Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 787

Archive 780

←

Archive 785

Archive 786

Archive 787

Archive 788

Archive 789

Archive 790

can someone please help me with an edit question?

I wrote a long piece on Carmel Snow a while back that put her in the context of her time and place, explaining her significance.

It was replaced in its entirety today by someone who eliminated the entire text, replacing it with a much more skeletal one

I'm saddened to have worked hard on a scholarly entry, only to see it replaced by a less informative one. I don't think that readers will be well served. I can see adding to the original material, but to delete all of it, altogether? Including footnotes, etc. etc.?

I'm not a frequent contributor here and, given my professional obligations, cannot take that on. I'd so appreciate it if someone could help me undo this new version, and create a fairer portrait of this subject?

Thank you, Biographer1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Biographer1 (talk • contribs) 10:38, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Biographer1 Welcome to Teahouse. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Content are summaries from many independence, reliable source and not an elaborate of every things about the subject. You edits have been reverted twice because you removed the "sourced" content - see here [1]. If you want to add any info, please back it up with sources (from newspapers, journals, publication houses) of such claim Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:51, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

I can understand why you were reverted. You took an article with 11 sources that is wikilinked to other articles and changed it to an article with one questionable source and no wikilinks. If you want to improve the article, I suggest you start with what is there now and improve the article. If you have concerns about the quality of the article the place to raise those concerns is on the article talk page, Talk:Carmel Snow. 10:53, 13 June 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GB fan (talk • contribs) 10:53, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

The version which you tried to reinstate was unsourced as well as malformatted. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:54, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your help! An earlier version was extensively sourced, as I recall. In any case, I'd be delighted to add sources as necessary.

This text has withstood scrutiny for over a decade. The larger question to me was why the original couldn't have been added to, rather than deleted altogether.

It's nice to have some of these new details, such as the color of CS's wedding dress, but the piece needs to put her in the context of her time. I'm unclear about why the new material -- and sources -- couldn't just have been added to the earlier text.

I'm a professional biographer and journalist and worked hard to give this subject credence. Carmel Snow had a profound effect on the cultural in America and Western Europe in the mid 20th century.

I'm convinced that there were sources in the original page. Is there a way to look back at earlier versions?

My only interest in giving this extraordinary subject her due!

Many thanks for whatever help you can offer.

Biographer1 (talk) 11:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

If you want to look back at earlier versions, click the "View history" tab at the top of the article, and it will take you to the history. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:34, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

You can see every single version the article. Go to the article, Carmel Snow. Then click on "View history". Next just above where the first version is, click "500". Now all the versions are visible on a single page. Now if you click on the time/date sequence you can see what the article looked like then. ~ GB fan 11:36, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Here's a look at all your edits: https://tools.wmflabs.org/sigma/usersearch.py?name=Biographer1&page=Carmel_Snow&server=enwiki&max= And it looks like your most recent edit until this week is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carmel_Snow&diff=prev&oldid=235063842 valereee (talk) 15:20, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Want to page for fairwell parties but not able, not able to collect authority reference

If a page doesn't exist on wikipedia, and I m going to create one, every time moderator ask for use references. I am not able to collect external links for reference.

Why can't you find acceptable references? If it's because there aren't any, then Wikipedia won't accept an article on that subject. Maproom (talk) 13:56, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

It's fpr Draft:Brother's Day. Doug Weller talk 16:11, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

The first paragraph (and references) are plausible. In my opinion, everything beyond that is not relevant and needs to be deleted before trying again. David notMD (talk) 16:49, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Twinkle

Why won't Twinkle automatically leave warnings for me?Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 01:40, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Thegooduser When use TW instead of HG, it will lead me to the user talk page, but I have to put what type of warning and the level of warning. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 01:49, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

There is a page at User talk:Sandbox for user warnings specifically for testing and comparing the way different tools issue warnings. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:17, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Thegooduser You can find all the warning templates - see here WP:WARN and the associate messages - see here WP:MLT for multi level warning and WP:SLT for single level. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 02:42, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Thegooduser! To answer your actual question, I think there are two reasons. First, many problematic edits do not meet the criteria for vandalism and thus automated templates are not an option. Second, even with vandalism edits, a large amount of discretion is required to determine the nature of an edit. Any edit which appears to be made in good faith is not vandalism. Twinkle cannot make those kinds of differentiations—if it could, then we probably would be able to automate more vandalism reverts. The nature of the warning is up to you, although Twinkle does provide you with some helpful warning templates to get you started. It is often helpful to leave an extra comment after a template as an explanatory note. Thank you for editing and improving Wikipedia!  :) —zfJames Please add {{ping|ZfJames}} to your reply (talk page, contribs) 02:34, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Avigdor Eskin

Good Day What format of a source in the PDF file. On many people sanctions are imposed. I want to write about it in articles. --Bohdan Bondar (talk) 17:43, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Bohdan Bondar. You cite a PDF like any other published source: with enough information to enable a reader to identify and in principle obtain the source, eg through a library. I am not aware of a particular citation template for PDFs, because these usually relate to a kind of publication (book, news, journal, website etc) rather than a format. Have a look at Citing sources. --ColinFine (talk) 20:26, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

talk Thank you . I experimented for a long time but managed to get what I wanted--Bohdan Bondar (talk) 16:46, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Biography

Why did you delete my article if it has valid references?

(talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emilthebest06 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't see anything deleted. However, Draft:Emil Cerda seems to be an autobiography with very poor sources and some BLP violations, and the editor added material about himself to Ensanche La Fé (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) in December. Doug Weller talk 18:35, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

how many kinds of barnstars are there?

"One, two, three, i messingly count them in a unordingly way and mess-up the barnstar names as a whole..." Bondboy9756 (talk) 11:03, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Bondboy9756. Can I ask whether you have plans to contribute content to the encyclopedia or help with maintaining it? Cordless Larry (talk) 11:05, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

They're insanely diverse. There are probably as many types of barn stars as there are types of articles. They're infamously difficult to get. Many editors do invaluable work only to have their edits go unnoticed and not even get one. I for the life of me can't see how some editors have dozens of them. Waste IMO to edit Wikipedia just because you want a barn star. Buy a real one on eBay. EnglishEfternamn_*t/c* 23:45, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Sparkle hard (album) link mis-redirecting

Hi! I noticed that the entry for Sparkle Hard, the latest album by Steve Malkmus & the Jicks, redirects to the wiki page of the band instead of going towards info about the album. Is this because there's no wiki entry for the album yet or because of the hyperlink itself? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.211.99.143 (talk) 18:32, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! The link you are referring to is a redirect at the moment that someone created because, while it may be a useful search term for the artist, there was not enough reliable sources to include it as a full blown article. That said, the sources appear to exist now so it could be turned into one. You are welcome to start work on it if you wish. I will probably turn it into a shorter article in a bit. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 19:27, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Natasha Bharadwaj (2)

I previously reviewed the sandbox of User:Nusratrah98 and declined it as duplicating Draft:Natasha Bharadwaj, and asked the author please not to work with multiple copies of drafts. The author had already been advised by User:TheSandDoctor to include better references to reliable sources. The author resubmitted the sandbox today without improvement. This time I moved the sandbox to Draft:Natasha Bharadwaj (2). It appears that the author doesn’t understand the advice that they are being given. (That is the good faith assumption.) Can someone else besides the two reviewers so far try to provide friendly advice to this editor? It seems that for the two reviewers so far, trying to advise this editor hasn’t helped.

Robert McClenon (talk) 19:23, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

The author has just tagged both copies of their draft for speedy deletion as G7. That is more likely a misunderstanding of what they are requesting than what they intend. Since both copies now will be speedily deleted, if they are really trying to create an article on the subject actress, it might be appropriate to give them advice starting with the Request for Undeletion, and then with adding better references, and then with how to submit a draft to AFC. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:29, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

How do I transfer my article

I wrote an article in my sandbox. And I think it's really looking good. I went through all the tutorials and learned a lot, but the real help came from the teahouse. I'm still a newbie and feel out of place.

My question is, if I am happy with an article in my sandbox, how can I transfer it to a real page? Thanks again, Matt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattketchen (talk • contribs) 20:25, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

@Mattketchen: A few problems:

1. Wikipedia articles are never sources for Wikipedia articles. This is an extension of our general prohibition against user-generated sources (which is why that source from a Forbes contributor is also not useful, as that's a blog hosted by Forbes and not actual Forbes content). We generally favor professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources.
2. The only source that mentions Canfield CyberDefense Group at all is their website. The rest of the references do not mention Canfield at all. You need to cite at least three reliable sources that are specifically about the subject but not dependent upon or affiliated with them.
3. As a result of the previous point, almost nothing in the article tells us anything about Canfield. The approach of raising serious problems (possibly even over-hyping them) to draw "awareness" to the company and what they do is advertising, which we do not want or allow.
4. YOU PLAGIARIZED FROM YOUR SOURCES. This is why I deleted the page. If you do this again, you can be blocked.

Honestly, you'd be better off starting over, following these steps:

1) Gather as many professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources you can find.

2) Focus on just the ones that are not dependent upon or affiliated with the subject, but still specifically about the subject and providing in-depth coverage (not passing mentions). If you do not have at least three such sources, the subject is not yet notable and trying to write an article at this point will only fail.

3) Summarize those sources from step 2, adding citations at the end of them. You'll want to do this in a program with little/no formatting, like Microsoft Notepad or Notepad++, and not in something like Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer.

4) Combine overlapping summaries (without arriving at new statements that no individual source supports) where possible, repeating citations as needed.

5) Paraphrase the whole thing just to be extra sure you've avoided any copyright violations or plagiarism.

6) Use the Article wizard to post this draft and wait for approval.

7) Expand the article using sources you put aside in step 2 (but make sure they don't make up more than half the sources for the article, and make sure that affiliated sources don't make up more than half of that).

Doing something besides those steps typically results in the article not being approved, or even in its deletion. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:43, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

@Mattketchen: Read the explanation above to understand what went wrong and why a recovery copy would not help you. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:26, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Apparently I did something wrong with my article

So another editor deleted it in completely and I can't recover it. Is there a way editors can point out the changes without completely deleting the article? I spent a lot of time on this. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattketchen (talk • contribs) 20:59, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Read the message above this one. Fixing the old material would require a re-write from the ground up, for the reasons explained above. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:24, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Creating a new article

If an article is already published in a foreign language Wikipedia, for example Japanese and want to publish the same article in English, should a user translate the already existing article? Or should a user create his/her own article in English and cite the Japanese article? Here is the Japanese Wikipedia Article: https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/全日空機高知空港胴体着陸事故 [The article is about All Nippon Airways Flight 1603] — Preceding unsigned comment added by OkayKenji (talk • contribs) 22:05, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

You can't cite the Japanese Wikipedia article, as Wikipedia is not a reliable source. For advice on translating, see WP:Translation. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:18, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, OkayKenji, and thanks for the excellent question. You can translate the existing article, if you think it's of sufficient quality. But you could also start the article from scratch. It depends on which you find a more suiting way of working, and which produces the better end result. But whatever you do, don't cite the Japanese Wikipedia article. Wikipedia articles are not reliable sources. Find and cite actual reliable sources, or cite the ones cited by the Japanese article. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:21, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

my article

I started an article on Laurelstone in my account & can't figure out how to return to continue writing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.69.57.62 (talk) 13:25, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

So it looks like your account is Hamish1066. Did you connect an email address to your account? If so, you should be able to recover your password. Otherwise, you're just gonna have to keep guessing what your password might have been. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:31, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

The draft is at Draft:Laurelstone. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:33, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

I got the article by clicking on the above link. Thank you. I still don't know how to recover the article through my account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.69.57.62 (talk) 22:32, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Do you mean that you don't know how to recover your account? The article is there, it's recovered, you can keep editing it. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:44, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Formatting gone wrong yet again

I've had another formatting hiccup in Cultural Action Party (Canada), could someone tell me what I did wrong? Thanks! The Verified Cactus 100% 21:56, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi VerifiedCactus You simply forgot to close the wikitable with a |} command. Plus I think you might have had four double brackets, not two, at the end of the 'eliminated' template. This has caused the references to become part of the table, which is clearly undesirable. I'll leave you to fix it, which I'm sure you can do. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:26, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

The usual thing: malformatted table. A table ends with |}, as described at Help:Table. Corrected in this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:23, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks guys The Verified Cactus 100% 23:38, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

User:Localemediamonitor

Does the userpage Imply paid editing?Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 22:54, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Not in my book, Thegooduser. I just call that healthy sarcasm... albeit from someone with apparently strong opinions, based on recent edits and discussions. Regards Nick Moyes (talk) 23:35, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

I thoroughly agree with Nick Moyes. This is obvious sarcasm, Thegooduser. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:22, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Referencing With A Book

Trying to find exactly what's needed in referencing with a book & formatting. Thank You! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2PacKidada (talk • contribs) 03:55, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

See WP:CITE and Template:Cite_book. A reference with a book usually looks something like <ref name="putatitlehere">{{cite book|title=Book Name|first=Author|last=Surname|publisher=Company|page=42}}</ref> when you are editing the article's source (I have no idea about visual editor or mobile, though). Ian.thomson (talk) 03:59, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Are excerpts in Italic acceptable?

Let us say I am going to include a certian quote from a certian person, can I write them in Italic? Is that acceptable? Or where should we use italic format? --Ruhubelent (talk) 04:22, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Ruhubelent. Specific guidance on use of italics can be found in the Manual of Style. The shortcut to that section is MOS:ITALICS. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:19, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Ruhubelent, I think the more direct answer to your question is "no, don't use italics for quotations", per MOS:ITALQUOTE. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:34, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Phone article

I think Wikipedia sufferered lack of articles about phone, as I don't see much of them here, can someone make an article about Razor Phone, it is notable thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.55.51.147 (talk) 06:41, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. We have an article about the Motorola Razr. Is that what you are talking about? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:45, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Cullen, Ummm the phone structure is very different, the Razor Phone is used more like a gaming phone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.55.51.147 (talk) 06:56, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Google sends one to Razer Phone. Perhaps we need a redirect from a common misspelling? — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:25, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Thx for fixing did you redirected it?, hope Wikipedia has more article about phone as I see bunch of them hasn't created on Meizu phone type. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.55.51.147 (talk) 07:54, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

There seem to be articles for earlier Meizu phones, but not necessarily the most recently released. As always, WP editors have to wait for reliable sources, independent of the vendor, to write something useful about the phones before there can be an article. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:28, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

The page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karate Edit War?

I'm recently updating the page Karate, and facing a difficulty that another user is keep reverting my words without a solid reason nor discussion, then I got his/her warning to block my account. Please pay your attention on the page, I would like to have any fairly judgment of yours. Osmond (talk) 13:19, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Here's my explainations

I found there are some online dictionaries explain the word “karateka” very well.

I’m not sure are they good enough to backup my claim.

1) Dictionary.com

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/karateka

[kuh-rah-tee-kah]

noun, plural ka·ra·te·ka, ka·ra·te·kas.

an expert in karate.

Origin of karateka

< Japanese, equivalent to karate + -ka person (< Middle Chinese, equivalent to Chinese jiā)

2) Collins Dictionary

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/karateka

karateka in British

(kəˈrɑːtɪˌkæ )

noun

a competitor or expert in karate

Or, in the case for whom doesn’t know Japanese nor Chinese, please let me try to explain.

Karateka in Kanji’s writing, which is 空手家, we can divide it into two parts, which is “karate” and the suffix “-ka”, no doubt “karate” just means “karate”, a martial art from Japan/Okinawa/Ryukyu, you will not call it as “Empty Hand”.

So you think the suffix -ka means the people who are doing such activity just same as English -er? Like “Boxer”, “Runner”, “Archer”…well sorry, No, they are not same.

The -ka add on a noun means an expert, for examples,

Senmon-ka (専門家) means expert,

Geijutsu-ka (芸術家) means artist,

Kigyo-ka (起業家) means entrepreneur…etc

Karate-ka (空手家) means Karate Expert for sure, never indicate the beginners nor the people who join a karate gym and put his/her dogi (道衣) into closet for decades.

I personally went to Okinawa to join a international karate seminar in 2016, I read the promotion leaflet that written both in Japanese and English, in Japanese it written as “世界の空手家”, the meaning is “Karate Experts of the World”, but it had been translated to “Karateka of the World”. We didn’t see any problem because that was a respectful expression in Japanese, we will call the people (especially in a group) higher rank than they entitled just similar to the English Sir/Madam.

I think the “karateka” had been misused for decades while karate were spreading into the west since the first generation of western karate trainers didn’t make clear the meaning of “karateka” and forwarded to their students.

Moreover, karateka is not a terminology like the "Nekoashi-dachi" means "Cat's stance" nor "Mae-geri" means "Front kick", it's a normal Japanese phrase used in public, a karate practitioner shouldn't be arrogant to claim oneself as an expert. Osmond (talk) 13:25, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

@Osmond: please have a look at this page. You made bold edits to the page, which were reverted, and the problem is that you then restored your edits, more than once. It's great that you went to the talk page to discuss the changes you wanted to make, but you have to wait until you have a consensus in favour of your edits, you can't just go back and restore them in the middle of a discussion where you don't have a consensus. (As an aside, even if you believe that the English use of the word is "wrong" in that it differs from the original Japanese usage, it's the English usage that's relevant on the English-language version of Wikipedia. However, that is a general observation - I have not looked into this particular case.) --bonadea contributions talk 14:51, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

A good point, Thanks. However, someone keeps deleting my page without reading it.

Thank you.

Very sad that another admin just wants to delete my page without any due respect.

I am adding links to wiki pages.

Can you help, please?

Very unjust and discriminative — Preceding unsigned comment added by EdTimCo (talk • contribs) 14:31, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Please read WP:UP Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 14:33, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

@EdTimCo: thank you for coming here to discuss your edits. Wikipedia is not a platform for people to promote themselves - I saw on your user talk page that you thought this was a matter of copyright, but that's actually not the problem here. If there is a copyright violation, a page has to be deleted, but the reason your user page was deleted is because it seems as if you are only here to create your own profile. Wikipedia user pages can contain a little bit of information about a user, but are mainly intended for collaboration within the project. Thanks, --bonadea contributions talk 14:46, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Should We block this user Indef?Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 14:39, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

@Thegooduser:, give the user a chance - they have started to discuss their edits now, and hopefully we can instead explain how Wikipedia works. (Offering an abbreviation in Wikipedia-speak, especially to a user whose first language is not English, is not all that helpful, to be honest.) --bonadea contributions talk 14:46, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

I think there could be a language barrier or WP:CIR issues at play too. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:49, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

This user has been blocked indefinitely. Maproom (talk) 16:05, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

EdTimCo

Delete as a G11? Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 14:03, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi TGU, first a courtesy link: User:EdTimCo (please start adding Wikilinks to your posts here, it makes it so much easier. If you are concerned about pinging the user, you can always use the {{noping|username}} template.) To address your question, I would say that's not a G11 candidate, but it is a borderline case. If a user seems to use their user page as a webhost, there is the U5 template, and given that this particular user has had a couple of spam userpages removed already I would use that tag. --bonadea contributions talk 14:12, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Yea thanks for the tip. I don't ping users usually because they usually won't react well.Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 14:23, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Should they be block Indef for Promo edits only? Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 14:24, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Thegooduser If you are going to use the Teahouse to report users whose actions you thing are questionable, then you should notify them on their talk pages, just as you would if filing a report at WP:ANI or WP:AN. Really one of thsoe notice nboards would be a better place for siuch reports. If you make such a report in future without notifying the affected user, on that user's talk page, with a link to the thread, i will do so on your behalf. @Bonadea: DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:03, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Creating Bernstein quote article

Hello Teahouse. I've created a dozen or so articles on BLPs, but never an article on a specific "subject" per say: Tribute to John F Kennedy The topic is notable, especially the extracted quote found within the address; I'm just wondering if there are special requirements for subject / topic articles vs BLP articles. I'd love for an editor or two to take a look at it in my sandbox if they have the time. Special thanks in advance. Maineartists (talk) 11:47, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Maineartists, and welcome to the Teahouse. User:Maineartists/sandbox looks pretty good to me. I took the liberty of making one small edit. I think this is ready for mainspace. In fact when you are ready to move it, please let me know, and I'll nominate it for Did You Know?. (Or you can do that for yourself if you prefer, but I know the procedure.) DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:47, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

DES That means a lot coming from you. You're one of my favorite editors here at WP; very knowledge and trustworthy. I really appreciate your time, attention; and feedback. Of course, I have no idea how to move the article. Would you aid me in this procedure? Not sure what "Did You Know" is; this is pure ignorance on my part. I have no excuse except that I am always eager to learn new things. Thanks again. Maineartists (talk) 13:56, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

I will move it for you, Maineartists, but for your future information, please read WP:MOVE. "Did You Know?" (follow the link above), is a program where facts from recently created or expanded articles appear for a short period on the Main Page, currently in the lower left section in my skin. The editors who created a page are credited. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 14:07, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Will do! (WP:MOVE) I appreciate you help. Maineartists (talk) 18:11, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Warning or help on articles featuring or explicitly mentioning suicide

Hi,

Some articles, like the article I was just reading 'suicide by hanging' feature quite prominently how to commit suicide. To avoid wikipedia being used as a how-to, I propose to have some kind of banner at the top of such a page which leads people to sites that provide help for people with depression and suicidal thoughts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaapinholland (talk • contribs) 21:09, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Jaapinholland welcome to our Teahouse. Whilst I fully appreciate your concern, I'm not sure how that would work in practice, or even whether it would be appropriate for an objective encyclopaedia to have banners saying "if you've been affected by the contents of this page, go here..." I note the article's talk page has had past discussions raising concerns over the need not to turn this into a practical guide to hanging oneself. To that end, I have just deleted one sentence (see diff) which I think could be classed as falling into that category. I hope you approve. But as for a banner? I don't think that would work. Which nation's support groups would one direct to? What other topics would it then be deemed appropriate to place similar banners on? I would point out that the infobox does already contain an expandable line on 'Suicide crisis'. I have also just added a 'See also' section containing Suicide prevention as a link. But I recognise that page is already linked to from the infobox I just mentioned, so whether it will stay there for long, I'm not sure. We do have a Village Pump forum for ideas to be put forward for discussion. (Ah - just checked, and it has been raised a number of times, see here and here. Whilst you are welcome to post your thoughts there again, I doubt it will receive much support.) I thank you for raising this matter here, and hope you feel I've taken your concerns seriously. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:15, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Jaapinholland if you see an edit that indicates that someone it at risk of self-harm, contact emergency@wikimedia.org See Wikipedia:Responding to threats of harm. Vexations (talk) 22:27, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Question

how do I go about restoring the edited text without deleting it after I made changes to the text? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonov ( Leon) Melincianu (talk • contribs) 22:42, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Leonov ( Leon) Melincianu, and welcome to the Teahouse. See Wikipedia:Reverting and Help:Reverting for information on how and when to revert, which is the wiki term for restoring a page to a previous state. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:06, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

@Leonov ( Leon) Melincianu: Your question mixes up a few different issues. The one that I'm guessing is most important to you is restoring a deleted page.

As a non-admin, you cannot restore a deleted page. An admin could restore a page but I don't see why that page would be restored.

If you're going to write an article about anyone or anything, here's the steps you should follow:

1) Gather as many professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources you can find.

2) Focus on just the ones that are not dependent upon or affiliated with the subject, but still specifically about the subject and providing in-depth coverage (not passing mentions). If you do not have at least three such sources, the subject is not yet notable and trying to write an article at this point will only fail.

3) Summarize those sources from step 2, adding citations at the end of them. You'll want to do this in a program with little/no formatting, like Microsoft Notepad or Notepad++, and not in something like Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer.

4) Combine overlapping summaries (without arriving at new statements that no individual source supports) where possible, repeating citations as needed.

5) Paraphrase the whole thing just to be extra sure you've avoided any copyright violations or plagiarism.

6) Use the Article wizard to post this draft and wait for approval.

7) Expand the article using sources you put aside in step 2 (but make sure they don't make up more than half the sources for the article, and make sure that affiliated sources don't make up more than half of that).

Doing something besides those steps typically results in the article not being approved, or even in its deletion. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:09, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Leonov ( Leon) Melincianu If this is about User:Leonov ( Leon) Melincianu/sandbox That page appears to ahve been some sort of fantasy narrative, and i don't see any way in which it was or could be appropriate for Wikipedia. I am not sure what you had in mind with it, but please do understand that the purpose of being an editor on Wikipedia is to help create an encyclopedia. See What Wikipedia is Not for a long list of things that are not appropriate here. I hope that you will chose to contribute usefully to the project. If you have any questions about how to do that I will be glad to answer them if i can. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:52, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

HTML in user pages: Possible or not?

I was looking for a progress bar for my Wikipedia status (inspired by another user) and I couldn’t find any image generators. What I did find was a bunch of HTML code generators. I was wondering if I could put this code into my user page and have it display the progress bar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DragonSlayr15001 (talk • contribs) 02:14, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello DragonSlayr15001 and welcome to the Teahouse.

I don't understand very well what you are intending to do, but from the part that I do understand, let me offer a few comments:

1. You can add CSS and Javascript code to your user interface. This is done through .css and .js files in your userspace, starting with common.css and common.js files. You can look at mine or most other users' userspace for some ideas of what you are able to do.
2. There are quite strict limits on what sorts of code you can add to your userpage itself, particularly code that would alter another user's view of the page. There are a few HTML and CSS tags you can add freely as markup, but more active elements will likely either not work or be actively discouraged.
3. The variety of existing userboxes is quite vast. You should check to see if something already exists that gets close to what you want. Perhaps you can modify it to be even closer.

I hope these comments are at least a little bit helpful. To get more competent advice, you'll need to be able to better explain what you are looking to do and probably ask at The Village Pump – Technical. The Teahouse is not usually a place for really technical answers. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:32, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm guessing what you're looking for is an edit/service award progress bar, if so the template can be found at Service award progress as well as the instructions. Copy and paste the template into your user page, enter your registration date and your edit count in the appropriate sections. You can find your registration date and number of edits by clicking on "contributions" on the left side of this page, or "contributions" in the upper right menu, then click on "edit count" at the bottom of the page. Then enter the year, month and date of your registration into the appropriate sections (if you haven't done so already) and also the edit count. Click on show preview and when you're happy with the results, click on publish. Hope this helps. Coryphantha Talk 02:47, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

I was actually looking for something else, but this is a nice addition to my user page! Though, I’ve forgotten what I wanted in the first place...

DragonSlayr15001 (talk) 03:27, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Where can I complain a bureaucrat?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

UPDATE: I am looking for an authority that can supervise the bureaucrat of another wikipedia, I am not expecting English wikipedia to do something. If you know the right place, point me there. That wikipedia has not done anything to the patrol that defamed me 3 times in a month and banned me instead for demanding that patrol be penalized. The same user is writing baseless content to wikipedia, is distorting the sources and despite me reporting the issue bureaucrats and admins are not doing anything. They are not giving any explanation to the steps they do, I want to report this issue to the higher authoirty. END UPDATE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruhubelent (talk • contribs) 16:00, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

I had an objection to certian topic on Turkish wikipedia. I reported the abuse of power to the relevant bureaucrat, it has been almost a month and the bureaucrat is not doing anything. He does not seem to do anything. Where can I complain about it?

The background of the event: I told the patrol that certian passages are no original research, I told them that they are distorting the source. We discussed it, they did not show any reason to prevent my proposal and to keep their version, they just stated "if we accept your changes, there will be a rotation of one-eighty, it will change the artically totally in a different way." Then, their bureaucrat protected the page, they are not stating any reasons and are not allowing any change. I told them over and over again that they are giving misinforation in wikipedia. It is going on for more than 5 months now and nothing is done. The same passages are updated in English version wikipedia, the same user edit-warred me here but after I reported him to Wikipedia admin noticeboard/incidents and to Admin noticeboard edit warring he quitted doing so on English wikipedia, probably due to him having no powers to prevent me here without stating any reasons. But on Turkish wikipedia the same user is a patrol and he stops me from changing the article via his/her powers. Where can I solve this problem? If it is not a right place to complain this issue, tell me where to apply? I know it is very unlikely that I am in the right place, I do not know where to go and I know this is the place I can ask this question. Where can I report this abuse of power and ignorance of the bureaucrat? --Ruhubelent (talk) 00:11, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Ruhubelent, if I'm understanding you correctly, the problem you had on en.wiki has been dealt with? Because, I'm sorry to say, neither our scope or knowledge here extends beyond en.wiki. The scope of our mission at Teahouse is to provide friendly assistance with problems newer editors encounter on en.wiki, which would include advice on how to handle a disruptive user, even an administrator. Here, bureaucrats have very little interaction with everyday editors. Other than supervising various election processes, I'm not even sure of their function. Each language Wikipedia are entirely separate organizations. It's possible, but doubtful a host at Teahouse would have an answer for you, but one may be able to point you to a better place to ask. John from Idegon (talk) 00:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

@John from Idegon: I know it was a wrong place to ask the question but I am hoping there will be someone who can point me to a place where I can ask this question. Who overlooks all wikipedias? Who assigns those bureaucrats? Where should I contact? These are the questions I am seeking an answer for. There may be someone who controls and can inspect bureaucrats. --Ruhubelent (talk) 00:34, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Ruhubelent Each edition of Wikipedia (one per language) has its own organization, and its own methods of appointing admins and bureaucrats. On the en edition, bureaucrats as such do rather little, and most significant tasks are done by admins (also known as sysops). Most bureaucrats are also admins. I believe this is true on most editions, but I cannot be sure. There is no one and no group that overlooks all wikipedias. The Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) provides support, and enforces a few core principles, but does not do any detailed supervision. Each language-edition of Wikipedia is independent and self-organizing, and has its own processes for dealing with problems. I have no idea what the processes are on the Turkish Wikipedia. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:53, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Ruhubelent, it's possible you may be able to find someone who would be able to help you out at our Wikiproject Turkey. John from Idegon (talk) 01:03, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

@John from Idegon: @DES:, now if I understood correctly: There is no way to oppose the bureaucrat and a bureaucrat can abuse Wikipedia or his/her powers as much as he wishes or as much as he can? No way to supervise them? Even in the relevant wikipedias? --Ruhubelent (talk) 05:33, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

No one said that. What we said, both of us in different ways, is that there is no interrelation between English Wikipedia and Turkish Wikipedia. None. I can say there is no one on English Wikipedia with any authority to do anything about anything that happens on Turkish Wikipedia. What you are doing here is getting upset with us because we can't solve your issue with a DIFFERENT ORGANIZATION. Would you expect Burger King to be able to solve a complaint you have about McDonald's? Because that is what you are seemingly expecting us to do. John from Idegon (talk) 05:46, 13 June 2018 (UTC) @John from Idegon: --Ruhubelent (talk) 19:39, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

No no no. That is not what I am expecting you to do. What I am asking is to point me to the place where can the actions of those bureaucrats be questioned? If there is a way to do that, point me to that direction. If not, then am I not wrong to deduce bureaucrats can do whatever they do and no one can question them?

User:Ruhubelent - John from Idegon and DES are right. Also, if Turkish is your first language, your complaint may be better understood by administrators of the Turkish Wikipedia in Turkish. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:03, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon:, Turkish is no different than my first language. Administrators of the Turkish wikipedia is ignoring this issue for a month, Turkish wikipedia community is ignoring it for more than 5 months. That is why I am seeking a supervision from higher authority. Turkish patrol even stated that he would not allow any change that would diminish Turkish writer's status into a liar. The point in question exposes the distortion of Turkish writer, the same crisis was experienced on English wikipedia as well but they did not have power here, I reported him and then he quitted edit-warring here but there on Turkish wikipedia he has powers to prevent me and protect the page, so did they. --Ruhubelent (talk) 19:39, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

As you've been told, we cannot help you with any issues on the Turkish Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 19:48, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

@331dot:, As you've been told, I am not here expecting English wikipedia to do something. I am asking this question to clarify the place we can complain about the issue. Where is that? Or there is no any place who can supervise it? Bureaucrats can do whatever they want? If there is no way to supervise them, tell it directly. If there is way, then where? --Ruhubelent (talk) 22:14, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

I can't speak to the processes and oversight, or lack thereof, of the Turkish Wikipedia. I suspect few users here could. You need to use whatever processes that version of Wikipedia has. 331dot (talk) 22:18, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

I am using it, they are not doing anything even if I reported a user that insulted me verbally 3 times in a month. I reported him a month ago right after the time that user insulted me, still no action. I am reporting no original research issue, still no action. So, in short they can do everything and there is nothing WIKIPEDIA does to prevent such actions? If someone outside wikipedia sees all of these, they will no longer take wikipedia seriously. --Ruhubelent (talk) 22:52, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ruhubelent: I don't think there is such a place. Coordination of all Wikimedia projects happens on the Meta-Wiki, and the Stewards there have advanced permissions across all Wikimedia wikis, but they generally don't interfere with individual projects unless those projects lack administrators and bureaucrats of their own. clpo13_(talk) 22:34, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

That means it is likely that those Stewards will not interfere in this situation since the Wikipedia version I have a problem with has its own bureaucrat? Since it has a bureaucrat and admin? If it is true, it means once a person is appointed as a bureaucrat he/she canact as he wishes on Wikipedia and there is no way to question him/her. What a frivolity --Ruhubelent (talk) 22:52, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Ruhubelent It means that whatever remedy for improper action by an admin or bureaucrat there may be, it will occur on the relevant Wikipedia edition, in accordance with the procedures of that edition. on en.Wikipedia, there are a whole set of procedures for dispute resolution, there are WP:AN, WP:ANI and other noticeboards, and ultimately there is ARBCOM (the arbitration committee) I don't know what equivalents of these there may be on the Turkish-language edition of Wikipedia. But if you can somehow manage to establish consensus that the other person is acting improperly there, there will probably be a way to deal with it. Those people who are admins (sysops) on that Wikipedia have the technical power to block users there. Under what circumstances they would use it, I do not know. But finding some appropriate forum on that project and raising the issue there is more likely to get what you want than any post here. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:11, 13 June 2018 (UTC) Ruhubelent DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:11, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

DESiegel, I need an authority over Turkish wikipedia. I have applied to everywhere on Turkish wikipedia. They banned me instead of banning a patrol that has defamed me 3 times in a month. I have been reporting this offense as well for a month, nothing is done and today I am banned for a week. Turkish wikipedia's bureaucrat banned me today, I have posted the offense to the pages of bureaucrats, to the page of community portal and demanded they penalize the attacker. Instead they banned me with doing nothing to the attacker. And the userf of Turkish wikipedia only started to respond my charges today after I am banned. They have not appeared for 5 months but today 2 of them replied, what a coincidence. They respond at the time I can no longer respond them. --Ruhubelent (talk) 15:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

There is no higher authority to consult. If the Turkish Wikipedia has decided to ban and block you, and doesn't want to listen to you, there isn't much else you can do- and there is nothing that we can do. 331dot (talk) 15:56, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Are you sure? What is your position on Wikipedia? Are you a patrol or someone like that? I mean, your answer is in compliance with Wikipedia's policy? Let us wait and see what others say. If what you say is the case, then this means bureaucrtas of wikipedia can do whatever they want and there is nothing to prevent them. They can write articles as they wish, they can publish their worldviews on wikipedia and protect it and there is nothing that can be done. I hope I can get all these published on major media sources and newspapers. We shall let the world see how absurd system Wikipedia has. --Ruhubelent (talk) 16:06, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm an administrator here, and I certainly don't know everything, but Wikipedia is a private entity and can determine who uses it as it sees fit, this can include blocking people for any reason or even no reason. Personally, I don't want to do that, but those that run the Turkish Wikipedia can determine who uses it as they see fit and I don't see as if you have much recourse. I think you are going to have to let this go; there are other websites you can contribute to, or you can start your own. 331dot (talk) 16:18, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

I know a certian site can determine their policies as they wish. I was not implying Wikipedia must obey certian rules. What I am saying is Wikipedia has such an absurd system, they can be absurd I am not objecting to Wikipedia's right to be that absurd. I am not trying to wikipedia obey something, what I am gonna try to do is to let this absurdity be shared as much as possible. --Ruhubelent (talk) 16:22, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Ruhubelent, to the best of my knowledge 331dot is correct, there is no supervising authority over the Turkish Wikipedia (or any other) outside itself. I am an admin here on en.Wikipedia, and have been an editor since 2005. I am reasonably sure that there is no such supervising authority. From your story, it does sound as if you have been treated improperly, although of course there could be another side for all that I know. You could try to bring attention to this on User talk:Jimbo Wales -- as the founder of Wikipedia Jimbo has significant moral authority, although little or no power of decree. His talk page is much read. Besides that, if the Community at the Turkish-langauge Wikipedia has decided to block you and that what has happened to you does not need any response, there is really nothing that you can do. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:04, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Then @DESiegel:, that means Wikipedia is a mob rule at best?

I am not saying I am totally innocent, I have pushed forward and insisted too much on the last days before I got banned. They may say we banned him for that, is it a reason to ban or not? It is up to discussion, I was insisting on them to supervise the edit-war the patrol was warring. I once consulted a bureaucrat, waited for 2 or 3 weeks (do not remember exactly), he did not do anything. Then, I posted my request to supervise the event to each and every page of admins and bureaucrats so that one of them will get engaged in this edit-war. The reason I posted it to every related page is I thought one of them (the first one I contacted) maybe too busy to deal with us and I thought others may get engaged with us. Instead they ended up banning me. --Ruhubelent (talk) 23:04, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Ruhubelent I wouldn't say "mob rule". Even in constitutional democracies with established institutions, there are points at which decison makers have power with no one who can and will supervise them. If the national legislature makes an unjust law 9(and there have been many in US history) an injustice will be worked until or unless the law is changed, or the courts overturn in. If the US Supreme Court makes an unjust decision (and it has made a number) then injustice will be in efect until it reverses itslef o a constitutional admendment is passed, which is quite rare. Much the same is true in all other countries to the best of my understanding.

@Desiegel:, You are confusing the analogy. Look at what you said earlier:

"if the Community at the Turkish-langauge Wikipedia has decided to block you and that what has happened to you does not need any response, there is really nothing that you can do."

What difference does it have from a mob rule community? They decided one of the members of their community can freely invent a content and publish it on wikipedia, can cherry-pick the content from a source and can prevent other user from using the same source, can insult that other user as he wishes and one that other user reports, that other user gets banned. What difference does it have from mob rule community? Nothing, nothing. What I am emphasizing is their ignorance towards their patrol who invented a content and published it on wikipedia; who cherry-picked content from the source and used the source according to his wills and prevented other user (me) from using the same source; who insulted other user 3 times verbally. All are silent there and there is nothing we can do to sanction that patrol. Do you reallly think it has a difference from mob rule? And in what constitutional democracy courts penalize the one who reported the violation instead of the violator? --Ruhubelent (talk) 15:10, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Now Wikipedia is not a country, nor a government. It does, for the most part, control its own operations. And each edition of Wikipedia is a separate community, and none of them have authority over any other, nor is there any central body which oversees all of them on the level you are discussing. Community opnion is powerful, and can be a force for justice or injustice, for good or poor policy.

I will say that in my experience on en.Wikipedia, someone who posts about the same issue in every possible forum is generally regaerded as someone who would not accept an answer that s/he id not like, and went looking for a different one. Such people are generally regarded negatively, sometimes quire negatively indeed. I suspect this will also be true on other editions of Wikipedia.

There was NOT any answer at all. The bureaucrat who was supposed to supervise the event did not do anything for more than 3 weeks. And why should I not report abuse of power to other pages if the one I contacted is ignoring the problem? Should we percieve someone who posts about the same issue in every possible forum as someone who would not accept an answer he/she does not like or should we supervise/analyze the problem that is being reported everywhere? --Ruhubelent (talk) 15:10, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

At this point i urge you to drop the stick. There is nothing to be gained from persisting, as far as i can see. But of course that is up to you. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:08, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

So, you suggest I should stay silent about a biased content on Wikipedia, a biased patrol of Wikipedia, a distorted content on Wikipedia just because a mob rule community has already dominated the scene? I have amended the same problem on English wikipedia, I will try my best to expose this myth on Turkish wikipedia as well. I know that mob rule community will probably ban me again but I will still try my best. --Ruhubelent (talk) 15:10, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Multi-Lingual Multi-Encyclopedic Directory to Help

It occurs to me that editors come here, or one of the other assistance forums, on the English Wikipedia to ask for help with a complaint on a Wikipedia in another language. It occurs to me that it might be useful to have, probably on Meta, a directory listing the Help resources for all of the Wikipedias in all of the languages, including brief descriptions about the resources in the language of the resource. We could then direct editors like this one to the superdirectory. (Of course, that might require support from the WMF because it crosses systems. The WMF has an inconsistent record of helping users. But it might be worth asking.) Robert McClenon (talk) 23:43, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

So, where should I ask or apply? Where can we give this proposal? --Ruhubelent (talk) 15:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Ruhubelent I poked around a bit, and if I'm understanding the situation correctly, there is a Wikipedia page saying someone said X, but you can prove they actually said Y because you've can show a link to the actual footage. That's original research, and no one on Wikipedia will help you insert original research into an article, even if that original research is demonstrably true and the Wikipedia article is demonstrably false. The only way you can make the correction without someone reverting it is to find the information mentioned in a reliable source. valereee (talk) 13:42, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

No, Valeree, you misunderstood the event. In the opposite way. The source used there EXPLICITLY states that someone said Y while, yes as you say, Turkish wikipedia shows it as that someone said X. I am not referring to the footage, I am referring to the source they are using. Things are more interesting in this situation because 1) The same source is used on English wikipedia for the same content, the same user edit-warred here but quitted. He has no power on Ennglish wikipedia. 2) Again, the same source is being used on Turkish wikipedia for the same content but the same is preventing me due to his power on Turkish wikipedia, not only the user but other authorities as well. Things get even more interesting because they are not only blocking me "it is original research" but they are not answering me if I ask them "look, is this statement found on that source or not?" Another patrol has discussed me several things regarding the topic but he deliberately dodging this question, all I concluded from this situation is: That users are afraid of getting banned in case they answer the question. --Ruhubelent (talk) 07:12, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Valeree; please take a look at English version of the same section: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1980_Turkish_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat&oldid=846365854#Allegations_of_the_US_involvement There, I have updated the section. All content are directly translated from the sources. And in front of sources I put the sentence that was translated. They are just preventing me from doing the same on Turkish wikipedia. The patrol even explicitly stated he would not allow a commentary change that would exalt Henze (Carter) and diminish Birand. I asked him what is a commentary in my proposal, he did not reply. He did not point out. Yet Turkish wikipedia's bureaucrat is ignoring everything and banned me. --Ruhubelent (talk) 08:55, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.