User talk:KylieTastic

It is approximately 11:44 PM where this user lives (Cambridge, UK).

If you have a general question it may be quicker to ask at the Wikipedia:Teahouse or Click this to start a New Question here

AfC Drafts NOTE: To be fair to all submitters I do not review/re-review on request, I just pick new and old submissions at random... Current Backlog: 1,681 pending submissions

 

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/C PERUMAL EX MP)

Hello, KylieTastic,

I think you filed this under the wrong username. There has been User:C PERUMAL EX MP and User:Perumal.C Ex-Mp (both blocked) but no User:C PERUMAL EX MP). I'm not sure but you might be able to just move this SPI page to one of the other usernames rather than deleting and then recreating it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Yup @Liz, I missed the bracket on the end. Third stupid mistake of the day. Thanks for the heads-up. I tried to move and it says I don't have permissions, so I'll have to leave it for an admin. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:24, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-36

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

Weekly highlight

• Editors and volunteer developers interested in data visualisation can now test the new software for charts. Its early version is available on beta Commons and beta Wikipedia. This is an important milestone before making charts available on regular wikis. You can read more about this project update and help to test the charts.

Feature news

• Editors who use the Special:UnusedTemplates page can now filter out pages which are expected to be there permanently, such as sandboxes, test-cases, and templates that are always substituted. Editors can add the new magic word __EXPECTUNUSEDTEMPLATE__ to a template page to hide it from the listing. Thanks to Sophivorus and DannyS712 for these improvements. [1]
• Editors who use the New Topic tool on discussion pages, will now be reminded to add a section header, which should help reduce the quantity of newcomers who add sections without a header. You can read more about that, and 28 other community-submitted tasks that were resolved last week.
• Last week, some Toolforge tools had occasional connection problems. The cause is still being investigated, but the problems have been resolved for now. [2]
• Translation administrators at multilingual wikis, when editing multiple translation units, can now easily mark which changes require updates to the translation. This is possible with the new dropdown menu.

Project updates

• A new draft text of a policy discussing the use of Wikimedia's APIs has been published on Meta-Wiki. The draft text does not reflect a change in policy around the APIs; instead, it is an attempt to codify existing API rules. Comments, questions, and suggestions are welcome on the proposed update’s talk page until September 13 or until those discussions have concluded.

Learn more

• To learn more about the technology behind the Wikimedia projects, you can now watch sessions from the technology track at Wikimania 2024 on Commons. This week, check out:
  • Charts, the successor of Graphs - A secure and extensible tool for data visualization (25 mins) – about the above-mentioned Charts project.
  • State of Language Technology and Onboarding at Wikimedia (90 mins) – about some of the language tools that support Wikimedia sites, such as Content/Section Translation, MinT, and LanguageConverter; also the current state and future of languages onboarding. [3]

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

MediaWiki message delivery 01:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Jane Wills

okay, first hi

You rejected my draft of Jane Wills (New Zealand actor). i know that you just did your job. But i worked more than 12 hours on that article. Iam not asking to review my request again but i ask you for help, help with my article, that the draft is good enouhg for public. thanks for giving respons Kaat2005 (talk) 18:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Kaat2005, sorry yes it's a fundamental problem with the idea that anyone can edit and submit a draft with no prior knowledge of the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia. I personally think anyone should have a minimum number of edits or have gone though some quiz or something so that they understand the key requirement of nobility (See WP:N). It would save a lot of disappointment and I can sympathise with you spending many hours on something to only later find key requirements. I will note that it may be that sources do exist to show she is notable per Wikipedia guidelines, but I did google and could not see enough, so it may just be WP:TOOSOON. If I, or any other reviewer, did accept it there are multiple people reviewing all new accepts and it would almost certainly to be soon flagged for deletion. If you can't find multiple independent reliable sources with significant coverage the best thing is to leave it for now. In most cases drafts are only deleted after 6 months of no edits so if in the next five months you find more sources appear you can update and resubmit. I know it's not what wanted to hear but this is why Fandom (website) exist, for subjects that are not yet encyclopedic notable enough for here but have enough fans to have a fandom page. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 18:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

The Harveys and the Klan

I see in the article William West Harvey that you wrote some time ago that he and his brother A. M. Harvey were thought to be in the Klan. But when I looked at the reference given, the snippets of the book that were available looked ambiguous to me, or perhaps even indicating that the Harveys were opponents of the Klan. Do you have access to the full text of the book, and does it really indicate they were likely Klansmen? It seems a little unlikely given that Alexander Harvey at least worked on a prominent free speech case, but there certainly were a lot of Klansmen back then.Brianyoumans (talk) 21:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Brianyoumans, google books has a very annoying feature: if you search direct it will often show a complete page but when you link it then hide some or all of the page. If you go to the search results in books for '"W. W. Harvey" Klansmen' this should work you get a result of the book page 101. If you select that you should be able to read the complete page and the start of the chapter on page 100. It documents the at the time the Klan was pulling in lots of office holders. When you see the restricted version I agree the "opponents" word is in unclear context, but in the full text its clear the word is in reference to T. A. Powell and Louis S. Harvey being Democrats. However, it does look like I misread this and it was just listing the brothers of Louis S. Harvey to show he was from a "prominent political family". They could have been members as well, but a lot of the office holders kept it on the down-low, but others clearly get called member in the newspapers of the day like it's no big deal. I did a search of the contemporary news and could not find any sources to say he agreed or disagreed with his brother (294 pages mention "W. W. Harvey" and the Klan in Kansas, so I didn't read them all). Thanks for flagging the issue, I've corrected my mistake in the article. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 08:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up! Yeah, using stuff on Google Books and other limited access sites can be a little dicey. And sometimes someone calls me on something I wrote years ago and I'm like, why did I put that in? Even if I did source it properly, which I am not always perfect about. The Harvey brothers were all successful politicians of the time, but I don't get the impression they worked closely together, so maybe the Klan influence didn't pervade the family. Brianyoumans (talk) 14:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I am not sure

Hello, i just got a notification form you but i am unsure what it says or means, i am sorry please could you explain, Thanks SwimmersSocial (talk) 12:13, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes i have used AI to write it but i have also sent it to Jon and he has confirmed and made a few edits towards it so it is fully clear and correct, Thanks SwimmersSocial (talk) 12:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

• Hi SwimmersSocial, firstly don't get AIs to generate articles, they often make things up (See Hallucination (artificial intelligence)), they also tend to write in a less formal encyclopedic style and also they do not reference things properly. Secondly, you say you asked Jon so assuming that is the subject you have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest - you need to read that policy and noting the mandatory requirement to disclose connections (see WP:DISCLOSE). Finally, all new articles on Wikipedia have to show the subject is notable (See WP:N) which in most cases requires significant coverage (WP:SIGCOV) in multiple independent (WP:INDY) reliable sources (WP:RS). You have no sources, and as an encyclopedia we care about what independent sources say about a subject not what they say about themselves. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 12:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)