This is an archive of past discussions with User:UtherSRG. 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.
Hello user UtherSRG, a non-admin user closed the discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1996 Abakan Ilyushin Il-76 crash (2nd nomination) without initially providing a rationale. Upon asking as to why they had closed the discussion, [1], they stated that they had closed the discussion stating that "The noms contention that this was a "run of the mill event" is not accepted" adding that they would not pursue a re-open and that I could ask for an admin to do so if I wished and later replying that they had nothing else to add. I'm not here to ask whether the article should be kept or deleted but I would like to request for the re-opening of the discussion as I feel like User:Destarun didn't adequately analyse the discussion. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 18:50, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
UtherSRG, Hello,Nice to meet you again, can you protect my Usertalk page from Ip editors or new users because sometimes they request for review her draft on my usertalkpage after, I receive notification from Wikipedia, I don't like to more afc draft on request if they are not more valuable or notable and I'm medical students, so, I have not enough time to reply other users as soon as possible, I happy if you semi-protect as indef my usertalkpage.Thanks ~~ αvírαm|(tαlk)15:46, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) I don't think this is a good idea. Aviram7 is enrolled in the mentorship program, which necessarily means that they will get questions from new users. In addition, they are a reviewer and should really expect to get messages from non-auto-confirmed accounts about their reviews. It's almost like inviting new users to post and then technically preventing them from doing so.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:00, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Undone. Yes, as a mentor and reviewer, you can't do that. Either resign as mentor and reviewer, or give up on restricting access to your talk page. - UtherSRG(talk)16:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
I am currently having a lot of mental or health issues in my personal life, I really enjoy helping new users and other users , however I can't help other users when I can't give advice myself because I myself need someone's help, I just want to edit Wikipedia in peace for as long as I can, maybe I need a rest...~~ αvírαm|(tαlk)16:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Problems in your real life should always take precedence over editing Wikipedia. By all means, take a break.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:26, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
I guess I don't need to protect my usertalkpage anymore since I'm also a mentorship and NPP reviewer, hmm... I'll try to go Wikibreak after I've finished the may drive of NPP backlog because I'm participated on them, thank you all for giving me good advice, I'll always try to help new and old editors on Wikipedia.. 😎~~ αvírαm|(tαlk)16:40, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Hey UtherSRG! can you protect my alternate's Userpage and it's Usertalkpage as both protect extended confirmed protection indef because they are redirect to my current usertalkpage, avoid to prevent editing from others editors, I think any other users have not objections for this, please can you do for me, if you feel comfortable? Thanks~~ αvírαm|(tαlk)03:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Hey!UtherSRG, I always see you everytime helping others editors and new editors also with civility and I happy to giving you "cup of coffee" for drinking, I'll feel happy if you accept this wikilove message who sent from me.😎 ᗩvírαm7 • [@píng mє]15:36, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Please check you're Mailbox!
Hello, UtherSRG. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Thanks for answering the questions on my talk, I had some real life stuff to take care of and I have set myself to inactive for mentoring. Best, v/r - Seawolf35T--C13:43, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi, nice to meet you. I had no idea you could edit Wikipedia and help keep articles up to date with correct sources. I'm mainly interested in history, politics, and a little philosophy (logic and reason). Since creating this account, I have primarily read the guidance and tutorials, but I am very interested in helping once I'm up to date with current practices. --Fileas Fogg (talk) 15:53, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
I think you restored all of these drafts but didn't make minor edits to the pages so they appear to be eligible for deletion again. Could you remedy this? Thank you. LizRead!Talk!00:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
These articles are still listed as eligible for CSD G13 speedy deletion. Can you make minor edits to the pages? Maybe add a word or header. Is there something wrong with User:SD0001/RFUD-helper? Or are these articles just too short? LizRead!Talk!01:28, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
The articles are just too short. The requestor should make improvements on them, or they should be re-deleted until they are ready to make those updates. - UtherSRG(talk)10:25, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Ah... I was seeing a change to using either Ireal or Palestine being changed to the other after the conflict between them had started (or increased, depending on your perspective) as being the political edit. If we have a particular standard and this edit was in keeping with it, then that's fine. - UtherSRG(talk)10:23, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
Yes, the problem is that both sides interpret "Palestine" politically, which is why I try to use something like the [[Palestine (region)|region of Palestine]], but inevitably it gets changed back and forth to either "Israel" or plain "Palestine". Sigh...
Hi UtherSRG, I was looking at Dorcadion kartalense. To me, I do not think the article is ready for the mainspace. I was thinking about moving it to draft, but I have seen weaker species articles (I have probably made one or two myself). To me this seemed basically like a copy and paste from WikiSpecies (species:Dorcadion_kartalense), without attribution. When is it appropriate to move a valid species article to draft? I have made some minor improvements to the article.
I then looked into the author of the article, it appears to be the scientists credited with finding this species. I have noticed the user is potentially trying to create their own Wiki article and an article for the journal they manage. The journal they manage is used a citation in this species article and in a few others. Additionally, they have created a category Category:Taxa_named_by_Maxim_Lazarev. Their Wikispecies userpage redirects to their Wikispecies article (see here) -- but I understand Wikispecies might have different policies. I recognize that the author is probably notable enough for their own EN Wiki page, but this feels like COI on a few fronts and away to juice the system to get their preferred outcome.
I left a COI user warning on the author's talk page, in hopes that they disclose explicitly on English Wiki if there is any connection.
I am wondering if I should have approached this differently or not at all? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks in advance. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me.07:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
I have so many people asking me for information about me and the work I do. They keep asking me if I have a WIKI page. So can I make a page about myself and the work I do? --ChristopherIsReal (talk) 10:29, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
I am working on an article on Schendylops ramirezi, and if I understand the edit history correctly, you think that it can be improved and needs rewriting. Thanks for the suggestion about adding links, which I have now done. Can you explain what other issues you see with the article? I am continuing to edit the article and would like to address your concerns. HCUPa (talk) 21:11, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback: I've tried to trim the Description section to minimize digressions, hoping these edits are responsive. HCUPa (talk) 14:29, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Linking to an existing genus article in place of a non-existing species article is problematic. If that species article gets created, the user will be directed to the wrong place. This is why I rewrote that sentence. Please consider something similar. - UtherSRG(talk)14:42, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Page move
Hi UtherSRG, I know this is a good faith edit but I seek you revert the move as the subject isn't the primary topic. Check the DAB page pls. Also, you didn't notify my move which you reverted. If you disagree with me, it's most appropriate opening a RM discussion. Safari ScribeEdits!Talk!16:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
The DAB indicates she is the primary topic, so the move was proper. To undo the move, the DAB should also be reformulated. - UtherSRG(talk)16:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
No, the page view tells it all. I moved the page to it's disambiguator "philanthropist" to be a better dab to the "preacher" while the page Mary Fletcher becomes the DAB page. If you had disagree with that, while didn't you open a requested move. I know you are right with your understanding but it's an error for me. Safari ScribeEdits!Talk!17:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Regarding the species range for the Asiatic Wild Ass
I saw you undid my revision for the range details for the Asiatic wild ass citing that it was 'unsourced'. As a result, I would like to show you that the IUCN Red List lists only India under the extant range for the Ghudkhur subspecies of the Asiatic wild ass (the one native to South Asia), as it has been extirpated from Pakistan.
New to editing on Wikipedia. I've been trying to clean up endowment for University of Cambridge and its 31 colleges. I usually update the endowment and net worth of each college annually as well as the University's total endowment.
It's a very big task, as Cambridge, unlike Oxford, does not publish consolidated endowment of all colleges. Therefore, I have to look up financial statement of each individual college on Charity Commission's website and update each college's endowment individually.
1) Is there a way for us to clean up the Colleges of the University of Cambridge page so I don't have to read 31 financial statements each year?
There also appears to be some dispute with another editor as to what constitutes Cambridge's overall endowment. Cambridge Uni Endowment Fund currently stands at 4 billion GBP (reference included), but not all of the Uni's endowment is in this fund.
2) How would we better gauge Cambridge's overall financial wealth? Is there a reviewer who can step in and resolve this.
I can help with general editing matters, but these questions are out of my realm. Both of your questions would be good to address on the article's talk page. - UtherSRG(talk)10:14, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Hey there. Are there any particular methods to finding information about an otherwise unknown topic, especially if very little information is found by simply searching up a subject's name for example? Many thanks. --Pradedovići (talk) 11:17, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
There's no standard way, since there is no telling where informaiton may be found. The world is a very chaotic place, eh? However, there are a variety of places and methods you can use to find information. Help:Find sources has a lot of great tips and tools you can try. - UtherSRG(talk)11:22, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
UtherSRG! Hi there, can you please protect this edit notice at ecu protection level, as per protection policy ,this editnotice are directly showing to others editors who access on my usertalkpage during editing, this important for me and I sometime edit this editnotice, If you protect my this subpage on my request then I feel more happy. Happy editing --- ᗩvírαm7 • (@píng mє-tαlk mє)14:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Hewdon-Mills is a Gospel Musician from a British-Ghanaian ancestry. From a west African family of renowned lawyers and academics, he was born Clement Nii Lantei Alloysius Hewdon-Mills.He is a certified Banker and accountant. Hewdon-Mills has an undergraduate degree in Banking and Finance with honours, emerging top of his class, he is a Chartered Banker and a masters degree holder from the University of Ghana. Hewdon-Mills is 41 years old. GODstill (talk) 23:01, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
You are claiming that the user desiring to delete the article is a sock of the master of the article's creator. Behaviorally, that doesn't make sense. I've asked a CU to get involved. - UtherSRG(talk)11:43, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
They were blocked before Joker Ukr appears to be a sock account and the master (bodiadub) was banned previously that why Joker Ukr was blocked (for block evasion) - that means all the articles created by them are G5 eligible. 77.76.178.52 (talk) 11:16, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Please point me to the master's account, and something showing that Joker is a sock of the master, so I can verify they were blocked before the creation of the article. - UtherSRG(talk)11:18, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
and @Q-bit array blocked this user for the global block evasion. No master is pointed there but it means that Joker Ukr belongs to the previously globally banned user. It's clear from the block logs in Russian and Ukrainian wikipedia and that is why they were blocked globally. 77.76.178.52 (talk) 11:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Without a clear link that says Joker is a puppet of a specific master who was blocked before the creation of the article, I can't G5 the article. You can PROD or AFD the article. - UtherSRG(talk)11:26, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I would like to correct this page as I am the organiser of the event. This event has nothing to do with Merano Cup as we are a completely new event. The results and the external links from Merano Cup page must be deleted and not be connected to our event. How can I edit this ? --Ekaterina Ivleva (talk) 20:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
My name is Koren, and I work for a company called Playnance. We have a product named PlayWall, which will soon be launched on Google Play and the App Store.
As I am not a neutral writer, I am seeking someone to edit the PlayWall Wikipedia page on my behalf. I would be happy to provide as much information as possible and send all the relevant links.
Please let me know if you can assist me with this. Note that the project is in the Web3 gaming space, which involves some familiarity with crypto and blockchain.
The goal of PlayWall's Wallet is to enhance the Web3 gaming experience by reducing the number of steps required to play and addressing issues such as volatility, security, fees, and other Web3 gaming challenges. --Korner writer (talk) 13:47, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
@Korner writer: You should start a discussion on the article's talk page. If there is someone interested in writing about the subject, that's where you will best be able to connect with them. - UtherSRG(talk)13:49, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi UtherSRG,
Wikipedia has suggested you as a mentor.
I am looking for a Wikipedia expert to help write about a cryptocurrency-related project. Would you be able to assist me in writing a page or recommend a relevant writer for this subject?
Thank you for your time and assistance. Korner writer (talk) 13:54, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
@Korner writer: I can not. I can assist with general Wikipedia activities, but that topic is outside of my realm of interests. You can check the talk pages for various articles in that realm and see what WikiProjects they are tagged with. That may be of help in finding others who understand the topic. - UtherSRG(talk)13:57, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
I also suggest you read your first article and WP:BACKWARDS, but know that writing a new article is orders of magnitude harder than updating existing articles. You would do well to get used to editing Wikipedia articles before trying to create a brand new article. - UtherSRG(talk)14:02, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi, can you please create an AFD for Gazetted officer (India)? The reason is: Not received "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", hence fails WP:GNG. It violates WP:NOTDIRECTORY as listing all gazetted designations are NOT within the scope of an encyclopedic article as it is not a directory or manual. The article predominantly consists original research, with references that barely support it. Legodesk.com fails WP:RS. Please copy-paste the above. Thank you for the time.--117.230.88.202 (talk) 16:13, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi, the documentation for Template:Wikispecies redirect says "This template is only for entries that currently exist on Wikispecies and which, due to previous re-creations, are likely to be re-created in unencyclopedic form. Do not place it on every possible title." Is your recent use of the template in line with this guidance? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:32, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
It is also used when someone makes a [[species:X]] link in an article. It is preferred to transform those links into [[X]] and create the local redirect with {{Wikispecies redirect}}. I don't make these for all possible redirects, only if the cross-wiki link has been made. This gives the reader fair knowledge that they are leaving Wikipedia proper and entering a sister project. Perhaps the documentation should be changed. - UtherSRG(talk)11:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Would appreciate if you could point me towards these discussions where consensus was established. And yes, the documentation should probably be updated. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:53, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Specifically, no, but in the AFD it is called out that the documentation was historic and inaccurate, and the person who so said also had one of the strongest keep !votes on the RfD. - UtherSRG(talk)12:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
I deleted the "s" from Himalayas because the word is singular, Nepalese in reference to the entire mountain range. I've had multiple students (college level) from Nepal. There is only ONE Himalaya. I also changed your "herbs" to "forbs" because GRASSES and other graminoids (e.g, sedges) are herbs as well. Forbs are herbaceous plants that are NOT graminoids, which is what is more appropriate here. YOU may be a software engineer, but I'm a naturalist with broad (Ph.D.-level) expertise in both biology and geology - having worked for nearly 50 years in paleo-environmental and paleo-climate reconstructions, using biological remains preserved in sediments. BeetleBob (talk) 23:05, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
On 12 September 2023 you moved the page Russian fascism to Fascism in Russia, as requested by Kpratter at WP:RM/TR. But here it gets tricky: User talk:Kpratter#Blocked as a sockpuppet. But most annoying in this is that it leads to links to disambiguation pages in templates that I can not edit. Templates as {{World topic| prefix= Fascism in |noredlinks=yes}}. How to solve this? Most easy way is to let is point to [[Fascism in Russia (disambiguation)]], what fools the maintenance bots into think that this is not a link to a disambiguation pages. Even when I had the rights to do this, I do not know how to do it. Can you help me with that? The Bannertalk20:13, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
You reverted an edit of mine, referencing that the heraldic beast translated into English as the leopard in the title of Lampedusa's novel Il Gattopardo, was really a serval. The Wikipedia article on that Italian novel gives ample sources. Furthermore, it actually links to the serval article. If Wikipedia articles aren't sufficiently credible sources for other Wikipedia articles, what are?
Nuttyskin (talk) 03:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
No worries. Their puppet names have been quite varied. The key identifier is that almost every edit summary is something like "create new user" or "create new article", etc. - UtherSRG(talk)12:25, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello - I saw that you added some tags to a recently published AfC article (Hemaris aethra), and I am a bit confused. You tagged it as needing to be rewritten to meet Wikipedia's quality standards; I looked through the article again and I cannot tell why the article as a whole would need to be rewritten, and there was no explanation on the talk page. If you tell me what the template was placed for so I can try to improve the article, I would appreciate it.
You also tagged it as needing additional inline citations corresponding to the full references. I am not sure what exactly needs to be cited that isn't already - I don't want to overcite, and to be honest, I thought I had done a fairly thorough job with the citations. Is it the two paragraphs in the description section that only have one citation per paragraph? Or the Threats and conservation section?
Also - this may just be me misunderstanding the content assessment system, but it seems like you changed the initial reviewer's assessment of C-class to start-class. Is this because of writing issues or referencing? Is it too short to be C-class?
Compare the article against other C- and B-level species articles. That'll give you an idea what is typical, what is expected, and what isn't. The only qualifying article in the genus is Hemaris thysbe so you may as well start there. Your article doesn't need to be rewritten from scratch, but does need significant reorganization. The Taxonomy section is written in a manner I don't think I've seen any other species article's taxonomy section written. Um... You're right, though... there's only one place where referencing is lacking, so I'll tag it and remove the referencing tags. - UtherSRG(talk)00:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for clarifying. I'll look at some C- and B-class species articles and try to model the article more closely after those. Dicynodont (talk) 03:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi UtherSRG, you deleted one article page that I had drafted before I could insert the relevant references for Dr. Enkelejda Miho. Can you please let me know if you can restore it back, review it after the references have been inserted and then take the action based on an exchange of arguments? thanks a lot in advance for your support. Best regards, ItaldechItaldech (talk) 14:54, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
@WikiResearch11: I've left you a plate of cookies and some helpful links on your talk page. In short, the "code" you see is wiki markup language. It is how we format the English language text to get the links and other formatting. You will have to learn the basics in order to participate. - UtherSRG(talk)10:07, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
First, please don't use all-caps... that's read as shouting. Second, those numbers are the changes in size of the article via each edit, "+" for an increase in size, and "-" for a decrease. - UtherSRG(talk)12:05, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
Plant stub style
Please note that as far as plants go, we don't add "commonly known as", since these plants generally aren't well known by that name. Also, in certain cases, the species continues to better known by a synonym, particularly in the horticultural trade, but with Englerarum montanum, in the scientific literature as well. Abductive (reasoning)19:42, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
Block
Hello. On 23 July 2024, you blocked me for a duration of 2 weeks for persistently making disruptive edits. Judging from your reply, I presume you were only referring to the edits made to the Cirsium hybrid articles you draftified, correct? If not, please let me know what other edits influenced your decision. Thank you. Ivan (talk) 00:58, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Why have you reversed my edit. It was not vandalism; it was a good faith edit. It was also accurate. I put my reasons onto the talk page five days ago and nobody has addressed them. So much for discussion. Apparently, the rule is ignore alternative points of view and then just cut them out of the discussion anyway.
The current opening to the article is a laughingstock. "Koala Bear" ia an inaccurate and old name for koalas, certainly never used by anybody who knows anything about the subject. Corythaeola (talk) 14:12, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
I have just read the page Wikipedia:Vandalism. My edit did not meet any of the requirements for vandalism outlined in that article. How can you justify your actions? Corythaeola (talk) 14:22, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
I've noticed you are interested in Primate taxonomy. You might want to work on the blue monkey page as it is missing the golden and silver monkeys as subspecies, although their pages have them as subspecies.
You might also like to mention the taxonomy used. It's not a big deal for me (although it does affect my life list) however the Ugandans certainly believe they have three species. I am not touching it as every single edit I have made since joining has been reverted. I think I will just go back to being anonymous. Corythaeola (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
As you started a discussion on talk:Koala, but did not get a consensus, then made an edit request, which I closed asking that you get consensus first, and then made that edit, yes, it was vandalism. - UtherSRG(talk)18:04, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
If nobody ever engages in a conversation, consensus can never be established. Normally if nobody replies that is taken as no objections.
I apologize for "shouting". However, I have not been told "no" multiple ways. I posted on the talk page, outlining my views and clearly stating my intentions. Nobody replied to my post till last night. I then saw the semi-protect edit option, which I tried but you refused. If you consider that a no to editing the page you were not exactly clear. Everything I have read indicated that it was appropriate to edit the page, including as I read it "being bold".
Anyway, I have already been punished for this. Every edit I have made on this site has been reversed by one of your colleagues. They took no more than three minutes to reverse 37 edits over three different pages. Clearly gave it a lot of consideration.
Given the way I have been treated, I don't know if I want to bother doing any more editing. When I get back from the conference I am at, I will draw up a submission for your "mammals" page and see how it goes. Corythaeola (talk) 11:18, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Hi there! I'm trying to write a page: Draft:The Harbour School
But users say that the articles aren't notable enough. Could you help provide some clarity?
I was told not to link back to the school site as its a primary source but I see a lot of other international schools cite themselves.. --Ths 2024 (talk) 07:16, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Hi. Only two of those taxonbar links are genuine, and both are badly outdated, and the GBIF link is contradictory. You'll note that (1) all of the records in iNat for this taxon are under Poblicia, not Crepusia. (2) the primary authority file for world auchenorrhynchs places it in Pobliciahere (3) the two most authoritative sites for North America, BugGuide and the UDel site (here} also both place it in Poblicia. I'd be grateful if you could undo that move and place this species back where it belongs. Thanks. Dyanega (talk) 14:47, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Fair enough. But my comment on not making the comment in the article but to start a discussion on its talk page is still valid. - UtherSRG(talk)14:48, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Hey. I hope you are not mad at me for reverting additions by the anonymous user for the 2nd time. I did so, because the text at ADW is rather outdated with references to Beacham and Beltz, 1998; "Clouded Leopard, Neofelis nebulosa", 1996; Sunquist and Sunquist, 2002; "About the Clouded Leopard", 2008, i.e. to years, when Sunda and Mainland clouded leopards were still considered as a single species. BhagyaMani (talk) 12:57, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Well, if this anonymous user tries again to add this rubbish, then I think a page protection would be nice. Cheers, BhagyaMani (talk) 13:13, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Removal of Describers
I would really appreciate it if you did not delete describers from the pages that I am creating.
But the fully scientific illustration is impossible by definition, while this example is based on a work by a professional bio-illustrator? Strecosaurus (talk) 19:04, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
There are plenty of images of life recreations (a technical term for art of non-living species) that don't place them unduly into a human setting. The art is fantastic, but I mean that in both in assessing the technical merits of the work and in the unrealism of the human setting. - UtherSRG(talk)23:04, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
What difference does the background make, as long as it's neutral? (And even regular chimps are sometimes dressed like that for ads and stock images - I've even seen dogs "doing science" - what do you mean by unrealistic background?) Strecosaurus (talk) 00:48, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
So frankly I'm very confused as to why this image should be deleted (plus again it's as scientific as there ever will be short of an actual photo of a humanzee). Strecosaurus (talk) 00:54, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
African Wild Dog Conservancy
Hey. I saw that you reverted my edits on African Wild Dog Conservancy, which now again redirects to African wild dog. I understand the reasoning and apologise for not pronouncing my reasonign behind my edit. Background: "African Wild Dog Conservancy" is the registered name both of an NGO based in the United States, and of a gazetted conservation area in Namibia. While I can't say much on the US NGO (the available information on their current level of activity is a little sketchy), I do see relevance for a stand-alone article on the Namibian conservation area. In Namibia, African Wild Dog Conservancy is the legal name of a geographically demarcated conservation area of 3824 km2, inhabitated by approximately 5 000 people. Although it carries the name "African Wild Dog" the purpose of the conservation area is broader and not specifically targeted ad Wild Dogs. A simple redirect to African wild dog will not do it justice. I therefore do suggest that African Wild Dog Conservancy is turned into a page about the Namibian conservation area, while for the US NGO a referenced mention on African wild dog is sufficient.
Calidumpluviam (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:51, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
You should take this to WP:DRV. Read the instructions there before making a request. I'm not the admin you need to ask, but the admin who deleted it via the AFD. - UtherSRG(talk)15:54, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
I see they spell it that way, but I listen to their pronunciation and I hear it they way I say it, with the V in the third syllable. - UtherSRG(talk)00:43, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
That's because there is no one universally agreed-upon method of syllabification for English, as explained in English phonology#Phonotactics. /ɪ/ is a checked vowel so English speakers find it difficult to produce it when it's not preceded by a consonant, as in nih. Respelling the following consonant together in the same syllable, as in niv, allows them to more intuitively identify what is meant by i. That's why we respell Minnesota, Michigan, Illinois, Libya, Himalayas, Mississippi, Cicero, Manila, Guinea, Anguilla, Brittany, Tbilisi, Barbiturate, Sikkim, Inuit, etc. with i and the following consonant in the same syllable, which Merriam-Webster does not do. If you think we should adopt M-W's syllabification, by all means suggest it on Help talk:Pronunciation respelling key, but you haven't made a case for why carnivora in particular should be exempt from this widely followed practice. Nardog (talk) 00:54, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
I do not see anywhere in the help link that the change you made is in any way more or less in alignment with our MOS. Can you be more specific? Looking at Illinois, for example, I see that respell is at odds with IPA. This seems confusing. - UtherSRG(talk)01:45, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
See the first and fifth notes in H:RESPELL. The syllabification in IPA and respelling need not match. ih is a compromise for when it would be misleading to syllabify the following consonant together. The implicit corollary is that there's no reason not to syllabify it together when doing so comes with no disadvantage (as in carnivora).
Looks like note 1 allows your spelling, but doesn't make it preferred or mandatory. It would seem that maintaining alignment with IPA would be preferrable when possible, reserving the misalignment for when doing so adds clarity. Note 5 doesn't say anything about where the V goes, only that ih is used to disambiguate the sound when needed. Neither nih nor niv are words. With nih being the accented syllable, the checked vowel is more dominant than the following consonant. If I were teaching a child how to pronounce via resepll, I would think nih would be more helpful in learning the correct pronunciation. - UtherSRG(talk)02:19, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
In fact, note 1 only deals with when the checked vowel is followed by a stressed syllable. In carnivora, the checked vowel is the stressed syllable, so Note 1 doesn't apply. - UtherSRG(talk)02:21, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Note 1 is about how one should go against the usual syllabification in IPA to help readers precisely by syllabifying a checked vowel and the following consonant together. We wouldn't be prescribing it if we didn't think it was more helpful and intuitive to do so, stressed or not.
Of course the vowel is more dominant than the consonants in the syllable—that's the definition of a vowel—that it constitutes the syllable nucleus. If that's why you think kar-NIH-vər-ə is more helpful than kar-NIV-ər-ə, then isn't karn-IH-vər-ə even more so? If not, why not?
No word ends in a stressed i, but syllables most certainly do. No, karn would be wrong. N is the first sound of the second syllable. - UtherSRG(talk)11:04, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
You keep insisting with no reference what is or is not part of the syllable, while I've shown you there exist competing methods for syllabifying English words, and ignoring my repeated question about what makes this word in particular special. If you don't have an actual concrete argument, please keep your preference out of our articles. Again, if you think we should change how we respell syllables with checked vowels, bring it up on the key's talk page, but you have made no justification for why we should treat Carnivora differently from thousands of other articles in which we respell checked vowels and the following consonants together. Nardog (talk) 22:37, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Wikidata entries
Thanks for adding the Wikidata entries for all the sawfly species I added to Wikipedia. It was on my to-do list but now I can cross that off and add more sawflies!
@Lyubomira95: The article you have in your user space? As it stands it is not suitable. This is the English-language Wikipedia. We only accept articles written in English. If you wish to write in another language, you should go to that language's Wikipedia and do your work there. - UtherSRG(talk)11:10, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Brandon Lawrence, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
It is not your decision to decide unilaterally what other editors may comment on, or where. Your reverts at User talk:BrownHairedGirl have been undone. If you believe that other editors are in violation of policy or guidelines in their comments, start by raising the issue at their Talk page, and if you don't receive satisfaction there, you can escalate to a centralized forum like WP:ANI. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 11:43, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
My understanding of TPO is that you may not take down the "semi-retired" because she wrote it and you didn't. As far as the block notice, I don't know who removed it, but if BHG was the one who did, that is within her rights per WP:OWNTALK. There are a limited number of notices that may *not* be removed from a UTP, such as a declined block appeal, but that doesn't appear to be the case here, so, the answer to the second question is, no, you should not restore the block notice. Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 11:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
The Notice of the ArbCom case was archived. I think that more than enough arbs and admins watch the page, so if anyone sincerely had a problem with there not being a block notice to point at it would have been raised already. I'm sure I'm not the only editor old enough to remember Uther's behaviour on that talk page being "easy to interpret as "gravedancing" (even if intended otherwise)". DuncanHill (talk) 12:08, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
For biographies of living people, every asserted fact needs to have a reference that passes WP:SIRS. If the fact isn't supported by such a reference, it must be removed. Your draft has many such facts. - UtherSRG(talk)10:55, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
LOUTSOCK block of Atlas Þə Biologist
I am now curious, why was the account blocked for only one month, but the IP blocked for 3 years? I'm interested in learning about how block lengths are decided, is there a specific reason why the IP (well, technically the /64) was blocked for that long? Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
There's really now set-in-stone rules or even set-in-mud guidance. I've looked at many IP and non-IP blocks over the years, and I haven't made heads or tails of it, other than generally escalating. In this case, I suspect the user would continue loutsocking when they can, so gave the most indef equivalent for the IP. I also expect the non-IP will soon escalate to indef. - UtherSRG(talk)14:45, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
What can be done if an editor claims that something is not a good source, and when you ask him what can be done to make sure that the source is WP:RS he claims that no matter the result of RfC, no matter the result of RS noticeboard, nothing will make the source good enough to change his POV. He also was invited to dispute resolution once, but he ignored it and showed no will for discussion. I am doing my best, asking him what can i do to make sure sources are ok, but he doesn't care and says even if i have 10 sources, his 1 is better because it's "consensus in scholarship" even though i provided him with academic sources that clearly disagree. Don't know what can i do Setxkbmap (talk) 17:03, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
I see that you restored the article Legal career of Keir Starmer after I had deleted it, not only without following the accepted practice of consulting an administrator before reverting their action, but without even informing me that you had done so. Why was that? JBW (talk) 23:36, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Many types of RFU requests are regularly handled without consultation with the deleting admin. Draftifying a G5 has no requirement to do so. - UtherSRG(talk)11:05, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
There is no requirement to do so, but I should have thought that at the very least it would be considered a courtesy to inform the administrator whose action you are reverting. Frankly I am astonished to learn that an administrator with as much experience as you have doesn't think so. JBW (talk) 21:32, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
why did you revert all of my edits?
not all of them were unconstructive. some might have been, but why did you revert the edits that were possibly constructive? Qxva (talk) 19:43, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
nevermind, i saw that only the unconstructive ones were reverted. still, when i responded to someone, why did you revert my reply? Qxva (talk) 19:48, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Hey UtherSRG, just following up on this tag. While I think you may be entirely correct that the redirect should be deleted, based on Template:R from species to genus stating "Note that the practice of creating redirects from species names that could be articles is strongly discouraged", I don't believe R3 is appropriate in this context. The subspecies/redirect (Etelis coruscans) is indeed mentioned at the target (Etelis#Taxonomy) which doesn't make it an implausible typo or misnomer. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:34, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
"Note that the practice of creating redirects from species names that could be articles is strongly discouraged" was added to the template a little over a month ago (29 July 2024). While I would agree with that sentiment, I think that note would be better placed on {{R taxon with possibilities}}. R from species to genus suggests that it should be placed along with {{R to monotypic taxon}} when relevant, and it is also used on species in genera known only from fossils such as Apatosaurus ajax. There is no consensus to discourage creating redirects for species in monotypic and fossil genera (although there is consensus that these are "species names that could NOT be articles").
I think there are a pretty small number of editors who are responsible for most of the species redirects to (non-monotypic and non-fossil) genera. And many of the species redirects to genera aren't tagged with {{R from species to genus}} (I've probably tagged a couple hundred of the species to genus redirects created by User:Galactikapedia, but there are thousands of them (see e.g. Microplana haitiensis).
I don't think bringing individual species to genus redirects to RfD is an effective solution. It would be better to start mass RfD's corresponding to the editors who have mass created species to genus redirects and get consensus to delete them all. Galactikapedia is the worst offender in this regard. Plantdrew (talk) 21:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
Hi. What would be the best way to help in the deletion process? I didn't expect this to still have significant damage to the encyclopedia left behind seven years later, and I'm sorry. I want all the impractical redirects gone. 13-year-old me should not have had this much access. Galactikapedia (talk) 02:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
@Galactikapedia:, Hi, I was intending to link to your contributions without calling you out specifically by a notification. I didn't want to put you on the spot over what you did as your 13-year-old-self. But I do think your creations of redirects from species to genera weren't very helpful. If you want to help clean-up your creations of redirects from species to genera, tag them with {{Db-g7}}. Plantdrew (talk)
I see that you had undeleted the page once and eventually deleted it after discussion. Naveen Tewari is one of the most notable entrepreneurs from India. Actually the founder of the first Unicorn. Maybe the page was poorly put together. Wondering if I could recreate it? NS1811 (talk) 09:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
Tried editing the page completely. But was rejected immediately by another user CNMall41 and placed a Undicslosed Paid tag assuming mischief. I thought the first rule of wiki was to Wikipedia:Assume good faith but alas, 6 hours of editing wasted. No point. So leaving it as is. Naveen is the founder of India's first unicorn and one of the most notable entrepreneurs of India. So thought that would give it a try. NS1811 (talk) 07:47, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping. If you feel I am not WP:AGF, please report such at WP:ANI. Keep in mind that based on the history, WP:PACT would apply. I would take the advice given to you above and go to WP:DRV should you feel it needs undeleted. The other advice I have already given you on my talk page. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:40, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
Draft Ntshepe Tsekere Bopape
Hi. Sorry I uploaded the old version and now it is stuck in review even though there were no changes. This is what I was trying to post (hopefully a much better version): [deleted by UtherSRG] Carohan2019 (talk) 17:45, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Hi.UtherSRG, can you please fully protect my userpage from creation because I think I no need to create our page due to they reflected from meta wiki as glibal userpage. Happy editing!--- ᗩvírαm7 • (@píng mє-tαlk mє)12:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
I thought fully protect level is very trustedable and anyone cannot edit fully protected userpage without any good reason, but I happy if you change protect level of creation of my userpage on here.Happy editing! --- ᗩvírαm7 • (@píng mє-tαlk mє)13:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
UtherSRG, Hello, today my user name has been changed from aviram7 to Bhairava7, and currently my user page unprotected from creation, so I humbly request you to please fully protect my user page from creation. WP:UPROT. Happy editing!Bhairava7 (talk) 11:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
UtherSRG, sorry for distributing you but My alternative user account's userpage that you protected previously on my request but today my alternative account was also rename to as main account name, If you re-fully protect my alternative name if you feel comfortable,then please proceed my request.Happy editing!--- Bhairava7 • (@píng mє-tαlk mє)06:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
Misuse of rollback
Here, you reverted my edit without any explanation using rollback. Why did you revert the edit at all, and which part of WP:ROLLBACKUSE did you think justified your use of the tool? csw9907:04, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
It is not possible for a competent editor acting in good faith to think my edit was "obvious vandalism". And why have you mischaracterised it as "blanking a portion of the article"? That suggests you didn't bother to look at it when you reverted it or at any time since. csw9907:18, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
You are welcome to disagree with my edit. You are absolutely not welcome to describe it as vandalism. To do so requires either incompetence or bad faith. Which was it? csw9906:31, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
Neither. I was correct. It was discussed in edit summaries. I see MPF has reverted you again. If you wish to revert to your version, please start a discussion on the article's talk page and get consensus. - UtherSRG(talk)10:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
Review of Scott Foster (Engineer)
Hello kind person, thank you for fixing a few things on a draft I am working on. I have just submitted. Would you mind reviewing (and hopefully approving?) feedback welcome.
Thanks, I don't think I'd seen the exemption before, so wasn't looking for it. And this wasn't so recently done... it was January 2023. I have restored the talk page now. - UtherSRG(talk)11:17, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
Hello Mentor, I want to move this page as an article and change the title too. but unable to find the move button. kindly suggest your input. --Omhari 1 (talk) 20:49, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
Put this at the top of the article: {{draft article}} You do not have permissions to move drafts into main article space at this point. Also, it is not ready for main space. Please read WP:EL for understanding that external links are not allowed in the main article, only in the References and External link sections. - UtherSRG(talk)20:54, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
Draft:Transfeero
Dear UtherSRG,
would it be possible to restore the draft I was previously working on?
We are currently working on add the relevant external sources and it would be useful to have the draft to work on it again.
Ah, I see that you have. It was a blatant advertisement. It will not be restored. As I said previously, you are free to make a new draft. - UtherSRG(talk)11:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Hi! I used to think that one of the options of Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion was for deleted content to be userfied/restored as a draft, but, looking at your last responses on the page, it appears that it isn't the case?
This is the passage in the description that I'm a bit confused about: This means that content deleted after discussion – through deletion processes – may in some cases be provided to you, but such controversial page deletions will not be overturned through this process but through deletion review instead. I read this as referring to content deleted through AfD, but I might be wrong about it.
@Chaotic Enby: The relevant phrase is may in some cases. In this case, I saw that it was already recreated once out of process, so declined to provide the refund. The requestor has the option of going to WP:DRV, after consulting with the deleting admin. This puts more eyes on the restoration than just a single admin's. - UtherSRG(talk)22:35, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
"Each reference should have only a single citation" is not in the policy page referenced (REFB). The WikiProject Article Creation guideline clearly warns reviewers to Avoid declining an article because you personally don't like the citation style or formatting (here). Please reverse your rejection. Ivan (talk) 17:03, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
@Иованъ: I know you know how to do what I'm asking. Also, learn the difference between a declined submission (where you are allowed to continue to work it to make it fit the main article space) and submission rejection (where you are required to halt work entirely and should move on to something else). - UtherSRG(talk)17:10, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification regarding the process. I know you know how to do what I'm asking is not very helpful. I genuinely don't. Can you please elaborate? Or perhaps demonstrate on one of the drafts what you had in mind? You never replied to any of my "Is this what you had in mind" attempts to conform these articles to your standards. Please bear in mind that these are my first ever hybrid articles. Ivan (talk) 17:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
I mean with regards to the citations. Almost every editor has differences in citation style. Mine happen to provide quotations, which there is no rule against. But I don't even know if the quotations are what you object to. So please elaborate. Ivan (talk) 17:16, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
Each reference should be to a single citation. Yours have multiple citations in some refs. And some of those citations are duplicated in other (often multi-)refs. Clean these up. Go look at other articles. Stop asking me questions that you can quickly research the answers yourself. - UtherSRG(talk)17:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
Oh, thank you. That was the answer I was looking for. The duplications I believe I can fix thanks to a new experimental template Wikipedia just introduced.
But multiple citations are very much an acceptable citation style for multiple sources stating the same thing. It is often used to back up complex claims. In this case, it reduces reading clutter for the sources of each country. It is not grounds for rejection. So now I have a technical question. If you continue to dispute the validity of multi-refs, is WP:DNRWP:DRN the proper avenue for dispute resolution? Or is there a better alternative? Ivan (talk) 17:27, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
For multiple sources supporting the same fact, use multiple ref tags. When one ref supports multiple facts, name the ref so that they end up being a single ref note in the references section. I don't think you mean DNR, but I don't know what you are actually meaning there. Please just make the reference fixes as I've requested, and I'll then approve the drafts. - UtherSRG(talk)17:36, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
I am in the process of replacing duplicate references with shortened+quotation.
However, since I believe I am correct about the validity of multi-refs (there is a reason the template exists in the first place and you have yet to show concrete support for your actions from policy), or at least that it is not grounds for rejection of an AFC, I am afraid I have no choice but to seek third party arbitration. You blocked me once without warning. I will not risk another block by resubmitting with only partial compliance with changes you demanded. Ivan (talk) 17:51, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
Draft:Cirsium × przybylzkii. This is as far as I am willing to go without a third opinion from a qualified editor. I even moved some of the bundled sources to a "Further reading" section for legibility.
I've updated przybylzkii to what works. This is the English-language wiki, including non-English text isn't helpful. Single instance of a reference in the reference list, with a pointer back to all of the places it is used. - UtherSRG(talk)18:33, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
Draft:Cirsium × stroblii now has neither of the issues you described (the issue of duplicate citations and the "issue" of bundled references). Were you just speeding through? Or is there something else you want fixed. Ivan (talk) 18:15, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
I have just reverted your deletions of my citations. The consensus for {{rp}} vs. quotations at Talk:Cirsium × przybylzkii was in your favour, but I will implement it differently than you did. Please wait a day before attempting any changes to the articles. Ivan (talk) 15:03, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
Hi. As per your suggestion, I have wrote the article in my sandbox. Kindly note that some of the content has been translated from Malayalam Wikipedia and please advise me the next steps toward a publishing it to mainspace. Thilsebatti (talk) 13:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
@Thilsebatti: See my reply to Omhari 1 above with regard to tagging the sandbox as a draft. That will provide you a button you can use to request a review of your draft. You should also take a look at {{Translated page}} and place that on the talk of your sandbox. Note that it needs the appropriate parameters for language code and source page name. - UtherSRG(talk)14:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the information, but I'm already well aware of these steps. I was not asking about this. The article's title is protected in mainspace. I myself is an experienced new page reviewer. But I'm experiencing this kind of situation for the first time. If I tag this as a draft, could you review it yourself? Thilsebatti (talk) 15:26, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
I will not review it. You can wait for the review to happen along with all the other folks waiting for a review. If an AFC reviewer finds the draft acceptable, they can find an admin to assist with the move. - UtherSRG(talk)15:31, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
The article can be only moved to mainspace by an admin. So how the reviewers without admin rights will be able to publish it to mainspace? Thilsebatti (talk) 15:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
I think it is more than a coincidence this was declined a few days ago, then the above discussion, and now this after your rejection. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:34, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Yes. I think it is likely another firm at this point since the one has failed repeatedly. Maybe a one-off on Upwork or something. I have not been there in a while but going to start paying attention on the freelance sites again. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:42, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Hi. Please delete this draft if G7 applies. I do not wish to be falsely accused of any UPI or sockpuppetry. I noticed that you opened an SPI against me shortly after I requested that the draft to be undeleted. I was only attempting to improve the site and had no intention of assisting any socks or UPE farm. Your above comment might be a new UPE farm this was handed off to (if aimed at me) is disheartening. Finally after thoroughly investigating the situation, I've concluded that one editor has taken this subject personally and does not want this article ever to be published. Thanks and best regards. Thilsebatti (talk) 06:45, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
Hello! I'm just wondering what I should do if an article already has a citation for a specific website, but there is other information on that website (a different page for example) that should also be cited as well. Should I treat it like a separate citation? Or should I do something else entirely? Thanks in advance. --Satanic Nightjar (talk) 01:22, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Your edits were not appropriate. You must cite references when adding new information. You must use appropriate grammar and formatting. - UtherSRG(talk)21:50, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Google scholar is just a form of google search. It returns a list of things. Which of those things did you want as a reference? It's impossible to tell. And the list changes depending on who is searching, where they are searching from, and when they are searching. - UtherSRG(talk)11:47, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
You can find them that way, but you then need to drill down into the appropriate ref, ensure that it says what you are attempting to support in the article, and use the link to the specific reference itself. And again, please read WP:RS. - UtherSRG(talk)12:24, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Okay, thanks.
However, one more thing: on the wood pigeon article you removed my citations because ’google search itself is not a valid reference. Which of the results? Searched when?
The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.
You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .
Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
You should not remove something "just because" You should provide a reason. You haven't provided a reason to remove content. - UtherSRG(talk)21:49, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
@Atlas Þə Biologist: In the beginning, we had no templates and we made taxoboxes by hand. Then we had templates for each entry in the taxobox. Then we had the simple taxobox template that required manual updates of taxonomic changes. Now we have the automatic taxobox system which allows us to not have to determine the hierarchy manually, it does it automatically. I stand with Elmidae: stop being stubborn and work with us instead of against us. - UtherSRG(talk)11:11, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I am having an issue with someone correcting my edits on a page for which I am the subject matter expert. The person removing my edits originally created the page, but he or she has allowed inaccurate information be added to the page over time. A friend alerted me to the misinformation on the page, so I created an account so I could fix the mistakes as well as update the entry from being just a “stub,” as suggested by Wikipedia. What recourse do I have to take over the page from the person? He or she appears to not be interested in having a page with added information and numerous citations to back up the content. It does not make any sense to me. Thank you, in advance, for your time! --ChestyXV (talk) 03:27, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
@ChestyXV: We are an encyclopedia. We have a certain standard of language and style. Please conform your writing to established encyclopedic norms. I'll provide you links on your talk page that may help. - UtherSRG(talk)11:10, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Actually, I see that the user you beleive you have trouble with has already provided you all of the information I was going to. Read and learn and comply. - UtherSRG(talk)11:11, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Question from Jack M James (19:27, 25 October 2024)
I had made a request to use the autowiki browser in English Wikipedia for Disambiguation and in my request I had commented on how I was doing ~120 null edits in order to clear articles that hadn't updated for 2 days after correcting a Navbox Disambiguation link, that way they wouldn't slow anyone else down who is working off the list. Part way through I realized there is no way to prove my statement and switched to dummy edits.
I thought I was meticulous on making sure there was no actual change to formatting, I'm sorry if I failed to do that.
Hi UtherSRG, I was looking at Draft:Ahmed E. Hassan which you declined and then rejected yesterday. The draft creator has asked about it at the AfC help desk, and has been told that rejection means "end of the line", but I wanted to ask you about it WP:NPROF is not my strongest suit, though I do know that the sourcing criteria are substantially different from other biography articles, and I wanted to ask about the Mustafa Prize. I take it that it is not sufficiently prestigious for WP:NACADEMIC criterion 2, has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level? It is frustrating when someone keeps resubmitting a draft without doing anything about the reasons it was declined, and I'm not questioning your rejection – just wanting to improve my own understanding of WP:NPROF! :-) --bonadeacontributionstalk11:07, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Someone else can move the draft past the finish line, but repeatedly ignoring declines and resubmitting gains the rejection. - UtherSRG(talk)12:12, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
You work quietly and diligently in thankless tasks. In particular, thank you for your editing of Joan Gibbs, an AFC acceptance of mine that deserved acceptance, but was in need of a serious editing session. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrentFaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:59, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
It did not add any helpful information to the article. Can you cite a reference that uses that name instead of the names listed? - UtherSRG(talk)16:56, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello! I was wondering if you could help me upload a photo to Wikicommons? The photo is from a YouTube video and I’m unsure of the proper licensing and how to correctly format it :) --Olivergrandeee (talk) 08:36, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Brachygobius sabanus, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.
Your recent reversion of a deletion in the article Muskox
Hello. Recently I deleted this line from the article Muskox, which you restored by deleting my edit:
Muskoxen were introduced to Svalbard in 1925–26 and 1929, but this population died out in the 1970s.
The reason I did delete it for, is because the exact same information is conveyed in an earlier text just a few sentences above it:
An attempt to introduce the muskox to Svalbard also failed. Seventeen animals were released in 1929 by Adventfjorden on West Spitsbergen. In 1940, the herd numbered 50, but in the 1970s, the whole herd disappeared.
By the way, the sentence I deleted was actually added by me, with the same source (Aulagnier et al, 2008), when I created the subsection "Reintroductions in Eurasia". The other text was added by a different user at a later time, expanding the information about Norway but without caring if some of that was already present and became repeated as a result.
I now realize that the other user didn't add any sources however, even if what they say is compatible with what I've read on the subject. I'm not sure how to proceed, so I won't edit it, but I think the current text should be left as is, with the repetition.--Menah the Great (talk) 17:08, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
Ah! Sorry, by your edit summary I thought you were deleting it because you thought Svalbad == Iceland, because where you deleted it from also mentioned Iceland. You could check the existing sources and see if they support the other editor's addition, and not that with the appropriate ref tag. - UtherSRG(talk)18:47, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello - my name is Matt Taibbi. I'm a reporter and writing about the decision to remove RCP. I'm trying to understand why it happened. I started covering campaigns in 2004, when it was the only polling aggregator in existence. It has a very strong track record and clearly outperformed the others in this cycle. It lists the error histories of all the polls it uses. Why would this service be removed? --Mtaibbi (talk) 11:06, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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.
There was an extra space between the starting letters so I had removed it but by removing it the apostrophe got switched so I had to change it again Eiehel (talk) 13:26, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
We seem to disagree on how to interpret the rules for specifying the type species in the taxobox.
As an example I'll consider the genus Haliaeetus which Marie Jules César Savigny erected in 1809 to accomodate a single species, L'aigle de mer (Haliaeetus nisus). see here and here.
The entry for the genus in Howard and Moore 4th ed Vol 1 page 249 (link requires registration) is:
HALIAEETUS Savigny, 1809 M – Haliaeetus nisis Savigny, 1809; type by monotypy = Falco albicilla Linnaeus, 1758
This indicates the Haliaeetus nisus is now regarded as a junior synonym of Falco albicilla Linnaeus, 1758 (the white-tailed eagle)
We disagree as to whether the "type species" specified in the Taxobox should be Haliaeetus nisus Savigny, 1809 or Falco albicilla Linnaeus, 1758
In the past I would use the senior synonym - ie Falco albicilla but having been alerted to a possible problem by the page history of the Haliaeetus article, I've read the taxobox guide and the ICZN rules and think my previous interpretation was incorrect.
Both the taxobox guide and the ICZN give this example:
Astacus marinus Fabricius, 1775, one of the nominal species originally included in the decapod crustacean genus Homarus Weber, 1795, was subsequently designated by Fowler (1912) as the type species of Homarus. The type species is, and should be cited as, Astacus marinus Fabricius, 1775. Astacus marinus Fabricius is currently synonymized with Cancer gammarus Linnaeus, 1758, but the latter is not the type species of Homarus and should not be cited as such. If mention of the type species is required it should be made in some such manner as "Type species Astacus marinus Fabricius, 1775, a junior synonym of Cancer gammarus Linnaeus, 1758"; or "Type species Astacus marinus Fabricius, 1775, now regarded as a synonym of Homarus gammarus (Linnaeus, 1758)".
which seems to clearly indicate that Astacus marinus Fabricius, 1775 and not Cancer gammarus Linnaeus, 1758 should be considered as the type species.
The Taxobox guide contains:
| type_species = the original name of the species that was initially used to describe the genus, without regard to its present-day nomenclature
which suggest to me that Wikipedia is following the convention used by the ICZN.
@Aa77zz: Yes. You are putting lots of data into the field. The field should only be the original name of the species that was initially used to describe the genus, without regard to its present-day nomenclature. Nothing more, nothing less. What, in the guidance, do you think permits or expects something different than just a species name, linked to the current article that name is synonymized to? No explanations in the field. Explanations are for the body of the article. So, for the Haliaeetus specific, which is the name of the species that was used at the time? It can't be H. nisus as Savigny created that term, and Falco albicilla was the original name of that taxon. H. nisus isn't even listed as a synonym for H. albicilla at white-tailed eagle! - UtherSRG(talk)19:52, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
If we are going to put more in that field, then we should return to what we'd done way back in the early days of taxoboxen. We should list the type species in this format:
This is what we originally did to show what was used. At some point, the latter portion was used. Now we want to swap to only the former portion? That's double wrong. - UtherSRG(talk)20:01, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
unconstructive Edits
Hi
Hope you don't mind me asking this here, kindly can you check the edits that Storm infantry's user are doing.
He/She constantly change the content of articles like Talpur dynasty without adequately explaining why. Balash-Vologases (talk) 20:18, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi UtherSRG. Would you consider full protection for this article or perhaps ECP rather than semi-protection? The disruption looks more like a content dispute over sourcing and other issues with an addition. And the editor adding that information appears to now have an autoconfirmed account. The semi-protection seems like it will only limit an unregistered editor that is appropriately removing the addition. Thanks. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 03:48, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
Okay maybe, I should ask for more clarification, since "Becuase it's a different person" is not answering this for me: What justifies replacing the redirect set up for the minor planet discoverer with a soft redirect to the Wikispecies page for the myriapodologist? Is one demonstratably more notable than the other? (Though I take it both fail WP:NOTABILITY since we're creating redirects for both of them instead of writing articles about them) Should the minor planet discoverer not have a redirect at all? (To be quite honest I am not a fan of Wikispecies soft redirect links either, but that's not relevant here)
The redirect to species is to an article about the one, while the redirect for the amateur astronomer is just to a list. The myriopodologist has a chance of becoming an article, the astronomer does not. Both of those facts weigh in favor of my edit. - UtherSRG(talk)15:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
Eudonia mercurella Translated from German. Added the tag to refs . Again thanks Notafly (talk) 08:33, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
@Notafly: That was insufficient. That should have been your edit summary when you did the translation. That's only one aspect: linking your translation to the other wiki's authors. The other aspect is that of verification: all assertions of facts need to be tied to a reference that is cited to verify those facts. - UtherSRG(talk)12:18, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Ongoing. Have to go to the library though so please bear with me. I need to fix a lot of edits for other micros in similar fashion.Part of the problem is that hardcopy authors give only general references to save on excess.Just a part Regards Notafly (talk) 18:50, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
i request for the one assestant if ok, becouse people gave me a strangle and broke my silf buddy i want to submit this request plaece , i hope to submit, i neet it right now, understand my agiants. if note gave a one person assestant i cike you agiant in youre possicion. ok, good luck, and god bless you, FROM: PRESS --Jilin09 (talk) 05:25, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
What is the reason for removing my comments on the etymology of Kuwavaatakdecteson the Kuwavaatakdectes page? It is relevant for the taxonomy section, and the etymology of Oradectes and Kuwavaatakdectes is mentioned in Kissel (2010) and Ponstein et al. (2024) respectively. Or would I need to repeat the citation at the end of each line? Ponsdedons (talk) 16:48, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Hi Hi Mentor,
Happy Holidays. Could you please provide me with a few editing skills to make my practice article publishable as an article? Thanks. --August899 (talk) 02:09, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
@August899: I can not grant you skills... you have to learn them. :) If you are looking to write an article, know that creating a new article is one of the hardest things you can chose to do here. I suggest getting to know the place by finding articles related to the topic you want to write about and helping to improve them. I'll put some helpful links on your talk page, but when you are ready to writing a new article I suggest using WP:MFA. - UtherSRG(talk)03:33, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Ah, I see that you already have the helpful links, and that you are already getting your draft reviewed. Read the info the reviewers leave you in the comments and the decline notice. Every link has helpful information. - UtherSRG(talk)03:35, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
