This is an archive of past discussions with User:Politanvm. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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.
Hello, I noticed you made reversions for Nico Tortorella that now contains several instances of pronoun-antecedent disagreement. Shouldn't this be reviewed neutrally by several editors? As it is now the article is riddled with errors. Thank you. RedEchidna (talk) 08:10, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Sorry I just saw your other response, but I hope writing here will be OK too. How is pronoun-antecedent disagreement acceptable on Wikipedia? I think this reflects poorly on the reliability here. Is subject-verb disagreement also acceptable? Also, are these not encyclopedic entries? An encyclopedia is a neutral source of information. How can subjectivity take precedence over neutrality and objectivity? Thank you RedEchidna (talk) 08:32, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
I am creating a Wikipedia Page for a University professor from whom I got permission to use the same introduction paragraph as appears on the University website. While it got removed by Wikipedia due to the "copyright violation" problem. In this case, what do you suggest me to do to solve the problem? From User talk:Jmei9wsb
Hi Jmei9wsb, in general, all content on Wikipedia should be paraphrased in the editor's own words from reliable secondary sources, and that would be the best way to draft this article. There are limited cases where copying and pasting text directly is acceptable (see WP:COPYPASTE), but it requires an explicit license for the content to be used freely (not just by Wikipedia, but by anybody, for any purpose). Even if the text is freely licensed, it's often not written in an encyclopedic way appropriate for Wikipedia. However, there may be a few other issues with the draft that may make it unsuitable to move from draft format to a published article:
Potential conflict of interest: You mention that you know the subject of the article. If you have a close association with them, you may have a conflict of interest. If you have a CoI, it's typically okay to edit a draft article, but I recommend reviewing some of the advice for editors with CoIs (WP:PLAINANDSIMPLECOI).
High dependence on self-published sources: Many of the sources on the article are published by the subject themselves. Articles should be based primarily on reliable secondary sources.
Notability: If there is little written about the subject in secondary sources, they may not be notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Specifically, read through the notability guidelines for professors (WP:NPROF) to make sure this subject meets the criteria. It's pretty easy for professors to meet them, so it may not be an issue, but it could help the draft qualify for a published article.
Hi Politanvm, I hope you are having a good day. Recently, I made to the article "Quran and Miracles", and added this piece of info:
"However, Muslim commentators and scholars have criticized conclusions made by critics without the use of contextual evidence."
You reverted my edit because of "good faith", and no source. However, this statement is factual, as critics have actually been refuted by Islamic scholars, commentators, and the common people. You can find many articles like "http://quran-errors.blogspot.com/p/blog-page_28.html" that refute critics because of the lack of context. I do not think that I can just provide one source for a statement like this because it would not make sense. If you can elaborate as to why my edit was removed, I would appreciate it.
Also, I have found out that I was reported by you for edit warring, which I had no idea about. I found this rule:
"An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period"
I do admit that I probably broke this rule many times because of article imperfections. It is my fault for not reading the rule, and I apologize for that. I have definitely learned that I made a lot of mistakes, and I will not repeat this again. Thank you for bringing this to my attention.
Sincerely,
Schoudhury3
Hi Schoudhury3, I reverted that edit because it didn’t have any citation for the claim. I marked it as an revert of a good faith edit to acknowledge that your edit wasn’t vandalism or disruptive. It’s important that everything on Wikipedia is attributed to a reliable source, otherwise there’s no way for readers to know that it is factual. Also, make sure you add sources that specifically say what you’re adding. For instance, if you say “many people have criticized” then you need to provide a source that says that. If you’re just talking about a few critics, it’s better to name them to avoid being vague. Also, blogs are not typically reliable and verifiable sources because they are self-published.
Where are you seeing that you were reported for edit warring? I’ve just left the welcome message on your talk page. Also you can sign your talk page comments by typing “~~~~”. Best, POLITANVMtalk00:49, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Politanvm. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Foxgluvv, 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.
Hello there, you recently denied an edit on the "Scambaiting" page due to me removing content just because I don't agree with it. I do agree with most of the article, however, when that article was first written, scambaiting was a lot different and more toxic, thus the comment about racism. However, few scambaiters (if any) are racist today and this article shames the entire scambaiting community, a community already riddled with arguments and battles. I'd like to see my edit added to the page. Thanks! Zachinquarantine (talk) 01:35, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Zachinquarantine, it's probably best to make the case for removing that content at Talk:Scam baiting, where other editors interested in the article can weigh in as well, particularly those that have already discussed the content in dispute. Nonetheless, there are a few reasons I've restored the content:
It appears to be well-sourced, with five different sources. I don't have access to all of the full texts, but it does seem that there's a verifiable racist implication in some scam baiting. To help your case for removing the content, you'll want to demonstrate either that the sources are not reliable, and/or that the sources are saying something different than what the Wikipedia article says.
Wikipedia aims to provide "a long-term, historical view," (WP:RECENTISM) so your claim that racism is no longer related to scam baiting doesn't support removing it altogether. Instead, perhaps it should be re-written to reflect that the nature of scam baiting has changed, if that's what more recent reliable sources say.
Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy requires that articles neutrally summarize how subjects are described in reliable sources, and that viewpoints are presented in similar proportion to how they're discussed in reliable sources (WP:DUE). In this case, the article has very little weight on racism, and is already very hedged ("some are motivated by racism"), and the next sentence says that a major scam baiting website bans racism. So it doesn't seem the article as written shames the entire scam baiting community.
The Wikimedia LGBTQ+ User Group is holding online working days in May. As a member of WikiProject LGBT studies, editing on LGBTQ+ issues or if you identify as part of the LGBTQ+ community, come help us set goals, develop our organisation and structures, consider how to respond to issues faced by Queer editors, and plan for the next 12 months.
We will be meeting online for 3 half-days, 14–16 May at 1400–1730 UTC. While our working language is English, we are looking to accommodate users who would prefer to participate in other languages, including translation facilities.
The changes made to the page are reverted. We have strong reasons to believe that this page is being managed by one or many, like many others of course, for personal interests. The previous editions of these pages are backed up and escalated for further scrutiny. Rawwbots (talk) 17:27, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi @Rawwbots, please be careful about following Wikipedia’s policies. In particular, please avoid edit warring, where you repeatedly revert to your preferred version. Even if you believe your preferred version is correct, edit warring is not a productive way to have it included, and is likely to lead to a block for disruptive editing. Your responses at Talk:Lil Nas X aren’t showing you understand the purpose of Wikipedia, or the reasons that @Bbb23 reverted your edits.
I’m not sure if you’re using “we” to mean you as a singular person, but please note that Wikipedia:Username policy prohibits accounts shared between more than one person.
Hello saw comments on my edits Please how do my edits less than neutral and is there a preference for references over external links?--Zend2020 (talk) 04:26, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your observations neutrality is subjective in this case and can be validated with facts but I choose to sit this one out, on the question of links to sites that again is not cast in stone because if the function of adding external links is totally second class ,unnecessary, outlived its purpose I figure the able Tech Wiki will do away with it. Many Thanks for your observations--Zend2020 (talk) 02:52, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
WHOIS Edits
Hi Politanvm, I didn't intend to spam, but I figured that if links to commercial serivces like https://whoisfreaks.com/ and https://www.whoxy.com/ were acceprable, then a link to a non-commercial service like https://ip-checker.info/ would be even more appropriate. I saw today that you have removed all other links as well, and this seems logical to me. Even though a link to a non-commercial an user friendly tool wouldn't be completely off topic. ;-) Anyways, have a nice day, and Greetings from Berlin! KastoB (talk) 09:15, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Sorry about that. It looked like the edit was only partially complete, and didn’t really make sense: … when told by a psychiatrist that she needed a theme so g.POLITANVMtalk13:26, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thank you for defending Wikipedia against vandalism and disruptive individuals. You deserve this barnstar! Jerm (talk) 01:26, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
That makes sense - thanks for letting me know. Seemed like a sock, but I’m not familiar with all the LTAs. And congrats on admin. I really appreciate the quick responses to vandalism and RPP. POLITANVMtalk06:05, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Politanvm, no problem. We don't usually give warnings to LTAs since that violates WP:DENY and they are just here to get seek attention. Thank you for congratulating me, I hope to do my best to deal with the vandals. I hope you have a great week. Ashleyyoursmile!06:14, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello. When you revert edits, please make sure you really revert the edits. Do not just revert the last edit in a series of edits, as you did in your edit in List of newspapers in Bangladesh, as that's almost certainly not what you intended. You should always check the article's page history to see how deep the revert has to be. When you're dealing with IP hoppers, using Twinkle doesn't work and you have to restore the last clean version manually. Thanks.—J. M. (talk) 14:31, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello Politanvm, thankyou for showing interest to correct me in image policy of Wikipedia, as you check I'm new Wikipedia user and not so much have experience about how and what picture to use without copyrighted, I had removed the copyrighted images from artist article page but images is still live on Wikipedia commons page I want to know how can I remove images from wikimedia commons, thankyou for your interest. Arbaazmu.4 (talk) 08:12, 18 July 2021 (UTC)arbaazmu.4
Thank you dear for your interest in my edits. I appreciate your constructive words.
My edits are not my opinion, they are words that come directly by the will and hand of the subjects. In that case of all World Peace Ambassadors the information is NOT completed for them, they are required to complete it themselves for accuracy and sincerity purposes.
The Words and titles attributed to both Sandgaard and Veronika are their words and their provided information. WPT is a reliable source of information.
Their perspective profile pages are here where they provide us with their private phone number and details.
Hi @Yosefyomtov, welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for leaving this message. I understand this is an important topic, and appreciate your good faith efforts to contribute to this encyclopedia. Unfortunately, these edits disregard a number of Wikipedia policies and guidelines.
Conflict of Interest guideline: I see your username matches a director at the World Peace Tract. If you are a director of the organization, you have a conflict of interest regarding that organization and its members. Instead of continuing to add this information, you should disclose your COI, avoid editing these articles directly, and propose changes on the Talk page (as I see you’ve done at Talk:Veronika, though it should be at Talk:Veronika (Ukrainian singer))
Verifiability policy and Reliable sources guideline: Content on Wikipedia must be cited with reliable published sources (like a reputable newspaper). Self-published sources (I.e., social media posts, self-written profiles) are not typically reliable sources. Self-published sources are only acceptable in limited cases (see WP:ABOUTSELF).
External links guideline: Articles should have limited external links, and shouldn’t have links to every social media profile of a subject.
Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion (“What Wikipedia is not” policy): Your edits so far seem to be promoting World Peace Tracts and its members, rather than adding encyclopedic content. While it may be in a good faith effort to improve Wikipedia’s summary of these people, it still comes across as promotion, and is unlikely to stay on Wikipedia.
I hope this a helpful summary of some key Wikipedia guidelines and policies. I hope you’ll read through these and continue to contribute to Wikipedia about topics where you do not have a conflict of interest. Myself and other editors you’ll interact with are doing our best to create an excellent free encyclopedia, the these guidelines are an important way to make sure Wikipedia achieves this mission. Best, POLITANVMtalk13:39, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
help Hello i am Niccky monas a newly Wikipedian, i want you Admins and checkusers to complete a Draft Article i was creating, i coudn't complete it because i lack some knowledge in completing it here is the name of the Draft: "Draft:Dc Themmie (Musician)"105.112.108.194 (talk) 01:38, 1 August 2021 (UTCNiccky monas (talk) 01:53, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi @Niccky monas, welcome again to Wikipedia. If you haven’t already seen it, Help:Your first article, is a great guide for getting started with new articles. For this draft, the subject likely doesn’t qualify for an article, because they don’t appear to be notable. Wikipedia only has articles about subjects that are covered by multiple reliable sources. See Wikipedia:Notability (people) for more about determining whether a person is notable enough to have their own article.
Writing a new article from scratch is difficult, particularly for new editors. You may find it easier to start by editing existing articles, then create new articles once you’re more familiar with Wikipedia. Help:Getting started has some more resources for new users.
Let me know if you have any questions, and I hope you continue to contribute to Wikipedia! Also, as a note, I am not an admin. POLITANVMtalk02:15, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
Nicky, please read the above message. While he may be your favorite artist, he doesn’t qualify for a Wikipedia article. POLITANVMtalk02:51, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi. If several IP addresses from a certain IP range have been making disruptive edits for a long period of time, then can a block be imposed on that IP range? Several edits by different IP addresses from this IP range have been reverted by other editors, including you. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 01:56, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi @LSGH, range blocks are possible, but I’m not an admin, so I’m not certain what the criteria are. Generally, I know admins try to avoid blocking very large ranges (especially if there are some constructive edits from the range), plus the usual hesitancy to block an IP for long durations unless there’s a very high volume of disruptive edits. Someone at WP:ANI might be able to help. POLITANVMtalk02:43, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. I am trying my best to avoid that venue because reports there can backfire. Just recently, someone was partially blocked from editing that page for one month because he made several erroneous reports. If more disruption happens again, then I might report the IP range. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 01:20, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, makes sense. It probably isn’t worth it for this range anyway. There’s only a few reverts every few days, so that should be manageable, and it looks like many of the edits from that range are good faith. POLITANVMtalk01:29, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Politanvm. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Foxgluvv".
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.
We have published our first document about the first feature: event registration. You can find the document on Meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Campaigns/Foundation_Product_Team/Registration . We provided first responses to initial feedback last week. If you responded before, consider reviewing the talk page and adding to the conversation.
We had several presentations at Wikimania:
Ilana Fried presented the Campaign Product team as part of a larger conversation about Wikimedia Foundation Product Strategy. Campaigns product start at 18:12 time:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57GzJ4GEvCQ&t=1103
What is next? At the office hours, we will share our first version of the designs for the Registration feature, and be asking for feedback. Additionally we will be onboarding our engineering team who will be building the registration feature.
Why is the character "Tyler Reks" (professional wrestler) referred to as 'she', but the character "Juno MacGuff" from the film Juno not referred to as 'he'? Tewdar (talk) 17:53, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi Tewdar, I’m not an expert in professional wrestling, so I’ll defer to whatever consensus is reached at Talk:Gabbi Tuft, but my general take would be that that Juno is clearly a character played by an actor who has had multiple roles, while Tyler Reks is a persona or stage name of Gabbi Tuft, and it is harder to draw the line between the person and the persona (hence there being one Wikipedia article about both the person and the persona). I think the main question is whether we can separate Gabbi and Tyler, rather than comparing to Elliot Page.
Hello, Politanvm. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Casa Ruby, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Hi,
Recently you removed content from Perawat Sangpotirat and Prachaya Ruangroj without explaining why. Please don’t do that. This’s good information to search in the future. Thank! Sheilalee2009 (talk) 23:47, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi Sheilalee, do you mean the edits removing Fanmeeting sections from articles? I explained briefly in my edit summaries, but to elaborate, there are two main issues I see with that section:
The section seems trivial. Nearly every celebrity will do dozens or hundreds of meet-and-greets. Listing all of them out might be appropriate for a fan site, but it’s an excessive amount of detail for an encyclopedia.
Hi Politanvm,
I've added sources already but Wiki didn't allow ??? You said "it’s an excessive amount of detail for an encyclopedia" so you should view wiki of Metawin Opas-iamkajorn, it has all information detail include liveshow, events, fanmeeting ???? So should you remove content like you do with wiki of Perawat Sangpotirat ? Please asap, thank ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheilalee2009 (talk • contribs) 03:04, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi Sheilalee, thanks for replying. A few thoughts:
Very few things on Wikipedia need to happen ASAP. There is no deadline, so it’s okay for us to take time to discuss and revise articles. It’s a normal part of improving Wikipedia.
I wouldn’t consider Metawin Opas-iamkajorn to be an great example of an ideal Wikipedia article. It has similar issues of excessive content that seems written for a fan base, rather than for an encyclopedia. It lists many awards that don’t seem to be notable. But there are millions of articles on Wikipedia, and nobody can fix all of them. Also, just because one article is written a certain way doesn’t mean every article needs to be written the same way.
If you’re having trouble using citations, Help:Referencing for beginners may help you. I did see links to YouTube and other social media, but those should almost always be avoided. Social media is not a reliable source. See WP:Reliable sources for the full guideline.
Perhaps others would agree that Fan-meetings are noteworthy and due to be included. If you want to discuss improvements to articles, you can do that on the articles talk pages. That way, other people can weigh in. I don’t own any of these articles, so if the community consensus agrees that Fan-meetings should be included, then they will be.
And as one final note, please keep in mind that I am just one volunteer editor among thousands, doing what I believe best follows Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines. Politanvmtalk04:02, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Campaigns Product Update #2
Hello Campaigns Product Newsletter subscribers! We are excited to share our updates:
Request for Feedback: We have shared our project principles, wireframes for the desktop version, and open questions for you about the team’s event registration project. See the latest status updates here.
Wireframes are design tools that imagine the future interface of the software. We haven’t built anything yet. We need your feedback on these designs so that we can make better product decisions. You can give feedback on the talk page regarding the design and features of the wireframes. We would love to hear your comments to help us establish the next necessary steps for the project.
Presentations: The Campaign Product team participated in WikiArabia 2021 and WikiConference North America 2021 to give a brief introduction on how the team works. Senior Program Strategist Alex Stinson gave an overview about campaigns and how we can scale the organizing experience within the Movement. Senior Product Manager Ilana Fried gave an introduction about the Product Team and the project wireframes of the first campaign software solution: the on-wiki registration tool. View the recorded presentation here.
Team update: We have hired our first team engineer, JCarvalho and our campaign organizing fellow, IBrazal. Newsletter updates will be done by IBrazal and she will be coordinating with you! We hope to have the rest of the engineering team onboard soon! For those of who missed the last Campaign Office Hour, you may watch the recording to know more about the Campaign Product Team.
What is next?
Testers Needed! We will be partnering with YUX, a design research agency, to learn how our team can improve the experience of Wikimedia campaign organizers and participants in Africa. For this reason, we are looking for community members who are willing to be part of the rapid testing sessions. Preferably, we want organizers and editors who have worked in an African context. If you would like to participate in testing, please email ibrazal-ctrwikimedia.org.
Upcoming Conferences. Wiki Indaba 2021. This year, the conference will be held virtually on November 5-7, 2021 with the theme "Rethink + Reset : Visions of the future". Read more about the conference here or register to join the event. We will be presenting the registration features on Sunday November 7.
We will also be attending Wikimedia CEE Online Meeting 2021, which will be held virtually again this year on November 5-7, 2021. We will be presenting the registration tool on November 6 as part of our communication and sharing process.
Translation Support. We are also beginning to translate the updates on Registration. If you think your language community would benefit from updates, please translate here.
Invite other organizers to subscribe to this newsletter for updates!
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.
On-wiki Registration Wireframes (Request for Feedback)
Hello!
We are very excited to share with you the wireframes for the desktop version of the On-Wiki Registration Tool. Feel free to share your feedback on this update. Results of these feedback will help determine the next steps we take. Thank you in advance!
"I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Analytical psychology have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. Politanvm talk 18:48, 3 January 2022 (UTC)"
Latest revision as of 18:48, 3 January 2022 (edit) (thank)
Politanvm (talk | contribs)
(General note: Adding inappropriate external links on Analytical psychology.)
It would be most helpful to know which specific links were removed and why precisely "They seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia."
A clarification of the message sent to me would be greatly apprecakted.
Hi Mr. Purrington, the only link you've added to Wikipedia is for a blog about Carl Jung, for which you appear to be the only author. The External links guideline I linked to in my message explains in more depth, but two specific parts to be mindful of are:
WP:ADV: In line with Wikipedia policies, you should avoid linking to a site that you own, maintain, or represent—even if Wikipedia guidelines seem to imply that it may otherwise be linked.
WP:NOBLOGS: Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject, one should generally avoid providing external links to: ... 11. Blogs, personal web pages and most fansites (negative ones included), except those written by a recognized authority.
Please let me know if you have any questions about this guideline, and I hope you'll continue to contribute to Wikipedia. If you're interested in getting more involved, I find Help:Introduction to be a useful tutorial. Best, Politanvmtalk20:53, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Woodland Grey Changes
Recently you deleted quotes on the woodland grey page from blogs reviews but kept the review from one blog. Can you explain the difference? Why delete only the smaller reviews? I think they should be put back or remove all of them. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nerdcolony (talk • contribs) 18:33, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Nerdcolony, there are a couple of Wikipedia guidelines I would look to about whether to include a particular review:
WP:USERGENERATED: The Reliable source guidelines don't generally consider user generated sources, like blogs to be reliable.
In this case, Rue Morgue seems to be notable (as evidenced by it having a Wikipedia article) and fairly reputable for horror commentary.
That said, I'm just one volunteer contributor, and other people might disagree. If you'd like to start a discussion about including the other blog reviews, you can do so at Talk:Woodland Grey, making sure to back your argument up with Wikipedia guidelines and policies. If you start a discussion there and nobody seems to be engaging with it, you might want to cross-post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film to solicit additional feedback.
Just a head's up, I declined your request to protect the talk page of this article, simply because the main article is (unsurprisingly) protected, and there needs to be a way of people adding good-faith edit requests. I've blocked a couple of the recent POV pushers and redacted their edit summaries with obvious spam links, which should hopefully calm things down a bit. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)19:00, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, i guess it was a mistake because the link i inserted there was relevant. You can check yourself as well. It has a recent information about sublimation printing.
I would really like to add the link where it was, it surely will help the users.
My Reply:
Sure, your words makes sense. But its not about my personal site, its about users value addition. I also have multiple articles that are written by the experts and after the research. So it can help the user in my opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.127.94.78 (talk) 05:43, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
Perhaps you could encourage those experts to join Wikipedia and write here, while citing reliable sources and following the tutorial at Help:Introduction. There’s not much else to discuss. Spamming your website is unambiguously a violation of WP:RS and WP:ELNO. Politanvmtalk13:40, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
Police abolition movement in Minneapolis
I corrected information on the Police Abolition Movement in Minneapolis and removed slanted information but you said you undid what I did. Why did you do what you did? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.153.53.19 (talk) 04:11, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi, looking through many of the changes you made, they were interpretations and commentary that weren't in the cited sources. Make sure that anything you're adding is a straightforward summary of reliable sources without editorializing. See WP:RS and WP:NPOV for more information. Also, please be sure to provide edit summaries. Best, Politanvmtalk04:59, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Where are inappropriate links?
Hi user, kindly check the links before commenting. All of the information updated is correct. So before doing any change must check.
It was an edit that was supposed to remove an “S” from an incorrect location, but somehow ended up rolling back your edits as a result of the edits being pushed at nearly the exact same time — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShibAlpaca (talk • contribs) 23:31, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Proposal to create new namespaces: We have proposed to create two namespaces, which are “Event” and “Event talk.” This way, we can easily create an Event Center that pulls data from event pages. This Event Center may include tools to create event pages with registration support, a calendar of events, and event statistics, among other features. More importantly, the Event Center will highlight organizing as an essential part of the Wikimedia movement. Please give us feedback on Phabricator or Meta about our proposal to create two new namespaces.
Engineering updates: We are excited that we have finished hiring for our engineering team! Three engineers and an engineering manager have joined our team since our last update. In the last few months, they have conducted technical planning and launched the building phase of the project. They are now building the registration tool. You can see the updated team on meta.
Design updates: We conducted usability tests with a small group of testers for early feedback on the desktop wireframes. After collecting this feedback, we have developed a new version for desktop wireframes, which will be ready to share in the next few weeks. These desktop wireframes display the user flow of two experiences: one for organizers who want to add registration to their event pages, and another for participants who want to register for an event. Additionally, the design team is also currently working on the first version of mobile wireframes, which will be shared during the next office hour.
2. Leave us some feedback on the desktop wireframes. Note that we haven’t posted the newest version of the desktop wireframes on the project page yet, but we will soon (and you can feel free to add feedback on any version you have seen).
Ambassador updates: Three product ambassadors for the Arabic, French and Swahili communities have now joined our team! They will help us collect feedback from Wikimedia communities about the project and understand the needs of organizers, through gathering first-hand information. These ambassadors are immersed as actual members of these communities, so they will also help us identify the needs of the organizers in our pilot communities. The ambassadors are: M. Bachounda for Arabic communities, Georges Fodouop for French communities, and Antoni Mtavangu for Swahili communities.
What is next?
Next Office Hour: We will be holding an office hour on March 31, 2022 at 15:00 UTC, which will be conducted via Zoom. We invite everyone to attend, and we really hope to see you! The focus will be on the Registration Tool. The team will also be providing community updates on the usability test findings and design highlights for the wireframes. We will also share our current Project timeline and answer any questions you may have. Join us and share your thoughts on these developments!
In a few months, we are expecting to have the early testable version of the tool. By then, the team will be doing the first round of general testing and gathering feedback. We are looking forward to adding more features on the tool such as communication support, potentially by the end of this year. If you know other organizers that might be interested in following these developments, please recommend that they subscribe to the newsletter. We want to receive as much feedback as we can.
Campaign Product Team Office Hour - March 31, 2022
Hello Campaign Product Newsletter subscribers!
The Campaign Product Team will be hosting the next office hour to share exciting updates on the Registration Tool and new proposed namespaces for events. We will also be sharing community updates on the usability tests and design highlights of the latest mobile and desktop wireframes.
Join us and share your thoughts on these developments!
The IP you just reverted is a persistent IP sock vandal targeting me. Please expect more vandalism on Colorado. I apologize for bringing this on to the page. ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:03, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
Event Registration Tool: Demo and Invitation to Test
Hello Subscribers!
The Campaigns Product Team from the Wikimedia Foundation will be hosting two office hours to demo the new Event Registration Tool, and train organizers how to use it. In these office hours, you will learn how to:
Create an event page in the new event namespace (as an event organizer)
Enable registration on your event page (as an event organizer)
Collect data on who registered for your event (as an event organizer)
Register for an event on the event page (as an event participant)
You can attend one office hour or both, depending on your availability on the following dates:
Session 1: Thursday, July 21, 2022 at 5:00 PM UTC
Session 2: Saturday, July 23, 2022 at 12:00 PM UTC
These events will be multilingual, with live interpretations in Arabic, English, French, Italian, and Portuguese, and Swahili. Note that Portuguese will be available on the 21st, but not the 23rd. We strongly encourage you to join and share your feedback on the tool. Your feedback will help us improve the tool so that Wikimedians can have a better event experience. To register, please reply to this email or sign-up to our page, by adding your signature.
Thanks for your good work on Creation science. That was a mess. I don't think the editor has found their talk page, so if this continues I might have to do a temporary block, that usually works. Doug Wellertalk08:51, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Politanvm. Thanks for the message you sent. I'm new to this, but your message said the page I'm building in my Sandbox "seem[s] to be advertising or for promotional purposes" which isn't correct. I'm just creating an informational page about a company I've been researching. I assume this was an automated message and I'm free to carry on? Thanks.Delirious4museli (talk) 04:10, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Delirious4museli, thanks for the message. I left the note on your talk page because the article you’re drafting has some similarities to the types of promotional articles that I often see. If you don’t have any conflict of interest with the company (see WP:COI), then I would suggest confirming that the company meets the notability guidelines for companies (see WP:NCORP. I don’t want you to potentially waste your time writing an article for a company that isn’t notable enough to have an article. Help:Your first article is also a great resource for getting started. Let me know if you have any questions. Best, Politanvmtalk04:30, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi, thanks very much for the help. I've read through the notability guidelines for companies as advised, and I have no conflict of interest with the company. They just seemed to be appearing in a lot of the academic articles I had read, and then I found some other interesting sources about their innovations, so I thought it might be worthwhile to make an article (and learn Wikipedia!). I'm learning to navigate the help pages too, but if I have any questions, I'll let you know. Thanks again! Delirious4museli (talk) 14:06, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Campaigns Product Update #4
Hello Campaigns Product Newsletter subscribers!
We are excited to share our updates:
Event Registration v0
We have successfully launched Event Registration tool V0 on beta cluster and collected feedback from the first batch of testers. This tool is part of a more comprehensive organizing solution, the Event Center, which hopes to support movement organizers. Through this registration solution, organizers can collect useful data on campaign participants and their needs while respecting participant privacy.
Testing update. In our first round of feedback collection, testers were composed of different types of organizers around the movement with a language focus on Arabic, French, English, and Swahili communities. Most of the testers successfully created their test event registrations and signed up for a test event registration created by other organizers. Simple, easy to use, and aids in managing event participants were the common feedback we received from first-time users. In contrast, access and proper localization of the tool were the points for improvement identified. We are working on V1, which will include communication support and integration with the Programs and Event Dashboard. This will be released on Meta-Wiki soon. We hope to address accessibility during this launch and improve localization problems once the tool has been deployed in local wikiprojects.
Looking for a way to learn how to effectively organize around sustainability? Join the beta version of the Organizer Lab on WikiLearn to understand how to effectively organize a global campaign around sustainability and climate change! Applications are open from September 22 - October 19, 2022. The Organizer Lab will be a 9-week online learning experience from the end of October until mid December that prepares participants to obtain knowledge about the topics that they wish to create, a call to action for strategic knowledge gaps, as well as more generalized Wikimedia organizing and campaign/event design skills.
Organizer User Rights. We are reaching out to a pool of administrators from Arabic, French and Swahili communities to collect feedback on what is the best way to define organizer user rights, what privileges to give to community organizers, and what are the limitations of these privileges. Feel free to reach out to our product ambassadors or send an email to ibrazal-ctr@wikimedia.org if you are interested to be part of these conversations.
Community Feedback:
"Participants have been always asking the organizers are asked by participants whether they are registered, now participants will just look directly if they are registered, Thank you for creating the system" - French Organizer
“I think that the platform will facilitate the process of promoting events and searching for participants” - Arabic Organizer
Respectfully, all of these have been trivially easy to fix, and would take little to no extra time above and beyond what you've been doing. Please just fix refs when you find they are incorrect. These emails in refs are clearly not violations of WP:NOTDIRECTORY, because they are clearly not intended as A resource for conducting business. As many people have explained you're not improving the encyclopedia by removing the emails without actually fixing the references. You are spending more time arguing and edit warring than it would take to just fix the issues. Politanvmtalk01:44, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
For me it takes up to 100-200 times more time then just deleting email. So i think it mostly better for every editor would do things he can do much faster then others, and not mix everything to one saucepan... As of 'not intended' - you chosen wrong ponit to see at - try simple listings... Also there's a huge amount of criteria why email can't be published is wikipedia is not intended for advertising - nor companies nor editors nor citation content authors, as writing news etc. is also business authors being paid for - so publishing authors' emails is their business advertising and taking in view Wikipedia is not intended for business advertising email publishing as one as other contact information is obviously prohibited. I just wanted to tell you thanks for doing fixes. And you started that mess. I don't understand why do you need it. 85.238.101.64 (talk) 03:00, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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.
In V1, the following new features will be includedː
Support for the organizer to specify an event timezone
Automatic confirmation emails after participants have registered
Private registration: the option for participants to register and only display their registered username to organizers of the event and we will teach you how you can use it yourself.
Office Hour Sessions:
1st Session: December 5, 2022 @ 18:00 UTC via Zoom
2nd Session: December 10, 2022 @ 12:00 UTC via Zoom
These office hours will be multilingual, with live interpretations in Arabic, English, French, and Swahili. Email us @ ibrazal-ctr@wikimedia.org or sign-up here if you want to receive a reminder for this meeting.
Thank you.
The Campaigns Product Team
Removing citation
I Felt that I needed to put some micro information about the company and put several information like PDD holding listed in US stock exchange, website of company and the information about all of these provided on a site. How this information violated the guideline? Could you please specifically mention? So that I would keep in mind while editing next time. Bipin1995 (talk) 19:30, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
The Campaigns team at the Wikimedia Foundation has some updates to share with you, which are:
We invite you to attend our upcoming community office hours to learn about organizer tools, including the Event registration tool (which has new and upcoming features). The office hours are on the following dates, and you can join one or both of them:
Languages available: Arabic, English, French, Portuguese, Spanish, Swahili
We have launched a new project: Event Discovery. This project aims to make it easier for editors to learn about campaign events. We need your help to understand how you would like to discover events on the wikis, so that we can create a useful solution. Please share your feedback on our project talk page.
Thank you, and we hope to see you at the upcoming office hours!
You are receiving this message because you subscribed to this list
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.
.jpg){kind=logo}
