User talk:Ca/Archives/2023/August

August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks again for reviewing Shut Up and Eat! I've have several other nominations at GAN, if you're interested, otherwise take care for now! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:20, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:22, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I just realized I thanked a thanking. I meant "You're welcome". I guess I'll give a Whack! to myself XD. Ca ^{talk to me!} 16:13, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Question from Elpasonews (14:47, 29 July 2023)

Hello, I frequently write about El Paso public policy issues on El Paso News (elpasonews.org) and because of that I am interested in updating El Paso-related entries. However, in updating the entry for Claudia Ordaz I was presented a possible violation in self-promotion. I understand the need to keep self-promotion out of Wikipedia. Should I avoid using my work as reference material altogether or use it sparingly as I did in my edit? I tried to use other sources in my edit as much as possible. Your guidance is appreciated. Thank you in advance, -martin --Elpasonews (talk) 14:47, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

@Epguru I apologize for the late response. You should not use your work as reference material as that is a WP:Conflict of Interest. If you really believe your work is helpful and would add valuable information to an article, you can send an WP:edit request on the article's talk page. Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:25, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. Epguru (talk) 18:33, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Saribek Sukiasyan

Hello. Please take a look again, I have updated the sources and have not received a response for several days. So, when can I see if the sources are accepted or not? Thanks for advance and have a good day. 45.159.72.251 (talk) 11:51, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Question from RT5549 (01:51, 7 August 2023)

Hello! My edit is displayed in red type. Is that because its veracity has yet to be determined? Thanks! --RT5549 (talk) 01:51, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello @RT5549! Welcome to Wikipedia. I am not sure what you mean by "red type" but if you are referring to the red numbers, [1], they just show how much characters of text you removed or added on each edit. I hope this helps. Ca ^{talk to me!} 02:06, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Richard James Waugh

Hi there, thanks for reviewing my draft.

As you have correctly guessed, I did not mean to prematurely submit it as it is still work in progress.

Hope you have a good week :^) Thatusername96 (talk) 10:36, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Draft article Lily Dillon

Dear Ca. Thanks for your message on my draft article. I have looked to strengthen some of the references as you suggested. The scanned documents on Wiki Commons have now been replaced with live links to the original birth, marriage and death records on the official Civil Records site of the Irish Government. Further background information on Lily Dillon has been added from a published historical work (with and ISBN number. Though given the age of the publication this ISBN has 10 rather than 13 digits). An additional link has been added to the death record for Lily Dillon on the Dept of Justice of Western Australian Government. The search tool does not give a dedicated link to the death record, but I have added the text from the result filed for the search. Also, instead of a 'find a grave' reference, I have added a link to the record of her burial place on the official Municipal Cemeteries Board website of the Government of the State of Western Australia. These are credible government websites from both Ireland and Australia. Flagship1537 (talk) 14:42, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for contacting me – I'll try to take a look at it today. Cheers, Ca ^{talk to me!} 06:58, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Question from EricJ33 (13:01, 16 August 2023)

hello, good morning. I am an epoxy flooring contractor. I want info on how to run a successful epoxy company. --EricJ33 (talk) 13:01, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I doubt I can help you much here. I am in no way a business expert and I don't think Wikipedia is a good place to solicit business advice. Cheers, Ca ^{talk to me!} 13:04, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol invitation

Hello, Ca. The new pages patrol team is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles and redirects needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help. I believe that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting. Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines. Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions. If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here. Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around! Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:44, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Extended peer community

Please help, see my previous; I would like to resubmit Extended peer community but it has disappeared. Sorry to bother. Andrea Andrea Saltelli Saltean (talk) 08:49, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

The draft Extended peer community has been submitted and is waiting for review. See my previous response. Ca ^{talk to me!} 12:09, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hi Ca. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at the permissions page in case your user right is time-limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page or ask via the NPP Discord. In addition, please remember:

• Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Steps such as checking for copyright violations using Earwig's copyright violation detector, checking for duplicate articles, and evaluating sources (both in the article, and if needed, via a Google search) for compliance with the general notability guideline are mandatory and will take a few minutes per article.
• Please review some of our flowcharts (1, 2) to help ensure you don't forget any required steps.
• Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. If you can read any languages other than English, please add yourself to the list of new page reviewers with language proficiencies. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 22:42, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Proposing things at ANI

Ca, you're fairly new here, so I wanted to discuss a bit the repercussions of the survey you set up at ANI.

If after a period of discussion, an admin had gone to TIG's talk and given them an indef block for hounding, TIG would be able to request an unblock, and the blocking admin or any other admin could have suggested as a condition for that unblock that TIG agree to a 1-way indef IBAN, appealable after some date. That appeal could be made by a request on their user talk page.

By setting up a community survey, I know you were trying to be helpful, but what you've set up will require TIG to appeal whatever the outcome is at ANI. Was that your intent? Because that can be so discouraging and demoralizing that editors have left the project over such obstacles. Valereee (talk) 15:00, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

I did not realize a community survey could have such impacts. I will make sure to be more careful in the future. I imagined a survey would simply sprawling threads of back-and-forth discussions into something that is more digestible to the closer. I saw the suggestion to create one, so I carried on with it. But there is one point I am confused on: if a sanction was determined by community discussion, wouldn't it be against consensus for an appeal to be accepted by one admin, regardless of the format of discussion? I am not familiar on blocking policies(mostly because I never read any), so I am not sure what the community standards are.

I thank you for assuming good faith and communicating with me. Yes, I was trying to be helpful. My intention was not to push TIG into further trouble, I believe TIG would be an excellent editor once the issues raised in ANI was addressed; I do not want him to be banned forever. Cheers, Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:18, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that's correct, sorry if I wasn't clear: generally any sanction that is imposed by the community must be appealed to the community. Just to clarify 'be banned forever': an indefinite block simply means no length of time has been specified. It doesn't mean forever. An indefinite block imposed by a single admin can be lifted 10 minutes later after a discussion with the editor convinces an admin that the user is going to address the issue.

Best to you! Valereee (talk) 14:40, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Erm...

I'm not sure if you even requested it, but I feel like I should point you to WP:Oversight and WP:Oversight/FAQ. It is extremely important, as the red template at the top of the FAQ says, to NOT point to or mention such material or even request the suppression of said material in anywhere that is public.

Just remove or trim that part out of the page, don't obviously mention it, and then request oversight through the email. Definitely don't repeat the entire information in your edit summary (although I'm guessing that was an accident).

Also just to give my opinion, I don't really see anything of obvious concern in the content you removed (just my opinion though, trying to explain to me what you saw would violate the same principles I've pointed out, I say request oversight anyways if you haven't already, because that's what they ask "even if you're not 100% sure if you're correct or not", they will answer you and tell you the result). – 2804:F14:8083:8C01:19F0:B267:1E58:5CC0 (talk) 02:27, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Seems you were right (at least as something that crossed the first resort threshold of suppression). Well spotted :). – 2804:F14:8083:8C01:19F0:B267:1E58:5CC0 (talk) 05:10, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I will follow your advice from this time onwards, and will not mention privacy-related removals in my edit summary. I was completely unaware that the section title leaked into the edit summary; I'll be more careful in the future. Thank you for your kind response :) Ca ^{talk to me!} 08:37, 22 August 2023 (UTC)