User talk:Sylperson

Sylperson, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Sylperson! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Jtmorgan (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Sylperson! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Content Box, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:03, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of William Snakespeare and Bob Ross

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as William Snakespeare and Bob Ross, to Wikipedia. Doing so is considered vandalism and is prohibited. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. JJP...MASTER!_{[talk to] JJP... master?} 16:46, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Sylperson. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Scottish Young Labour, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. AllyD (talk) 07:16, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Removing posts left by others or responded to by others

Hi Slyperson. Even though you probably meant well, please don't remove questions you ask at noticeboards like the Teahouse once they have been responded to by other editors. Teahouse questions are automatically archived after a certain amount of time has passed; so, if your question has been answered and you need no further clarification, then just leave it be and it will be eventually removed from the main Teahouse page. The Teahouse is place where all kinds of people go to ask questions and often the answers given are beneficial to others who might be wondering about something similar. In addition, removing comments left in good-faith by others is generally frowned upon per Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Editing others' comments and can quickly lead to problems between editors when such a thing is done. You may remove certain comments left by others (like this one I'm leaving now) from your user talk page as explained here, but anything on noticeboards like the Teahouse or article talk pages left by others shouldn't be removed or edited no matter how good your intentions are unless there's a really good Wikipedia policy based reason for doing so. It's OK if you weren't aware of any of this, but try to avoid doing the same thing in the future. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editing

Hello Sylperson. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Sylperson. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Sylperson|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Theroadislong (talk) 22:22, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do not get paid to edit. Sylperson (talk) 21:54, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Scottish Young Labour. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 12:34, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template parameters

Hi Slyperson. The reason edits like this keep being reverted by others is because you're tyring to add invalid parameters to Template:Infobox political youth organization. A WP:TEMPLATE will only work as it has been set up to work and it will only work with the parameters defined on it's documentation page. So, the only parameters that work with this particular template are the ones listed here. If you don't use this parameters correcting (e.g. spelling, underscores), they will not work. If you try to make up your own parameters and add them to the template, they will not work. In other words, you can only use the paramters defined for the template. If you want the add new parameters to the template, you will need to make a request at Template talk:Infobox political youth organization and perhaps a WP:Template editor will be able to help you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:46, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple accounts

Perhaps due to your desire to try and make the edits listed above in #Template parameters, you either created another account or asked someone else to try and make the same edit. Please be very very careful in doing either of these two things as explained in WP:MULTIPLE, WP:SOCK and WP:MEAT because doing such a thing is one of the fastest ways to find yourself quickly and indefinitely WP:BLOCKed by an administrator, even without warning. If you didn't know any better and meant no harm, then fine; just do do it again and don't use any other accounts you might have created to make any edits at all related to Scottish Young Labour on any Wikipedia pages. Everyone's entitled to one mistake, but if it appears that there's any inappropriate editing going on involving multiple accounts from hereon, a formal request will be made to try and figure out what's going on. If you didn't create other accounts but are aware of others who might have created accounts specifically to try and help you edit Scottish Young Labour, then please pass along this information to them as well because they can be also blocked if administrtor feels they're being disruptive. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021

Hello, I'm Jdcomix. I noticed that in this edit to Alba Party, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jdcomix (talk) 20:11, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I’m so sorry I accidentally deleted the full page and I didn’t mean to. Sorry again Sylperson (talk) 20:12, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Scottish National Party, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 16:38, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm SmartyPants22. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Douglas Ross (Scottish politician), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SɱαɾƚყPαɳƚʂ22 (Ⓣⓐⓛⓚ) 19:28, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Pam Duncan-Glancy

The article Pam Duncan-Glancy has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:43, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Kenneth Duffy

Hello Sylperson,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Kenneth Duffy for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

HeinzMaster (talk) 21:20, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Monica Lennon.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Monica Lennon.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 01:45, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Monica Lennon.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Monica Lennon.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 06:52, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:MonicaLennon.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:MonicaLennon.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 00:00, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:MonicaLennon.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:MonicaLennon.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement of https://twitter.com/monicalennon7?lang=en. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Whpq (talk) 00:07, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Glasgow University Labour

Hello, Sylperson. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Glasgow University Labour, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:03, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Elsie Greenwood

Hello, Sylperson. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Elsie Greenwood, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:02, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Glasgow University Labour

Hello, Sylperson. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Glasgow University Labour".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:50, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Elsie Greenwood

Hello, Sylperson. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Elsie Greenwood".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:59, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dalziel High School

Please don't mention non-notable students by name. And please read WP:MINOR. Meters (talk) 04:40, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Repeatedly reverting AfD consensus decision

The Scottish Young Labour article was redirected as the consensus outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scottish Young Labour in March 2021. On March 11th and again today you have attempted to restore the prior article. Please don't do so again. AllyD (talk) 08:38, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is there no way to reinstate the article, Scottish Young Labour deserves its own page just as other youth groups in Scottish political parties such as the Young Scots for Independence (SNP). I’m not the best on Wikipedia that’s why I kept restoring the prior article without knowing better, so I was wondering if anyone else would be able to figure out a way to bring it back. Sylperson (talk) 02:54, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There would need to be reliable, third-party coverage specifically about Scottish Young Labour to demonstrate its notability. There was also a consensus to delete a former article on the other organisation that you mentioned: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Young Scots for Independence. AllyD (talk) 06:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RS needed

Hallo, Twitter is not a WP:RS and we cannot add Ashley Dalton's new post until it is reported in an independent, published, reliable source. All information in Wikipedia needs to be sourced to a RS, but information about living people doubly so. I'm not sure whether a shadow PPS appointment is considered major enough to go in an infobox: will look for comparable cases. PamD 18:29, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've found several examples of MPs who were PPS to a shadow team, like this, early in their career but it does not appear in their infbox. PPS to Leader of the Opposition does seem to be infobox-worthy. See Jess Phillips, Carolyn Harris, Jessica Morden, Lisa Nandy. PamD 18:36, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Unhealthy Club Tour, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scarborough. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]