Jump to content

User talk:Abelmoschus Esculentus/Archive 10

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11

Trying to clean up a page

Sorry I am very new at this, I didn't mean to remove any references as i was just trying to improve the page and remove some less than reliable info. Attempted to clean up the "Natural Remedies" section that was added 00:21, 2 April 2018. I tried to undo it but I couldn't so I revised what I could from what was added. I removed some dubious information including a (broken) link to an outside website selling an "herbal medicine formula" that is claimed as a treatment. Removed the parts that not written properly for an encyclopedia and removed parts giving medical advice. was trying to clean it up following the guidelines on this page

Shortcuts

.

71.176.227.56 (talk) 19:46, 21 August 2018 (UTC) 71.176.227.56 (talk) 19:45, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Huggle

See [1]. Please be careful. The tool has its limitations. Rzvas (talk) 04:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

I have removed the sentence. Thanks for reminding me. It's my fault not the tool's. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 04:30, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Request removal permission.

There is no reliable source for the content I deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:B011:800C:1177:ADDF:D157:6681:AEBD (talk) 07:30, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

It is a Wikipedia page, not a content page. Verifiability only applies to content pages. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 07:33, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Great, look what you did! You just blew up Wikipedia!
Great, look what you did! You just blew up Wikipedia!

Please give time to creators to upload things before quickly placing it for deletion .. it’s s notable page and sources and links will be uploaded, it’s not ok to not give it time and quickly jump to conclusions. Thewikicreator01 (talk) 07:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Then better to draft it instead of directly creating it in mainspace. Drafts have a lower risk of being speedy deleted in most circumstances. Once you create an article, it will be immediately visible to the public, and they don't expect to read these kind of articles in Wikipedia. Why you upload them later? ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 07:34, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

What is the difference?

Why can't I delete the Wikipedia page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:B011:800C:1177:ADDF:D157:6681:AEBD (talk) 07:51, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Because you are not an administrator. If anonymous editors can delete pages, then Wikipedia will be blown up completely. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 07:53, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

What is the difference

What is the difference between deleting a content page and deleting a Wikipedia page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:B011:800C:1177:ADDF:D157:6681:AEBD (talk) 08:02, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

A content page is a content page while a Wikipedia page usually documents policies, guidelines or essays. I will say no difference since they are both page deletions. However, Wikipedia pages are seldom speedy deleted unless they are vandalism, if you want them to be deleted, you need to go through a deletion discussion first. If content pages (especially new pages) do not meet any of the policies such as WP:N, WP:NPOV, WP:OR or WP:V, they can be deleted immediately without further discussion. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 08:09, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Abelmoschus Esculentus. You have new messages at Kpgjhpjm's talk page.
Message added 08:11, 22 August 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Kpgjhpjm 08:11, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Wish

Hello. Help add early life Maureen Wroblewitz. Thanks you. 125.214.49.215 (talk) 08:07, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello. What do you mean by "Help add early life Maureen Wroblewitz"? Sorry if my comprehension is bad, but I really can't understand what do you want. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 08:13, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

can editing

This page does not prohibit anonymous user editing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:B011:800C:1177:ADDF:D157:6681:AEBD (talk) 08:45, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it does not. Actually you can edit any pages you want if they are not protected. However, your edit is not constructive so I have no reason not to revert it. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 08:50, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

I have already said that the source of this page is not reliable.

I have already said that the source of this page is not reliable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:B011:800C:1177:ADDF:D157:6681:AEBD (talk) 08:56, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

As I've said above, that is a Wikipedia page - Wikipedia pages document policies, guidelines or essays. You say the source is not reliable, which is a verifiability issue, and it only applies to content pages. I have also explained the difference between a Wikipedia page and a content page. Please stop asking questions that I've already answered and explained to you. Warning issued. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 09:07, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Prohibit editing

Why not prohibit all anonymous users from editing Wikipedia pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:B011:800C:1177:ADDF:D157:6681:AEBD (talk) 09:22, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Because according to studies in 2004 and 2007, over 80% of edits by anonymous users are not vandalism.[1] As current policy stands, anonymous users have the same rights as registered users to participate in the writing of Wikipedia. However, in your case, your edits are not constructive (as said above), so I reverted it. If you made a constructive edit, then I will not and maybe send you a welcome message. Now you should know what you should know. Fuck off. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 09:29, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ See: Opabinia regalis' studies, Feb 2007

dirty word

I saw dirty words? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:B011:800C:1177:ADDF:D157:6681:AEBD (talk) 09:32, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 09:37, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Fuck is also one of the most versatile words in the English language. Jim1138 (talk) 09:40, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

LOL I don't think administrators have the same position as anonymous users. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:B011:800C:1177:ADDF:D157:6681:AEBD (talk) 09:42, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

We are not stereotyping IPs as vandals. I am just saying that your edits are not constructive. If you continue to not fuck off, I will contact an administrator and you will be fucked up. Good luck and goodbye. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 09:45, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

You can contact the administrator or block me but you are still unreasonable and I will report you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:B011:800C:1177:ADDF:D157:6681:AEBD (talk) 09:53, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
This is for your valuable efforts for reverting Vandalism and protecting enwiki from it. PATH SLOPU (Talk) 10:26, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
@Path slopu: Thanks for your kind words. I enjoy doing it. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 11:03, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

May 17 Movement

Hi AE, In the page- May 17 movement , it is a fact that the movement is illegal therefore it can be stated along with prominent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhavya1333 (talk • contribs) 11:26, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

WP:NPOV. Defining something as illegal or not is a matter of opinion, which may be biased. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 11:40, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipidea page for Sindhis - level 4 warning

dear AE, I had made some edits confirmed by DNA reports from 23&me.com in California done in 2016 and 2018, one of my cousins works there. I just cannot share it with any anonymous user in Wiki. We have some European/Middle Eastern looking folk in our family tree and have always wondered about our genetics.

Most sindhis do not share our genes, people fear and condemn what they do not understand and banish my edits as "fake news". It's OK if they/you remove my edits - but calling them unverifiable is short sighted. Ill show my reports if you show me your credentials but not to some random wiki editor.

Meanwhile I risked putting my real name on edits - Sam xxxx. Can I please please request you to remove my name from edits? Let the sindhi people have their day, I want no part of it anymore

Regards xxx 198.91.228.30 (talk) 13:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 198.91.228.30 (talk) 13:33, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

I have requested to hide the revision you mentioned. Yes, feel free the show the reports here. "Geneology DNA surveys 2016-2018" is not a valid reference (I Googled it and found hundreds of reports) since it's not specific, so the content you added is not supported by reliable (and valid) sources (aka not verifiable). ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 13:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

WP

Questions

Hey, I just read WP:Don't Be Trigger Happy, and I am now going to go out of my way to be less trigger happy while monitoring RC. But I have a few questions still.

  • Q1) If an edit borders on test/vandalism, what should my edit summary be?? And warning be?? (would i summarize the edit as 'test/vandalism' and leave a vandalism warning on their talk page?? or something else?. A vandalism warning mentions using the sand box for test edits.
  • Q2) If an editor makes an unsourced change, (ie adds or changes a birth place of a BLP or adds someone that the BLP is dating to an article) but there is nothing in the article that supports the change, should I click on all of the sources in the article to see if one of those websites the source takes me to supports the unsourced info that was added?

for example, editor adds unsourced info into the Joe Schmo article that Joe Schmo has been in a long relationship with Jane Doe,but nothing in the article mentions Jane Doe. Should I click on all of the 15 or 25 references in the article to see if any of those sources mentions Joe Schmo dating Jane Doe?? or should i revert the edit and tell the editor who made the unsourced change to add a reliable source??)

  • Q3) I know that 4m warnings are a must in rare times, but in what situations would I start off with a Warning 2 or a Warning 3?? or would I ever need to? My twinkle has a ARV option to report an editor who vandaliszs again after coming off a block in less than 24 hours but wouldn't a 4im warning be more cautious and better than to report them straight to AIV?
  • Q4) Can you point me to warnings not listed in the twinkle warning templates??

thank you. JC7V-constructive zone 06:01, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

This is definitely not a test
A1: If it is a editing test, you revert it using the Twinkle [rollback] (blue one, it allows you to leave a custom edit summary) and leave an edit summary like “rv test”. If it is vandalism, you revert it using the [rollback (VANDAL)] (red one, doesn’t allow you to leave custom edit summary). The warnings for vandalism and editing tests are {{uw-vandalism1}} and {{uw-test1}} respectively. WP:IDT is a good essay regarding editing tests by Oshwah, I highly recommend you to read it.
A2: For me, I won’t waste spend time checking the references and the talk page. I usually revert it and template the user. If it is really supported by reliable sources, then you can “justify” your revert by saying that it lacks inline citations.
A3: Good question. It depends. If the user has a lot of unconstructive edits (simply check their contributions), you can start off with level 2, 3, 4 or even 4im (very occasionally). For example, if a user has 1 unconstructive edit, then level 1 is the most appropriate one. If the user has 4 unconstructive edits and no warnings found on their talk page, you can use level 1, 2 or 3 (I recommend level 2). If the user has 15 unconstructive edits, theoretically they’ve been blocked already, but if surprisingly the user’s talk page has no warnings whatsoever, you can directly issue a 4im vandalism warning template (and ofc, report to AIV). I don't think the "vandalism after recent release of block" is a good option. I never use it. You shouldn't too.
A4: I can't give you the whole list, but I know {{uw-sandbox1}}, {{uw-sandbox2}}, {{uw-sandbox3}} and {{uw-sandbox4}} are not on the list.
~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 06:25, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
@Knightrises10: It doesn't matter which article or page the user is vandalising. If the user makes one unconstructive edit, then you are welcome to revert and warn the user. Of course you need to increase one level after each unconstructive edit. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 11:02, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @JC7V7DC5768: A lot more warnings can be found at Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace than the ones listed with Twinkle. However, there are still some missing on that page, such as {{uw-sandbox1}} and that whole series. I do think that Category:Standardised user warning templates contains all user warning templates, so you could look through that category for the warning template you need.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 13:43, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
I'm lazy
Thanks for your response SkyGazer 512. The ones in Twinkle are just more common and more likely to be used. Or if you are lazy (like me), you can write the message in your own words instead of searching for the templates. Templates are cold and impersonal ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 13:50, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, sometimes it's easier and better to just write in your own words rather than find the template that works perfectly for that situation. For most of the RC patrolling I do, I rarely have to use any warnings that are not in Twinkle already.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:00, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
I use Huggle for RCP. It has a revert-and-warn option which reverts the edit and warn (template) the user with about 20 template options. They are enough for about 99.99% edits. Therefore, I almost never warn users in my own words . Biggest advantage of automated tools.
I have Wikipedia:Sandbox and Draft:Sandbox on my watchlist, so sometimes I need to use {{uw-sandbox1}}. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 14:08, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Xbox 360

Hey Abel, I have been doing a few touch ups to the Xbox 360 article (mostly adding sources to areas that need them) but I think that the lead for the Xbox 360 article is too long. Do you agree that it is too long? If you believe so ,can you give me an outline on how to condense it without omitting key points?? I know you aren't a reviewer for GA (correct me if I'm wrong) but your opinion on this would help. Thank you JC7V-constructive zone 18:25, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

No, I don’t think it’s too long. Hong Kong is a good article, its size is 149,547 bytes. However, Xbox 360 is only 110,306 bytes, which is far less than that. You can take a look at WP:AS (WP:TOOBIG) for relevant guidelines. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (alt) (talk to me) 01:50, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Peninsular War

Hello AE,

I inserted a couple of words in the article on the Peninsular War to call attention to the various errors in this paragraph:

"In the meantime the Allies under estimating the size of Suchet's force and believing that 3,000 more men had left for Lyon and the Suchet with the remnant of his army was crossing the Pyrenees to join Soult in the Atlantic theatre start to redeploy their forces. The best of the British forces in Catalonia were ordered to join Wellinton's army on the river Garonne in France."

There are multiple spelling errors e.g. under estimating -> under-estimating Wellinton -> Wellington

and grammatical errors e.g. "the Suchet" --> huh? Should be "Suchet" or "that Suchet" " to join Soult in the Atlantic theatre start to redeploy their forces" --> cannot even make out what this should be but it is clearly not well formed.

I assumed an editor would notice these problems and fix better than I could, perhaps by asking the original author to rewrite with correct spelling/grammar. Could you please escalate or fix these errors? Obviously, I can fix some and even try to fix all but it would be better fixed by the person who wrote it.

24.6.16.207 (talk) 18:04, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Confused
Hello. Thanks for raising the question. One of the most important editing behavior in Wikipedia is to be bold. In other words, if you spotted a problem, error or typo, do not hesitate to change it. If you are not very sure, you can ask other’s opinion first. Anyone can edit Wikipedia articles, not only the original author. The content is free to everyone, no one owns any articles here.
In this case, you added a few “(huh?)” to the article. Let me explain why it’s not helpful. As you may know already, once an edit is made to an article (aka published changes), it is immediately visible to the public. Therefore, your “(huh?)” can be seen by others. If you are a reader of Wikipedia and you saw this “(huh?)”, will you be confused? If yes, then better not to add it. Wikipedia’s aim is not to confuse readers, but to provide useful information, like an encyclopedia (actually it is).
Now you know the problems, hope you can be bold to change it. Happy editing! ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 07:27, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

I can be bold. However, let me repeat:

Obviously, I can fix some and even try to fix all but it would be better fixed by the person who wrote it.

So: What is the procedure to escalate this to the person who originally wrote that paragraph (or the article) or to some other expert, who can fix the mistakes in the best possible fashion?

Note that correcting grammar cannot always be done without changing the information content. e.g. if someone writes "He went home tomorrow." --> we know this is incorrect. We can guess two potential corrections: 1) "He went home yesterday." [OR] 2) "He will go home tomorrow." With more knowledge of the subject matter, an expert can better guess which of the two reflects the original intent of the author.

If no escalation procedure exists, then I can be bold and fix the mistakes using the immediate context of the article to deduce the best possible correction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.16.207 (talk) 08:08, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Good question. Then you can probably guess by reading the whole passage (or the section where the problematic sentence exists). If you are still unsure or inconclusive, you can remove the sentence first and leave a message at the article's talk page (Talk:ARTICLE NAME) or the author's talk page if you think that the talk page is not a good place to draw attention to it. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 08:15, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Could you make me a sandbox page for me

Could you make me a page for me I like football. I’m a fan of Middlesbrough F.C. my favourite player is Darren Randolph Jimbobtron2007 (talk) 09:16, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

@Jimbobtron: You can make a request at Wikipedia:Requested articles/Sports. An editor will create it for you ASAP, but the backlog there is very huge, so you need to be patient. I am not a content creator, sorry. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 09:19, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

August 2018

Information icon Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at User talk:73.102.218.240. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 10:15, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello

Please do not post threats on my talk page it only proves that I am right and you and Jim are wrong and are actually being the disruptive ones. So please stop removing a person’s comments on a page’s talk page. Both of you lost the argument once the threats started happening. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.33.13.52 (talk) 10:30, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

FYI: RfPP of Talk:The Big Bang Theory Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 10:39, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

How do you update picture on an iPhone

Just asking Jimbobtron2007 (talk) 11:07, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

I think you should not post anything not related to Wikipedia here. Youtube has tons of video tutorials about that. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 11:10, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

About that

I meant to update wiki pictures Jimbobtron2007 (talk) 11:15, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

You can upload a file to Commons and update the image (change the name) in the desired location. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 11:17, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Notifcation That You Have Been Reported

Please see here if you would like to make any comments on the report. 69.36.183.89 (talk) 11:34, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Bandolin edit

Hi, What was wrong with the picture you removed from the Bandolin article? I don't understand why it was removed. Thanks, Respubliko de Gvapolando (talk) 11:49, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Restored ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 12:09, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Stockton town player

There is a Stockton town player which I edited because no one knew when he left a club I found out and I found out so I changed it to what it was and it got changed back. I had sufficient evidence cause the football club put it on when he left Jimbobtron2007 (talk) 13:28, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Who is the "Stockton town player" you've mentioned? ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 13:31, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
He is Nathan Mulligan Jimbobtron2007 (talk) 13:37, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
I have reverted good-faith edits by you in Muhamed Bešić because you didn't provide a reliable source. You are welcome to add information about the player, but you also need to provide reliable sources to support the content added. Here's why:
For information on referencing citations in Wikipedia articles, see Help:Footnotes, Wikipedia:Inline citation, and Help:Referencing for beginners.
~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 13:43, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
For being an awesome editor and mentor JC7V-constructive zone 17:13, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
I've made mistakes using rollback many times. How can I be a great editor? ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 02:35, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Welcoming users and other questions

IPs and newcomers would like to see this, right?

Hey AE, and welcome back! I've been spending most of my time latley dedicating myself to fighting vandalism with Twinkle and using the RTRC tool. I have to say it's really fun ! I've also been experimenting with the "Welcome" option with Twinkle when I see IP users who are editing constructively. Is that the right thing to do or should I wait until I am more experienced?

Yes, it's definitely fine to welcome IP editors. Good editors leave Wikipedia all the time, good editors join the project as well. You and me may retire in the future, and these newcomers or IPs (assume they are clueless) are important for the survival of Wikipedia. We need to show our hospitality, be polite and (of course) welcome them to our project, guide them to be great editors in different aspects. According to studies in 2004 and 2007, although most vandalism (80%) is generated by IP editors, over 80% of edits by IPs were not vandalism.[1] Their constructive edits made up 29.4% of all edits to articles in Wikipedia.[2] Therefore, the yellow welcome button should be used more often. Not only reverting vandalism and warn users help the project, but also welcoming newcomers and IPs. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 02:59, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

On the other note

Can you review my Rollback history and my history of giving users the right warnings? I want to know if I'm doing anything wrong or if I could do anything better because I'd like to apply for Rollback rights soon and I'd like a good history of rollbacking vandalism. I read some of the applications put in for the rights and it seems like the admins need to gain a lot of trust and experience before granting them to you. The admins seem to look at your contributions and especially warning history of how you warned other users correctly. Thanks. Yanjipy (talk) 00:58, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

I have gone through the latest 100 reverts. No big problems. Just to make sure that you need to leave an edit summary if the edit is not vandalism. For example, if the user blank out content or added content but did not provide a reliable source, you can leave an edit summary like "unexplained content removal" and "unsourced" respectively. Also, if you believe the edit is in good faith, then better mark it as a good faith edit, such as this one (I believe it is a good faith edit). You can explain it to the IP editor in your own words or templating them as usual. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 03:13, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ See: Opabinia regalis' studies, Feb 2007
  2. ^ Viégas, F. B.; Wattenberg, M.; Dave, K (April 2004). "history flow: results" [executive summary], and "Studying Cooperation and Conflict between Authors with history flow Visualizations" (871 KB). IBM Collaborative User Experience Research group.

A toast sandwich for you!

You never seem to get tired reverting vandalism . Keep up the good work . Kpgjhpjm 16:20, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. But I would like to work in other areas instead of reverting vandalism all day. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 02:34, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Hey AE, maybe you help out in the Article Rescue Squadron or the backlogs if you're looking for a change? As you may know, the ARC is where project members try to fix up articles that need to be 'rescued'. I am sure you would do a fine job there. I sometimes like to clear out the backlogs (adding refs to non referenced BLPs), and I think that you would be an asset there too (and needed). Of course we still would love you to help out at RC patrol. No editor is perfect (there should be an essay: WP: No Perfect Editors') so keep up your great work. JC7V-constructive zone 06:37, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Actually I have other things to do already such as AFC review, pending changes review and article maintenance. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (alt) (talk to me) 06:44, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

How to update pics on and use commons and what happens if there copyrighted

Asking Jimbobtron2007 (talk) 08:50, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (alt) (talk to me) 09:31, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

About a change you reverted.

Hi Abel,


I recently edited the following page: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Stenotrophomonas_acidaminiphila


This microorganism is a gram Negative organism.

In the original revision, it was mentioned as a gram Positive.

You reverted my edit.

Please read one of the references of the page. in all of them it is introduced as a Gram Negative organism.

I am a microbiologist, and I work with these bacteria.


Thanks, Heidar

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.126.167.204 (talk • contribs) 19:53, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry this happen Heidar, but Abelmoschus Esculentus didn't make that mistake I did. It was unfortunate but your edit has been restored now and I have removed the warning from your talk page. Shellwood (talk) 22:49, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Does this article meet Notability?

Hey AE, I came across this article, Blake School (Plantation, Florida) on WikiProject Schools and it seems to me it doesn't really meet WP:N for a school. What do you think about it? Thanks. Yanjipy (talk) 15:11, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Please see the talk page. It should be good enough :) ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (alt) (talk to me) 15:14, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 29

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 29, June – July 2018

Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for answered my question in TeaHouse. Chhengly (talk) 12:21, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

@Chhengly: Always happy to help :) —AE (talk • contributions) 12:34, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 35, 2018)

"The noblest motive is the public good." Thomas Jefferson Building, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.
Hello, Abelmoschus Esculentus.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Public good

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Guacamole • Anna Anka

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 27 August 2018 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Added Attactions for Tekkali

Hey Abel,

I made an edit for Tekkali Wiki page and published the changes. It has been moved to Archive asking for reliability for the source.

Tekkali is my home town and i have been to the attraction multiple times. Please let me know what kind of proof i have provide to publish the changes.

Thank Mehar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meharnathborigi (talk • contribs) 03:03, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

@Meharnathborigi: Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! One of the most important policies in Wikipedia is verifiability, that means all content in Wikipedia must be written from reliable sources and can be checked by other people. I left a message regarding this on your talk page (section "Why do we need to provide reliable sources?"), and you should read it thoroughly (including the links). If you have any questions, feel free to ask me here, at the WP:Teahouse or WP:Help desk. Happy editing! —AE (talk • contributions) 03:09, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Winona County Courthouse

You have removed my change noting the swastikas on the courthouse floor as being unconstructive. It was a change made quickly and poorly, but is relevant. If the sole reason it was removed is because it was negative (and thus "not constructive"), I would say this page is biased to all hell. It is an easily verifiable fact that there are swastikas on the courthouse floor and is a VERY significant piece of information given the problems in this county and it's history.

Now if it had been simply removed for poor quality, that I would understand. I'm not familiar with contributing to wikipedia, but would hope that wikipedia doesn't simply whitewash and only document things people would not consider disturbing... especially when they are absolute undeniable facts.

207.138.208.191 (talk) 21:05, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, it was PiGuy3 who reverted your edit. —AE (talk • contributions) 07:44, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Borac Incel Swimming Club

Hey AE, I came across this article, and I'm not sure on what to do with it. What would be the right tags and does this meet WP:N?

@Yanjipy: The best way is to improve the article, not tagging. Since the club participates and won some tournaments, it may be notable. {{no footnotes}} is probably the best option, but it can be easily fixed so I encourage you to be bold to fix it —AE (talk • contributions) 07:49, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #327

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
    • Structured Data on Commons: A draft specification for using Depicts statements on Commons is up for community feedback.
    • It's possible to add somevalue and novalue using QuickStatements, and to use the tool on test.wikidata.org as well.
    • More properties can be searched using haswbstatement. This includes all properties with "external identifier", "string", "item", "property", "lexeme", "form" and "sense" datatypes, except published in (P1433) and cites (P2860). In addition you may make queries without a specified value.
    • The page creation and edit rate limit imposed in April will be removed in the next days. However, users who are not bots or administrators are throttled to 90 edits per minute (which was set up on all Wikimedia wikis in May).
    • These new languages are now supported for monolingual text strings: mid, mnw, gmy, rar, haz, uga. The language doesn't show up in the suggester, but you can save the statement and it will be stored properly.
    • Reminder: Wikidata's sixth birthday happens in two months. It's time to think about organizing a meetup with your local community, or preparing a gift (see the list of presents last year).
    • Lexicographical data: you can now try Senses on beta
    • 25% of the labeling campaign to improve the vandalism detection on Wikidata has been done. Please help by reviewing a few edits!
  • Development
    • More work on merging Lexemes
    • More work on data types and edit summary for Senses
    • Improve qualifier suggestions using constraint definition (phab:T201288)
    • Improve constraint property item suggestions for property constraint values (phab:T199672)
    • Remove ratelimit from Wikidata for some groups again (phab:T198396)

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.


Tech News: 2018-35

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • You can now see moved paragraphs in diffs in the mobile view. It also works on all languages in the desktop view. [2]
  • Bureaucrats on all Wikimedia wikis can now remove the interface admin user right. [3]

Problems

  • Some diffs show lines in the wrong order. The developers are working on fixing it. [4]

Changes later this week

  • The message you see when you thank a user will change. This is to make it easier to understand. [5]
  • AWB will stop adding using AWB in the edit summary. Instead it will add a tag that says AWB. [6]
  • Advanced item Some abuse filter variables have changed. They are now easier to understand for non-experts. The old variables will still work but filter editors are encouraged to replace them with the new ones. You can find the list of changed variables on mediawiki.org. They have a note which says Deprecated. Use ... instead. An example is article_text which is now page_title. [7]
  • Advanced item Abuse filters can now use how old a page is. The variable is page_age. [8]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 28 August. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 29 August. It will be on all wikis from 30 August (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 28 August at 18:30 (UTC). See how to join.
  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 29 August at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • Because of a data centre test you will be able to read but not edit the wikis for up to an hour on 12 September and 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time. The time when you can't edit might be shorter than an hour. You can read more about this.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:16, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Status

Where do you get that cool status marker?Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 01:19, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello Thegooduser. You can put {{statustop}} in your userpage and copy & paste User:Xenocidic/statusChanger2.js in your vector.js page. You will see the options in the menu bar on top after you purge the page. I don't use it often now. —AE (talk • contributions) 03:38, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Semiprotected

Hi, AE. Funnily enough the vandals you revert seem to like to abuse you. I've semiprotected your page for a while; please let me know if you'd rather have it unprotected. Bishonen | talk 16:04, 28 August 2018 (UTC).

Hi Bishonen. Thanks for protecting this page. It’s okay, I don’t mind. However, sometimes I see constructive questions here by IPs or newcomers, so can you shorten the duration to 1 Sep? I would like to lend them a hand. Regards —AE (talk • contributions) 00:16, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 Done Bishonen | talk 00:24, 29 August 2018 (UTC).
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Abelmoschus_Esculentus/Archive_10&oldid=859311727"