Loading AI tools
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Asilvering. 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. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:44, 22 March 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello, I hope you are having an excellent day,, I write to you because of the comments you left on my draft a while ago. I updated the page and added new references. Would you take another look? Thanks. Rseinfold (talk) 00:19, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
You may be interested in the discussion at Category talk:Nazi personnel who resisted the Holocaust#Correct title?. Sincerely, HopsonRoad (talk) 14:45, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
I nominated Federated Legion of Women to appear on Did you know on the main page at Template:Did you know nominations/Federated Legion of Women. SL93 (talk) 23:42, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- The sources for DYK articles can be in any language. SL93 (talk) 03:15, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- I knew I should have stuck to just the sincere plea for withdrawal of the nomination... I can redact that part of my comment if necessary but it does not at all change the underlying request. -- asilvering (talk) 03:19, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- If you're referring to D7 on the DYK supplementary guidelines, I don't see how an article that is nowhere close to a stub counts as that. SL93 (talk) 03:21, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Ay. I can redact that part too. The underlying request remains: please withdraw the nomination. -- asilvering (talk) 03:25, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- I will have to refuse. You started the article by translating from the French, but you don't own the article. SL93 (talk) 03:28, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- How utterly discouraging! I really do not understand your motivation for doing this. -- asilvering (talk) 03:33, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- I look for actual reasons beyond an article creator using ownership behavior. You already retracted your reasons. SL93 (talk) 03:37, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- You can look for whatever you want, but if someone tells you that your actions are distressing, maybe they're being sincere. Urve (talk) 04:06, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- I never said they weren't sincere. I would have been glad to withdraw the nomination if the issues that were mentioned, and later retracted, were actually issues. If it is an ownership issue, I refuse to withdraw the nomination because that would mean that they find the core concept of Wikipedia distressing. SL93 (talk) 04:23, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- You can look for whatever you want, but if someone tells you that your actions are distressing, maybe they're being sincere. Urve (talk) 04:06, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- I look for actual reasons beyond an article creator using ownership behavior. You already retracted your reasons. SL93 (talk) 03:37, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- How utterly discouraging! I really do not understand your motivation for doing this. -- asilvering (talk) 03:33, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- I will have to refuse. You started the article by translating from the French, but you don't own the article. SL93 (talk) 03:28, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Ay. I can redact that part too. The underlying request remains: please withdraw the nomination. -- asilvering (talk) 03:25, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- If you're referring to D7 on the DYK supplementary guidelines, I don't see how an article that is nowhere close to a stub counts as that. SL93 (talk) 03:21, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- I knew I should have stuck to just the sincere plea for withdrawal of the nomination... I can redact that part of my comment if necessary but it does not at all change the underlying request. -- asilvering (talk) 03:19, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Asilvering, is it the article's appearance itself that distresses you? Would it make you happier if we, say, removed your name from the credits? I think we're having a little trouble understanding the nature of your request—if you'd like, feel free to email me or SL93 about it to discuss in private... theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 05:01, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- No indeed! This is an pseudonymous account, after all, so whether my name is on something or not doesn't make much of a difference to me. I think I've covered the rest on the main DYK talk page. -- asilvering (talk) 05:27, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- In other news: You may find interesting my latest project, which is of a fanciful type; I hope that as I write it (still early stages, as all things are), I can give it the flowing characteristics of poetry. The whimsy. Do you know of Deleuze's jurisprudence anecdote? I think you would like his perspective here, given... well, you write about French revolutionaries with certain perspectives on law. I always promise to keep in touch with the people I meet here on Wikipedia - I often don't follow through, but do know that I follow your work and remain delighted that you keep writing so beautifully. Urve (talk) 05:53, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- ha! the chief justice on The West Wing does this exact thing :) I wish I could find a source to justify inclusion, but it looks like no one considered it much more than trivia. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 06:23, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- I did a quick speculative check for this and was, of course, buried in articles about the actual West Wing rather than the TV show. Well. I tried. That'll teach me to get off wikipedia and go back to the work I'm supposed to be doing... -- asilvering (talk) 20:02, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Oh, I love it! I'm delighted to see that there are at least two books on the subject - when I saw the title I thought, "surely it's impossible to write this without WP:SYNTH?" But I should never have doubted legal writers. Of course they've published on it, and in full books, even. By the way, I enjoyed reading your zombie pornography article and am honestly surprised it's still hanging around as a GAN. I thought having a title like that and being relatively short would move it through the queue pretty quickly! Once April (the cruellest month, alas that I have to admit it's Eliot who has the right of it and not Chaucer) runs its course, I can review it if it's still there. -- asilvering (talk) 20:01, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- ha! the chief justice on The West Wing does this exact thing :) I wish I could find a source to justify inclusion, but it looks like no one considered it much more than trivia. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 06:23, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi There, I saw you declined my draft but please have another look.. there are sources on Edelson among there... I will add more and resubmit, thanks. Polysaccharides (talk) 07:06, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:51, 30 April 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
 |
Women in Red Translation Contest |
| asilvering Thank you for your additions April 2022 WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:46, 1 May 2022 (UTC) |
- @WomenArtistUpdates Thank you! -- asilvering (talk) 00:48, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
The issue with your edits is that you leave an article with 2~3 sentences (i.e. Postal codes in Yugoslavia), which at that point should just be deleted. The difference between these still existent articles and the ones listed in "articles for deletion" is that those pages were deleted altogether, i.e. did not have only lists deleted from them. Second issue is that those AfD proposals you cite did not list Yugoslavia and Serbia (among the ones I reverted you on), so you'll have to make a new deletion proposal and list every article that has to be deleted. As a consequence of not doing that... these articles won't be deleted, and that's the issue here. -Vipz (talk) 20:14, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Vipz I did not intend for any of the surviving articles to be deleted, so I'm not quite sure what concern you're trying to express here. You are correct: the articles will not be deleted without a deletion discussion. However, the consensus at the earlier AfDs that I linked was that the list content was unencyclopedic and does not belong on Wikipedia. That is why those lists have been removed from the surviving articles. -- asilvering (talk) 20:24, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- To sum up what my concern is, see WP:STUB. What is not clear here? Two sentences does not make a Wikipedia article. Why do you not intend for these to not be deleted, but the ones you listed there to be? -Vipz (talk) 20:29, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Vipz What is your specific concern? WP:STUB, you will find, explains what a stub is; it does not say they should not exist. The articles that were deleted in those linked AfDs were articles that were purely lists of postal codes, for which an existing "Postal Codes of..." article also existed. There are no extant "List of Postal Codes in..." articles (or, at least, there should not be) following those deletion discussions. Some articles that were previously called "List of Postal Codes in..." in fact had more encyclopedic content than simply the list; in those cases, the lists were removed and the articles were renamed. Articles that were named "Postal Codes of..." and were only a list, but could plausibly exist as a "Postal Codes of..." article, were stubified. I do not believe they would have survived an AfD discussion, but I did not start one because the problem of unencyclopedic list content could in those instances be solved simply by stubifying the articles. Alternatives to deletion, including stubification, are typically preferred over deletion. -- asilvering (talk) 20:42, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- To sum up what my concern is, see WP:STUB. What is not clear here? Two sentences does not make a Wikipedia article. Why do you not intend for these to not be deleted, but the ones you listed there to be? -Vipz (talk) 20:29, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- I thought the point of these articles is to provide a layout of routes and a list of seat cities to illustrate basic information introduced in the lede. There's nothing to expand in these articles if we can't have any lists of postal codes on them. I can't provide information about historical postal codes from a former country (and their changes throughout time), which is nowadays not an easy thing to find information about. Anyway, if that's your case, so be it. I'll preserve some of these lists on other editions of Wikipedia. I do recommend you tag them with Template:Postal-stub when you shorten them to barebones. -Vipz (talk) 21:44, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
I preface this with saying I've never found it helpful. I assume (but wouldn't know) that others do, though, so leaving you a note. Regarding Chaucers Wordes unto Adam, His Owne Scriveyn, if you think a redirect is notable and could warrant an article, you can tag it with {{R with possibilities}}, which then populates Category:Redirects with possibilities. All I know is someone came across a redirect I once made and added various redirect templates to it, so I assume it matters to someone; your choice. Urve (talk) 06:46, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Urve Ah, I think this one might actually be a useful one! I've seen some of these (eg "redirect to band") and wondered why anyone bothers, but it looks like this one explicitly says
Since a new page may be created, links to this redirect should not be replaced with a direct link to the target page.
That in principle seems useful. Though I can't imagine there are too many editors around here who are likely to fuss with inbound links to a single seven-line verse attributed to Chaucer... -- asilvering (talk) 17:38, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
 |
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar |
| For reviewing at least 7 points worth of articles during the January 2022 GAN Backlog Drive, I hereby present you with this barnstar in my capacity as coordinator. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 03:52, 15 May 2022 (UTC) |
- @Trainsandotherthings Thank you for this, and all your work during and after the backlog drive! -- asilvering (talk) 05:07, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for looking at this draft. Can you clarify, exactly, what sources or references this article is lacking? I have addressed the concerns of the previous reviewer and made all the suggested corrections. I have read the “Referencing for Beginners” and “Citing Sources” articles and don’t see that anything in this article draft conflicts with Wikipedia’s expectations. The draft has 21 references to reliable sources, each one verified and verifiable, as well as dozens of links to same in the body of the text. I expect that further edits will be done, by me and likely others, once this draft is approved, but without specific instructions, I don’t see that this draft lacks anything that the sampling of accepted Wikipedia pages about other recording artists linked below, chosen at random, does not. Please advise. Thanks!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austin_Lucas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jutta_Hipp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Gayle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Duo_Jets
Howard Bleach (talk) 13:40, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Howard Bleach The first and last of those examples were both tagged with maintenance tags indicating that they had citation problems! I've done some work towards fixing the first, but the last still needs help. Not all articles go through the AfC process, and either way, anyone can edit them (and start introducing new content without references...). Here's an example of the kinds of issues in your draft right now:
- opinion, attributed to no one, and not footnoted:
DeCicca is a notoriously selective producer, known to only pursue production work that interests him.
- believable fact, but no reference for verifiability:
In 2021, DeCicca's song "Watermelon" became a surprise viral hit, racking up over half a million Spotify plays as of April of 2022.
- quote attributed to a person, but no clear indication of how to find it for verification:
DeCicca has also earned accolades from peers working outside the realm of music. Author Maggie Smith wrote that DeCicca's Time The Teacher "... engages with the big, timeless subjects we expect to find in poetry—love, place and the ghosts of place, loss, memory—but it's also full of the delicious particulars of a particular life".
- full attribution but no footnote for verifiability:
The album was named by Bill Callahan in UK-based webzine Mr. Porter as one of the "Best Texas records".
(To be clear: this is not "against the rules", since it's verifiable enough, but reviewers will be happier to see it footnoted.)
- opinion, attributed to no one, and not footnoted:
- The first one is the most important kind - you have to have a reference for subjective statements on biographies of living people (see: WP:BLP). For the others, providing a citation will keep another editor from removing the content as "unsourced", but will also help you show the notability of the subject. -- asilvering (talk) 16:24, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ah, see this is what I needed! Extremely helpful. Thank you. I'll work on it and resubmit it next week. Thanks again! Howard Bleach (talk) 12:58, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for your attention to my draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:David_Porter_(writer). You declined my submission with the note "No change from before. Additionally, the entire biography section has no listed footnotes, and needs them."
If you have not already done so, please take a look at the Talk page for that draft. There, you'll find correspondence with the first reviewer, in which I explained why in my opinion no changes are necessary. Concerning the biography section: It has no footnotes because the biography itself (Duriez, Colin (August 2005). "David Porter, cultural critic, lecturer and writer, 1945-2005". Evangelicals Now: 14. Retrieved 6 December 2021) is the source of all biographical information in the article. It's unlikely that Porter was biographized elsewhere, for reasons I give in that Talk page contribution.
Perhaps a note indicating that this is the sole source for his biography can be added to the draft. I saw such a note once, but regrettably have not succeeded in retracing it. If you know what that note is, I'll be glad to add it.2603:6010:4E42:500:AD86:CD9C:A016:9606 (talk) 09:56, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
- I don't understand the issue here - why not just footnote that biography where appropriate? That's all we're asking for. As to your second post, it's not enough to simply say that an article subject meets WP:NPROF; you need to show it, with references. -- asilvering (talk) 10:10, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advice. I've redesigned the page so that there's now a Biography heading with subheadings, and the Duriez article is now a reference. And since it's the single source for all the biographical information, I've added a note to that effect, following advice kindly provided on the Teahouse. If you don't mind, please take another look at my draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:David_Porter_(writer) and let me know if it's now acceptable.2603:6010:4E42:500:D8A2:2925:629C:C58B (talk) 14:10, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello. You can help me delete this unsource and non-existent lake, Biketi lake. ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.115.7.146 (talk) 07:55, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Er, I could, but there does appear to be a lake (or what's left of one) there on google maps, and visible by sattelite. So I'm not sure why this should be deleted. Can you explain your reasoning? -- asilvering (talk) 11:36, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
| Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive | |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. | |
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 09:19, 31 May 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Thank you for your feedback. I had some questions in relation to my draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Leftover_from_the_void , titled leftover from the void. I wanted to know if the draft is being considered for inclusion as well as the French version of the site. Is the French version being considered as it was written in English? Most of the references and media coverage given was in French. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattab1234 (talk • contribs) 01:33, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Mattab1234, I'm not sure I understand your question. Are you asking if someone will translate the article into French? That is extremely unlikely, since the article is currently a draft. If it becomes an article in the English-language Wikipedia's mainspace, it may be translated into French by another editor, but that isn't very likely - there are far more editors and articles on English Wikipedia than French Wikipedia, so most things aren't translated unless they're relevant to a particular editor's interests. -- asilvering (talk) 18:17, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- When you approve/reject the draft do you consider the French sources/ media coverage used to cite the article? Mattab1234 (talk) 15:06, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Mattab1234 Yes, we do. The language the sources are in doesn't affect whether a topic is considered "notable" or not. However, articles at Articles for Creation do tend to take a bit longer on average to be reviewed when the sources aren't in English, since fewer editors feel confident evaluating them. -- asilvering (talk) 00:34, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- In my original question I was asking if the English wiki version be reviewed for inclusion in the French version? It's not a question of translation. Does my original submission have to be in French for this purpose in order for this to happen?
- What would be the submission procedure for the French version? Mattab1234 (talk) 21:40, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Mattab1234 The article would need to be in French to be considered for the French-language wikipedia. You would have to write the article yourself. But first you'd want to make sure you think it's an admissible topic for the French wikipedia (the standards and norms are a bit different on each individual wiki). Their inclusion criteria are here: . -- asilvering (talk) 21:16, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Mattab1234 Yes, we do. The language the sources are in doesn't affect whether a topic is considered "notable" or not. However, articles at Articles for Creation do tend to take a bit longer on average to be reviewed when the sources aren't in English, since fewer editors feel confident evaluating them. -- asilvering (talk) 00:34, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- When you approve/reject the draft do you consider the French sources/ media coverage used to cite the article? Mattab1234 (talk) 15:06, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Have you read Le livre blanc by Jean Cocteau? It doesn't sound as if it's something in your interests, but I thought because of your French translations, it would be good to ask. The book came up during my research into Boychick as another "pederastic erotic classic" (🤢); I don't have time to read it, but I'm in the process of creating a small article for it. If you have read it, maybe you could lend a hand? :) Urve (talk) 05:46, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- I have not! Though I'll happily pitch in if I spot anything I think I could be useful with. btw, I was much amused by the last sentence of Boychick (novel). Of all the reasons not to stock that particular book... -- asilvering (talk) 22:20, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello!
I saw that you just edited out all of the "cv style material" from the page I submitted for review- could you please explain why this is not able to be included? I feel like it is important to the integrity of the page, as it shows the body of work from her time as a researcher and author. Furthermore, I referenced the page of Naomi Klein in creating the page, and she has lots of "cv style material" and seems to have not had an issue being accepted. Is there a way to get it put back up? Thank you for your help! Cprice061 (talk) 15:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Cprice061 You're welcome to add back the selected articles if you like - I removed the whole list section at the end but having a few particularly important articles listed is perfectly fine. (But it is best to make sure these are actually particularly important articles, eg her most famous, most widely cited, etc, rather than just a somewhat random selection.) For lectures, we don't usually list these at all, and these all look like routine conference-type events to me, not the sort of thing that goes in an encyclopedia. If she's delivered a particularly important keynote or something, you might consider listing that. For books, rather than "recent books" it's best to go with her most important ones, since this is more useful to readers and also less vulnerable to looking out-of-date in the future; no need to add the awards back in.
- There's no need to use this section to show that she's an important or well-known researcher; the article already does that. (I'll accept it as soon as the revision deletion is done.) So you're looking to add the work that most defines her as a researcher and will be most helpful for readers to know about. -- asilvering (talk) 17:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello Asilvering:
WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Editathon event in July 2022!
Running from July 1 to 31, 2022, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) editathon event focused on the topic of women and the environment. Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works during the event period (with an emphasis on environmental links and topics). GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to receive a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.
We hope to see you there!
Alanna the Brave (talk) 13:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:45, 27 June 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello, Asilvering
Thank you for creating Céleste Hardouin.
User:Clovermoss, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
An interesting article about an interesting woman. Thank you for writing it. :)
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with <nowiki>{{Re|</nowiki>Clovermoss<nowiki>}}</nowiki>. Please remember to sign your reply with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> .
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Clovermoss (talk) 01:31, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
|
Women in Red Translation Contest |
| asilvering Thank you for your additions June 2022 WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:41, 1 July 2022 (UTC) |
- Not sure how I missed this earlier - thanks! -- asilvering (talk) 04:09, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 |
Hi Asilvering! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please .
|
Thank you for mentioning me about the citation errors in Draft:Shiva Baby (soundtrack). I have fixed them. 122.162.75.39 (talk) 04:22, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Asilvering
Thank you for creating Eulalie Papavoine.
User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Thanks for the article!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with <nowiki>{{Re|</nowiki>SunDawn<nowiki>}}</nowiki>. Please remember to sign your reply with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> .
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 15:44, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
Just in case you were wanting more explanation for my revert of your decline and G12 tag - I saw nothing in the copyvios report that indicated there was any significant copy/paste. A high percentage by itself -- even if it is at 83% -- does not automatically mean that something is a copyright violation. In this case, it appears that long lists and titles such as "Charles Irwin Lambert Endowed Professor of Health Behavior and Education" were what was triggering the match. In other words, please make sure that when you decline something as a copyright violation or tag it with {{db-g12}} that it isn't only because of a high percentage.
Of course, if I am wrong and I somehow missed something obvious, please let me know. Primefac (talk) 11:51, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Primefac It was a lot more than that - entire paragraphs fully affected. I actually think the copyvios report is reporting artificially low because some individual words have been substituted or added and that throws it off. eg, there is a "climate change, migration and language, population health, and technology" in the draft and since the original does not have the word "language", most of that isn't highlighted by the copyvios tool, even though on inspection it's clearly lifted right from there. The worst one is the one that starts "He is the co-founder..." -- asilvering (talk) 14:46, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, how are you? Thanks for your review and pointing out problems with tone. I have spent some more time to fix the draft. Please let me know if it is good to be accepted now. If no, please help me learn the areas that still need work. Thanks! BlueDot987 (talk) 16:49, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
- @BlueDot987 Hi there! Just so know, when you make a new Talk page post, you should start it at the very bottom of the page, rather than the top. I'll move this one once I've made this reply. Don't forget to submit your draft for review! -- asilvering (talk) 21:17, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the tip asilvering ! I aprreciate it. I have resubmitted it now!BlueDot987 (talk) 14:17, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 10:57, 29 July 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:35, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 15:34, 31 August 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello Asilvering:
WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Editathon event in October 2022!
Running from October 1 to 31, 2022, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) editathon event – Wildcard Edition! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to any and all women and women's works during the event period. Want to improve an article about a Bollywood actress? Go for it. A pioneering female scientist? Absolutely. An award-winning autobiography by a woman? Yes! GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to receive a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.
We hope to see you there!
Alanna the Brave (talk) & Goldsztajn (talk) 23 September 2022
You are receiving this message as a member of the WikiProject Women in Green. You can remove yourself from receiving notifications here.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 14:58, 29 September 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 17:32, 26 October 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Federated Legion of Women you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Catlemur -- Catlemur (talk) 21:21, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
This person Draft:JohNel NG has passed the WP:NSINGER. It was stated in the draft that he reached top 5 on African chart in the Arabic music platform Anghami and it was referenced with a Nigerian reliable source. All sources in the draft are reliable according to the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Nigeria/Nigerian_sources. I believe it passes WP:NSINGER. Please review this draft again and give me a feedback. Thank you Lilsusanalex (talk) 08:09, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
- I don't believe he has passed WP:NSINGER, actually. The claim that he does is based entirely on that charting single, but Anghami is not a national chart, as that criterion requires. Furthermore, it appears to refer to a sub-chart (Afrobeats) and not music of all genres. The citation also does not come from Anghami itself. I wasn't able to access the article in fn 4 because it contains a malware link (so I'm also not really convinced that's a reliable source), but this appears to be a duplicate of the article: . The attribution is made, but it's not verifiable with any kind of hyperlink. -- asilvering (talk) 19:43, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the good news! Cheers —- Lucretius (talk) 21:09, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
I would like to know how else can I add an article about Barry Silbert who lives in NY and is listed by Forbes to be worth 3.2 billion dollars. What more legitimacy do I need for a person like this? His company DCG right now is valued at 20 billion dollars. Barry was the founder of SEcondMarket which was purchased by NASDAQ
Let me know how you will do it though?
AmGan1976 (talk) 23:16, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @AmGan1976, the problem isn't with "legitimacy" of him as a person, and his net worth and companies don't matter either when it comes to the question of whether he should have a wikipedia article or not. The only thing you need is "significant coverage in (usually multiple) reliable sources". That needs to be coverage about Silbert - not about his company, not brief comments by him to the press about cryptocurrency in general, but actually about him. And that coverage needs to be independent - not something he, his company, or some other interested person set up or paid for. (That disqualifies this one, for example: ) Not everyone who is rich is also frequently profiled in the media! By the way, the Forbes link is now reading 2B, not 3.2B. -- asilvering (talk) 00:02, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
- Maybe you should try at least making 10 million dollars in your life when you say someone only has 2B? Forget 10 million , maybe you should try to make a million.
- Anyone who has made 1 billion plus and employing people is worth better than all of us here who really have nothing really worthwhile to do for ourselves or someone else and that is the sole reason we are here editing pages for free like monkeys :) AmGan1976 (talk) 01:53, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
- I have not at any point said "only has 2B", nor do you have any idea how much money I or any other editor on this site has made. If you find a monkey who edits Wikipedia, please create an article for them! I'm sure they would receive enough media coverage to qualify for one, and the monkey would of course be unable to write it, as that would be a conflict of interest. -- asilvering (talk) 02:08, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
I closed this discussion as a Redirect to John Hornby. If you can find any salvageable material to add to the destination article, have at it! Joyous! | Talk 00:51, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reminder! I'll see if I can't come up with a sentence or two for the Hornby article. -- asilvering (talk) 22:02, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 |
Women in Green Editathon — October '22 | |
| Thank you for your excellent contributions to GA nomination Federated Legion of Women during the WiG Wildcard Edition editathon! Best, Alanna the Brave (talk) 14:43, 12 November 2022 (UTC) |
The article Federated Legion of Women you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:Federated Legion of Women for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Catlemur -- Catlemur (talk) 14:41, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:52, 26 November 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
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.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
What exactly did you mean by "sniff test" with your comment on Draft:Serifos miners strike? ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 22:20, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- "If it smells bad, throw it out." ie, anything that doesn't look like WP:RS to you, just cut it and accept the draft rather than doing a back-and-forth with the article creator. -- asilvering (talk) 05:24, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:00, 27 December 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hi Asilvering, there's a question at the AfC help desk, from a new user who has created a draft about an academic, and is asking why it was declined. I think it looks like the person is notable per WP:NPROF but I am not sure and don't want to create more confusion! There's been no response for a couple of days – do you think you could take a look? It's at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk#17:49:26, 16 January 2023 review of draft by ADtrials. I didn't want to ping you there in case you didn't have the time or inclination to comment :-) (I should really improve my ability to gauge NPROF-ness, and do more reviews of drafts about academics...) Best, --bonadea contributions talk 21:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll have a look! -- asilvering (talk) 02:44, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm close to completing the unofficial GA improvements you recommended to the above article: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernie_O%27Malley Another editor is reverting my insertion of images, however (designed to break up the 'wall.of text' you correctly referred to). How am I to proceed when he simply reverts without discussion? I have noted the GA improvements effort underway. Thanks, Billsmith60 (talk) 14:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
- I see that the other editor has let most of the images stand, so in your position I might shrug and move on. Their rationale was that there are now too many images and that they don't add anything to the article, so if there are any particular ones you were really sad to lose, you might add those back, write on the Talk page about why you think they do add to the article, and tag the other editor there. It's also helpful to write something like "explanation on talk page" to the end of an edit summary in case the other editor is only looking at the article history and not at the talk page. They were correct to move them to the right-hand side of the page, by the way - in general that's where you want all the images to be. (One common exception is when it's a portrait, and you want the person to be shown looking into the article rather than towards the edge of the reader's screen.) -- asilvering (talk) 09:00, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. I should have the revision finished tomorrow. If I drop you a note would you be free to do the GA assessment or do I need to list it again? Billsmith60 (talk) 23:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- You have to go through the GA process again, as a second nomination. Good luck! I'm afraid I don't have the time to review it right now myself. -- asilvering (talk) 02:00, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
The article has been revised, if you would be able to reassess it? I added in a number of comments (see "+") at your original review page, if they might be useful? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ernie_O%27Malley/GA1&oldid=1071557465#GA_Review
I'm sorry it has reproduced in such a messy manner (I use Mt phone, not a workstation), but I'll ensure my next response is much clearer. All the best Billsmith60 (talk) 01:20, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
-- complete with unwanted line breaks. (Sorry about these.) -- Hoary (talk) 05:22, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 | |
| One year! |
|---|
(as Urve said last year) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:52, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Gerda. :) A bit hard to believe I've been around here this long already. -- asilvering (talk) 23:07, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Adding translation of Samuel Frey Theanonymoustypist (talk) 17:24, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry, I don't know what you mean by this. -- asilvering (talk) 17:55, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi, this is my first article, thank you for your feedback. I'm hoping you could tell me if any of the sources already referenced are appropriate for showing notability. Like is the Day in the Life article at Tricycle appropriate? Also, are the Buddhist journals accepted as reliable? Thanks and if you aren't who I ask, please let me know! 🙏🏼 187.252.197.100 (talk) 12:05, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- It looks like you have forgotten to log in. I'll reply on the talk page of the user who submitted the article originally. If you're concerned about your IP address being visible, you may want to read WP:OVERSIGHT. -- asilvering (talk) 03:29, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 12:51, 26 February 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
