Jump to content

User talk:Pbsouthwood/Archive 21

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15←Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21Archive 22Archive 23→Archive 25

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

  • Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:18, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Empty sections

Hi! I saw that you added "Circumscription" to Blastocladiomycota [1] and Neocallimastigomycota [2] and placed {{Empty section}} within them. Are you planning on populating these sections? If not, I am not sure how adding them was useful, and I intend to remove them. TelosCricket (talk) 20:16, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

TelosCricket, I would add them if I could, but do not have access to the necessary sources. I went to those pages specifically to find out what those taxa include, and the information I needed was not there, so I created the empty sections firstly in the hope that they would notify someone competent that the articles lack basic information on the topic, and thereby encourage its addition, and secondly to notify other readers that they need not waste their time looking for the information as it is not there. I think that makes them useful both to editors and readers, don't you? Maybe you can think of a better way to convey the same information? Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 03:36, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
I see. In the case of Blastocladiomycota that information is indeed there in the article under the taxonomy section and partially so in the taxon box. In the case of Neocallimastigomycota, that information is in the taxon box. I am therefore going to remove the circumscription sections. TelosCricket (talk) 10:25, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
TelosCricket, in Blastocladiomycota#Taxonomy there is a listing of the taxa currently accepted as contained in Blastocladiomycota, but nothing that I could find that would make it clear why those taxa are in Blastocladiomycota, i.e, the shared characteristics of all Blastocladiomycota that are necessary and sufficient to classify them in this group. The same thing applies to Neocallimastigomycota, only the listing is in a different place. Perhaps you use a different term? Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 12:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
Ah, my apologies, yes, I misunderstood. I have reverted myself on both pages.
shared characteristics of all Blastocladiomycota that are necessary and sufficient to classify them in this group is what I would think of as a formal taxonomic diagnosis/description. For Blastocladiomycota that would be found in James et al. 2006 and what I quote below:

Zoospore with a single flagellum, side-body complex, nuclear cap of membrane-bounded ribosomes, cone-shaped nucleus that terminates near the kinetosome, microtubules radiate anteriorly from the proximal end of the kinetosome around the nucleus, zoospore flagellum lacks electron-opaque plug in transition zone. Asexual reproduction with zoospores, sexual reproduction through fusion of planogametes, life cycle with sporic meiosis.

TelosCricket (talk) 15:14, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
TelosCricket, Thanks for the quote, that is exactly what I was looking for. I take it you have access to Taylor & Francis online, which I do not. Now I have to work out what it actually means, as some of the terminology is unfamiliar. If I manage to get that right I will add it to the article in the empty section, and we all win. I have seen it referred to as circumscription, but a "formal taxonomic diagnosis" would be an accurate description and may be more widely understood and therefore "Taxonomic diagnosis" may be more suitable for the section header. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 16:18, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Don't archive yet. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 10:30, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).

Administrator changes

readded Jake Wartenberg
removed Emperor • Viridian Bovary
renamed Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:45, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

New Page Review queue September 2021

Hello Pbsouthwood,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Natural sciences Good Article nomination

Your feedback is requested at Talk:The Compatibility Gene on a "Natural sciences" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
  • Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
  • The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.

Miscellaneous

  • Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
  • The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Engineering and technology Good Article nomination

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Mac Mini on a "Engineering and technology" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Engineering and technology Good Article nomination

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Mac Mini on a "Engineering and technology" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Music on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from ItWasAlfred (17:27, 8 October 2021)

Hello,

I wanted to add some information about a topic. It's the startup that I work for, and some edits have been undone from a colleague even though they were neutral. The company produces a leading solution in the space and there is barely any content on Wikipedia about it. What's the right process for us, this is not intended to be promotional? We don't even have a company page on Wikipedia yet even though the biggest entertainment productions use our technology and our clients include top tier enterprise companies such as automotives as well.

Thanks! --ItWasAlfred (talk) 17:27, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

ItWasAlfred you will have to be more specific. I suggest you provide a link to the disputed content and the reversion. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 01:28, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the response Peter. I have written a reply on the editor that removed the edits, I think it would provide further context:
The InstaLOD mention was on this page since 2018: https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=List_of_CAx_companies&oldid=875561735. I think there were more, but I'd need to dig in further. I also wonder about the removal of InstaLOD from the Level_of_detail_(computer_graphics) page seeing that it's one of the two leading solutions (InstaLOD and Simplygon). While I do understand that it's all done by one user, those edits were — from what I can see, not promotional. In regards to the game page edits, where it's a bit diffuse, I believe the usage of middleware/technology as part of a game development is of interest to the community, and quite common to do on other pages and technology. The edits cited YT videos that were produced by the game developers themselves as it's not possible to cite those contributions otherwise. Those edits were done by one member of our community, that we've approved under the condition that it's done according to Wikipedia guidelines and standards. If those edits were not correct, please outline the correct procedure!
Here is the diff to the 2018 revision of the CAD software page: https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=List_of_CAx_companies&diff=prev&oldid=1048885661
I'd love to hear what the right process is, as even the 2018 edit was deleted! ItWasAlfred (talk) 09:29, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
This is apparently about my reversions of the contributions of JacobMorgan1 (talk · contribs) the other day. - MrOllie (talk) 13:17, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Indeed MrOllie, with the exceptional part that the edit here https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=List_of_CAx_companies&diff=prev&oldid=1048885661 predates JacobMorgan1 (talk · contribs)'s by two years. ItWasAlfred (talk) 18:27, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
InstaLOD is clearly not a CAx company as that list envisions the term. MrOllie (talk) 18:45, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Would you mind clarifying that perspective MrOllie? InstaLOD provides CAD tessellation and CAD file conversions as part of the core offering for enterprise customers. Apart from reading or tessellating data, the software is used to perform CAD/CAM data-prepping (PDM). The same page lists products such as "GrabCAD" which is an online repository for CAD files or "Simplygon", which competes with InstaLOD in the 3D optimization space but not in the CAD/CAM space, as they don't have a single product that can read or tessellate CAD files. There are many more examples such as products by "Automapki", that are not directly "CAD" as in a "design" or "manufacturing" software, but provide tangential services in that space. ItWasAlfred (talk) 14:02, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
I've already cluttered PBsouthwood's talk page and notifications enough. MrOllie (talk) 14:20, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
@ItWasAlfred and MrOllie: This looks like a content dispute, so the proper place to discuss it is on the article talk page, where it may attract the attention of other editors interested in the topic. Possibly even knowledgeable on the topic, which I am not. Either of you are welcome to ping me from that page for my comments. MrOllie, I am not greatly concerned by the clutter, but I think you could be more informative in your edit summaries when deleting content that may be disputed. It may have seemed obvious to you at the time, but it is not obvious to me. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 16:00, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the kind and balanced response, Peter. I'll follow your advice and move the discussion over to the discussion on the article. If there are any articles/resources on how to structure/present such a dispute on the page, I'd be glad to do the edit in accordance to the standard practice. ItWasAlfred (talk) 18:21, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from Kiddlogan on Wikipedia:TWA/1/Start (00:13, 16 October 2021)

Hello I would like to know the national soccer team of Brazil in 1998 world cup --Kiddlogan (talk) 00:13, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Kiddlogan the search function will help you with this. Type a likely search string into the search box and click on the icon to initiate. Something like 1998 FIFA World Cup or Brazil national football team should be a good start. If there is an article of that exact name it will open, otherwise you will ger a list of articles that contain some of your search terms. Choose the one that looks most likely to contain the information you want, and click on it to open the page. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 13:20, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from Atkinsonm2 (18:59, 21 October 2021)

Hello! I am new to contributing to Wikipedia and I had a question for you. I am looking to create a wikipedia page for my father, he is a writer in the Midwest who just got his first major publishing contract. I want to create a page about him for general reference and his works. Is this a valid thing to put into wikipedia? Thanks for your help in advance! --Atkinsonm2 (talk) 18:59, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Atkinsonm2, What you are proposing is one of the most difficult things to get right on Wikipedia. It is a biography of a living person, to whom you have a close connection, so editors will assume there is a conflict of interest, and this will lead to some prejudice, as there is a lot of history of CoI leading to problems on Wikipedia. Furthermore it will be necessary to prove WP:Notability of the subject, by reference to multiple independent reliable sources. A very high level of competence would be needed to succeed in this task without assistance or conflict.
I would strongly recommend that you learn to edit Wikipedia by first editing existing articles on similar topics to get a feel for what is expected in this class of article, read the relevant policies on biographies of living persons, conflicts of interest, notability, and referencing, read the relevant sections of the manual of style, and gather your sources. Create a draft as a user subpage and ensure that it meets all the requirements, then ask an experienced Wikipedian to advise on whether you have sufficient evidence of notability in your references, that the content is adequately supported by the references, and that the formatting, content and tone are appropriate for an encyclopedia.
An alternative would be to request an article to be created, but the backlog is usually rather long, and it may be months or longer before someone chooses to do it, and unless there are adequate sources on the internet, it may not ever happen.
I would also refer you to the WP:Teahouse, where you might get more useful advice from someone who has more experience in creating biographies of writers. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 06:42, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
Atkinsonm2 Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography#Structure gives good advice, and there may be other helpful information on the project page. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 09:23, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
To get back to your final question, If you can prove notability to the standards that apply to the class of topic, this would be a valid thing to put in Wikipedia, otherwise not, and the validity may increase with time if more reliable sources become available. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 18:21, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from Gerald Dawes (20:57, 22 October 2021)

I am trying to get my Wikipedia page up as soon as possible. I am publishing my first book next month and I need a page. Most of what I have for my page was written by well-known authors and public figures. --Gerald Dawes (talk) 20:57, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Gerald Dawes, it will help if you do not think of a potential page about you and your work as "your page" – it will be edited by anyone who wants to, and can. Actual content that remains must comply with Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not social media or publicity, and if the material you have is promotional it will be removed. The question here is not whether you need a page, but whether there is enough existing published information from independent reliable sources about you and your work to support a neutral, informational, fact-checked article. The judgement of whether such a page meets the criteria for inclusion is by consensus of Wikipedia editors. It requires considerable skill and restraint to successfully write an article about oneself for Wikipedia that is not rejected, but maybe you are one of those people.
I suggest that you read Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography#Structure for technical advice on the procedure.
Other information pertinent to your concern may be found at Wikipedia:Autobiography, Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, Wikipedia:Notability (people), Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography, Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Citing sources .
I would strongly recommend first editing similar topics in which you have no conflicts of interest, to develop a feel for what is acceptable and what is not. I have briefly looked at your current user page draft and it has a few obvious problems:
  • There is no topic title – it is not clear what the article is intended to be about, so one cannot judge how much of the content is relevant. This is easily fixed.
  • It is entirely lacking in inline references and a reference section: Every quote "must" be referenced to its exact source, in a way which allows the reader to check that it is accurate and relevant. Every claim of fact which could reasonably be questioned should also be similarly referenced. Where practicable, include chapter, section, or page numbers in the citation. It must be possible to find the source and check that it supports the cited article content, but is not a copyright violation or plagiarism.
  • The content is excessively promotional. There is insufficient encyclopedic information.
  • It does not establish topic notability, mainly due to the absence of adequately cited, checkable, reliable references, but also because the topic is unclear.
There may be other problems which I have not noticed, but those listed above are all major barriers to acceptability. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 06:39, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Real Life Barnstar
Here's a barnstar for you. Have a great day!! Partha Basak 16:10, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from 2006nishan178713 (14:02, 23 October 2021)

Hello Mentor, Hope you are doing well --Partha Basak 14:02, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Well enough thanks, Partha Basak, Welcome to Wikipedia, though I see you are not particularly new. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 15:40, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
That's True indeed. Are you aware that you are my mentor?? Partha Basak 15:52, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
Only now that you have messaged me, Partha Basak. It would seem that I have probably been randomly allocated. Were you playing with The Wikipedia Adventure? · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 15:59, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
No, I didn't even knew what Wikipedia Adventure was until i searched for it now. It seems that Wikipedia redirects a new personal Homepage when we click the username on the top Partha Basak 16:02, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
Can you give your opinions on my new draft article??
Any feedback is appreciated
Draft:Vartak (Project) Partha Basak 16:12, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
Partha Basak, I think the topic is appropriate, and the article is informative, but there are a few places where it can be easily improved.
Firstly there is a lot of capitalisation which does not seem necessary. I suggest removing capitals from all terms that are not proper names, because when one runs into a capitalised term in the middle of a sentence one tends to expect the term to be the official name of something. For example, is Western Arunachal Pradesh a proper name, or is it just the western part of Arunachal Pradesh? There are also a lot of place names that will not be familiar to most readers. Wikilink them the first time they appear, so we can look them up conveniently. If there is no article, try for a link to a section which refers to the term, or just leave a red link if the place is likely to get an article someday.
Secondly, is there a reason for the name Vartak? does it have a meaning?
When I read your listing of bridges, by immediate reaction was to wonder if they are over rivers, and named for the rivers. If you they are, then either link the river name to the river article, or if the bridge has an article or a section, in an article link the whole bridge name. These links do not distract the reader who is only interested in the project, but are useful if one is looking for more information on regional development or the local geography.
Is Vartak or Project VARTAK the better title for the article? As an outsider I would have thought Project VARTAK is more likely the official name, but you should be in a better position to judge, and the more commonly used name is also a valid choice for the title.
I assume BRTF is Border Roads Task Force, but it should be mentioned somewhere as it is not that obvious.
I am guessing that the references to all-weather use refer to the area having heavy snow in winter, but it would be better if there was some background information about why these roads were considered desirable.
What are Project Udayak and Project Arunak? More army road bulding projects?
Some images of the bridges or tunnels would be a nice touch if you can find any.
I have not looked at your references, do you want me to? Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 19:10, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your efforts and time. I will surely work on the flaws noted by you and improve it. Clarifying your questions, Vartak is the name of this project (meaning is elephant;that's how military projects are named in india e.g. Another project 'Dantak' means teeth) and the title should be Project Vartak but I have mistakenly written Vartak(Project). Arunak and Udayak are similar projects in adjoining regions. I have also written another article - https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Dantak which was approved last week. Its also about a military construction project. And yes you can checkout the references for any improvements. I would highly appreciate it. Thanks!! Partha Basak 19:35, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Partha Basak, The title is easy to fix when the article is moved to main space, or you could move it now. I think it is worth mentioning that Vartak means elephant, and in which language. A short note about Indian military project naming traditions would not be out of place if you can find a reference. I will take a look at a few of your references and let you know if I find any problems. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 03:08, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
  • On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 01:59, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from Synogeek on Draft:Synologit (02:09, 24 October 2021)

Hi There, can you please provide me with an advise on how to get my Company profile published instead of a draft? Thanks in advance. --Synogeek (talk) 02:09, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Synogeek, You will need to prove that the topic is notable and suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia by citing sufficient independent reliable sources. See Wikipedia:Notability, and particularly Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). It will also help to properly format all references to facilitate fact checking. Bear in mind that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a web host, and that our articles are not "company profiles", so write an encyclopedic article. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 02:40, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! I think I complete my article following the rules. Can you please move my article from draft to live?

Thanks in advance. Synogeek (talk) 04:36, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Synogeek, You still need to prove that the topic is notable and suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia by citing sufficient independent reliable sources. Until this has been established the other points needing improvement are of little relevance so I will not list them now. So far none of the references establish encyclopedic notability. It is not sufficient to merely prove that the company exists. Please re-read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) and ensure that you understand the requirements. Also read Wikipedia:Reliable sources so that you understand what kind of source may be useful. Once you have established notability, or at least listed some relevant reliable references that might indicate notability, we can discuss the way in which they should be used to support the claims in the article.
Places to look would be articles and reports in significant regional or national media, like newspapers, journals, tech and business magazines, newsreel type TV shows and similar, with significant coverage of the company. You could also ask for assistance at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, or at Wikipedia:WikiProject Companies.
Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn and other social media do not establish notability. They may in limited cases be useful to support that they say a thing, but that is about the limit.
You might also find it useful to read Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations, as this information is relevant and may help you avoid conflict. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 09:16, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Question from Huge37 (17:39, 14 November 2021)

must the biography written be for a celebrity and people of influence and Affluence --Huge37 (talk) 17:39, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Huge37 You will find a lot of useful information on biographies on wikipedia at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography. Basically on Wikipedia we write about topics that have already been covered by reliable sources, so a person is considered sufficiently notable to be included in Wikipedia if there is sufficient published coverage elsewhere to support a useful article. This can be limiting, and it can be difficult to find good sources. In a nutshell, celebrities tend to be easier to write about because there are a lot of sources, even when the person has no other informational or social value. People with influence may or may not be well covered in the literature, and similarly wealthy people tend to be noticed and information on them published. Sometimes the people most worthy of mention do not attract sufficient notice and publication to be included, as we must follow the sources. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 10:18, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Question from Hari Prasad Bhargava on Astrology and science (11:38, 16 November 2021)

How do you say Astrology is "pseudoscience" It's an Ancient science practiced by great Philosophers and "Nastradamous" Was all they Pseudo-Predictors --Hari Prasad Bhargava (talk) 11:38, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Hari Prasad Bhargava, please read Pseudoscience and WP:Pseudoscience. It may also help to read Scientific method, as you may not know what that means. If you still do not understand, ask on the talk page of whichever of those pages you do not understand. You may ping me from the discussion if you wish. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 08:49, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Hari Prasad Bhargava, have you actually read Astrology and science? It explains in considerable detail why astrology is currently regarded as a pseudoscience. I found the explanation adequate, but perhaps there are some aspects you do not find convincing. If you have a rational argument and sound logic or reliable sources to support that argument, you could explain your position on the article's talk page, If your arguments are sound, someone will probably respond. The invitation to ping me from the discussion applies there too. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 09:13, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Question from Barren Sansż (19:25, 15 November 2021)

hey there, im looking for assitanced on getting more information regarding to credible sources used to make an article "qualifiable" --Barren Sansż (talk) 19:25, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

@Barren Sansż: Have you read Help:Your first article, Wikipedia:Notability, and Wikipedia:Reliable sources? · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 09:14, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Question from Globeabb thats my potna dem (04:57, 6 December 2021)

Hows ur day? --Globeabb thats my potna dem (talk) 04:57, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Engineering and technology Good Article nomination

Your feedback is requested at Talk:First Wikipedia edit on a "Engineering and technology" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:30, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).

Administrator changes

removed A Train • Berean Hunter • Epbr123 • GermanJoe • Sanchom • Mysid

Technical news

  • Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
  • The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Outline of chocolate for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Outline of chocolate, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Outline of chocolate until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Your help with my article

Thanks so much bud. The Mt Gambier Cave Diving article came out excellent. I know you said it changed a lot, but I saw plenty of my writing on there, which made me quite happy. Thank you for helping me get it published. 75.131.192.159 (talk) 16:13, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

About 40% your text according to Xtools, so a decent start. A worthy addition to our coverage of diving history. What inspired you to start it? · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 16:27, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a survey about medical topics on Wikipedia

Dear fellow editor,

I am Piotr Konieczny, a sociologist of new media at Hanyang University (and User:Piotrus on Wikipedia). I would like to better understand Wikipedia's volunteers who edit medical topics, many associated with the WikiProject Medicine, and known to create some of the highest quality content on Wikipedia. I hope that the lessons I can learn from you that I will present to the academic audience will benefit both the WikiProject Medicine (improving your understanding of yourself and helping to promote it and attract new volunteers) and the wider world of medical volunteering and academia. Open access copy of the resulting research will be made available at WikiProject's Medicine upon the completion of the project.

All questions are optional. The survey is divided into 4 parts: 1 - Brief description of yourself; 2 - Questions about your volunteering; 3 - Questions about WikiProject Medicine and 4 - Questions about Wikipedia's coverage of medical topics.

Please note that by filling out this questionnaire, you consent to participate in this research. The survey is anonymous and all personal details relevant to your experience will be kept private and will not be transferred to any third party.

I appreciate your support of this research and thank you in advance for taking the time to participate and share your experiences! If you have any questions at all, please feel free to contact me at my Wikipedia user page or through my email listed on the survey page (or by Wikipedia email this user function).

The survey is accessible through the LINK HERE.

Piotr Konieczny
Associate Professor
Hanyang University
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:24, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:31, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A t-shirt!
A token of thanks
Hi Pbsouthwood! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk ~~~~~
A snowflake!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pbsouthwood/Archive_21&oldid=1068998873"