User talk:Seawolf35/Archive 1

Self-trout

Welcome!

Hi Seawolf35! I would like to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! — Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:38, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

wp:burden

Please don't restore uncited text without following wp:burden. I've reverted, to comply with wp rules. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:A0FB:76EB:FB0B:6692 (talk) 00:14, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Thanks! Seawolf35 (talk) 00:15, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy editing.--2603:7000:2101:AA00:A0FB:76EB:FB0B:6692 (talk) 00:18, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging pages for speedy deletion

Hello, Seawolf35,

Please be more careful in considering whether to tag an article for speedy deletion. Review Criteria for Speedy Deletion thoroughly so you understand the criteria better because you are using criteria that don't apply to draft articles. Know what namespace the different criteria apply to. It helps if you use Twinkle to tag articles as it will only present you with criteria that apply to the namespace of the page you are looking at. For example, none of the "A" criteria apply to Draft space, they only apply to main space articles.

If you have questions about CSD criteria or Twinkle, please bring them to the Teahouse. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:50, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks! Is it alright to look for articles to tag for deletion if they for sure meet criteria? Seawolf35 (talk) 06:55, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

changing image filenames and reference names

Hi, I noticed some of your recent edits (apparently using WP:JWB) intended to correct spelling or capitalization, but introduced errors into the articles. Please avoid changing the name of files in articles, as you did at Savanna and "The Spaghetti Incident?", as this breaks the link to the file. In the future, please check the preview before saving your edits to help avoid errors like this. Additionally, avoid "correcting" the capitalization of citation names, as you did at Ailanthus altissima, as this can break other uses of the reference in the article; checking a preview before saving would help here too, as your edit created two cite errors. Please check that what you are correcting is really a typo and not a proper noun (the name of a person, place, etc.), as was the case at 101 Dalmatians: The Series. Thank you. AKiwiDeerPin (talk) 00:57, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, noted, thanks! Seawolf35 (talk) 00:58, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent Prod

Hello, I took the liberty to redirect Neelakurukkan to the list where it's mentioned. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:20, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well that solves that, thanks! Seawolf35 (talk) 13:56, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ayesha Saffar

Hello, Seawolf35,

You didn't close this discussion completely. Please follow it through and untag the article and place the appropriate tag on the article talk page. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:53, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, will do. Seawolf35 (talk) 12:09, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tokitae's DEATH, Incorrect Information

The necropsy results have not yet been published. I hope you will correct this statement, as it has not been verified.

Tokitae's page is wrong. No one know's how she died until the Necropsy comes back. Funny! Miami Seaquarium and friends of toki have been spreading this misleading information to media etc. HOW DO THEY KNOW THIS???????????

the necropsy results have not yet been published. I hope you will correct this statement, as it has not been verified.

Vengeance is mine say's the lord. Tokitae will have justice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ih8satan (talk • contribs) 07:29, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A cheeseburger for you!

A cheeseburger for the trout Teamsonic2011 (talk) 04:18, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Trouted

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: YOUR REASON HERE CajunX (talk) 06:31, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And that was that for Seawolf35 (talk) 06:38, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

stalin was a dictator and the worst human criminal ever 🐒🐒🐒🐒🐖🐖🐖🐖💩💩💩 78.1.6.6 (talk) 10:25, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are you serious about reverting?

Just asking what is your intention?2603:8000:D300:3650:E8E3:EFCE:96FD:F15F (talk) 07:35, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was reverting spam links on another article, see [1]. I had your diff open on one side and the diff with spam links I was about to revert. I just hit the wrong button. I didn't mean to revert it, but I think there needs to a space between North and Western. Feel free to change it back. Thanks, Seawolf35 (talk) 07:41, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I truly try to follow the camaraderie of this project so will not comment any further than if you create a mess then clean it up. Revertings is not a sport. Considering it is the administrator level that has a particularly significant responsibility to show it, especially to an IP usuername usuer.2603:8000:D300:3650:E8E3:EFCE:96FD:F15F (talk) 08:02, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned it up, I think. Archiving. Seawolf35 (talk) 08:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Northwestern Uni "cleanup"

I have been editing WP since the day that it started at very fundamental levels and there is one thing I know for certain about returning an article to its encountered condition. And archiving does not do that. I am offended by this tactic as it very well may show that although operating on at least an administrator level there may not be what rightfully should be the appropriate level of care taken to protect WP from REAL vandals, create a situation that upsets other contributors who are editing actual content rather than rely on what may be substantially reverting and running up edit numbers. I must be missing something here because there was an edit that seem to be imperfect merely because "Northwestern" "University" was run together. All that had to happen to bring order to the article was to supply a space that with three actions easily could have been done with one action but was not. The supplied space was not one until I reviewed that status of edits made on "wester" hits. My original edit was no longer there so i completed it a second time, after three moves were made to do I do not know what but certainly not to bring it to WP standard by merely supplying a space? All this is rather odd and merely having become disoriented with what was on your screen may not be the full answer. Others will have to decide for themselves. All I know is that when something that does not uphold WP standards is presented as either an explanation or an apology, if it should be found out it was neigth give yourself a rest.2603:8000:D300:3650:E8E3:EFCE:96FD:F15F (talk) 09:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Optional RfA poll

To echo some of the feedback from the poll that you opened, note that it's not intended to make a projection based on what you plan to do, but to estimate your chances of successfully requesting administrative privileges based on what you have done already. Good luck with your editing. isaacl (talk) 22:46, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Misplaced Comment

Hi - I'm trying to make edits to the National University page. NU has merged with Northcentral University and reorganized. The list of schools/colleges has changed and the descriptions are different. See here for info on that: https://www.nu.edu/degrees/ But you have reverted my changes. Is there some reason why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DSH4639 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Association of Food Journalists article rejected

Granted: this brief, just-the-facts article is about a professional organization that no longer exists. Like many such entities, it was organized for its members and received little mainstream coverage, as many such organizations do, e.g., National Nurses Association or American Association of Petroleum Geologists. The sources provided for the article are solid and include Poynter Institute, NY Magazine/Grubstreet (not impeccable but not bad), an in-depth, lengthy, scholarly article in a peer-reviewed journal, as well reputable second tier sources. The claims made aren't puffed. I'll revise it, see what else I can find, and if warranted, resubmit it. Sam Perkins (talk) 17:45, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for bringing your concerns to my attention.

The reason I declined the article is because given the, like you said, the little mainstream coverage that it has received and the fact that it probably wouldn't survive a deletion discussion as well. Some of the sources seem to be routine press releases and not in depth coverage of the subject, especially the source that is just a big list that doesn't lend much to supporting the notability of the subject. If a few more sources are added and a little clean up work is done, it could make an article. (Note:If you would like you can just publish it straight to the main article space since you are well past the threshold that allows you to do that.) Thanks, Seawolf35 (talk) 17:55, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your helpful reply. Will do. I appreciate the rapid review and thoughtful response. Sam Perkins (talk) 18:04, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Seawolf, I'd like to discuss why you thought Association of Food Journalists didn't already have sufficient sources when you rejected. Among other lengthy treatments, there's an academic article nine pages long about it. Valereee (talk) 12:00, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if it came across as a bad decline at the time. Here is my reasoning: The first two sources are solid, yes. The next source was just a list of articles some guy wrote for the New York Times. I couldn’t find anything directly, relating to the subject in that one. Granted, he did write about food a lot. The fourth source is just a big listing of winners about a competition they held, the Association is not the focus whatsoever of that list. The fifth source just seems to be a press release announcing their shut down with a few excerpts from representatives of the Association. The last source seems to be a piece written by the subject themselves that states their code of ethics.

At the time, I had come to the conclusion that the sourcing wasn’t quite good enough to show they met the notability guidelines for organizations. In its current stable, I would have accepted it mostly without question. If you any more questions about it, please feel free to reach out again. Thanks, Seawolf35 (talk) 12:30, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Valereee If there are things you would like me to change about my reviewing at AfC please do let me know. Seawolf35 (talk) 13:42, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was actually a woman whose articles are listed there in that one source, and I agree that citation to that list is a problem and have tagged it as such. We need a citation saying that, not a list of her articles.

We generally never would end up with an article being deleted through AfD -- or even moved to draft -- because there were only two solid sources. I myself prefer to see three, but if there were only two solid sources, instead of rejecting the AfC submission I'd do a google check to see if I could easily find a third. But I wouldn't reject a submission simply because there were only two solid sources. I might not be able to accept it for other reasons, such as promotional tone or unsourced content, but most editors would agree that two solid sources -- especially if one of them is a 9-page academic source -- is really enough. Realize too that this organization is defunct, so the likelihood the creator was trying to sneak promotional content in is slim to none. Valereee (talk) 13:54, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will be sure to apply this to my future reviewing. Seawolf35 (talk) 14:19, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Paid disclosures

Just a thought, but Special:Diff/1178888378 is a bit unnecessary - if anything you have removed information about the user and their paid status. Using {{paid}} isn't required, just that a disclosure is made. I don't necessarily think you need to revert, but it's something to keep in mind going forward. Primefac (talk) 13:45, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up, I had thought that using the paid template was almost necessary, I had just gotten a bit fed up with trying to guide them through it step by step. Thanks, Seawolf35 (talk) 14:13, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely the easiest way to say "here, copy and paste this onto your user page", which is why it's as heavily-used as it is! Primefac (talk) 14:18, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It just gets hard not to point people towards WP:CIR. Seawolf35 (talk) 14:28, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A cheeseburger for you!

cheese bergor defaultkid99 (talk) 13:40, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse

Dear Seawolf35,

Thank you for volunteering as a Host at the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a community of people working together to make knowledge free. You are an important part of that effort! By joining as a Host, and by following our expectations, you are helping new users to get started here at Wikipedia, and aiding more experienced users who just have a question about how something works. We appreciate your willingness to help!

Here are some links you may find helpful as a Host:

Useful scripts you can install to make responding easier,
templates to use and, of course:
the question forum itself.

Editors who have signed up as hosts, but who have not contributed at the Teahouse for six months or so may be removed from the list of hosts.

Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:46, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CFDs

Hello, Seawolf35,

You have only been editing Wikipedia for 7 months and I don't think you are experienced enough to be closing CFDs. They are very tricky, even for many administrators to handle.

For example, you can't just tag a CSD tag on a category that a CFD says to be deleted, you may need to use the CFD bot, User:JJMC89 bot III, to recategorize the category's contents and only categories that have been emptied can be deleted by speedy deletion.

If you have questions about handling CFD closures (and closing the discussion is just the easy part), I recommend talking to someone like Marcocapelle who has been editing the project for 12 years and is very experienced with CFD closures. Look at any CFD daily page and you'll see those editors who've been working with categories for a while and handling closures and ask them for pointers, especially regarding when JJMC89 bot III should be used and when changes can be handled manually by regular editors. Meanwhile, I reverted your tagging of two categories for speedy deletion as they hadn't been emptied. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:06, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Liz, the reason I tagged the categories with G6 is that I have seen several admins, you included, delete categories under G6 after a CFD was closed as delete. I apologize for my being mistaken when tagging. I do list the discussions that I close on Wikipedia talk:CFD/W, but those tend to go ignored. I will hold off on CFDs for a while and observe to gain more experience. Best, Seawolf35 (talk) 19:31, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2023 Israel–Hamas war on a "Politics, government, and law" 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 20:30, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New page reviewer granted

Hi Seawolf35. 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, including 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.
Please review some of our flowcharts (1, 2) to help ensure you don't forget any 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. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:32, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Rehmani58 (04:48, 1 November 2023)

I want to write an article on dr. nabi bux khan bloch please help me. --Rehmani58 (talk) 04:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged copyvio on List of The Eminence in Shadow episodes

Hi, regarding your request for a revdel on List of The Eminence in Shadow episodes for an alleged copyright violation, the article you linked was published on November 12, 2022. If you look at the edit history of The Eminence in Shadow, the edit that adds the same information from the linked article was made on November 10, so it can be assumed that Fandemonium Network simply copied the synopsis from the Wikipedia article. Harushiga (talk) 02:11, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Harushiga. Yeah, I didn’t go digging through other articles history’s for publish dates and such. I just saw that the edit copied stuff from a website that hit in Earwig so I assumed copyvio. And if you look at the authors talk page, they are no stranger to copyvios either. Seawolf35 (talk - email) 12:36, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Hobbes860 (01:57, 28 October 2023)

Dear mentor: I would like to contribute what I believe to be a more neutral POV for the article:

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/California_Environmental_Quality_Act

Since 2019, most of the edits on the page have come from an editor Avatar317 who has added a lot of content about abuses of the act. I would like to add context about the history of the act, and cite studies and examples that may add opposing evidence to some of the statements presented on the page.

My first edit, which is limited to augmenting the history of the act, was quickly reverted citing the lack of reliable sources:

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=California_Environmental_Quality_Act&oldid=1182233991

I do not believe there was a good reason to revert my edit. My first source was a press release from the California Governor's office. The second, a 2023 study entitled CEQA by the Numbers, was a recent report by economists who specialize in California's housing production. I am just wondering how multiple paragraphs of criticisms reported by many sources are reliable, whereas the Governor’s press statement and an economists' published report is not reliable.

I realize that the law has become quite controversial, but I think it important to accept and show divergent points of view, as long as editors are acting in good faith, and basing their edits on published studies and uncontested statements such as press releases from the Governor’s office. I feel that a more neutral POV can be presented if other sources by experts in the law are represented in the article.

Could you please help me understand how these two sources are unreliable? Is there something I need to add to the talk page to further describe the economist study and try to resubmit? Or extract relevant quotes?

I apologize for being a new editor. --Hobbes860 (talk) 01:57, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Hobbes860 Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia! The is absolutely nothing wrong with being a new editor, you guys help Wikipedia grow! Now to start, let’s look at what forms a reliable source.

Sources should be reliable, secondary, and independent from the subject except in certain, specific circumstances.

Why do we need reliable sources?

We have a policy that prohibits original research in articles.
Sources are required so we can verify what has been said in the edit.

Who needs to provide sources?

It is accepted that the responsibility to provide sources lies with the editor who introduces the material.

Now on to your sources.

Your first source, the Rose foundation website seems to be heavily biased towards one side of the act and sources like this don’t follow our neutral point of view policy, it is known that all sources have some kind of bias. This particular source seems to be closely connected with the subject of the article, or their writing about it would have a significant conflict of interest would their writings appear on Wikipedia. Note that the foundation can write whatever they please about the act in the manner that suits them best.
Your second source appears to be a primary source since it is the government’s own website. It could be acceptable to use but it is iffy at best.

If you can find reliable, and secondary sources that support your changes, feel free to make them.

Some other points to note

We have a friendly place where new editors can ask for help, the teahouse. Check it out!
If somebody disagrees with you and reverts your edit, you should discuss with them. Do not revert their edit back because that is edit warring and that is not welcome here.
If you disagree with somebody, be civil and be polite and work out your differences with them. Wikipedia is not a place for grudges and battles.
Be bold! Don’t be afraid to edit!

I apologize for the delay in responding and don’t hesitate to let me know if you need anything else!

Cheers! Seawolf35 (talk - email) 21:58, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to review and explain things to me. I will definitely try to cite secondary sources going forward.

I also have an interest in learning more about achieving a more Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view for the CEQA article, which currently seems to present the widespread abuse of the law as a basic fact (in the top-level introduction), or at least treats this as the "majority view". Since this would involve a more detailed discussion of what is already published in the article, I guess I should take it to the talk page there, rather than asking you for more advice.

Is it a good practice to add discussion about WP:NPOV and WP:UNDUE on the talk page at the same time as, or before, submitting a new edit if that is the intent of the edit? Hobbes860 (talk) 02:23, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Editorwiikii001 (16:59, 29 October 2023)

Hi ZI Jony! I hope my message finds you well. Since I’m new to Wikipedia, I was wondering how I can best contribute to this diverse community, specially when it comes to misinformation published on certain pages.

Also some pages are semi or fully protected which prevent me from editing. What is the solution in such cases? --Editorwiikii001 (talk) 16:59, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Editorwiikii001, welcome to Wikipedia!. To start I suggest you look at the introduction page for new editors. Also, you might want to complete The Wikipedia Adventure which will help you learn the ropes of editing here.

Regarding your thought of misinformation on certain pages.

We have a policy prohibiting original research.
We have a policy that requires a neutral point of view.
A good amount of contentious topics are frequently challenged due to alleged "misinformation".
Be Bold! Don't be afraid to edit!

About pages being Protected.

For starters, read our protection policy, pages are often protected due to constant disruption and vandalism.
You will need certain access levels to edit certain pages.

See the welcome message I left on your talk page for more info.

Cheers, Seawolf35 (talk - email) 17:35, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Chuckeholm (22:01, 29 October 2023)

hi! i was a squid myself. how do i change slightly the title of my draft? --Chuckeholm (talk) 22:01, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chuckeholm Please see the answer you got at the help desk which says everything I would have said to answer your question. Thanks, Seawolf35 (talk - email) 01:18, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Showersdirect (12:02, 31 October 2023)

Hi been editing a few articles following the guidelines, just looking to know how I can create an article? --Showersdirect (talk) 12:02, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Showersdirect, welcome to Wikipedia!

If you would like to create a page, I would use the Article Wizard to do so and submit the draft to Articles for Creation.

Some points to note about creating a new page.

If you want to write about your company, as your username would suggest, please read our username policy and our guideline about having a conflict of interest with a subject you are writing about. Please also read WP:BOSS.
If you are paid to write about a subject, you MUST disclose your connection in line with the Terms of Use and the paid editing disclosure policy.
Make sure your topic is notable and passes our general notability guidelines.
Make sure your topic is covered is multiple reliable, and secondary sources that are independent of the subject.
Make sure to cite your sources in your draft.

For more info, see our help on creating your first article and general article creation info.

If you need anything else, please let me know!

Best, Seawolf35 (talk - email) 15:35, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November Articles for creation backlog drive

Hello Seawolf35:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 1300 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023 NPP backlog drive – Points award

	The Working Man's Barnstar
	This award is given to Seawolf35 for collecting more than 10 points during the October 2023 NPP backlog drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to the drive! Hey man im josh (talk) 02:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Niloofarkabir21 on Solidity (17:50, 2 November 2023)

سلام برای پول در آوردن باید چیکار کنم ؟؟؟ --Niloofarkabir21 (talk) 17:50, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Niloofarkabir21 I don't speak persain, you don't make money from editing wikipedia. You can find the persain wikipedia at fa.wikipedia.org Seawolf35 (talk - email) 17:58, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Hulapopper on Talk:Walton family (12:45, 8 November 2023)

I got a email saying I won an electric bike 2nd attempt, I try to click on it and it won't let me says site unsecured. Amen I getting the bike or is this a scam --Hulapopper (talk) 12:45, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Hulapopper Sir, this is wikipedia. not a social networking site. Seawolf35 (talk - email) 16:06, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, that is probably a scam. Seawolf35 (talk - email) 16:06, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Ccmo2023 (15:52, 10 November 2023)

how to publish an article? --Ccmo2023 (talk) 15:52, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ccmo2023 Hi, Inwoukd read the guidance at WP:YFA to get started. That says all I would say. Thanks, Seawolf35 (talk - email) 21:36, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Turtlepro22 (01:11, 12 November 2023)

Hey! I’m new to Wikipedia, I’ve edited a few articles before but forgot my account. I want to add a new article to Wikipedia about someone, can you help me? --Turtlepro22 (talk) 01:11, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Turtlepro22 In general I would submit a draft through the WP:AFC process. I would follow the guidance at WP:YFA. Make sure your topic is notable and more specifically take a look at WP:NPEOPLE. Make sure you don’t have a conflict of interest with the subject of the article. If you are being told to write about somebody it is strongly suggested that you don’t. Best, Seawolf35 (talk - email) 01:19, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Zethor270 (18:04, 15 November 2023)

hi Seawolf35,

how wold i possibly cite a source if the source came from somebody that i know in real life, and if i can even cite that source

all the best, zethor --Zethor270 (talk) 18:04, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Zethor270! I am not really sure what you are asking here, but if the source you are referring to is just word of mouth, that is not a valid source as that would be original research, which is not allowed of Wikipedia. We need to be able to verify what is said in articles with reliable sources which are reputable institutions, publishers, editorials, journals, etc. If it is a book you are referring to, you can use the {{cite book}} template to do so. For more information, see refrencing for beginners which has useful information about how to do citations and such. If you need anything else please let me know! Thanks, Seawolf35 (talk - email) 02:07, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

thanks! Zethor270 (talk) 18:16, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

< ref> and < /ref> issues

i am curretly having an issue where it says "there are extra < ref> tags in the citations section,but i have scoured the source editor, and there aren't any missing < ref> tags Zethor270 (talk) 04:49, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Zethor270 I found the issue and fixed it for you, see what I removed with [2]. It was 2 <ref></ref> tags right next to each other without anything in them.

P.S. - Given what has been said in the decline notices for the draft you are working on, I would look at the notability guidelines for schools and try to source the article better. Best, Seawolf35 (talk - email) 05:06, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for all the help!!! Zethor270 (talk) 16:41, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Zethor270 Your welcome! Seawolf35 (talk - email) 17:12, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your new signature

In your new signature, Seawolf35 ^T--C, it appears that you forgot to link to your own contributions. The link in your signature points to Special:Contributions, not Special:Contributions/Seawolf35. – dudhhr^talk_contribs^she_her 07:24, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DudhhrOops, need to stop editing when sleep deprived. Will fix it. Thanks! Seawolf35 ^T--C 13:31, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from O. Christopher kelechi on User:O. Christopher kelechi (20:10, 23 November 2023)

Hello please where can I upload an image of the person on my content when I want to publish a content --O. Christopher kelechi (talk) 20:10, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@O. Christopher kelechi You can make a request at WP:FFU. Seawolf35 ^T--C 23:41, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I need your help also to set citations. And other errors

Really its been over 48 hours and got exhausted too

Can you help me fix citations - I will appreciate it 🙂 seniors are here to help people like us. 182.190.213.219 (talk) 20:39, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there? I've seen your last message.

182.190.213.219 (talk) 21:51, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just logged in from my account.

Can you please help me fix some erorrs? Such as citations and referencing lines? SaneFlint (talk) 21:52, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @SaneFlint I will go ahead and try to fix some of the errors, give me a few minutes. Seawolf35 ^T--C 23:18, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Stradbach on Ivan Galamian (03:25, 25 November 2023)

How do I add notable student of Ivan Galamian

Eugene Sarbu --Stradbach (talk) 03:25, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Stradbach Hi, first you have to make sure they are actually notable. If you think they deserve their own article, please read your first article and get started using the article wizard. If not you can perhaps add them into the article you have mentioned under a new section or header. Best, Seawolf35 ^T--C 23:54, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He is of note he has been noted in the New York Times. He won the Paganini, the Carl flesh. He is a virtuoso prodigy, and he also has a wiki page. Eugene Sarbu is of note, and was a student at the time of Joshua Bell, and itzak perlman 2603:8001:2700:4650:E58C:2A57:EB73:2C26 (talk) 00:14, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from User81874761 (14:17, 26 November 2023)

How can make a image that displays which leagues the countries are playing in, like the map here: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3a/2024%E2%80%9325_UEFA_Nations_League_map.svg/800px-2024%E2%80%9325_UEFA_Nations_League_map.svg.png --User81874761 (talk) 14:17, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Geoff.W57 on HMS Leeds Castle (23:01, 28 November 2023)

How do you add a photo --Geoff.W57 (talk) 23:01, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Geoff.W57, you can get started at This page for help with Images with the visual editor. Best, Seawolf35 ^T--C 17:04, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Sista Prudy on Bunny Wailer (22:03, 29 November 2023)

Could you please help me edit --Sista Prudy (talk) 22:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]