, it wasn't her right enough. No kind of similar appearence or bad light or bad composition, just wrong image. scope_creep^Talk 12:20, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. I presumed there was a sensible reason (as you're a sensible editor, so it clearly wasn't vandalism), but was curious. And I also didn't notice that it was already mentioned on this talkpage, apologies for the duplication. :) Joseph2302 (talk) 12:31, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@Joseph2302: I find it hard to find previous conversations on the talk page, even with search. There is another image needing replaced on Leon Grossvogel, which needs done. There both on my todo list and will get done this week or next. I'm really happy there is folk looking at it and not just myself. scope_creep^Talk

UPE on EnergyX

Check out the building image. This is something I see UPEs regularly slip up on, the uploaded images. I can see from the metadata this is professional photography and not likely to be uploaded for free by the photographer. BusterD (talk) 15:03, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@BusterD: Well done for spotting that. I never even saw it. It is beautifully constructed photograph, perfectly in focus, take at the right just as dusk is settling and all the lights are on and perfectly framed with no cars on the road. Probably taken a few minutes after dawn, instead of dusk (road closed) and got the classic red, blue, yellow and green and the metadata of course. Its brightended my day. Thanks for posting that. scope_creep^Talk 15:43, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

It's one of the the classic blunders. If your uploader is the the page creator, chances are excellent they have provided us more information than they suspected. This user is 100% coi, so apparently paid. BusterD (talk) 18:58, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Rachel Dübendorfer.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Rachel Dübendorfer.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:49, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red March 2024

Women in Red | March 2024, Volume 10, Issue 3, Numbers 293, 294, 299, 300, 301 Online events: New: Alphabet run Q & R | Art+Feminism | Find Her Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements Celebrate Women – All content gender gap events, in every language Wikipedia, in March 2024 Francophone Women★ Writers Fortnight 2024 Feminism and Folklore 2024 Writing Contest Tip of the month: When creating a new article, check various spellings, including birth name, married names and pseudonyms, to be sure an article doesn't already exist. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk 20:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Élisa Mercœur

Élisa Mercœur contains the word "orphange" twice, would you be so kind to check if they are typos and if so, replace them with "orphanage". Polygnotus (talk) 14:21, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Please check if this edit is correct. Polygnotus (talk) 14:56, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Polygnotus: Will do. scope_creep^Talk 15:05, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Polygnotus: Good work. You have got eyes like a hawk. The 2nd one is good. The first still working on. scope_creep^Talk 15:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

We make a good team. You write, I nitpick. Polygnotus (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Polygnotus: I checked the document finally. Spelt wrong. scope_creep^Talk 15:59, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Polygnotus (talk) 16:00, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Polygnotus: This one must be double strength wrong. Katherine Singer Kovács Prize Gold star for spotting that. That is quick!! Speed of a hawk as well. I wouldn't seen it, I'm going to start doing a check in the future. I'll check it when I get back. scope_creep^Talk 16:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I have asked them to fix the typo on their site as well. Polygnotus (talk) 16:49, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Just a heads-up

I reported the Hazooyi, Anoghena Okoyomoh, and Cece GFI accounts for socking. There's just too much coincidence with timing, and AfD's, and non-notable UPE articles to not believe they're all connected. And some bad acting, today. You can read my evidence here if you like. Fred Zepelin (talk) 19:47, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 March 2024

• News and notes: Wikimedia enters US Supreme court hearings as "the dolphin inadvertently caught in the net"

• Recent research: Images on Wikipedia "amplify gender bias"

• In the media: The Scottish Parliament gets involved, a wikirace on live TV, and the Foundation's CTO goes on record

• Obituary: Vami_IV

• Traffic report: Supervalentinefilmbowlday

• WikiCup report: High-scoring WikiCup first round comes to a close

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:02, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

WP:BITE

This is the second time I've come across you WP:BITING and threatening newcomers. Maybe this isn't a representative sample, but you need to calm down. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 20:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Consolidating refs

So I managed to consolidate the refs on that Murray article, but one thing I didn't plan for was the individual ref names that aren't in the consolidated list. Is there a format to add those back in, or should I just go to the second instance where each source is invoked and double the reference there? Fred Zepelin (talk) 22:38, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

@Fred Zepelin: A script will come around in a couple hours and add the missing references back into where they are invoked in the article. I know you can run the script manually but don't know the name of it. You could ask around, or at the help desk. If it not done by say, tommorrow morning it may need to be done manually by fetching the reference from the previous revision and adding in yourself. It slow but will only take 20 mins. Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 22:48, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

@Fred Zepelin: It is the AnomieBOT. I see it just ran. Quicker than it used to be. scope_creep^Talk 22:55, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

wow, that's handy. Thanks for responding. Fred Zepelin (talk) 23:36, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Dimarjio Antonion Jenkins.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Dimarjio Antonion Jenkins.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:18, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 March 2024

• Technology report: Millions of readers still seeing broken pages as "temporary" disabling of graph extension nears its second year

• Interview: Interview on Wikimedia Foundation fundraising and finance strategy

• Special report: 19-page PDF accuses Wikipedia of bias against Israel, suggests editors be forced to reveal their real names, and demands a new feature allowing people to view the history of Wikipedia articles

• Op-Ed: Wikipedia in the age of personality-driven knowledge

• Recent research: "Newcomer Homepage" feature mostly fails to boost new editors

• News and notes: Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee Charter ratified

• In the media: "For me it’s the autism": AARoad editors on the fork more traveled

• Traffic report: He rules over everything, on the land called planet Dune

• Humour: Letters from the editors

• Comix: Layout issue

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:40, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red April 2024

Women in Red | April 2024, Volume 10, Issue 4, Numbers 293, 294, 302, 303, 304 Online events: New: Alphabet run S & T | Gender studies | Health Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements The second round of "One biography a week" begins in April as part of #1day1woman. Tip of the month: If you run into technical problems, you might find help on our Tools and technical support page Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk 19:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024

Hello Scope creep,

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)

Are you up for giving a tactful tutorial

Sfns are not my best thing and he likes you better than me. Plus I just growled at him yesterday over changing images after the alts were written. He *is* awful new, necessary to the project, and on his third language, I keep reminding myself. But yes at least some of the new reference errors are from the slavery section. The main things I see him not getting that format matters, E.Lastname is alphabetized under Lastname, and the year really has to match. Or should I just fix the ones I understand? Actually, some of them I understand but am not sure how to fix. De Grammont has a range of years because there are multiple volumes at that link and the items are for the particular volume. De Haëdo and a couple of the others have modern-day reissues, etc. I seem to recall that orange means it *was* broken, but it's brown we have to worry about? De Grammont used to be working (?) Elinruby (talk) 14:09, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Accct ually both de Grammont citations work on the laptop so shut my mouth. Maybe I need to just test them at some point, Or have you look at this since I apparently stilll do not understand the John the Trappist scriot....Elinruby (talk) 15:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Elinruby: I'm just back in. I've been planting trees today again. To address the above, de Grammont seems to be working fine, whatever you done. Yes, the name and the year must match. If there multiple publication by the author in one year e.g. 1980, then the dates become 1980a, 1980b on the citationa and the same on the sfn tag. If there is multiple volumes per authors, generally they have different years, and occasionally different isbn's so it pans out. On those instance where it doesn't pan out, you can use an artificial match. So you use on the citation the ref field e.g. "|ref=CITEREFsheling1940" and then the sfn becomes "{{...|sheling|1940}}". I use the same script and i'm not seeing any errors. I'm not sure about Trappists errors. You would have to ask him. I have about 16 scripts installed so I might be getting combines results. I'm not seeing errors. What ever you have done seems to have fixed it. If an error comes up, ping and I will show you how to fix it. I scope_creep^Talk 16:33, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Yeah ignore the entire comment while I investigate. He has created some errors per the tags. I have not fixed them, have you? If not, I have not been giving him enough credit ;)

I see no errors on the laptop and about four brown and six orange on my phone and huh I dunno. I am on the laptop right now. At some point I will click the links to be sure. I finally got the new ref in about the arrival in Constantinople is what I do know for sure. Talking to helpdesk about your wiktionary suggestion for divan because I couldn't remember the syntax. Don't stress if you have been digging holes, nothing is on fire. Elinruby (talk) 17:02, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: I keep forgetting it as well. Template:Wikt-lang will do it, but there is shorter version for en wikt entries, i.e wikt: scope_creep^Talk 17:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

If there is only one definition you can use word but divan has five definitions in English alone and about seven languages so... anyway, I have notifications, will check them. Got distracted by the reanimationof some zombie stupid I made the mistake of commenting on at NPOV once. Not going to get directly involved this time but I just asked for help find ing material for balance. believe me you don't want to know. It reaLLy is very very...did I say stupid? I am a bad wikipedia editor. A stick has not yet been dropped. Meanwhile, I think I accidentally overwrote your comment about the six months, but I did see it and yes, I am going to try to work down the list. But not in one sitting ;) have a hot bath and don't worry about Algiers for a bit. It's been a few days since I dreamed about this article so I will put some hours in lol Elinruby (talk) 17:18, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

oh hai

half the talk page was missing when I wrote that. Sorry.

I moved some headers. My fault. I will fix it. Meanwhile huh. I got pinged into a MoS capitalization argument and Mathglot asked me for help and I found out that a courtly old Brazilian editor who helped me a lot died a few months ago. I wonder if you have a spare moment if you could take a look a a look at the mayhem I caused on my userpage last night when I was crying about that? It turns out that I can't run the errand I thought I was going to run for a couple of hours yet so I guess I will tackle the strike tag. War with Spain is done except for the many names of Mohammed ben Othman and making sure I checked the references.

I have excused myself from any further discussion of whether "chair" is a name. What the hell. The things you get pinged into, eh?

If you really want to work on the article, I suggest scrutiny of the Manufacturing section with extreme prejudice. There also probably should be additional mention of ship-building and slaves in that section. Or not. If you need a break from this, take one. Now is an ideal time. I hope to restore sanity and have an updated to-do by tomorrow. Elinruby (talk) 20:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Elinruby: I spent yesterday about, five hours, trying to join two different sources for the Rado article and came back to the Algiers article only intermittently. I will take a look at the manufacturing section and forward. I'll take a look at your userpage as well, but both will be later this afternoon. On the wikt thing which I was thinking about yesterday. I would link it to the version on the name of the article on WP, which is probably the common name, although it may not have been decided yet, what the common name is. So if the diwan, or whatever the article is called, need renamed, I can do it for you. I can check the war with spain and sections around it, this week. I've not looked at any blocks around there. I know for a fact that are going to be good, but a quick read is a good thing for grammer even. On the strike tag storm on talk page. I saw that yesterday but didn't have the wherewithall to fix. Still jaked yesterday after that tree planting. On RFC's, I did that years ago when you were pinged for RFC's. I had to give it up. So many were spurious and simple cases that should have been settled quickly, although I was asked to do a massive one recently, which was really cool. On the colouring of the reference. I had to look at the code yesterday. Darker does seem more problematic. I think what we could do is for you list the reference number in talk and we can take a look. I can't see it. We can check the authors, but in going through those section, in the first 1.0 main block, the authors were very decent. I did check the authors, all pro historians. So Nourerrahmane and yourself have done a pretty decent job on it. Later. scope_creep^Talk 09:42, 14 April 2024 UTC)

Glad to hear from you as I was feeling guilty the talk page is still a mass. A different and improved mess, but still. I slept all day as it turned out, definitely needed it, and will try to be done tonight.

Yes, when you want to start again, start at the Manufacturing section, where N seems to have missed a question about Kaddache, and it looks like I never got back to rewrites because I was answering his answers. That is a priority because I cannot swear I got all the copyvio. There *was* at least one word for word sentence. Go forward from there and double-check me. I do see daylight, but it's been a messy process and I would like to document the due diligence in an understandable way. All of this is optional and a favor to me, of course.

It is a RM that turns on whether the pieds-noirs of Algeria are a distinct ethnic group. They are not, unless "all non-Arab inhabitants of Algeria at the time of independence" is an ethnic group, but it seems we have a GA that says otherwise. I was pinged to the talk page because I had once commented there about a year ago. Somebody started an RM while I was looking at the MoS, and I didn't realize where I was talking or I would have run run run away very fast ;) 10:12, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

PS: BTW don't know if you saw that N is on vacation with family. This is why I say the timing is good for a break. Don't worry about wikt: divan, pretty sure I have that documented. Will ping you on it. Elinruby (talk) 10:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Out for a couple of hours, maybe all day. Sanity has in my opinion returned to the talk page. I have some thoughts bot later for that Elinruby (talk) 19:06, 15 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) 16:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey

Hi @Scope creep, hope you're doing good, first thank you for this massive work on Regency of Algiers, i beleive the article progressed really well, but i don't know what caused Elin to be so upset. If i understand well this has to do with some of my edits that have issues with spelling, but i think there are no issues with that anymore since, well Elin worked on that and i made sure not to undo or change any of its edits; unless i was adding additions while taking account of her suggestions. Suddenly she became upset for un unkown reason for me...Hopefully she comes back, i really want this article to become GA or even FA as this would really give so much credit to both of you. She's part of this and i want her to keep being part of it.

Other than that i have reworked agriculture, education and Crisis of the 19th century sections and first paragraph of political status.) if there is anything more to work i'm available.

Thanks! Nourerrahmane (talk) 10:29, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Nourerrahmane: How goes it? I think Elinruby left because her work was being overwritten multiple times by yourself and it put her in a downer. Generally if it happens more than a few times, then the person withdraws, as there is no point going on, which has happened here and in the past. I've seen it quite a few times with folk who can only put up with so much. I don't think she will be back. I checked a bundle of stuff last night on the 2nd tranches of checks I did about 3 weeks ago. The updates done by yourself and Elinruby were pretty decent and I signed off on them in the talk page. I would make sure the 3rd tranche addressing Section 2 "Political status" is done. There was a couple of things needing fixed in here. A lot of the images still don't have alt tags, after 6-7 weeks and some images are still overlap which fail the WP;MOS . I would look at quotes to make sure your accurate. Quotes can't be a composite construction. They need be exactly as the source says. I would fix these first and then submit it to WP:PRG to see if there is anything outstanding on it. Its close to being finished at least for WP:GA anyway. At the beginning of next week I will doing WP:NPP for a month, so won't be doing too much more on this article. See what the peer review says. They are generally pretty good. Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 15:15, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

@Nourerrahmane: Once you make any fixes needed from the WP:PRG review, submit it for WP:GA. scope_creep^Talk 18:19, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I have made some changes six or seven times, and hey If Nour doesn't want to be believe me, then maybe he will believe it coming from someone else. I have said multiple times that spelling is not the issue. Well it is, but that's not something he can fix by listening. Whereas discovering that "what is a quote" was still a problem, and the mystery of the disappearing interlanguage links, were both really discouraging. Speaking of, I saw you laughing about the footballer. I will fix that link but I tried asking a question first about how to prevent that problem at the helpdesk and got a blank stare. At some point I will click all the links looking for more bad links.

I ran earwig's again a few days ago -- in english it is ok-ish. The score is 31% but all the hits are for generic things like "Algiers declared war." Assuming I read the report right. I can send it to you if you like. I haven't done Mathglot's hack yet. Elinruby (talk) 08:17, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: I thought Nourerrahmane would have seen the cewbot link and fixed it. I've had to revert it numerous times. Yes, I figured it was something like that. Elin, I didn't think you would be back to the article. I did see the talk page warnings and they weren't being addressed by him. Thankfully the work is almost done. If you could sent the Earwig report, I can take a look but I'm not too worried about it. I just wondering when it will go into review. Still seems a good bit of tinkering going on. 13:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Tinkering is fine. Much of what he does is actually an improvement, but then requires copyedits. I am not ruling out a final copy edit, but I don't feel like he believes me about some constructions and I dunno, I am just not feeling it. I would encourage him to have some other people look at the article. To give credit: he has grasped the important point about an image alt, that it is descriptive for people who cannot see (but "house hall"?). Also he says he is now checking the quotes. I think I should do Mathglot's earwig's hack, because there seems to have been some copyvio that predates him. And yes, I can send you the report I have for English, but it is on the phone, so a bit later for that. Will try to do it later today. Elinruby (talk) 23:20, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: I'm assuming they will be picked up at WP:GA or WP:PRG, assuming it going to be put in as it seem to be dragging on, that was the reason I suggested PRG in the first place to get an external review. Its law of diminishing returns that is in effect. He want to send it to FA, so it will definently be picked up there, probably GA as well. You could pass it the guild of copyeditors but it could be some weeks before its done. I don't see the final value of doing it. We are pretty decent copyeditor's already, although there is a several editors out there who a truly excellent and if we got one of them it would be great, but the chances are slim. It might end up be a just a typo pass. There is no doubt there is stuff we have missed and I think you would expect to put it through the guild as a natural step. What is the Mathglot hack for Earwig and I will give it a go? Either that or save it as a pdf (if possible) and mail it to me. I wonder if we can convince Nourerrahmane to submit to PRG this week for a review, see what comes out of it and then submit it for copyedit while we are doing the fixes. It could take a couple of weeks before somebody turns up. I would like to get some kind of review started as soon as. scope_creep^Talk 08:03, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2024

• In the media: Censorship and wikiwashing looming over RuWiki, edit wars over San Francisco politics, and another wikirace on live TV

• News and notes: A sigh of relief for open access as Italy makes a slight U-turn on their cultural heritage reproduction law

• WikiConference report: WikiConference North America 2023 in Toronto recap

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Newspapers (Not WP:NOTNEWS)

• Recent research: New survey of over 100,000 Wikipedia users

• Traffic report: O.J., cricket and a three body problem

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Article/AFD we've been discussing

I'm no pushover regarding new articles....of the approx 1,400 articles that I've done NPP on in the last 90 days I'd guess I've taken about 50-100 to AFD with about half of those kept, and left notes on another 20-40 saying it shouldn't be a seperate article. With respect to meeting the GNG sourcing requirement, this article has them a lot stronger than the norm on kept articles. There been discussion at AFC about reviewers using different criteria than the AFC criteria which is: having reasonable chance at surviving at AFD. In short the previous reviews on this really didn't review according to this standard, centric on whether it has GNG sourcing. And all of the ones that had specifics (vs. just referring to previous reviews) basically said that it had some (or many) low grade sources in it. IMO an easily made error or misunderstanding.....to look at the general nature of a sample of the 57 sources rather than seeing if it did/didn't have 2 (or 1 or 3) sources to meet the norm regarding GNG. IMHO at the AFD you are promugating an interpretation that is in some cases not applicable (NCorp standards on a person article) but more to my point here is so unusually strict that such would result in rejection of about 90% of new articles.

In several cases, after I took an article to AFD and people came up with sourcing or arguments which changed the situation; I just happily changed my opinion to "keep". I consider it a better reflection on my self to be able to leave what I said previously rather than being mentally invested in arguing for what I said previously. Also better for my fun and sanity in Wikipedia work. I don't know if this is useful or applicable or not but thought I'd say it. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 20:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

@North8000: I know and I know. I will take it out, then. I'm seems to be of a particular concern. I'll complete the chat in the morning. I'm goosed at the moment. scope_creep^Talk 20:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Have a nice evening!  :-) North8000 (talk) 20:54, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red May 2024

Women in Red | May 2024, Volume 10, Issue 5, Numbers 293, 294, 305, 306, 307 Online events: New: Press women | Alphabet run U, V & W | Central and Eastern Europe Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities Wikimedia CEE Spring 2024 - contest with certificates of participation and prizes The Wikipedia Library: #1Lib1Ref - May 15th to June 5th Tip of the month: Use open-access references wherever possible, but a paywalled reliable source is better than none, particularly for biographies of living people. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 06:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

The Signpost: 16 May 2024

• News and notes: Democracy in action: multiple elections

• Special report: Will the new RfA reform come to the rescue of administrators?

• Arbitration report: Ruined temples for posterity to ponder over – arbitration from '22 to '24

• In the media: Deadnames on the French Wikipedia, and a duel between Russian wikis

• Op-Ed: Wikidata to split as sheer volume of information overloads infrastructure

• Comix: Generations

• Traffic report: Crawl out through the fallout, baby

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Creating New Page for Michael Huppe

Hello! Hope you are doing well.

I am reaching out to inquire about posting a new Wikipedia page for 'Michael Huppe' as I saw you are one of the Users who was involved in its deletion in 2023. [Here is the page for reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Michael_Huppe]

I am aware that in 2023 the page was removed for not meeting notability guidelines for biographies. The new page that I am looking to create corrects these issues. It is a fresh draft with unique copy and contains a significant number of independent, new sources and added context that affirm the individual's notability.

As my bio states, I am a digital marketing professional whose work sometimes includes helping clients with suggested edits to their Wikipedia pages - in this case, for Michael Huppe on behalf of SoundExchange, the non-profit collective rights management organization that employs him as CEO.

I am committed to following Wikipedia's policies and guidelines in the creation of a page that is based only on reliable, error-free and bias-free sources.

Please let me know if you have any thoughts, questions or suggestions regarding the creation of a new 'Michael Huppe' page. I value your input here and any guidance would be much appreciated.

Thank you for considering. Hannrose (talk) 15:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Hannrose: The article was deleted at Afd about 8 months when an examination of sources found the subject non-notable. Its likely still non-notable. If it was recreated again I would send it for deletion. Lastly forum-shoping on here will get you blocked. scope_creep^Talk 09:46, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

On "Donald C. Chang" 4 June 2024

@Scope creep

Thanks for your message. I have several questions about your action.

First, as you suggested, I read the policies and guidelines, I cannot find anything wrong with my contribution according to these published guidelines. In your message, you said my recent contribution “did not appear to be constructive”. Your comment is very vague. Can you be more specific?

To me, non-constructive contribution could mean (1) It contains information that is not true. Or (2) Its major points do not have supporting evidence. (3) The contribution just expresses some personal opinions rather than stating the facts. (4) The contribution is trivial; it is not important.

What was the reason that you thought my recent contribution is not constructive?

Second, my recent contribution was written for the purpose of information sharing; its content is aimed to be material fitting an encyclopedia. Thus, it is written in a neutral tone, i.e., matter of fact. Is this what a contribution in Wikipedia supposed to do?

Third, in my opinion, this book appears to be the most significant work of Donald C. Chang in recent years. This work is published by a very credible publisher (Springer). According to a senior editor of this publisher, this book is very important for people interested in physics. He wrote:

“Excited to announce the launch of the new book, "On the Wave Nature of Matter: A New Approach to Reconciling Quantum Mechanics and Relativity" by Donald Chang of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology!

This groundbreaking book offers a fresh and insightful approach to understanding the foundation of quantum physics through the "quantum wave model" hypothesis. It delves into some of the most pressing challenges facing modern quantum theory, including the longstanding conflict between quantum mechanics and relativity…” Link: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7176527401173028865/

Have you had a chance to read part of this book? If you have not, I would like to suggest you to take a quick look of it before deciding whether to include information about it in this entry.

Your response to my questions will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Bochang1942 (talk) 09:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Bochang1942: How goes it. That seems perfectly reasonable. However, you put in an glaring external link in the body of the article. Wikipedia is not a blog or a forum. Book and publications as placements have particular layout requirements defined in the WP:MOS and raw external links are illegal except in an ext links section. Don't use linkedin on Wikipedia at any point. It is non-rs. scope_creep^Talk 09:25, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@Bochang1942: I've reverted the changes and removed the external link. scope_creep^Talk 09:59, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@Scope creep

Thanks. Your edit is fine.

Bochang1942 (talk) 10:06, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Loch Doine

You just reverted some minor but important corrections I made to this page - why was that? Thanks Tecnomagus (talk) 14:45, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Tecnomagus: How goes it? You removed that reference, which rightly was knackered, but you redirected the British lakes tag to Bathymetrical survey ref which doesn't support details. It doesn't have those properties. The British Lakes site closed a few years ago and there is probably several or dozens of loch articles that I wrote then that still use that British Lakes ref. I changed it the article to the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Scotlands which does have those properties listed. If you see any more of loch articles with that British Lake ref, please change them for a Centre for Ecology and Hydrology ref. scope_creep^Talk 14:50, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Happy to do so. Point of order though: the Bathymetric survey (ref 1) is canonical - there haven't been any other detailed surveys since, and the data presented by the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology is either a pretty approximate rounding from that or a derivative. Main thing to change though is the area measure, for which the Bathy survey data (54.63ha converted) is still likely more accurate than anything derived from an ArcGIS geospatial calculation, bearing in mind that the latter will be much less accurate in terms of the marginal areas. Water levels have increased since the Bathy survey, so I would - if anything - expect the area to be greater now than then, even allowing for a degree of sedimentation in the upper reaches. Tecnomagus (talk) 15:06, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I've heard that said before. It know it is approximate and lot of them have been converted into dams or resovoirs or increased or decreased in size depending on use. There is consensus to use the Centre for Ecology ref as it was most upto date in terms of useful data. I did make an attempt to contact a Scottish environment agency about 5 years ago or moe to try and get useful data abut it went under or the website went offline for weeks and I gave up. I've been doing two or three scottish loch article every month, so there is lot of them, contained in List of lochs of Scotland. You can see the scope of the work. Many more to do. Any help is appreciated. If you think it needs changed, change it, if it makes it more accurate. scope_creep^Talk 15:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

It is unfortunate that the bathymetrical survery doesn't cover all the lochs. scope_creep^Talk 15:21, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I know where you're coming from: I suspect that you tried to contact SEPA, whose data was wiped out in a cyberattack circa 2020/21. Happy to use the Centre for Ecology ref and will correct the Loch Doine data to their figure. FYI, I'm co-founder of a geospatial AI company (BlueGlobe), and we've been working with agencies such as NatureScot to create a unifying (and validating!) data framework for highly diverse data sets - we're almost at the stage where we can work all these figures out instantly from our data sets, something that will be available as both a commercial service and a free-at-point-of-use public system. Tecnomagus (talk) 11:29, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 8 June 2024

• News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation publishes its Form 990 for fiscal year 2022-2023

• Technology report: New Page Patrol receives a much-needed software upgrade

• Deletion report: The lore of Kalloor

• In the media: National cable networks get in on the action arguing about what the first sentence of a Wikipedia article ought to say

• News from the WMF: Progress on the plan — how the Wikimedia Foundation advanced on its Annual Plan goals during the first half of fiscal year 2023-2024

• Opinion: Public response to the editors of Settler Colonial Studies

• Recent research: ChatGPT did not kill Wikipedia, but might have reduced its growth

• Featured content: We didn't start the wiki

• Essay: No queerphobia

• Special report: RetractionBot is back to life!

• Traffic report: Chimps, Eurovision, and the return of the Baby Reindeer

• Comix: The Wikipediholic Family

• Humour: Wikipedia rattled by sophisticated cyberattack of schoolboy typing "balls" in infobox

• Concept: Palimpsestuous

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red August 2024

Women in Red | July 2024, Volume 10, Issue 7, Numbers 293, 294, 311, 312, 313 Online events: New: Translation contest 2024 | Science Fiction and Fantasy | Women in Sports Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities Wiki Loves Sport 2024 22 July - 22 September Tip of the month: A foreign language biography does not guarantee notability for English Wikipedia. Check the guidelines before you start. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 14:29, 30 June 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

The Signpost: 4 July 2024

• News and notes: WMF board elections and fundraising updates

• Special report: Wikimedia Movement Charter ratification vote underway, new Council may surpass power of Board

• In focus: How the Russian Wikipedia keeps it clean despite having just a couple dozen administrators

• Discussion report: Wikipedians are hung up on the meaning of Madonna

• In the media: War and information in war and politics

• Sister projects: On editing Wikisource

• Obituary: Hanif Al Husaini, Salazarov, Hyacinth, and PirjanovNurlan

• Opinion: Etika: a Pop Culture Champion

• Gallery: Spokane Willy's photos

• Op-Ed: Why you should not vote in the 2024 WMF BoT elections

• Crossword: On a day of independence, beat crosswords into crossploughshares

• Humour: A joke

• Cobwebs: Counting to a billion — manuscripts don't burn

• Recent research: Is Wikipedia Politically Biased? Perhaps

• Traffic report: Talking about you and me, and the games people play

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Antique Collector's Club?

Is this really RS? Kuban, Doğan (2010). Ottoman Architecture. Translated by Mill, Adair. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Antique Collectors' Club. ISBN 978-1-85149-604-4. OCLC 540182825. Elinruby (talk) 00:37, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Morning @Elinruby: How goes it? I've been away for a few days, relaxing the sun. Feel I need a holiday when I got back. I think it probably is a reliable source. Kuban is a Turkish architectural historian and well respected heavyweight with an article here and the book has been reviewed twice, once by a yale academic. I saw your comment left at Nour this morning. The article still seems to be under active development and I've no confidence its going to be at FA in the immediate future or anytime soon. I think to a certain extent work is being duplicated. Its tinkering when we should be focusing in getting it finished. I know how frustrating it is, having read the comment. I'm pretty much off it now. I can't do any more on it when I've so much work to do here. scope_creep^Talk 08:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Shrug then maybe let him submit it then. Thanks for the thoughts on the book. Elinruby (talk) 16:05, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't submit it until you say its ready to submit. But I think there is stuff getting that doesn't necessarily add anything of real encyclopeadic value. scope_creep^Talk 17:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Barochan Cross

Hello, FYI File:Barochan Cross frontpiece.png and File:Barochan Cross backpiece.png are duplicates at the moment and I don't think that's on purpose. Jonteemil (talk) 20:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Jonteemil: Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I'll fix it now. scope_creep^Talk 20:57, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

@Jonteemil: That seems to be it finally. scope_creep^Talk 21:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Perfect. Jonteemil (talk) 21:22, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 July 2024

• Discussion report: Internet users flock to Wikipedia to debate its image policy over Trump raised-fist photo

• News and notes: Wikimedia community votes to ratify Movement Charter; Wikimedia Foundation opposes ratification

• News from the WMF: Wikimedia Foundation Board resolution and vote on the proposed Movement Charter

• Essay: Reflections on editing and obsession

• In the media: What's on Putin's fork, the court's docket, and in Harrison's book?

• Obituary: JamesR

• Crossword: Vaguely bird-shaped crossword

• Humour: Joe Biden withdraws RfA, Donald Trump selects co-nom

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Proposal for a new, "Propaganda" WikiProject

Hi, Scope creep. I see you are carrying on in the saga over at Regency; hope that's proceeding according to plan. In the meantime, there is a proposal outstanding to create a new, "Propaganda" WikiProject, and I thought of you as possibly being interested. I think it might be a good idea, if they can attract enough interested volunteers. Have a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Propaganda and see what you think. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 21:23, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red August 2024

Women in Red | August 2024, Volume 10, Issue 8, Numbers 293, 294, 311, 313, 314, 315 Online events: New: | Women in film and stage | Indigenous women Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) | Translation contest 2024 (July, August, September) | Women in Sports (July, August) Announcements from other communities TBD Tip of the month: Check your athlete's notability before researching and creating her bio. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 19:59, 25 July 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

policy on anachronistic images

I think you are better positioned to figure this out that I am -- We pulled a couple of images in peer review because they were not from the period. Kinda confused about that, although I can see that late 19th-century is a problem, neither own work nor of the period. But, I take it that photos taken and uploaded in the 21st century are fine. (see Ali Bitchin Mosque, images in architecture section) We currently have several images and multiple references from around 1850. This makes sense as much of the material before 1830 is in other languages, and there were far more French after 1830. Is 1858 (say) close enough to our period? I don't think this matters much for the references but am confused about how this applies to images. For example we have an engraving from the 19th century that depicts the bombardment of Algiers in 1681, and this could be your masted ship in the masted ship vs galley thing, if it is ok to use. Also, if you are interested, if we are going to devote two images to changes in ship technology, I do think that it is that important, but we only spend about half a sentence on it and maybe it should be fleshed out. Does this align with your interests? If not I have some thoughts on who could be called in for a consult. Elinruby (talk) 04:23, 5 August 2024 (UTC)have an

breaking for food. Might another hour in me after that. It's a bank holiday here so I can procrastinate a little more on RL. Congrats on catching the Hugh Roberts thing. Elinruby (talk) 11:28, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: Its been there since almost the beginning. If you hadn't altered the structure, it would still be there. scope_creep^Talk 11:52, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: I don't know what this image is ->Engraving from the 19th century that depicts the bombardment of Algiers in 1681. scope_creep^Talk 12:05, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

File:Dictionnaire Décembre Alonnier-II-002.jpg -- it's in the Beyerleybeylik (sp?) section Elinruby (talk) 00:49, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: The main galley that Nour found in in and its a very clear image. I don't think we need a huge mention. The caption can take most of the heavy lifting since the description of change of design is only single sentence in the para. If I can see that engraving and assuming it contains a Algerian ship of the line that is ocean going it would be fine. scope_creep^Talk 12:13, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

See above. It is not an Algerian ship of the line Elinruby (talk) 05:20, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

ok well as i see it in images: 1. we need to do something about ships, and that is in progress. 2. we have several book illustrations from "costumes of the world" type books. Whatever we use out of that should probably go in culture. 3. A sub-question of that is the depiction of a Jewish man. One problem I am having is that I do not see much difference between the way the Jewish man is dress and the way everyone else is dressed. Jewish community apparently extensive, but so were most of the Berber tribes. I don't think we need to try to be exhaustive. Probably can start by linking in Jews in Algeria.

I saw you started on Angelita. Thanks. I will get out of your hair, but wow, I guess I was pretty tired when I quit editing that. I was trying to meet the length requirements for DYK but I didn't finish in time. Keep an eye out for typos and missing words. I added some wikilinks. Peace out for a good little while this time Elinruby (talk) 17:24, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: I just saw the markup you left. I didn't see it. Let me look at it. scope_creep^Talk 19:19, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

environmental working group

I had not heard that they are not reliable, and I am not finding it at RSN. You're probably right, but do you have a link handy? Elinruby (talk) 15:02, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: I'm not finding much either. There is a single comment and the model seems to be if there is any negative comment, when its barely been commented on, is to err on the side of safety and remove it. It is advocacy group so that may be the reason its considered unreliable. I would post RSN notice and see what comes up, if it needs to stay. scope_creep^Talk 19:59, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

There are quite a few sources so I don't know that we actually *need* it, but I have been treating them as, yes, opinionated, but reliable for the science. Mind you organic chemistry is seriously not my field, and I am really struggling with the pesticide end of this, but it is hard not to be opinionated when you read that the average life expectancy of a field worker is 49. I should probably go find where I read that actually. Anyway. another reason for requesting the review is that I don't know what's neutral when a government agency is by its own measures breaking the law and mandatory school attendance means that people who came here fleeing persecution (Triqui) are compelled to send there children to schools where they are exposed to lethal chemicals in the name of cheap strawberries

I will work on the science end. What do you think of making a flowchart or timeline for the legal aspects? You aren't the only one who finds them Byxantine; I do too and I actually am semi-literate when it comes to the American legal system. I will also review the Further Reading items Elinruby (talk) 04:02, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 August 2024

• In the media: Portland pol profile paid for from public purse

• Recent research: STORM: AI agents role-play as "Wikipedia editors" and "experts" to create Wikipedia-like articles, a more sophisticated effort than previous auto-generation systems

• In focus: Twitter marks the spot

• News and notes: Another Wikimania has concluded.

• Special report: Nano or just nothing: Will nano go nuclear?

• Opinion: HouseBlaster's RfA debriefing

• Traffic report: Ball games, movies, elections, but nothing really weird

• Humour: I'm proud to be a template

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:49, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Missing word

They also sales in Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina. [4] Polygnotus (talk) 05:45, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

New pages patrol September 2024 Backlog drive

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. 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) 17:11, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

September 2024 at Women in Red

Women in Red | September 2024, Volume 10, Issue 9, Numbers 293, 294, 311, 316, 317 Online events: New: Women writers & their works | Geofocus: Islands A - H Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) | Translation contest 2024 (Jul, Aug, Sep) Announcements from other communities August 30 is the tenth anniversary of WikiProject Women writers! Tip of the month: Try her pen name when searching for sources, and remember to add her to any of these that apply: List of pen names, List of literary initials, and Category:Pseudonymous women writers. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Rosiestep (talk) 19:03, 26 August 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

WorldCat

Okay, I accept your decision about The Deep; it's not an especially notable novel in itself. However, I was surprised that you called WorldCat an unreal reference. It establishes that the book exists, gives its publisher, date of first publication and lots of other information. Wikipedia's article describes it as "the world's largest bibliographic database". I'd call it a solid reference. Also you say "reviews are better..."? I've nothing against reviews being referenced in book articles, but even from the most respectable of publications, they're still only one person's opinion and you very often don't know anything about that person. I prefer to put them in External links as interesting extra reading material. -- Robina Fox (talk) 20:16, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Robina Fox: I use worldcat almost every day as well, but I wouldn't use in that situation. It can't be used as a reference. It can certainly be used to formulate a reference but its entry in the directory isn't a reference on its own. The reason I suggested book reviews was that when I did WP:AFD work, books reviews were always the thing that saved the book article from being deleted, particularly if they are from an established journal. I looked for book reviews and other references on the other articles I looked at that you created but couldn't see anything. I know those authors are notable. Its difficult to write these types of articles. I even looked up referencew for that illustrator women who did the Tolkien books. There is no doubt she is notable, but again very difficult to find stuff on her. It seems be most difficult types of articles your creating which I admire, so I'm not too worried if they are not correctly referenced. Ideally one or two would be good. scope_creep^Talk 20:28, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello! A big thing to consider when creating pages is not just establishing that something exists but rather that it is notable enough to have its own Wikipedia article. As a basic example, I can prove that my cat exists, but very few people actually care about her; because reliable sources aren't writing about her, she's not notable enough to have her own Wikipedia page. The same thing is true about databases such as WorldCat. They can provide great information about a book (e.g., ISBN, date of publication), but they just prove that the book exists, not that it's notable. For that, we look to reliable, independent sources. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:59, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: William Morton Mackay has been accepted

William Morton Mackay, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

scope_creep^Talk 12:02, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay, lets do it I wont revert back Shubhamgawali1 (talk) 20:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

September warning you gave me

You gave me a warning for "advertising"... I am in no way whatsoever affiliated with Refugee Lens Investing. It was an interesting topic on Article for Creation. Uhtregorn (talk) 04:04, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Uhtregorn: The previous article reviewer posted a advert tag on it. I think it is an advert. Why was it written in such an overtly promotional manner? scope_creep^Talk 06:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't understand how that comes across as an advertisement. It is explaining what the mechanism is and why. It's not like "go to this website to find out more!". Uhtregorn (talk) 04:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 September 2024

• News and notes: WikiCup enters final round, MCDC wraps up activities, 17-year-old hoax article unmasked

• In the media: AI is not playing games anymore. Is Wikipedia ready?

• Recent research: Simulated Wikipedia seen as less credible than ChatGPT and Alexa in experiment

• News from the WMF: Meet the 12 candidates running in the WMF Board of Trustees election

• Wikimania: A month after Wikimania 2024

• Serendipity: What it's like to be Wikimedian of the Year

• Traffic report: After the gold rush

• Humour: Local man halfway through rude reply no longer able to recall why he hates other editor

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:28, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Orphan article Thomas Berger Johnson

Greetings, Today I de-orphaned this article by adding a link at List of people from Omaha, Nebraska.

Help to de-orphan articles.

1. WikiProject Orphanage - working to reduce the article backlog.

2. Wikipedia:Orphan - the complete How-to Guide for Orphaned articles.

» De-orphaning articles is an important aspect of building the web.

Cheers, JoeNMLC (talk) 18:15, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @JoeNMLC: How goes it. That is excellent. :) scope_creep^Talk 18:20, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Double negative?

In Special:Diff/1244211570, I think you meant "behavior will change"? RoySmith (talk) 18:31, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

September music

story · music · places

Thank you for good wishes! - Recommended reading today: Frye Fire, by sadly missed Vami_IV. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:22, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Happy because my story today is about a Czech mezzo soprano who is mentioned on the Main page on her birthday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Afternoon @Gerda Arendt: Its good to see you back. I can tell you I was severly peeved when I saw you were blocked. For a wee while I worried you wouldn't be coming. I've been away a couple of days or I would have replied sooner. I hadn't heard of her, but that story list you have created, which is beautifully presented has given me a lot of new music to listen. I just discovered this, the last few weeks.[5] scope_creep^Talk 14:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Love it. My first barnstar was for resilience ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Three stories related to today in memory, 11 September, 20 July and 20 June, the latter piece of art also pictured on the Main page. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:28, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Today is Schoenberg's 150th birthday! On display, portrayed by Egon Schiele, with music from Moses und Aron, and with two DYK hooks, one from 2010 and another from 2014; the latter, about his 40th birthday, appeared on his 140th birthday, which made me happy then and now again. - See places for a stunning sunrise, on the day Bruckner's 200th birthday was celebrated (just a few days late). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:29, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

My story today features a pic I took from my position in the choir, I can also offer varied delightful music, some from Venice, also with pics I took, - note the rose in the clarinet ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: I know about Telemanns Passions from my dad but not heard much of him since I was a child. Got the opera/classics bug from him. I think Telmann probably a wee bit early for me in the scheme of things, but will give it a listen. I think there is one of them that gave me the shivers, vaguely remember but not heard it for donkeys. I take a look at the other stuff as well. I like a good recommendation. 15:17, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Rawdog

Hello, Scope creep. You have new messages at Talk:Rawdog.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ 19:30, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Etienne Uzac

I feel like you have conflict of interest how can someone decide on one vote basis its redirect? Just because the Title has controversy I dont find it fair. I’m reverting please re-list it Shubhamgawali1 (talk) 20:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

@Shubhamgawali1: Take it to WP:DRV if you think it is unfair, but don't revert, because you'll end up getting blocked for being disruptive. You have a chance to discuss the article at Afd, but you never took it for some reason. scope_creep^Talk 20:39, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I don’t why do you want this article deleted but I wont revert it anymore but I’m going to challenge it for DRV. Shubhamgawali1 (talk) 20:42, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

@Shubhamgawali1: Did you manage to take it to WP:DRV? scope_creep^Talk 09:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

No, I’ll do it in sometime later today, I’m reading the guidelines for DRV because I need to understand first guidelines for DRV. Shubhamgawali1 (talk) 09:46, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

I did participate in the AFD because I thought others will and justice will be served with whatever result I would have been happy but just one vote and result was absolutely unfair or probably biased or perhaps UPE. Shubhamgawali1 (talk) 09:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

I didn’t** Shubhamgawali1 (talk) 09:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Do you want me to take it to DRV for you? scope_creep^Talk 09:56, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes please, the reason I’m giving is the AFD had insufficient participants and just because he’s founder of IBT can not be redirected to the article he is convicted felony and has indepth coverage by media which were already in the article. Thats why I think the result was incorrect. Shubhamgawali1 (talk) 09:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Right. I'll post it now. scope_creep^Talk 10:00, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi again, I read the DRV for 17th sept but now its gone and you mentioned that i created the article but I have not, the article has been on Wikipedia since years as I can check the history. I only edited the article please mention me again where do I read it? Shubhamgawali1 (talk) 10:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

That is fine. Its posted now. I've updated it to say you expanded it, instead of created it. Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2024 September 17 Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 10:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Regency article

Hello @Scope creep, It's been a while, I did some work on the regency article based on some feedback on the talk page, like merging political and history sections into one single section. I have also fixed some spelling errors, misplaced paragraphs and unsourced information. Do you think I can submit this article to GA review? Thanks. Nourerrahmane (talk) 20:18, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Nourerrahmane: Sorry for the late reply. It should really have done on the Monday/Tuesday when @Elinruby: suggested it. Elinruby did a lot work while your were in China. To be honest I would have not have integrated the politics section in with the history section. You have lost something vital there. Politics is a particular important part of the developement of civilisation and to cover a 300 year period without it, is probably a mistake. It done now anyway but I thought Id mention it. I would submit it for WP:GA today. Without submitting it would be an abrogration of all our work. I wouldn't hold your breath though. If they find any spelling mistakes for example, you might not get a chance to submit it again, since its been submitted before. Doing so much work to so late it day, changing and amalgamating sections days before its submitted isn't a good sign either. They may take that has a sign that its not stable. The upside is that GA is relatively easy to pass as the requirements are far less stricter than FA. scope_creep^Talk 17:40, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks scope; some users actually suggested merging politics and history sections in the talk page. mainly @Mathglot and @R Prazeres. I have also seen that a lot of work was done indeed during the month of August, but I've also witnessed many spelling mistakes and failed verifications. I had to work on that. Nourerrahmane (talk) 17:51, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

@Nourerrahmane: I wish I took part in the discussion as I've advised against it. One bit of advice about the GA process. Once its review starts make sure your available. Respond to each point as quickly and succinctly as possible. You can disagree with them. They are not experts, just other editors, but if you have to disagree make sure you have a valid reason. Its good to be there when they start. If you need help ping me. scope_creep^Talk 18:04, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Noted. Thanks ! btw, don't you think that the History section in the article feels more like an extended political history section ? We do have an article dedicated to history only. Nourerrahmane (talk) 18:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't know. I don't think so. scope_creep^Talk 18:14, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

@Nourerrahmane: I'd submit the history article to GA as well. scope_creep^Talk 18:16, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Alright. About History article, I think we need to reword those first two sentences in "Spanish expansion in the Maghreb" section. Nourerrahmane (talk) 18:25, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Really just reading at this point

need to get used to the engvar Elinruby (talk) 18:27, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: Different gig I guess. I'm going to get back to Lister after NPP. Ive got enough to write 20-30k. Thanks for copyediting it!! scope_creep^Talk 20:26, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

well right now I see some things I would write differently but the Washington Post stylebook I was trained on is a bit discordant here maybe. As I said once, there is something to my writing style being overly journalism-ese, and I am not sure if length is a concern. But passive to active has been thoroughly beaten into me in other venues and is now easy for me. Maybe a pronoun if appropriate.

Hard deadline set by plane tickets: A friend is visiting in early October and we will be absorbed in whether he will be a refugee in my country or I in his, or neither or both. Think Brexit: critical elections are in the offing in both countries, not to mention BC on October 19. I am going to ping you to something. It's not a new article and I just nuked a big buttload of copypasta, source misrepresentation times utter ineptitude circa 2006, raised to the power of why. It's like the collaboration article in that everything it actually says is true now, I think -- except that I need to take another look at Norway and there are important caveats on the talk page -- HOWEVER.

It is still a List of Disparate Things^TM. Make sure you notice the JSTOR reference + quote I added. It's all like that. Or will be, if it gets properly referenced and DUEd. Maybe the heart of this problem is in the category tree? This is not an edit request and it may probably is not a good idea to make any. But maybe you have an opinion on the Wikipedia words to express what this article is? All I see is AE case in the making, and why? I just can't find the words.

Next up pesticide regulation and Oaxacan field workers. It would be nice to finish that this weekend. Hehe. I know. I swear it is possible to do such things however, and I have done them. Would a diagram of agencies be useful? pathway of the appeals? Elinruby (talk) 01:15, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: The passive to active voice is the one thing I really worry about as you know as I can't do proper grammer. I got my English higher, as far as I went. Lots and lots of reading followed but didn't help my grammer. I had a look at your church arson article last/beginning of the week. Its a kind of weird article. It seems to be a set of disparate events at the moment. Is there is something underlying it? Otherwise its a set of unlinked events and may not need an article. I could send it to Afd. If there is something underlying it then will be really strange but not unusual. It might be an anti-relgious trend or right wing nutters thing. Could be anything. There has been plenty of anti-relgious, anti-church action throughout history, some of it over very long periods. Its not outside the bound of reality. If it was that it would be cool. Finding something like that. I will take a look in detail on Sunday. Now your off the Regency article, should have time for the pesticide article. Its a small article but nice to see it finished. On Regency. I figured Nour would drive you off. I read the talk discussions. He's still tinkering with the article so very late. I began working on that in March. scope_creep^Talk 08:45, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

I know right? I had been in it longer than that. The main issue for me is that he is over-confident in his English and doesn't discuss his changes. This means I had to keep checking the history, then ask questions, which led to further unannounced rewrites, usually also unexplained. I have encountered this before in other people who attended French universities. One I knew in person visited us in London and could not make himself understood ordering pastries at the corner bakery, and he had a doctorate in English. To be fair, I am sure his spelling was fine though and Vauxhall was then a working-class neighborhood of squats and housing estates so foreigners were really rare. And I cannot write a an article in *my* third language. Thi doesn't contradict my impression that he may genuinely be a subject matter expert, and he would know more than us about historical facts simply by attending secondary schools in Algeria. However I was not a passing IP making random unexplained changes; I was someone whose help he requested arguing with featured article criteria and retreating into outraged when I pointed out that the source didn't say that though, and that this was a requirement for even keeping B status. I have been watching the article and I think that having a source that says that in the article is not the same thing as having it at the end of the sentence that also says that. Nor can I affirm that all the copyvio is gone, because although I heavily rewrote the article wording, new ambiguous machine translation kept getting inserted, which wording I apparently do not understand because I am an idiot he keeps referring to as she.

When Sashi encouraged him in this as a result of, follow thus closely, an offline dispute about a Wikipedia dispute about an offline dispute, then wow. I was not going to bring in an energy like that, that can call "lol" a PA while accusing me of canvassing of all things over an article I wanted nothing more than to stop editing, I had a moment of clarity and stopped editing it. Sashi has not attempted to fix or understand anything but probably will be back if I try to fix *his* source misrepresentation. He still maintains it is correct.

I do not think Nour realizes how much we were protecting him. He definitely should finish the article, which still has problems, remain finished with the article, and have another copy editor review it. Every reference will need to be validated all over again, most especially the ones in Arabic we were AGFing. Not all problems found will be of his creation but this needs to be done and if the source integrity problems remain unaddressed I dunno. I literally would rather hammer a nail into my forehead than attempt to fix this before he inevitably gets blocked either CIR and POV pushing. Or both.

Speaking of source misrepresentation, Church arson is validating the section that is largely repeating the Canada section at the article about the residential school gravesite discoveries, which is definitely part of somebody's disinformation as I was to my astonishment able to demonstrate at ANI. With a lot of help. I freeze up and am definitely not touching this until after I figure out what country I will be living in this winter. There is no point in stockpiling food here if I will be in DC able to get anything I want at all delivered to the door. Etc. But TP is suggesting the removal of anything not definitely declared an arson and is probably right. This could maybe get done. And see, it would me the main article of the disputed section.

Angelita could be longer but let's talk about that on the prep page. I was really struggling with the chemistry but I do understand what happened in that outrageous appeals process. I could do a chart, or a timeline might be better.

Passive voice is acceptable as grammar goes (even though the people talking about it likely ran Grammarly). I can explain why if you like but this is already long. On first pass while I am still learning facts I will stick to passive voice and obvious grammar. I didn't see anything outrageous, just a Lister->he or two, which also is really about readability not grammar. Ideally you should sound like you. At Regency there were too many copyvios to even think of going that slow. Mathglot wanted to report it. I am not worried right now about whether the Lister article is finished. I do understand his importance now.Elinruby (talk) 11:05, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

NPP is making real progress this time compared to the May sprint which I didn't take part because of the Regency work, so I'm devoting as much time as I can to help it along, but it will be finished at the end of the month with a real noticeable difference. scope_creep^Talk 08:49, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Awesome. I checked: Extremely unavailable dates are Oct 9 to 16. 11:07, 20 September 2024 (UTC) Elinruby (talk) 11:07, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: Re: Your comment. I asked him to post to GA a couple days ago. But still tinkering. If the references are damaged or unreliable or npov'd then they will immediately show up the FA source review. It may be a shock. I sincerely hope they are ok, considering the amount of work we've done. scope_creep^Talk 21:46, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I can only shake my head Elinruby (talk) 23:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2024

• In the media: Courts order Wikipedia to give up names of editors, legal strain anticipated from "online safety laws"

• Community view: Indian courts order Wikipedia to take down name of crime victim, editors strive towards consensus

• Serendipity: A Wikipedian at the 2024 Paralympics

• Opinion: asilvering's RfA debriefing

• News and notes: Are you ready for admin elections?

• Gallery: Are Luddaites defending the English Wikipedia?

• Recent research: Article-writing AI is less "prone to reasoning errors (or hallucinations)" than human Wikipedia editors

• Traffic report: Jump in the line, rock your body in time

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red October 2024

Women in Red | October 2024, Volume 10, Issue 10, Numbers 293, 294, 318, 319, 320 Online events: New: Women in STEM | Geofocus: Islands I-P | Women in archaeology Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities October is Women in Green's "Around the World in 31 Days" Good Article Edit-a-thon Tip of the month: Unsure how to expand a stub article? Take a look at this guidance Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 08:08, 29 September 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Draft:CT Group Viet Nam

Hello, I have removed all sections that were considered to be advertising. Please review the article again. Thank you. Nguyenkimgs (talk) 14:54, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

@Scope creep Could you please review it again for me? Thank you. Nguyenkimgs (talk) 08:44, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

@Nguyenkimgs: It is better somebody else who is not involved review the draft. scope_creep^Talk 09:46, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Nguyenkimgs (talk) 09:57, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Potential UPE

Hi, I saw that you had templated Padibso for potential COI/UPE. So, you might wish to join the conversation at User talk:Bishonen#Opinion on UPE. Thanks, TrangaBellam (talk) 08:53, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

@TrangaBellam: Thanks but i'll pass. I'm a bit burnt out at the moment. scope_creep^Talk 09:44, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

October music

story · music · places

You may remember Maryvonne Le Dizès, my story today as on 28 August. Some September music was unusual: last compositions and eternal light, with Ligeti mentioned in story and music. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Morning @Gerda Arendt: Ive started listening to Ligeti. Quite unusual. First track put the fear in me, but the piano sonatina's are much softer. I'll look at the rest. I like a good music recommendation. scope_creep^Talk 07:20, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, and I have one almost every day ;) - today I remember an organist who was pictured on the Main page on his birthday ten years ago, and I found two recent organ concerts to match, - see top of my talk. I couldn't decide for a piece, so took a complete interview. The Ligeti piece sung in the concert I heard was Lux aeterna, - famous because it became used in a film. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:20, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Today brought a timely promotion of Helmut Bauer to the Main page on the day when pieces from Mozart's Requiem were performed for him. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:32, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

I made Leif Segerstam my big story today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: I hadn't heard of him. I see he is a professor of conducting. I hadn't heard of that either. Its curious. I see he has done a couple of his own compositions. I'll have a listen over the next couple of months 8), if I can get hold of them. A busy man. I see there is a couple of names of that main article list that I don't know either. I think that is a pretty decent recommendation. scope_creep^Talk 14:35, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

He was great. I only knew his name because the German orchestra isn't far from where I live. 371 symphonies! Brahms wrote 4, Beethoven 9 ;) - I hoped he would appear today among the recent deaths but there's this ? in my story. It could still happen. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:19, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

My story today is a cantata 300 years old, based on a hymn 200 years old when the cantata was composed, based on a psalm some thousand years old, - so said the 2015 DYK hook. I had forgotten the discussion on the talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:21, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Happy whatever you celebrate today, - more who died, more to come, and they made the world richer. Greetings from Madrid where I took the pic of assorted Cucurbita in 2016. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:59, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Example of a comma splice

[6] is one I just did. See how it was really two sentences? If making it two sentences makes the reading choppy, you could use a semicolon instead. This sort of opposition is common in spoken English but in formal written English it is wrong unless there is a connector like "and" or "but".

this is just a random followup to our discussions a week or two ago. I am not sure how well I explained this at the time or whether you have had the time to go re-read what I wrote. Feel free to ping with questions. I am just nibbling around the edges of a couple of things trying to stay out of deep dives for just now Elinruby (talk) 20:44, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: I read all of it. scope_creep^Talk 07:06, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

ok. Elinruby (talk) 19:05, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Palapye Public Library

may i kindly be helped retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement,it was deleted under speedy deletion Olgatladi2020 (talk) 11:56, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

@Olgatladi2020: You can ask for it to be undeleted at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. I think maybe it will sent to draft but I don't know. scope_creep^Talk 13:27, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

September 2024 NPP backlog drive – Points award

		The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia
		This award is given in recognition to Scope creep for accumulating at least 500 points during the September 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions helped play a part in the 19,000+ articles and 35,000+ redirects reviewed (for a total of 26,884.6 points) completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 15:17, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

September 2024 NPP backlog drive – Streak award

		Asymmetric Epicyclic Gears Award
		This award is given in recognition to Scope creep for accumulating at least 50 points during each week of the September 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions played a part in the 19,000+ articles and 35,000+ redirects reviewed (for a total of 26,884.6 points) during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 15:38, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 October 2024

• News and notes: One election's end, another election's beginning

• Recent research: "As many as 5%" of new English Wikipedia articles "contain significant AI-generated content", says paper

• In the media: Off to the races! Wikipedia wins!

• Contest: A WikiCup for the Global South

• Traffic report: A scream breaks the still of the night

• Book review: The Editors

• Humour: The Newspaper Editors

• Crossword: Spilled Coffee Mug

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

King Island Dairy

Hi Scope Creep.
Re this this edit, redirecting to Saputo Inc.. Little as it is, shouldn't the content of King Island Dairy be edited into that page as there is no mention of that company on the Saputo page?
Regards, 220 of ^ßorg 11:52, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

@220 of Borg: That article is highly promotional, that was the reason for the redirect. Saputo used to own king island diary, but it a defunct company and don't see any reason to add anything to it. There is no historical value to it. scope_creep^Talk 13:49, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of bays of the Orkney Islands, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Hope.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red November 2024

Women in Red | November 2024, Vol 10, Issue 11, Nos 293, 294, 321, 322, 323 Online events: New: Asian women | Geofocus: Islands Q-Z | Women in engineering Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities Annual Wikipedia Asian Month (WAM) is an online campaign designed to boost Asian content on Wikipedia each November. Unreferenced articles backlog drive. These Wikiproject clean-up lists offer a start to November's backlog drive, e.g. Women's History and Women writers Tip of the month: Looking for an image? Sometimes you can find openly licensed images at search.creativecommons.org/ Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 20:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Reference question

Hi. Not urgent, but for when you have a moment, I have a quick question about an edit you made last month.

Every once in a while, I check whether there have been any changes to Ira Brad Matetsky, which happens to be the mainspace article that was created a few years ago about myself. (One might consider this to be either solipsism or self-preservation.) I did so recently, and noticed this edit, in which you removed a citation to a Wikipedia-space page listing the dates I served on the Arbitration Committee, with the edit summary Removed illegal ref.

I would agree that 99% of the time, removing a mainspace citation to another Wikipedia page would be completely correct and non-controversial. However, in this particular instance, I am curious: what better source than Wikipedia's list of ArbCom members could support the dates when someone served on the Wikipedia ArbCom? While the fact that I was on the Committee for awhile has been discussed in several places outside Wikipedia, it is unlikely that anyone writing off-site will mention the specific months and years, so the citation needed that you added probably can never be filled. Disallowing the internal reference in this situation thus is probably tantamount to saying that the dates shouldn't appear in the article at all.

In a different context, I would suggest restoring the reference, but for obvious reasons I do not edit this article, and at any rate this raises wider questions than just about support for this one sentence in one article, so I'm curious what you think about the broader issue. As I said, this is not urgent or time-sensitive, so please feel free to reply at your convenience. Thanks very much for all that you do. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 09:28, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Newyorkbrad: How goes it? No it doesn't mean that at all. Yes that is the core of it. How its represented. Is it that important? It a wikipedia reference and they are illegal in every instance. Although its a bit special as its a Wikipedia editor who have a wikipedia article; I'm not sure what the process in this instance, if it was any different from a typical BLP. But certainly in any another instance in a BLP of this type I would remove the Wikipedia reference immediately. I think you would need to chat on the policy noticeboard or have a chat with the folk who drew up the policy. I could post something on the helpdesk if you want? See if anybody knows anything about it. At the time I never gave it a thought. scope_creep^Talk 16:11, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Morning @Newyorkbrad: Right. I've asked around on Wikipedia and off with various friends who edit and the consensus is that there no scope for adding wikipedia sources to a BLP and no exceptions can be made. There is no process for it, its frowned upon and will be removed if it added, so I wont add it back. Questions were raised about coi several times but I didn't see a problem with that. As a BLP, it needs high quality sources as stated "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources." which I use, but the sentiment was referred to several times. However, the work we do here is work simlar to any other work that requires mental concentration, effort, training, skill and talent and so you should be able refer to it someway that is not hidden; to show you have made that effort. I would possibly raise it at WP:VPR to see if there is wider consensus or to find out its seen as a wider problem. Other editors may have came across it already. There is several editors who work in very specialised area for long periods and would perhaps like to see it mentioned. Its the only thing I can suggest.05:45, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughtfulness and research regarding my question, which I appreciate. I am not sure where you've discussed this, and would be interested in seeing it, but my instinctive reaction remains that we can't possibly have a policy precluding use of the best, if not only source, for an uncontroversial assertion. However, in our wiki-world of far too many rigid written policies, anything is possible.

So I've just looked up the formal policy, at Wikipedia:Verifiability#Wikipedia and sources that mirror or use it. The policy states, sensibly enough: Do not use articles from Wikipedia (whether English Wikipedia or Wikipedias in other languages) as sources, since Wikipedia is a user-generated source. That restriction is obviously appropriate, both for quality-control reasons and to avoid the possibility of circular referencing. However, technically it does not apply here, since the list of ArbCom members is not contained in an "article."

In any event, the policy goes on to state: An exception is allowed when Wikipedia itself is being discussed in the article. These may cite an article, guideline, discussion, statistic, or other content from Wikipedia (or a sister project) to support a statement about Wikipedia. Wikipedia or the sister project is a primary source in this case and may be used following the policy for primary sources. Any such use should avoid original research, undue emphasis on Wikipedia's role or views, and inappropriate self-reference. The article text should clarify how the material is sourced from Wikipedia to inform the reader about the potential bias.

By my reading of that paragraph, the citation as it was should be okay, perhaps with a minor rewording of the sentence? Again, I'm not so much concerned about the citation in my own article—I have more significant concerns about what the current state of that article says about the overall (lack of) upkeep of BLPs, which I plan to write an essay about when I have a bit more time—but the application of the general principle.

Please let me know if you think this addresses the issue or if you still think I should ask about this at a noticeboard, in which case I'll try to figure out the best one to use. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 18:16, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy ping

To let you know about an AfD discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruno Bertez (2nd nomination). The article is back following refund after soft deletion and I am pinging participants in the previous AfD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Dclemens1971:. Thanks for bringing it to my notice. It is a terrible refunded article. scope_creep^Talk 05:19, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 November 2024

• From the editors: Editing Wikipedia should not be a crime

• News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation shares ANI lawsuit updates; first admin elections appoint eleven sysops; first admin recalls opened; temporary accounts coming soon?

• In the media: An old scrimmage, politics and purported libel

• Special report: Wikipedia editors face litigation, censorship

• Gallery: Why you should take more photos and upload them

• In focus: Questions and answers about the court case

• Traffic report: Twisted tricks or tempting treats?

• Technology report: Wikimedia tech, the Asian News International case, and the ultra-rare BLACKLOCK

• Humour: Man quietly slinks away from talk page argument after realizing his argument dumb, wrong

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Gedania (Supply ship).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Gedania (Supply ship).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:12, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

File:Caspar C24.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Caspar C24.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — Ирука¹³ 21:50, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Razorpay

Hi @Scope creep,

I saw your comment on the Draft:Razorpay AFC submission. Could you please elaborate on the issue? Is it related to the references (i.e., WP:GNG, WP:NCORP) or the tone? I have added a section on controversies about the topic, so I don't believe the entire article is an advertisement, though some sections might still have issues.

Since I have worked on old content, it might still have multiple issues. If you think there are serious problems with the draft or topic (given its controversial history), please let me know. I am willing to stop working on the draft and withdraw my submission if necessary, allowing others to continue. The company is keen to add promotional information. Additionally, I was advised by @Kinleysoda (an editor with COI) to not continue the current submission.

Thank you for your guidance.

Best regards, Macrobreed2 (talk) 08:41, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Macrobreed2:, It states everything in the comment. The company is non-notable and is an advert since none of the first two blocks of references don't establish notability. Its all routine business news. There is nothing of significance in this company that warrants an article and that is reflected in the article itself. scope_creep^Talk 06:14, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

I understand . Thanks for replying and clarifying the comment further. Regards, Macrobreed2 (talk) 14:28, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 November 2024

• News and notes: Open letter to WMF about court case breaks one thousand signatures, big arb case declined, U4C begins accepting cases

• In the media: Summons issued for Wikipedia editors by Indian court, "Gaza genocide" RfC close in news, old admin Gwern now big AI guy, and a "spectrum of reluctance" over Australian place names

• Recent research: SPINACH: AI help for asking Wikidata "challenging real-world questions"

• News from the WMF: Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia Endowment audit reports: FY 2023–2024

• Traffic report: Well, let us share with you our knowledge, about the electoral college

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:44, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Personal attacks

You can certainly express strong opinions without comments like this one. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:50, 19 November 2024 (UTC)