User talk:GeneralizationsAreBad/Archive 8

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you very much for the welcome messege. I have not been on Wikipeida long, but what I noticed during the brief time I have been on Wikipedia I noticed that Wikpedia is a caring community. I like people like you on Wikipedia because you encourage new wikipeidans to edit. You help make Wikipedia a very caring community. Thank you very much! Charlie Jeff (talk) 00:28, 3 June 2016 (UTC) Charlie Jeff (talk) 00:28, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

@Charlie Jeff: Thanks for the kind words. The learning curve is a bit steep, I admit, and there is a bit too much animosity towards new editors, but good luck with everything. GAB^gab 00:31, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

I'd like to thank you so much for your needy edits in Iran's frozen assets. That seems like a professional prose now. ♥ Mhhossein (talk) 06:29, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

@Mhhossein: Thanks! I'll see if I can add anything helpful. GAB^gab 12:01, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Re: FMF Edit

Hello, I hope you are well, I was in the process of editing my information then it was deleted. I was trying to add information from The Mayo Clinic, for an American Medical definition, as a sufferer from Italian ancestry, and knowing many others across the world, we wanted to see a broader definition for FMF, because when ignorant people who hear of our disease, look up on Wikipedia and ask how we can have this disease if we are not Armenian, then we saw the Wikipedia page. Adding a broader definition helps the patients not have to re-define the disease to everyone who gets their definition from Wikipedia. I apologize for the lengthy nature of this message, but it is important to those who suffer from FMF, and mean no insult to you, but I was asking for some help on properly citing my source when it was deleted, if you could direct me to someone/where that could help me edit mine so that it can be accepted, it would mean a lot to a lot of people. Thank you. Biancafiore (talk) 22:27, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

@Biancafiore: No problem, and thanks very much for asking for help. The issue was not at all with the source. The only reason I reverted (i.e. undid the edit) was because the formatting of the page (here) was sort of broken. It looks like you understand referencing, although make sure to put the closing tag (</ref>) at the end of each citation - this will ensure the citation appears properly. Also, the information was inserted straight into the template, whereas I believe you may have aimed to insert the text into the main article (the lede). It seems that you cut-and-paste right from the website, which is not generally allowed as per our copyright requirements. So I'll reinsert the text after editing it to avoid the copyright problems.

For more help on referencing, you could see here, which is pretty comprehensive. Our intro page for new editors is also helpful, and I recommend you take a look.

I realize that I just threw a ton of new information at you, so my apologies if there is any confusion. Happy editing, and good luck improving the FMF article! I'm glad you are interested in contributing to the project. GAB^gab 22:39, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

@GAB, thank you so much for your help and response. I didn't copy and paste the text exactly, I changed the wording around, mostly in the first few sentences referring to specific ethnic groups and I wasn't sure if that was enough, although I'm very new to this I'm certainly trying to understand and do everything correctly and with accuracy, someone else might have changed it again, but it almost looks more like the Mayo wording than the original, I'm sorry if this is incorrect, I'm still trying to figure it out. One more question, if you don't mind,  :) when you said I almost got it right but I edited the wrong area, can you explain it a bit, the difference between where the template and main article are, and how toften make sure I'm editing the right of? Thanks again for your help, and if you have any more input on my edits, I'd love to know to avoid repeating. Biancafiore (talk) 01:43, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

@Biancafiore: Yes, I changed the wording and quoted the Mayo Clinic source directly, which is allowed under the guidelines. In order to track changes to an article, you can click the little star at the top in order to add it to your watchlist, and you can view the article history by clicking "View history," also at the top.

As for the template issue, that is more complicated. Here is the area (an infobox, as indicated by the coding) into which the original material was inserted:

{{Infobox medical condition | Name = Familial Mediterranean Fever | Image = | Caption = | DiseasesDB = 9836 | ICD10 = {{ICD10|E|85|0|e|70}} | ICD9 = {{ICD9|277.31}} | ICDO = | OMIM = 249100 | OMIM_mult = {{OMIM2|608107}} | MedlinePlus = 000363 | eMedicineSubj = med | eMedicineTopic = 1410 | MeshID = D010505 | GeneReviewsNBK = NBK1227 | GeneReviewsName = Familial Mediterranean Fever }}

Strange and confusing stuff, I know. Fortunately, there is no need to worry about the infoboxes, since that is not the area you want to edit.

Underneath the infobox (in the editing screen, at least) is the article text, which you can recognize because it looks like the text you see when reading the article normally: "Familial Mediterranean fever (FMF), also known as Armenian disease..." There's a lot of other text surrounding it, which is markup used for citing sources, links, using italics and bolding, etc.

So when you want to insert new material into an article, you may want to use the "show preview" or "show changes" function at the bottom of the editing screen (right next to "save page") to make sure the page looks the way you want before saving. You will probably want to edit the main text of the article as opposed to the infoboxes, so look for the brackets ({{ }}) to see where the infobox ends and the text begins. You can distinguish this pretty easily, since the text corresponds to the article's actual content. I know this is a bit perplexing, but I hope it helps. GAB^gab 16:09, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Hands Across Hawthorn

Hello: I was involved in some discussions with respect to linking in relation to this article. I notice that you added a "Working" tag to its listing on the GOCE request page. I made one minor change to the article, and with the work you did, the copy edit is now complete. Would you like to add a "Done" tag to the GOCE listing so that the article can be removed from the list? Kind regards, Twofingered Typist (talk) 13:02, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

@Twofingered Typist: OK, thanks! GAB^gab 20:25, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

AfD

It appears that you have included me in the group of "several prominent MILHIST editors" when commenting on the WP:Articles for deletion/Helmut Wendorff. If yes, thank you. If not, I'll take that anyway :-). Hope the editing is going well, and also thank you for the additions you did at Operation Barbarossa a while back; these were great ones. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:16, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Yep, you've done some strong work there :). Thanks for the thanks, and I hope to get back to WW2 once Operation Infinite Reach is done. Good luck! GAB^gab 00:08, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

barnstar

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		For excellence in copyediting Tingey House, among many other articles. LavaBaron (talk) 06:38, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

NPP / AfC

Hi. Just a reminder that in just over a week at Wikimania there's going to be a cross-Wiki discussion about the systems of control of new pages. This is a round-table rather than a presentation or a lecture. On the agenda are reforms to the new article reviewing systems and ways to help new users better understand our content policies. If you are going to Italy and would like to take part, please check out the conference schedule, and I look forward to seeing you there. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:06, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

TWL Questia check-in

Hello!

You are receiving this message because The Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to Questia. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

• Make sure that you can still log in to your Questia account; if you are having trouble feel free to get in touch.
• When your account expires you can reapply for access at WP:Questia.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed.
• Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, email us and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services The Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thanks! 20:24, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for fixing caps issues I worked hard on this and you are awesome for fixing this and and quick comment any suggestions you have on how to make my robert blue moon post on that artist better is greatly appreciated!! you rock!!! kittens all day for you <3

Moonshine2424 (talk) 00:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

deletionFinder

Hi GeneralizationsAreBad. Further to José Rafael Cordero Sánchez, which I can guarantee you is an auto-bio , his 288th known attempt to write about himself cross-wiki cf. the centralized LTA file on Dutch Wikipedia, let me introduce you to an invaluable script, User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/deletionFinder.js. It checks to see if a page has been previously deleted or discussed at AfD, and if it has, deletionFinder.js provides links to the deletion log and/or AfDs to the right of the article title. Install it by adding the following to your common.js or your skin script file: {{subst:js|User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/deletionFinder.js}}, save and bypass your browser cache. For an example go to Emil Nielsen where, to the right of the article title, you see the blue prev dels and prev AfDs links when the script has been been loaded. Regards, Sam Sailor ^Talk! 13:51, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Sam! Nothing like a useful script to start your day off the right way. This should prove useful. GAB^gab 14:28, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Help me with the page Jose Rafael Cordero Sanchez

Hello GeneralizationsAreBad, I write for the reason that the user Sam Sailor want to delete the Page José Rafael Cordero Sánchez aid me for article is not deleted. Thank you. --Benyee167 (talk) 14:39, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Funny you should say that... GAB^gab 14:40, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

It is not an autobiography

by God because they do not understand, this is not an autobiography. José Rafael Cordero Sánchez --Benyee167 (talk) 17:13, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

FYI I just blocked this user as an obvious sock of the globally banned user Joserafaelcorderosanchez. This is about the fifteenth time they have created a heavily fictionalized article about this person, under multiple spellings and variations of the name. --MelanieN (talk) 17:34, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

@MelanieN: - Thanks, Sam told me above that it was the 288th time :) GAB^gab 17:47, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

I can believe that. I was just counting the English Wikipedia, and I was underestimating; they have used 8 or 10 versions of the name, with multiple attempts each time, so probably closer to 30-50 just here. And apparently the versions on the Spanish Wikipedia were TNTC (too numerous to count). --MelanieN (talk) 17:50, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

I just now saw the links that User:Sam Sailor provided above, very interesting! I see that the troops were already on to Benyee167 but hadn't gotten around to globally locking him yet. --MelanieN (talk) 17:58, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Some people have too much time on their hands... and they just don't realize this can harm their reputation. See the LTA SEFPRODUCTIONS (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) case, for instance. GAB^gab 18:00, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

We all have our hobbies, apparently this is his. I doubt if he has a reputation to uphold; or on the contrary he may be highly admired in the troll community for his persistence and productivity. We are a very tempting target after all, that's one of our burdens. It's why we need people here who dedicate themselves to stopping trolls! I see that I identified the wrong sockmaster, it is apparently Josercs1. I've updated my info. --MelanieN (talk) 18:11, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Well, I try my best... some LTAs do leave eventually. GAB^gab 18:21, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for deleting and salting, and for blocking, MelanieN. Accounts creating articles about José gets globally locked pro forma, but José isn't globally banned, as he does not meet the criteria for global bans, a last resort described by one WMF staffer as the rare nuclear option. Looking more into that policy, it would appear that since its implementation in 2013, it has only been enacted ~4 times. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 11:18, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

That's strange, Sam, because I'm sure I came across something saying that Joserafaelcorderosanchez was globally banned. I can't find it now. Maybe I (or whoever wrote what I read) confused globally locked with globally banned. --MelanieN (talk) 14:53, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Impersonator?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/GeneralsAreBad Is this you? Sro23 (talk) 22:19, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

@Sro23: Nope. Thanks for letting me know. GAB^gab 23:32, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

chainstore paradox

Hello,

A Nash equilibrium does not care for credibility of threats. For this one needs a stronger concept, i.e. subgame perfection.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-credible_threat

Seems like to edit wikipedia one has to have been for years on wikipedia 1. to be credible and 2nd to understand how use this incredibly complicated system.

Have a nice day,

Michel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michel1006560 (talk • contribs) 14:03, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Socks

Hi GeneralizationsAreBad. I saw that you marked World Deaf Futsal/Football Championships as G5 for being create by a Rowingasia sock. Would you also mind looking at the contributions of Tornado1248 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and let me know if you think they might be the same user? I initially suspected that they were a sock of Mauricio80 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (see SPI, but now I'm not so sure.- MrX 13:39, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

@MrX: Tornado1248 is a CU-confirmed Rowingasia sock. However, there is some similarity in the subject areas frequented by both masters. Is there a remote possibility that they are related? GAB^gab 20:15, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

They may be the same, or related, but I'm not sure. Mauricio80 usually create articles with a future year in the title, otherwise there are quite a few similarities such as the flag-cruft.- MrX 00:23, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Hmmm. I suggest asking a friendly neighborhood checkuser if there is a potential connection... GAB^gab 00:25, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't think it makes much difference and I don't think I could make a convincing case for a CU. What's important is that we recognize the socks as they appear so they can promptly be put back in the drawer.- MrX 13:09, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Page mover granted

Hello, GeneralizationsAreBad. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, and move subpages when moving the parent page(s).

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:

• Wikipedia:Requested moves
• Category:Articles to be moved, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, post here, or just let me know. Thank you, and happy editing! Katie^talk 19:04, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

@KrakatoaKatie: much appreciated, thank you. GAB^gab 03:26, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your Assistance. Regards --Laxnesh LOKEN (talk) 19:38, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

I didn't do much of anything, but thanks anyways. GAB^gab 19:39, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Angelz7777

I updates the peaceful nations (Islamic States), original ideology in the Islamic state wiki page and it is relevant, also original flag, remember the terrorist flag is black it is not the terrorist flag. this ideology is peace to all. so important — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angelz7777 (talk • contribs) 12:13, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

I've replied on your talk page. GAB^gab 22:23, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Sir,this was from neutral point of view, no harm to all, best for the peace and humanity in this world, hope you would understand, this is totally neutral. your consolidation is highly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angelz7777 (talk • contribs) 02:31, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Carré d'As IV incident

Hello! Your submission of Carré d'As IV incident at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:52, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Europefan

Do you think is MArischka is Europefan? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:03, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

@Anna Frodesiak: Yep, it's our old friend in Oldenburg. GAB^gab 22:04, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Cheers. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:08, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

I had just woken up and was foggy. I should have checked some of the histories. That would have shown it to be him. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:26, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

@Anna Frodesiak: No problem. By the way, I really respect your attempts to get Gabriella Comito to stop the socking and disruption. Unfortunately, so many of these LTAs are just persistent, if not actually malicious. Either way, thank you. GAB^gab 22:29, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

01:06:36, 9 July 2016 review of submission by Majid KMH

• Majid KMH (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:What is scientific reasons that Muslim stand or face toward Kabbeh while in pray or sleep or in death in their grave? (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Your explanation is not and dose not make sense. First it was said no reference to this article, then I gave reference. later get different excuse for that. do you have such article? does any one in the world knows about the facts? If the viewer knows about this please give me reference link so I disregard my article of fact. Please be logical, and search your

data base for such article if you find similar please let me know. thank you.

@Majid KMH: Thank you for contacting me with your concerns. At the time that I reviewed the article, it looked like this, and there weren't sources. Since then, I have not edited the article. I have looked at the article since, and here are my recommendations:

• Of the three references I could find through a simple Google search, none of them included any mention of Islam or the Kaabeh. At Wikipedia, we need to directly support our assertions with references. This goes for writing our own articles, as well as adding to preexisting articles (such as this). Please see WP:OR, WP:V, and WP:SYNTH.
• Wikipedia does not have articles in question-and-answer format, so the title seems inappropriate to me.
• You can improve the draft and resubmit it. However, the new reviewers may say something similar.
• I recommend that you read WP:YFA for further helpful advice on writing an article.

Thanks, GAB^gab 01:41, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

no wp:self published source

Per the discussion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums/Archive_46#Piero_Scaruffi_-_Final_Verdict_on_using_him_as_a_source_in_reviews there's a very clear consensus here that Scaruffi is not to be used as a source in music/album articles in any capacity. So please, do not add his opinions anymore. It is a wp:self published source. Since this is a long running dispute, any contributor warned by the situation and who doesn't respect it, would encounter sanctions and could be blocked from editing. Thanks. You've been informed because you used this source here. Woovee (talk) 15:49, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

@Woovee: Alright, thanks for the notification. I was not aware of the consensus at the time. Regards, GAB^gab 15:55, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Can you edit my page and make it published?

You reviewsed my page. Can you edit it and make it published? This is the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Audiowav_Media_Inc._/_WAV_Global

I have inserted verifiable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angelwriting (talk • contribs) 03:39, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. GAB^gab 13:33, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Carré d'As IV incident

On 14 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Carré d'As IV incident, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that on September 2, 2008, Somali pirates seized the yacht Carré d'As IV, prompting a French commando operation? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Carré d'As IV incident. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Carré d'As IV incident), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 14:21, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Request on 23:23:37, 14 July 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Lee Price

• Lee Price (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Mary Baer (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Lee Price (talk) 23:23, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Please delete the proposed article for Mary Baer. However, your reason for declination makes no sense at all.

Replied on your talk page. GAB^gab 13:33, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes. Please delete the proposed article for Mary Baer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lee Price (talk • contribs) 14:16, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Done - I have tagged the page for deletion. An administrator will delete the page shortly. GAB^gab 14:39, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

AFD

In situations where an AFD seems to be created mistakenly or improperly, do we close it? Referring to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/That Poppy. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 18:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

@Adog104: I've left a note for the nom, asking them to clarify whether they did indeed mean to XFD the article. If they did, then we can reformat it. If not, then they can just withdraw the nomination and close the discussion. GAB^gab 19:13, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Alrighty then, thank you! Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 19:13, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Wait you tagged the wrong editor lol, Elliecontex (talk · contribs) is the one who nominated the article for deletion. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 19:16, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, isn't that embarrassing. Fixed. Sorry, I'm used to editors signing their AFD noms. GAB^gab 19:30, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

You're good, my mistake for not specifying which editor tagged it! Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 19:31, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

And that was a carefully crafted personalized message, not a template :p GAB^gab 19:34, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

That's fine, I appreciate your input. I'm still not 100% sure what I'm doing on these talk pages, etc., so it's good to learn. :) So strange that an innocuous page I created seems to be in the middle of an edit war.TheFatJamoc (talk) 21:56, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

10:00:17, 16 July 2016 review of submission by Aalnafia

• Aalnafia (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Khalid Hamad abuhaimed (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear the reviewer, Khalid Abuhaimed is popular in Saudi Arabia and has been participating in charity works. We believe that we aren't generalizing someone but writing some knowledge. Please I ask you to approve this article.

Kindest regards, Abdulrahman Alnafia.

Responded on your talk page. GAB^gab 17:55, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

06:22:49, 17 July 2016 review of submission by 68.229.28.220

• 68.229.28.220 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Phillip A. Hall III (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, I really need your assistance to publish my clients WiKi Page. Your review States that I need to tone down the promotional tone of the page. But, I needed more details as to what is in the page that needs to be toned down. I am really confused at this moment & don't know where to go from here. I give you rights to the page to correct anything that needs to be corrected because I'm totally Stumped At This Time. If you can So kindly correct his page properly & publish would take care of any issues the page is having. My client is a very well known Actor/Entertainer/Model. He has broken many records & continues to do so. Also he is related a Legend. Please fix this page properly and publish. We would really appreciate that. Right now our hands are tied in confusion & desperately need your assistance, Thank You!

68.229.28.220 (talk) 06:22, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Responded on your talk page. GAB^gab 17:55, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank You For Your reply, I'm still fixing this page as we speak. But I'm not being paid to make his page. I'm labeled his manager due to me assisting him with his career. But we are good friends and I want to make sure he is getting noticed for all the accomplishments he has made. Also, to inform the public his talents, family & projects ha was in & still doing that are high profile. So at this very moment, I'm fixing the grammer. And trying to tone down the said promo feel of the page. I really want this to get completed soon. So at this point by what you see on his page. What would I need to do to get the page approved by you. I only want to work with one person. I just didn't hear back from you so I had to resubmit the page earlier as you already seen. Also, I am also going to join the group you stated very soon. But if you can outline in steps like in a 1-5 order I would appreciate that and get theses things done for approval. Please contact me with this info as soon as you can. Thank You

68.229.28.220 (talk) 00:20, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

04:11:59, 18 July 2016 review of submission by Geetha akkihebbal

• Geetha akkihebbal (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:T N Suresh Kumar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

i am extremely unhappy as my created page was declined about "Mr.suresh kumar's" wikipedia page. i am ready to spend some more time but i wanted it to be created.kindly help. firstly this is my first project and i am not a software person.kindly help me to write inline citations

Responded on your talk page. GAB^gab 13:26, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

18:30:03, 19 July 2016 review of submission by Adamcurley

• Adamcurley (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:SmileyCookie.com (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I was unaware of the critical importance of well developed citations-- also I was unaware of how in-depth one should be. I am requesting a re-review because I have added credible citations and embedded them accordingly. I feel the SmileyCookie Wiki page is finally ready to be published.

Please see your talk page for my response. Regards, GAB^gab 23:04, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

UnbiasedVictory

UnbiasedVictory is back as User:Space man J. 2605:6001:E484:1000:A89E:7688:CF15:1751 (talk) 21:29, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks - I'll look into it. GAB^gab 23:01, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Notability in Knight's Cross Holder articles

Hi, since you participated in an AfD discussion that involved this topic, I'm letting you know that I started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Notability in Knight's Cross Holder Articles -- to see if the issue can be dealt on a systemic basis, rather than one off AfDs.

One of the suggestions I got was to see if an RfC may need to be formulated, so I'm seeking input into this potential RfC or other possible ways to address the notability concern in similar articles. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:42, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm glad you opened a discussion on this. GAB^gab 12:33, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Closing panel for New York naming debate

A debate is underway about moving New York to New York (state) and placing either the city, the dab page or a broad-concept article at the "New York" base name. Would you be willing to exercise your wisdom and participate in a closing panel tasked with adjudicating this 15-year-old conundrum? Apply here: Talk:New York/July 2016 move request#Closing panel. Note that the move was first approved on June 18 then overturned on July 7 and relisted as a structured debate to gather wider input. You might want to read those prior discussions to get a feel for the arguments. (Be sure to have your cup of tea handy!) — JFG ^talk 19:52, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

I'll take a look, although I think this will be a very long read. But ever since I slogged through All the King's Men, I think I've become accustomed to lengthy reads :) GAB^gab 22:06, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

07:29:32, 21 July 2016 review of submission by Geetha akkihebbal

• Geetha akkihebbal (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:T N Suresh Kumar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

my article Submission was declined on 16 July 2016 by GeneralizationsAreBad (talk). as The content of this submission not meeting for inline citations... Now, i have made the changes as suggested.kindly advice me to make any more changes if required,i want to make sure everything ok before re-submission.

 below is the link of the draft:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:T_N_Suresh_Kumar regards Geetha

Responded on your talk page. GAB^gab 14:12, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

AfC Notice

Looks like this AfC decline was posted to a disambig due to a recent name change. Just FYI. TimothyJosephWood 14:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Ah, I see. They evidently changed their username. GAB^gab 14:10, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

About a page I tagged

Hi @GeneralizationsAreBad:, can you please explain why you reviewed the page I tagged? I am making good edits and I'm not a sock. I asked because I want to know why it was reviewed. Thanks! --ThunderFan109 ^{(Thunder Up!)} 03:19, 23 July 2016 (UTC) ThunderFan109 ^{(Thunder Up!)} 03:19, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

@ThunderFan109: Reviewing is just done to take pages off a long "Unreviewed" list, and to show they're unproblematic. Of course, there was nothing wrong with the pages I reviewed. No worries, I never accused you of being a sock . GAB^gab 03:24, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

I know man I am not a sock thanks for not accusing me. You get to review pages off the Unreviewed list with the reviewer flag? That seems cool! --ThunderFan109 ^{(Thunder Up!)} 03:26, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

It's nice, but ultimately, the best things of this site are not just the perks. Content work is a lot more fun and rewarding. GAB^gab 00:25, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Request on 06:39:01, 23 July 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Timsworth

• Timsworth (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Selves We Cannot Forgive (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I'm aware of the view that more sources = better verified information, however, I believe that the source that I have provided is the most official source possible for the subject matter. What better source for information on an album than from the record label themselves? In this particular instance, I don't believe more sources for the particular information detailed thus far to be beneficial as any other sources are more than likely to have received their information from the very source that I am citing. Timsworth (talk) 06:39, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Responded on your talk page. GAB^gab 00:29, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Requesting not to delete webedict page

Hello ,I request you to remove the speedy deletation tag as reason is that It's a very reputed company in domestic market as it came online very late so its not famous on internet but soon will be. Its my humble request — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhumil777 (talk • contribs) 11:09, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

A year ago ...

battle for credible, respected information
... you were recipient no. 1277 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:27, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! I remember it like it was a year ago :) GAB^gab 01:26, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

A request

Can you please take care of the allegations regarding this article, which you recently copy edited, that says the article needs to be copy edited? Mhhossein (talk) 15:01, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

@Mhhossein: While I hope I made some improvement through copyediting, I think more work could certainly help to get the article in better shape. Some of the phrasing and ideas are difficult to understand and convey, at least from my (albeit limited) vantage point. I can try to help out in the future, though, and I'm confident that we can make this work. GAB^gab 01:07, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

07:34:09, 28 July 2016 review of submission by Geetha akkihebbal

• Geetha akkihebbal (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:T N Suresh Kumar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

hello i have made the correction regarding inline citation.i will be thankful to you if could kindly review the same . i have included gallery at the beginning of the article with video link of the original cockpit videos is it ok? i have presented all data from leading national papers of india,year books/infopedia ,TV interviews telecasted and original videos. kindly help me to improve .then i will resubmit for approval. regards geetha

Replied on your talk page. GAB^gab 16:23, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

05:52:07, 30 July 2016 review of submission by Geetha akkihebbal

• Geetha akkihebbal (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:T N Suresh Kumar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

hello good morning i have made changes using inline citation/footnote method. kindly review please as i wish to resubmit again. i have used all the authentic information collected from national newspapers,year books,infopedia TV telecast coverage's etc.. i have inserted gallery in the beginning of the article with original video links of edge of space and zero gravity flights performed by Mr. T N suresh kumar is it ok? kindly advice me regards geetha

Replied on your talk page. GAB^gab 16:23, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Operation Infinite Reach

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Operation Infinite Reach 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 Kabahaly -- Kabahaly (talk) 10:40, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Kabahaly - I hope you find it interesting. GAB^gab 16:13, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Ping

Just an FYI, I'm pretty sure the ping doesn't go through unless there's a signature included in the edit. TimothyJosephWood 20:47, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

As below. GAB^gab 20:55, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

FYI

Pings don't work without a new signature. NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:49, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. I thought people were just ignoring me GAB^gab 20:55, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Nope, still won't work. The ping and the signature have to be in the same edit. NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:57, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

OK, then. GAB^gab 21:13, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

12:31:33, 1 August 2016 review of submission by Geetha akkihebbal

• Geetha akkihebbal (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:T N Suresh Kumar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

hello i have made changes as advised by you. kindly review once again and give your suggestion . regards geetha

@Geetha akkihebbal: The "Early life" and "Career" sections are still unsourced, and the article still has a rather promotional tone that should be corrected. Sorry for all of the criticism, it's just that it's best to get this worked out before resubmitting. GAB^gab 15:01, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Exsite Webware article deleted, starting again

You noted that "Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources"; however, open source software only requires "relatively informal sources" according to the guidelines. Are we able to start again, or shall I re-start from the beginning? The article gets deleted every 3 or 4 years, and it's difficult to start again from zero each time. Santamoly (talk) 06:43, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page... GAB^gab 16:16, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Submission Review

Hi GeneralizationsAreBad,

Thank you for reviewing my article, and for your advice. This is my first article, and I completely forgot about referencing, I do apologise. I have made the recommended changes. Thank you again.

Regards, Edward

P.S. This is my second time posting this, as the last time looked messy, and I am rather a perfectionist. I apologise for the inconvenience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EdwardJBourke (talk • contribs) 08:24, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page... GAB^gab 16:17, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi GeneralizationsAreBad,

Thank you so, so much for your reply. I have added an additional reference, and also added page numbers. There is only one book without a cited page number, as I took the reference from another page, that did not cite a page number. I hope this is ok. Thank again, and I hope to hear from you soon.

Regards, Edward — Preceding unsigned comment added by EdwardJBourke (talk • contribs) 02:45, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

13:31:02, 3 August 2016 review of submission by Geetha akkihebbal

• Geetha akkihebbal (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:T N Suresh Kumar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

hello Sorry for the repeated reviews. I have incorporated all those changes as advised. Kindly review once again & give your suggestion.

regards

Akkihebbal Geetha

Replied on your talk page. GAB^gab 16:24, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Carré d'As IV incident

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Carré d'As IV incident 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 Parsecboy -- Parsecboy (talk) 20:40, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Rolling back edits

I don't typically go through a sock's edits and roll them back unless there's something special or if it's a VO account. It's really up to you and every case varies.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:21, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Alright. I am used to the WP:BOGOF model, but I will reconsider this in the future when dealing with this master. GAB^gab 21:23, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Mendoza

T6t524 (talk) 10:02, 4 August 2016 (UTC)These are the informations was provided by here, the proplem is I can't prove that.T6t524 (talk) 10:02, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

@T6t524: I don't understand what you mean - could you please clarify? If you read the "draft declined" notice on your talk page, it should give you a better idea of why I declined and what issues you might want to address in the draft before you choose to resubmit it. GAB^gab 14:41, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

@GeneralizationAreBad and GAB: I mean that these are the informations and reference which I was provided and there is no more references, shethe topic about is a rising talent in American Horror Story and many other movies, so referencing is little hard more than that, there is a list of interviews and articles in Publicity section which are available only as a hard copies now.

@T6t524: Understood. Quite simply put, Wikipedia works on the basis of notability, meaning that even if people/things exist, they are not necessarily considered "notable" and suitable for their own article. If referencing is hard, this may be a sign that this individual is non-notable, and that it may be too soon for an article. Our general notability guideline is as follows:

"If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list."

Further details on the GNG are available here. Regards,

GAB^gab 14:44, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

14:25:57, 4 August 2016 review of submission by Geetha akkihebbal

• Geetha akkihebbal (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:T N Suresh Kumar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello i am fine. Thank you very much for all the help in correcting the draft. I have made all the necessary amendments and sending it to you for review once again. Sorry to trouble you time and again.

kind regards

Akkihebbal Geetha

Please see the reply on your talk page... Thanks. GAB^gab 15:17, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Carré d'As IV incident

The article Carré d'As IV incident you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Carré d'As IV incident for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Parsecboy -- Parsecboy (talk) 20:21, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

I just saw this article; congrats on GA for it. Kierzek (talk) 15:02, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

@Kierzek: Thanks! I'm also waiting on a GA for 1995 CIA disinformation controversy, which is actually the first article I've created. I'm sad that my Operation Zeppelin draft has stalled - maybe I'll revive it sometime. GAB^gab 15:11, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Operation Zeppelin is mentioned and cited in the Walter Schellenberg article. That may offer you some help. Kierzek (talk) 15:15, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

There's really only one major study on it, so I am unsure whether that's sufficient sourcing. But indeed, I've seen it alluded to on Wikipedia, so an article might do some good. GAB^gab 15:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

19:28:17, 5 August 2016 review of submission by Santamoly

• Santamoly (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Exsite Webware (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Your notes in declining the submission state "Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". However, the notability requirements for open-source software don't say that. Can you advise me why you're applying this standard in this instance when the requirements are actually different?

Thanks :-)

@Santamoly: Hi, thanks for contacting me. I can fully understand that my position must seem very bureaucratic and frustrating, and so I am truly sorry about that. As to the question of notability requirements, I understand that WP:NSOFT is more lenient with open-source software. However, I think it's important to note that NSOFT is ultimately an essay that may be consulted, rather than a policy (WP:GNG). Take, for instance, GNG's supremacy over an essay such as WP:SOLDIER. Furthermore, when checking the source, it appeared to be a download site that told me very little about the subject (unless I am somehow missing something there). Thus, I also had to take WP:V into consideration, since the citation didn't back up the content provided. If you would perhaps add a few more sources to indicate notability, this would help preclude AFD, too, and ultimately enhance the quality and longevity of the article. If you would like a second opinion, feel free to contact a fellow reviewer. Thanks! GAB^gab 02:04, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

07:18:56, 6 August 2016 review of submission by Geetha akkihebbal

• Geetha akkihebbal (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:T N Suresh Kumar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

hello i have taken care of all those changes as suggested by you. kindly re-review.

regards

akkihebbal geetha

10:50:58, 9 August 2016 review of submission by Geetha akkihebbal

• Geetha akkihebbal (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:T N Suresh Kumar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

hello i made the changes as advised by you.kindly review once again.i am extremely sorry to trouble you time and again kind regards akkihebbal geetha

13:05:59, 11 August 2016 review of submission by Geetha akkihebbal

• Geetha akkihebbal (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:T N Suresh Kumar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello as advised i have made the changes.kindly let me know if this needs to be edited further regards akkihebbal geetha

Mail

My talk page says that I have mail, but I have tried to check for email and I don't see it. Can you please resend? Robert McClenon (talk) 17:39, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: I just resent it. It's iffy, sorry for that. GAB^gab 17:44, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

It was in the spam folder. Got it. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:50, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Heh, I think your email server really understands the quality of my writing. GAB^gab 17:51, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

your change to my comment on Zika

This line makes the implication that abortion is justifiable due to the fact most cases are rape "and widespread sexual violence results in many women getting pregnant against their will"

You need to prove that there is an epidemic of pregnant women due to rape in Latin America. This is unlikely to be true. It is very likely to be a very very very small amount of pregnancies are due to rape. It is 1/2000 abortions in the US are due to rape. Not sure the actual pregnancy numbers but I assume it is low. We can't be making the implication that men are just walking around raping everyone. Unless it is sourced and true. Furthermore rape doesn't' necessarily lead to pregnancy.

Whether or not you believe in abortion or not you can't dismiss it as being a purely Roman Catholic idea without exploring their thought process "ccess to contraceptives is limited in the predominantly Roman Catholic region,[146] and widespread sexual violence results in many women getting pregnant against their will"

Why not just say a majority of Latin Americans think abortion is unethical. The implication is religious people are stupid. So the quote should say: the Roman catholic church is unsure when life begins therefore many of the region take the stance to not allow abortion after conception. The quote is more clear and it doesn't demean people for having a certain view different from yours. The content here assumes abortion is always justifiable. That is a controversial opinion and not a FACT.

Aug 15, 2016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samuelboyle96 (talk • contribs) 20:28, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

@Samuelboyle96: The source used for this is here. The removed content essentially says two things:

• "Widespread sexual violence results in many women getting pregnant against their will."

• "Anti-abortion laws in much of the region leave women with no recourse once they become pregnant." Then it provides specific examples.

Both of these claims are supported by the source cited.

The content does not make the link between Catholicism and abortion; rather, it says that "Access to contraceptives is limited." I do not think either of us need to "prove" anything, and there is no implication in the content that "there is an epidemic of pregnant women due to rape in Latin America" (the word used is "many," which is unclear), that "religious people are stupid," or that abortion is justifiable. Regardless of percentages, rape can lead to pregnancy, and I don't see the need for an extended discussion on abortion vs. religion in this particular article - we have Abortion and the Catholic Church for that exact reason. I would appreciate if you would engage on the talk page instead of reverting back to your preferred version, as per WP:BRD. Regards, GAB^gab 20:55, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

11:46:40, 16 August 2016 review of submission by Geetha akkihebbal

• Geetha akkihebbal (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:T N Suresh Kumar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

hello I have made changes as advised. Information provided in the article are authentic and verifiable. I have pushed the source down to external links in the "Accolade," "Early Life" and "Career" sections as per your earlier advice on 5 august 2016. I have deleted most of the phrases also.

Kindly suggest if it requires any further refinements.

regards

Akkihebbal Geetha

DYK for 1995 CIA disinformation controversy

On 17 August 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1995 CIA disinformation controversy, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that KGB mole Aldrich Ames enabled the Soviet Union and Russia to funnel disinformation to the CIA for eight years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1995 CIA disinformation controversy. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 1995 CIA disinformation controversy), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:06, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

DYK for 1995 CIA disinformation controversy

On 17 August 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1995 CIA disinformation controversy, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that KGB mole Aldrich Ames enabled the Soviet Union and Russia to funnel disinformation to the CIA for eight years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1995 CIA disinformation controversy. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:06, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Operation Infinite Reach

The article Operation Infinite Reach you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Operation Infinite Reach for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kabahaly -- Kabahaly (talk) 03:41, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016

Regarding pv Sindhu see the secunderabad wiki page it is only known as hyderabad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Padukati (talk • contribs) 23:11, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

The source says she is from Secunderabad, and so that's why I believe we ought to keep her residence as such. Please don't edit-war over this. GAB^gab 23:19, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

New sock attacking you

Just wanted to let you know about User:GeneralizationsAreTikeem. ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 15:44, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. The fun never stops when I'm in town. GAB^gab 15:45, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank You

GAB - Thank you for your feedback on draft:Michael_Leonard_Hecht. I have tried to rewrite in a more neutral tone, and per other guidelines. Appreciate it! Djelky (talk) 17:44, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Sure, glad to help GAB^gab 17:49, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Belle Nuru

Hello, it seems that the editor that nominated that Belle Nuru be deleted is a constant spammer of deletion discussions and I'm not sure that he has reason to be. She passes musician guidelines by having two albums released by a major label. Can the tag be removed since no one is even commenting in the discussion? Iknowallsecrets (talk) 01:43, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

@Iknowallsecrets: Sorry, regardless of whether you believe the nomination is valid, it's always best to present your arguments at the AFD - if the musician is notable, then go ahead and say so. After a week or so, an administrator will assess whether there is a consensus to keep, delete, merge, userfy, etc. Please do not remove the tags, as repeatedly doing so is considered disruptive. Thanks, GAB^gab 01:47, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, can you please direct me to any admins, so that I may ask one to personally look into this? Iknowallsecrets (talk) 01:54, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

@Iknowallsecrets: I recommend you ask the nominator if you have any questions or direct your comments to the AFD page, rather than involve an admin in this. It usually takes a couple of days for people to begin AFD discussions, so even if no one is talking now, they will be soon. Also, I do not see anything explicitly wrong with the nomination, and the nominator has made only 10 XFDs in about a month - that doesn't seem like spamming to me. Regards, GAB^gab 02:01, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Operation Infinite Reach

On 22 August 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Operation Infinite Reach, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that on August 20, 1998, President Bill Clinton ordered cruise missile strikes on Osama bin Laden's Afghan training camps and a Sudanese pharmaceutical plant? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Operation Infinite Reach. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Operation Infinite Reach), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:01, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

13:08:53, 22 August 2016 review of submission by Geetha akkihebbal

• Geetha akkihebbal (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:T N Suresh Kumar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

hello thanks for all the help kind regards akkihebbal geetha

@Geetha akkihebbal: You're very welcome. As I've stated on your talk page, please refrain from any conflict-of-interest (COI) editing if you do have a COI, and feel free to ask other reviewers for assistance. GAB^gab 17:58, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

"Lacks a lead"

Regarding your decline of Draft:Building Performance Institute (BPI): "Lacks a lead" is not a valid (or helpful) decline reason. As a reminder, the threshold for accepting an article at AfC is that it would likely survive an AfD, nothing more. Not having a lead is a relatively minor stylistic issue which is easily addressed with a {{Lead missing}} tag or by simply writing one yourself. Joe Roe (talk) 22:16, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

@Joe Roe: Understood - my apologies for this. Thanks for letting me know, and I'll be sure to take care with future AFCs. GAB^gab 22:44, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Clerk trainee

GAB, are you interested in becoming an SPI clerk trainee with me as your trainer?--Bbb23 (talk) 22:35, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

@Bbb23: I am very much interested in this - while I may be online rather less in the coming months, I will do my best to keep up. I appreciate the offer GAB^gab 22:43, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

How much time do you think you'd be able to devote to it?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:02, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

I should be able to contribute consistently during weekends, as well as rather more sparingly during the week (no more than 30 minutes or so per day, and I may not be online every day). That being said, this might fluctuate depending on my weekly/monthly workload and commitments. Sorry if this is insufficient. GAB^gab 23:09, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Why don't we give it a go. If it's too much for you, tell me. If I think it's too spotty, I'll say something. Here's your first assignment. If you haven't already done so, please read Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Clerk and checkuser procedures. After that, answer the following questions here on your Talk page:

1. What kinds of behavior constitute disruptive behavior from a policy standpoint?
2. What can a clerk do in a case?
3. What can't a clerk do in a case?
4. When evaluating a new case, what would be your checklist of things to look at?
5. When evaluating a reopened case, would be be your checklist of things to look at?
6. This isn't a question. Please tell me if there is anything wrong on the clerk procedures page.

Please ping me when you respond, even though I have you on my watchlist. Also, anytime, now or later, if you have a question, feel free to ask, and never be embarrassed to ask something you think you should already know or that I may have answered before. The more we communicate, the better. This is my first time training anyone, so if I say something to you that bothers you, let me know; I can be blunt.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:46, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Just occurred to me. If you want to create a subpage for this stuff, might be better so it doesn't clutter up your Talk page. Let me know.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:47, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

OK. See User:GeneralizationsAreBad/Clerking. GAB^gab 01:40, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Ha! It could be read Generalizations Are Bad Clerking. I won't be able to look at what you've said there until tomorrow.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Well, I can always improve :) GAB^gab 00:27, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Half Barnstar
		It's rare to see editors work through disagreements as well as you and Cjhanley. Rhoark (talk) 20:38, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

@Rhoark: That was a while ago, but thanks for the kind word. GAB^gab 14:36, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Had to wait and see if it would stick :) Rhoark (talk) 16:56, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Your user name

May I just say I think you should've used "GeneralizationsAreBadM'kay". lol ^{(talk page stalker)} CrashUnderride 21:05, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

@Crash Underride: I've heard that one before - I can change my signature, perhaps? GAB^gab 14:38, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Eiher one's funny to me. lol. Yes, I'm immature, typical South Park fan I guess. M'kay? ^{(talk page stalker)} CrashUnderride 20:51, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Abdul Qadir Mumin

I've removed the proposed deletion, which you have repeatedly added multiple times. See diff 736178216. 80.221.159.67 (talk) 16:49, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page; see also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dave8899. GAB^gab 14:18, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Congrats

Hello GAB. I saw this and I wanted to say congratulations on becoming an SPI clerk. After months (years) of watching your work on these as a regular editor I know that you will do well. I also know that you have good admins to work with when question come up. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 18:37, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

@MarnetteD: Thank you very much - that's quite kind of you. Like Wikipedia generally, there is a learning curve, but I think I'll gradually come to grips with it. I enjoy this sort of thing :) GAB^gab 18:39, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

SPI opening I just royally muffed up

Just WP:TROUT me already. I thought I was reopening the SPI for User:Michaeluzomam but confused myself into accidentally opening it under the nonexistent username User:Michaeluzomamichael. I don't know how to fix this without bollixing things up even worse, so I am abasing myself to you, o noble SPI clerk trainee GAB! Thank you for rectifying my end-of-the-day cluelessness! - Julietdeltalima (talk) 00:55, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

@Julietdeltalima: Hey, no worries. Just a couple days ago, I tagged a sock and closed the case without said sock actually blocked. Cheers, GAB^gab 13:28, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Archiving training SPI's after you close them?

Hi. Can I go ahead and archive the Swag master joe SPI, which you closed a few days ago? Or is archival part of the processing which the note says I'm supposed to allow you to do without interference? — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 06:42, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

@Richwales: Thanks for asking - I don't think there's a problem with that. GAB^gab 13:58, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

OK, thanks. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 16:40, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

I challenge you

You say you "want to improve Wikipedia's much-maligned reputation, and transform it into a credible, respected source of research and news information, free from bias and editorializing. I am indeed opinionated, but also a strong believer in objective, judicious, and rigorous writing. I understand the importance of maintaining and improving existing content, as well as creating new content; I enjoy sprucing up articles in disrepair."

Wiki's maligned-reputation is created by bias & terrible scholarship. Are you willing / able to join the discussion & improve things??? See Yom Kippur / Talk. -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Yom_Kippur -- Purrhaps (talk) 02:07, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps I'll take a look. Regards, GAB^gab 12:32, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Who should "close" an SPI

Hi. Just to be sure you get the right info, anyone is allowed to close an SPI — but only clerks or CheckUsers should archive a case. (See WP:SPI/AI.) — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 17:23, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

@Richwales: Sorry but not quite right. Any administrator is allowed to close an SPI.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:28, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Understood. Thanks again. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 17:38, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Acknowledged. Would you like me to refrain from closing cases in the future? Regards, GAB^gab 21:02, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

No, a clerk can close an SPI. When I said administrator, that meant a non-clerk administrator.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:20, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

OK, good. Just wanted to be sure on that point. GAB^gab 21:21, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Some religion scholar

Thanks very much for handling my request.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:32, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

@Bbb23: Sure, you're welcome - that's what I'm here for. GAB^gab 22:39, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Junior5a SPI

Hey GAB, I don't want to overwhelm the SPI with every account that's created, but they did create more. Should I hold off adding them? RickinBaltimore (talk) 20:42, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

I don't see why not - I'll add them to the list. GAB^gab 21:08, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Yale Law &amp; Policy Review

Your comment "the refs don't indicate how the articles are themselves notable" is confusing to me since no other law review Wikipedia pages cite this information. See for example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_University_Law_Review and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yale_Law_Journal.

Why aren't these sections deleted as well? Is the problem with the word "notable?" If so, what if I changed that section to "Past Articles/Authors" ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vrp609 (talk • contribs) 22:03, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for asking. First, please note that just because another article has or does not have something, it doesn't necessarily mean that something is desirable or even acceptable. Plenty of articles have problems that need to be fixed, so we typically try to look at each article individually, rather than comparing them to others. The word "notable" refers to the fact that there is no source provided that independently notes that these articles are notable in themselves. See also our notability guideline. The guideline cited by Randykitty, WP:JWG, says that "Lists of contributors and full editorial boards should be left out of articles, unless there are independent reliable sources discussing their involvement with the journal in more than an in-passing way." That's not a hard-and-fast rule, but advice. I would be happy to discuss this further on the article's talk page, along with Randykitty. Thanks, GAB^gab 22:09, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Sorry - I am happy to discuss with Randykitty in that forum but am having trouble accessing it. I click on talk part of the article's page, but there seems to be no where to add a section to talk. While that guideline cited makes sense, I didn't add a list of contributors - in the journal's history there have been hundreds of contributors. I simply added to the existing section a few of the articles published (probably around 20 - a fraction of the total amount). I thought this was helpful to give a flavor for the authors and types of pieces that we have published over our history.

Vrp609 (talk) 22:16, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Vrp609, given that you say "that we have published over our history" (my emphasis), I think you'd do good to also read WP:COI. I also left a message about this issue (as I now see with the same gist as the one above) on my talk page. --Randykitty (talk) 22:28, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for this information Randykitty. I actually read this information before I edited anything and I have no COI to disclose as I am not a paid editor for the journal and have no financial incentive or ties whatsoever. But I appreciate the heads up. Vrp609 (talk) 22:34, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

• Vrp609, please read WP:COI anyway, because it is not necessary to have a financial interest in order to have a COI. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 11:34, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Second Opinion Needed

Hey! I saw you were the last one to decline Draft:Selves We Cannot Forgive, so I'm wanting to get your input on things since the author added two more review sources, here and here. I'm looking at WP:NALBUM and I'm wondering if Sputnik Music and Metal Injection meet the "non-trivial, multiple" threshold required by point 1. Thoughts? RegistryKey^(RegEdit) 07:02, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

@RegistryKey: OK, I'll take a look at this later. Thanks for asking! GAB^gab 14:54, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

@RegistryKey: Sorry about the delay - working on a bit of a deadline. I love Sputnik, but I'm not sure the review counts - it was written by a contributor, but Sputnik's Wikipedia page states that contributors' reviews "are not eligible for inclusion by either Metacritic or Wikipedia." That being said, the Wikipedia page isn't the best guide to this, either. Regardless, I've seen Sputnik reviews by lower-ranked users cited before, although I don't really know if they should be. However, I am on the fence about the second source, since I'm not terribly well-versed in the world of music-related sourcing. I'm sorry that I couldn't be more helpful here. GAB^gab 22:12, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Adminship

Hey, I saw that you'd run before and I also saw that you're training to be a clerk. If all goes well with that, you should run again. Your edits look to be pretty good overall, based on a cursory glance, and you appear to be trying to meet the concerns posted by others. Your rationales for closing the RfA here are well thought out and rational, two qualities that a good admin needs.

Also just giving a bit of my own advice: on the MelanieC thing, I'd have checked her edits. If she was editing Spice Girls related content then she'd have received a famous person block. If she was editing unrelated articles then at most she'd have gotten a head's up (written out, not template) letting her know that her username is similar to the celebrity and that it might be good to differentiate it somehow from the moniker.

Other than that, your edits look really good and honestly, I'd recommend you trying for it again soon. I suppose it'd be better to try next year so that it shows a decent spread of time (I know that it's recommended to wait about 8 months before trying again), but when you go back up please let me know and I'll support you. I'm not seeing anything that would make me doubt that you'd be a good admin. Let me know if there's anything I can help you with in the meantime. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:06, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

@Tokyogirl79: Thank you very much for your kind words. Immediately following that RFA, I was constantly editing with an eye towards that future RFA, but I have found that it's better to edit without thinking of "This will be cited in an !oppose" or something like that. Running then was quite premature and not entirely advisable, in hindsight. But I think I've overcome my old misconception that adminship is a status symbol, and that a failed bid is a rejection of me as an editor.

No guarantees on anything, but time permitting, I may run in early summer 2017. I've done a good bit of my post-RFA checklist of things to work on, such as AFD and content work. That being said, I'm now more focused on getting Operation Infinite Reach to FA (when I have some time), as well as keeping up with clerk training and balancing all of this with my offline duties. Beyond the generic UAA, RFPP, AIV, and CSD work, the tools would be very helpful for use in my SPI work, as they would reduce a layer of bureaucracy. In any event, thanks for the advice - I'll start more rigorous RFA prep a few months before the real thing. Best, GAB^gab 15:08, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)You'd have my support. You're one of those "Wait, they aren't an admin?" users to me. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:09, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

The Jaguar does what? I didn't think I even had talkpage stalkers. Thank you, I appreciate it GAB^gab 15:12, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Support -- I think it will go swimmingly :-). K.e.coffman (talk) 17:05, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

The Jaguar !votes what??? GAB^gab 18:48, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I've never had any interactions with you (I think) but I have noticed your clerking at SPI and your doing a great job. I'd support an RFA in 2017. - Yellow Dingo (talk) 03:56, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you - that's really quite kind. GAB^gab 14:58, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PavelStaykov

Crovata made a total mess when he reopened this case. Please fix the structure or revert his edits. I have no problem reverting when it's that malformed, and although it's hard to read because it's in AN3 format, it sounds like nothing need to be done anyway.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:22, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. I'll tackle that today. GAB^gab 18:36, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

2016 Uri Attack

In you last undo, you have modified all sections that were written by other authors and were represented very well with citations. It is requested to undo your current undid and modify only relevant information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smart.maverick (talk • contribs) 21:14, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Awaiting your response ... -- smart.maverick (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:55, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

SPI; Nadra.elif/Mara kara

Here's the SPI. - LouisAragon (talk) 00:45, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks - I actually didn't know there was an earlier master, but there you have it! Cheers, GAB^gab 15:22, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

And I've deleted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Circassians in Iran which was never listed in any case. Doug Weller talk 15:44, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks - glad that was all dealt with smoothly. GAB^gab 15:45, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: You might want to see User talk:Rugby9090. Thanks! GAB^gab 15:46, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

I saw your CU request at the other talk page, but User:Bbb23 and User:Jpgordon have already checked them so I don't think I should. Doug Weller talk 15:54, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Alright, no problem. Sorry for bothering you. GAB^gab 15:55, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Never a problem. If you're ever not sure whether to contact me, contact me. Doug Weller talk 18:51, 22 September 2016 (UTC)