User talk:Wxidea

Hi. Thanks for visiting my talk page. I cleared a lot of historical history from here in September 2015, but you can see it by viewing history.

Request on 03:13:32, 3 September 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Shanno2012

• Shanno2012 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Granny NANNIES (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, this is my first article I have tried to submit to Wikipedia. I have submitted an article about the Granny Nannies company but it has been rejected twice due to it reading "more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia." I have made edits to the article in order to fix the proposed issues but I have not been successful. Any help you can offer to ensure the approval of this article would be greatly appreciated. Shanno2012 (talk) 03:13, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Shanno2012 (talk) 03:13, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

03:35:01, 4 September 2015 review of submission by Breton66

• Breton66 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Accredo Business Software Ltd (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, I am keen to get this entry approved, and am unsure why it is not being accepted. The problem seems to be with the references and golden rule. In my opinion, the article cites significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic (including references from x3 independent business magazines). I am unsure of what to do next. Please help. Regards Jonathan.

Breton66 (talk) 03:35, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, I'm not the right person to be lobbying when you haven't edited your article for 2 weeks. I'm sorry to be negative, but my opinion is that your article doesn't convey notability. The articles are too insider, talking about opening an office, etc? You need real objective articles that might target a kind lay public. Some other editor might interpret thing differently, and you are welcome to resubmit, but I think resubmitting without edits is futile. Wxidea (talk) 04

04, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

4 September 2015 Thank you!

Hi Wxidea, thank you for leaving the comments on the article. That's helpful, clear and constructive feedback. Glad the devil is not in the notability of the sources any more. Will keep my eyes peeled for articles about success and longevity. Have a great weekend ahead! Mkraay30 (talk) 12:54, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

23:54:22, 9 September 2015 review of submission by Breton66

• Breton66 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Accredo Business Software Ltd (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, I am keen to get this entry approved, and am unsure why it is not being accepted. The problem seems to be with the references and golden rule. In my opinion, the article cites significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic (including references from x3 independent business magazines). I am unsure of what to do next. Please help. I entered this question over a month ago and it disappeared into your archives without being answered.

Breton66 (talk) 23:54, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I responded in my note on your article draft which I just rejected. Sorry to be negative, but I don't think your article establishes notability. Wxidea (talk) 03:33, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Hancock Historical Museum

Thank you for your feedback on the article. Just to clarify, I do not work for, know anyone who works for, or am otherwise affiliated with the museum. I live in Florida and happened across it on a recent trip to the Midwest. I know that my relationship (or lack-there-of) with the museum does not affect whether or not the article is sufficiently cited, but I wanted to let you know that it is not "mine."

I will gladly move the website links to an external links section. Thank you for the advice. However, I am a bit confused: only two of the eleven references are directly affiliated with the museum. The other nine are all independent sources, three of which are published books with the authors, publishers, ISBNs, etc. already included. I guess I just don't understand what additional information you are looking for. Also, the article already states and cites that the museum is a non-profit. I can cite NCCS, or any other 501(c)(3) database source you recommend, if you think it would help.

I believe that it is important to document these little gems of cultural and historical significance, and I think that this one in particular is notable enough to warrant its own page, rather than a subsection on an existing page. I appreciate your advice on improving the article, and look forward to hearing any additional feedback you can offer. Amockens (talk) 15:44, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi thanks for clarifying, and apologies for the assumption that you are affiliated. I guess I was working too quickly while tired, I saw your article was sitting in the queue, and was trying to give you some attention, apparently at the cost of imprecise comments. You can ignore my question about AASLH. Thanks for your effort to add interesting content. The 3rd party citations are all fine, it's just the early ones that directly cite the museum that should be removed (I think). It's a quirk of Wikipedia that they don't like primary sources. I'd say give it another pass, and let's see. And even better if you can dig up some older references. Wxidea (talk) 15:53, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick response, as well as your candor. It's true, I was tired of waiting in the queue to be reviewed, so I do appreciate your time. I will make the suggested revisions before resubmitting. Unfortunately, at that point, the article's future will be subject to the whim of the next reviewer. I'm just afraid it will be glanced at, seen that it was already declined twice, and automatically dismissed as another trivial article written by an overeager affiliate looking for free advertising. :/ Amockens (talk) 16:33, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Send me a note when you edit it. I'm fundamentally interested in cultural heritage institutions being including in Wikipedia. Wxidea (talk) 16:35, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry for the delay, but I removed the primary source citations, created an external links section, and resubmitted. Thank you again for all of your help and support. Let me know if there's anything else you think I should change. Amockens (talk) 19:55, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

16:14:03, 15 September 2015 review of submission by Maggie Edmunds

• Maggie Edmunds (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:YETI Coolers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thanks for helping review this submission. I've reworked it again to be even less promotional. I know clearly establishing notability for the company is key, so aside from mentioning awards and the Inc. 500 placements, do you recommend another way?

Maggie Edmunds (talk) 16:14, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi... My sense is that you've established notability, the catch is to sound disinterested while making statements about notability. Wxidea (talk) 16

16, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maggie Edmunds (talk • contribs) 17:52, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

16:33:57, 15 September 2015 review of submission by Maggie Edmunds

• Maggie Edmunds (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:YETI Coolers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi - Looking at GoPro's page, they list out their individual products. Do you have any tips on how to do this without sounding too promotional? Thanks! Maggie Edmunds (talk) 16:33, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

17:10:26, 18 September 2015 review of submission by Fiberartist42

• Fiberartist42 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Central Arizona Museum Association (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

HI, Thanks so much for the helpful comments! This has been a character-building effort for me, and I hope I've made progress toward getting it right!

I'm not sure how the review process works, but will you be able to look at my submission again and see if I followed your good advice?

Thanks again

Fiberartist42 (talk) 17:10, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi. It's looking better. :) I'd suggest you try making the "Founding Institutions and Officers" section into a table. Wikipedia seems to like tables. Similar to the kind of table that might be in the bio of an actor/actress. Or just make it paragraph format. I'm not convinced a list of people's names is relevant, so you could just list the founding orgs in paragraph format. Wxidea (talk) 17:15, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

18:07:05, 18 September 2015 Submission Declined. Halyna sm

• Halyna sm (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Nova Ukraine (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

{{SAFESUBST:Void|

I appreciate the review and I would like to further edit the article for publishing. I used references (third-party, independent sources) for almost every sentence in my article about "Nova Ukraine". Yet, it was not submitted due to lack of notability. I read all the guidelines and still can't figure out why the references I used were not enough. Was it because not all of my sources were in English? Could you please explain how can I improve the situation? Should I simply wait for more online publication about "Nova Ukraine" to appear? Thank you!

Halyna sm (talk) 18:07, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

18:29:40, 18 September 2015 review of submission by Fiberartist42

• Fiberartist42 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Central Arizona Museum Association (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thanks again. I like the more uniform look of the section much better! And, on we go...

I appreciate your help!

Fiberartist42 (talk) 18:29, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Mattias Bärjed

Hi. I saw you declined this article for notability reasons. Last month I had been working with the editor on what I felt would get it over the hump. Do you think the fact that he won the Guldbaggen award makes him notable? It's the Swedish equivalent of the Oscar? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:41, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the Guldbaggen would do it, and forgive my ignorance. However, readers will also be ignorant of it. I think the verbosity of the entry got in the way of seeing that detail. I'll approve it, but I strongly suggest you work on tightening the piece. Wxidea (talk) 12:52, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Consider adding an "Awards" section.Wxidea (talk) 12:57, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

No worries. I was "ignorant" of it as well, until it was also pointed out to me. Thanks for your help. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:59, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the input, guys! Will get back to the article - Awards section was a good idea. Best, /RKUV — Preceding unsigned comment added by RKUV (talk • contribs) 16:21, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks also from me (helping out here as a Wikipedia mentor on Swedish Wikipedia).--Paracel63 (talk) 08:27, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Contest your opinion at Miscellany for deletion

Hi Wxidea – I recently noticed your involvement in this draft Accredo Business Software Ltd, I have put up this article for deletion debate, You might want to post your vote at Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Accredo Business Software Ltd. Thank you! ♔ MONARCH Talk to me 13:49, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pepperidgefarmcookbook.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Pepperidgefarmcookbook.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:29, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Indonesia Corruption Watch

Dear Wxidea,

Thanks for your advice. Indonesia Corruption Watch is my first page creation. I've reworked it, cut the extraneous material and beefed up the citations as per your recommendations.

I've already re-submitted it for consideration, but If you have a moment to stop by and have a look, I'd appreciate any further input.

Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Champ 7FC (talk • contribs) 22:16, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Nice work. Wxidea (talk) 03:46, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

21:38:25, 17 October 2015 review of submission by Mmcnaughton

• Mmcnaughton (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Paul Hardy Carter (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thanks for your comments and revision suggestions. I just wanted to follow up, to see if I had resolved the issues you identified. I got overwhelmed with work and wasn't able to get back to it until now, and I also wanted to wait until the photographer's latest exhibition had gone on display.

You noted that some of the citations needed bull bibliographic info - I used the citation template builder, and all of the citations followed the format of the templates. Some of the media articles didn't have authors listed (it's not uncommon for some media articles to run without attribution or bylines). Are there particular concerns you had, or should I be doing something different instead of using the citation templates.

I have expanded on what makes Carter's work notable. I'm not sure I follow as to your comment about writing quality - as an academic I write for a living. Is there something about the article tone that doesn't quite read "encyclopedic"? I know that sometimes changing genres means that a person doesn't get the tone right, and this is my first Wikipedia article.

You noted that the article would be stronger with press coverage: I have cited press coverage - an in-depth interview by a magazine on his work and technique, 3 news articles,and a short documentary about the photographer's method/approach (respectively, citations 1, 4, 8, 13, and 5).

MMcNaughton (talk) 15:35, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

19:46:16, 27 October 2015 review of submission by Acianciara

• Acianciara (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Technopolis Moscow (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Re-review requested as objections have been resolved and page is ready to go live.

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Ask for help

Hi Wxidea,

I've written another entry at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amanda_K._Hale. Following the different feedback, I tried to improve it, but didn't get answers except for the "link" problem. Could you please take a look at the page and tell me if my correction is right or wrong and kindly offer me some suggestions? And then I'll make improvement.

Your time and attention are greatly appreciated!

1001Bookworm (talk) 19:48, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Iru (food)

An article that you have been involved in editing—Iru (food)—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. A12n (talk) 16:17, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Wxidea. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Wxidea. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Wxidea. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Thumbnail scan from John Bunyan's "Pilgrim's Progess".png

The file File:Thumbnail scan from John Bunyan's "Pilgrim's Progess".png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Competitive Sport of Checkers & Draughts (January 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Curbon7 was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Competitive Sport of Checkers & Draughts and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Competitive Sport of Checkers & Draughts, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Curbon7 (talk) 09:09, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Wxidea! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Curbon7 (talk) 09:09, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Could you please review my article

Hey.

I noticed you have reviewed a few pages in your time at Wikipedia- I am a beginner to Wikipedia and have just finished writing my first article, now the draft is pending for review. It'd be great if you could check it over! I am apprehensive that it will contain mistakes and I will need to wait another few weeks/months before getting another review.

Many thanks, Apaul291003 (talk) 11:21, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Competitive Sport of Checkers & Draughts

Hello, Wxidea. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Competitive Sport of Checkers & Draughts, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:01, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello Wxidea:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 1200 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:54, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.

You have been pruned from a list

Hi Wxidea! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed on the AFC's participants list, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 6 months. Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to regain access to the AFCH script, you can do so at any time by visiting WT:AFCP. Thank you for your work at AFC, and if you start editing Wikipedia again we hope you will rejoin us. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:02, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:13, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

IP Unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Wxidea (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Caught by a colocation web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is 2606:54C0:76E1:6398:0:0:10:2BC. Place any further information here. Wxidea (talk) 02:55, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Decline reason:

That's allocated to Cloudflare. Since you didn't include any further information, we have nothing more to go on than this. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:29, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Hi User:NinjaRobotPirate - I figured it out. My Mac automatically enabled "iCloud Private Relay", and that's serving as a VPN. Since this will increase, I might suggest if you know the people who edit the main templates, they could mention iCloud Private Relay. Wxidea (talk) 03:39, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

I could try to look into it, but it's not easy to figure out what services IP ranges are being used for. Thank you for the tip, though; it might make it easier to find and label other iCloud services. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:08, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

September 2022

Your edit to Nile has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 00:34, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

philosophy

Hi!

I liked very much your philosophy section on your userpage and it gave me some ideas.

I've added it to a page on my userspace on the Portuguese Wikipedia with some comments on it.

May I translate the section you wrote into Portuguese (European Portuguese in this case) ? I would like to translate it and on the same page to have the original version as a citation so readers can compare if necessary both versions. What do you think?

I thought about sending you a link to Google Translate with what I wrote in Portuguese translated to English... but after reading the translation it made I found several typos that corrupt the meaning of the text. So I send you what I wrote correcting the typos I belive Google Translate made:

«Texts that I think think (sic) about Wikipedia in an effective way:

(They can be potentially useful in growing Wikipedia in quantity and quality)

Secondary schools

User:Wxidea 's logical, pragmatic and concise opinion on:

the «[...] educational/social benefit of Secondary Schools having a presence on Wikipedia.» (my translation)

From the original in EN : « [...] educational/social benefit of having High Schools have a presence in Wikipedia,»

1st version (28-08-2011)

Latest version (02-08-2012)

The statistics cited change over the years, however the logic and relevance of the topic remains. Most recent version fully translated into Portuguese (with citation of the respective full version for comparison) here. (Confirm if User allows)

In Lusophony: (Under construction)

• Brazil
• Angola
• Mozambique
• Portugal - 1,716 3rd cycle and secondary education establishments. [2022, Pordata ].
• Guinea Bissau
• East Timor
• Equatorial Guinea
• Macao
• Cape Green
• Sao Tome and Principe

Total of potential educational establishments that could each have an article on Wikipedia:

xxx.xxx.xxx

In my opinion, several independent secondary references continue to be necessary to support the article with a neutral point of view.

It may be needed to be reflected on whether:

1. Can school newspapers generally be considered acceptable secondary sources, that is, that they are vetted by the Wikipedia community and are independent?*
2. Will they be independent sources: a source in x school newspaper is used in x school article?*
3. And if in the same school group there is the newspaper x, y and z with respective articles 1, 2 and 3: each article portrays a different school from the one in the newspaper but of the same school group. As a secondary source, can it be independent and can each article be used as a reference in its respective article?*

*Not denying the principle of common sense and the application of casuistry.

(Insert more interesting texts that I find.)»

Have a good day! :) CaveatLector2022 (talk) 21:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC)