Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 8 sections are present.

Hi! This is my talk page, feel free to drop me a message. To experienced editors: feel free to stalk my talk page and reply to any threads here.To admins: I prefer that my talk page remain unprotected, even if it's being vandalized. Such edits do not particularly bother me and I prefer to remain accessible to anyone who would like to reach me. However, if the volume of vandalism is so high that no other solution would stop disruption, I don't mind if my talk page is semi-protected for a day or two. Hopefully, this is a rare occurrence.

Good morning. I have been getting comments on the sites I use for citations. How can I get better? -- Oluwanifemi Precious ( talk) 10:22, 28 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi again, I encourage you to read some of our documentation on how this website works. If I were you, I would start with WP:RELIABLE. Dawnseeker2000 18:49, 28 June 2024 (UTC) reply

The third round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 28 June. As with Round 2, this round was competitive: each of the 16 contestants who advanced to Round 4 scored at least 256 points.

The following editors all scored more than 400 points in Round 3:

• Generalissima ( submissions) with 1,059 points, mostly from 1 featured article on DeLancey W. Gill, 11 good articles, 18 did you know nominations, and dozens of reviews;
• Skyshifter ( submissions) with 673 points, mostly from 2 featured articles on Worlds (Porter Robinson album) and I'm God, 5 good articles, and 2 did you know nominations;
• Sammi Brie ( submissions) with 557 points, mostly from 1 featured article on KNXV-TV, 5 good articles, and 8 did you know nominations; and
• AryKun ( submissions) with 415 points, mostly from 1 featured article on Great cuckoo-dove, with a high number of bonus points from that article.

The full scores for round 3 can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 28 featured articles, 38 featured lists, 240 good articles, 92 in the news credits, and at least 285 did you know credits. They have conducted 279 featured article reviews, as well as 492 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 22 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed during Round 4, which starts on 1 July at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether for a good article, featured content, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges ( Cwmhiraeth ( talk · contribs), Epicgenius ( talk · contribs), and Frostly ( talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:30, 29 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello Elli,

Is good to be hear. I want to know if i can post the history of my community on this platform.

Thank you. -- Na Allah ( talk) 14:04, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Na Allah: depends. Anything you post should be backed by reliable sources. A page would also need to meet our notability guidelines. And if it's a community you're closely involved in, you might have a conflict of interest to worry about. Can you clarify that you're wanting to write here? Elli ( talk | contribs) 16:08, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello Eli, How do I add a picture to my page? -- Amara Patman ( talk) 07:43, 6 July 2024 (UTC) reply

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2024).

Administrator changes

• Elli
• HouseBlaster
• Pickersgill-Cunliffe

• Brianga
• De728631
• Georgewilliamherbert
• Hyacinth ( deceased)
• ProveIt
• The Night Watch

Technical news

• Local administrators can now add new links to the bottom of the site Tools menu without using JavaScript. Documentation is available on MediaWiki. ( T6086)

Miscellaneous

• The Community Wishlist is re-opening on 15 July 2024. Read more

Hi mentor! lol Today I came across a page that had information that wasn’t correct. It was on the “excess mortality” page and someone referenced an article on a study about the Covid vaccine and excess mortality. The article said there wasn’t a link between the two but whoever wrote on wiki and referenced the article said the study did say there was a link. So I edited the whole thing to say the correct thing but the sentence after it also said somewhat the same kind of stuff. That “German researchers have found a link between the Covid vaccine and excess mortality” but that didn’t have any kind of cited reference. I guess my question in all of this is, I think I saw there’s a way to hi-light certain parts of a page you might find “questionable” to go under review by other people? I don’t know how to do that first off and would that be the right thing to do for the sentence about the “German researchers” with no reference? Instead of just deleting it? If not what would be the right thing to do? I love Wikipedia, been using it for years now and been off and on doing some simple editing (still learning how to do it as you can tell) but when I see misinformation stuff like this it just drives me nuts lol. I also want to edit correctly since I really love wiki! Sorry for my super long msg :) -- Missalex420 ( talk) 08:48, 7 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Missalex420: hi; thanks for reaching out. You can tag questionable claims with {{ dubious}} if you don't feel comfortable with removing them -- but if something is clearly not in line with the sources cited, you should just remove it from the article. Elli ( talk | contribs) 13:36, 7 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi, I just created a new article Cuisine of Jerusalem. I think it might be nice for our home page did you know area, who can I consult with about this? -- PeleYoetz ( talk) 10:58, 9 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ PeleYoetz: hi! The instructions to nominate are at WP:DYKNOM; take a look there and let me know if you get stuck? Elli ( talk | contribs) 22:26, 9 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi Elli, I hope you are doing well.

I'm looking to set up a page about a UK company, Six Ticks Limited ( https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/08163992).

The company has recently released a major development in the Blockchain industry, which is showcased here so far: https://www.newbusiness.co.uk/articles/trainingeducation/innovative-technology-removes-transaction-fees-while-offering-robust-secu

Other sources of information that are not from the company website are: https://www.uknewsgroup.co.uk/exclusive-national-hotels-contract-for-six-ticks/ https://www.shropshirebiz.com/five-minutes-with/five-minutes-with-stephanie-henson https://www.severnbusinessnetwork.co.uk/member/profile/six-ticks-limited/ https://www.sme-news.co.uk/winners/six-ticks-ltd/

I'm not sure if these meet the notability criteria or not. Could you please provide some guidance?

Many thanks, Ian -- Roundwave54 ( talk) 03:33, 10 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Roundwave54: unfortunately I don't think those sources allow that company to meet the notability guidelines. WP:CORPDEPTH is pretty strict and that isn't really established here, nor are all those sources both reliable and independent. Elli ( talk | contribs) 02:38, 13 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi Elli,

Thank you for getting back to me.

I understand your points. The press release speaks about quite a significant development in blockchain, validated by Aston University. I think this needs to be on Wikipedia somewhere, so would it be better looking at something like Blockchain itself, rather than a company page?

Thanks, Ian Roundwave54 ( talk) 04:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC) reply

I am a PhD in carnatic classical music (South Indian Classical Music). So I can write, edit articles related to that form of music. Stories related to Ramayana, Mahabharata, and Hinduism are of interest to me. Musician saints and sages of Bharat such as Tyagaraja, Diskshitar, Annamayya , Ramadasa etc.... are of interest to me. -- Kk durga ( talk) 09:27, 10 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi how are you. Need some help please its my 1st edit :) -- Nicholas Andronicos ( talk) 20:42, 10 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Not sure how to add the new link ro Saint Petersberg State Institute... -- Nicholas Andronicos ( talk) 20:43, 10 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi im not sure how to do the highlight blue for example of a persons name so you can click it and go direct to the link -- Nicholas Andronicos ( talk) 02:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Nicholas Andronicos: not sure exactly what you're asking? If you want to make a link, Help:Link has relevant information. Elli ( talk | contribs) 02:36, 13 July 2024 (UTC) reply

thanks. Thats the link im after. Will try it Nicholas Andronicos ( talk) 02:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Why are you mentioned wrong thing about lodhi caste kindly give me permission so that I can edit -- Satish001111 ( talk) 15:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi Elli I want to create a wikipedia article about myself. -- Meedhya ( talk) 19:23, 13 July 2024 (UTC) reply

(Talk page stalker) Making an autobiograhy is strongly discouraged. Do you think you are notable, and have many sources about yourself? —  48 JCL 12:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC) reply

hello -- Prntnn ( talk) 17:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Does the article I am working on auto save? I only have the option to publish my page and I am still working on it. -- Troy Brewer Ministries ( talk) 21:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Is your username pronounced like "Eli", "Ellie", or something else? Cheers, Queen of Hearts  ^talk 04:12, 19 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Queen of Hearts: second option. Ellie seemed harder to usurp. Elli ( talk | contribs) 04:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, Elli. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:1954 Illinois legislative apportionment amendment, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 01:05, 21 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Has it really been five months? That's a wake-up call... Elli ( talk | contribs) 01:48, 21 July 2024 (UTC) reply

How can I publish this page? -- Arjunvijayanpp ( talk) 04:27, 22 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi Elli,

As the admin that protected the new timeline page, are you also able to update the link on the main page? Thanks :) Aydoh8 ( talk | contribs) 16:35, 24 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Aydoh8: sure :) Elli ( talk | contribs) 16:38, 24 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you. Aydoh8 ( talk | contribs) 16:38, 24 July 2024 (UTC) reply

So, are you going to provide an appropriate target for these 5 redirects? As for being a "valid CSD", this is essentially WP:CSD G8: "Redirects to targets that never existed or were deleted". The relevant section was removed entirely from the article in question and doesn't appear in the main article either. - dcljr ( talk) 04:02, 26 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Dcljr: that sounds like a great rationale for a nomination at redirects for discussion, but CSD is pretty strict. These are redirects to a target, and that target hasn't been deleted, it just no longer has a mention of the redirect's title. Deleting them without a discussion would be improper (oftentimes when such redirects are brought to RfD, content is restored to a relevant article or a new target is found). Elli ( talk | contribs) 04:28, 26 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Already doing that: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 26#Bionic Bunny. - dcljr ( talk) 04:31, 26 July 2024 (UTC) reply

So I've made over 80 edits after my 500th edit, which i feel are constructive. I've been browsing Wikipedia for 6 or 7 hours and have only left the site briefly a few times. It's taken hours to hit 80 edits because I'm reading random articles on topics I'm not even interested in and sometimes there's nothing to edit. If I don't make it to 200 new constructive edits today, can I still get extended confirmed access back, being on this site for hours and making almost 100 constructive edits, does that prove I'm trustworthy, can I please have my thing back. I didn't know gaming edits for Extended confirmed access broke the rules, one user said I was aware, but I wasn't because I didn't read my talk page a month ago. And I made around 60 unconstructive edits on Jim Cornette to get extended confirmed access, since I have 80 new constructive edits, I think I've made up those 60 edits I used to wrongfully gain extended confirmed edit access HumansRightsIsCool ( talk) 11:32, 26 July 2024 (UTC) reply

btw I accidentally wrote this message on ScottishFinnishRadish's talk page, I meant to send it you you, sorry HumansRightsIsCool ( talk) 11:35, 26 July 2024 (UTC) reply

What is looking more and more likely is that I'm going to block you indefinitely for falsifying sources and disruptive editing. This souce you added doesn't mention anything from that paragraph. This source doesn't mention Run DMC or Faces. This and this add puffery that could have been created by a LLM. There's this edit that makes the prose objectively worse and leaves in the obvious false statement, and this ECR violation. This adds content not supported by the source and this is not an improvement. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 12:16, 26 July 2024 (UTC) reply

With the Rucka Rucka Ali thing, I was trying to be fair to the Palestinians because the state of Israel and Palestine both claim Jerusalem as their capital city. As a person who's Jewish myself, I love everyone it doesn't matter if you're Arab, Jewish, Black, white, etc. my name is HumansRightsIsCool because I believe everyone is equal, I didn't know i broke a rule, there's so many rules on this site im sorry I'm bad at memorizing and reading everything. Also it is sourced that El Chapo was charged with murder, just scroll down on that page it says he was charged with murder in 1993, thats why I added it to the lead. And I don't know what an LLM is, but you're saying this thing called an LLM wrote stuff, I don't even know what that is and I've been writing stuff by myself all night. I have no friends helping me. Also you claim I'm falsifying sources,I only read the headline of the sources, I'm so tired I stayed up all night and I just assumed the sources were good so I can get back to editing because I'm extremely desperate to get extended confirmed access back. Notice how their was hardly any problems and barely any warnings before you took away my extended confirmed thing, I really wanna edit things I'm passionate about, but I can't because most pages I'm interested in require extended confirmed access. Please don't block me, I at least spent 7 hours trying to make good edits, hopefully that shows how dedicated I am to this website. HumansRightsIsCool ( talk) 12:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Also you claim my edit about University of Greifswald was false when I said there's centuries of notable people that want to that school. There is, the article already says "generations of notable people", but the schools been around since the 1400s, like over 600 years it seems, so that's why I put centuries instead of generations since I thought it also sounded cooler and more relevant. Sorry I messed up apparently. And the puffery, I didn't mean to add puffery, it wasn't my intention. It won't happen again sir, it only happened a few times thankfully, and I'll be sure not to make that mistake again. I forgot not to be biased, I was rushing some stuff because I'm desperate to get that extended confirmed thing today. If I wait for a month, I'm going to be bothered about it 24/7 the whole time. And you only complained about 6 edits I made out of 80 new ones, so yeah see most my edits there's not a problem with it, can I be trusted now. And before I hit 500 edits, most people didn't have a problem with the 400 edits I made, there was only like 2 warnings in 2 months. I'm here to build an encyclopedia and dedicated to this site. HumansRightsIsCool ( talk) 12:54, 26 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Also why do you wanna block me indefinitely because I made few mistakes. You also when you didn't read my edit summary on El Chapo and thought I added unsourced info when it was sourced, everyone make mistakes, and the edits you did complain about, i only made a few mistakes out of like 90 new edits in 7 hours. I made good edits on Communism and LGBT rights, Sinners (2007 film), Tupac Shakur, Grandparent, and so many other pages, and a few editors even pressed the "thanks" button on my edits. And I promise these mistakes won't happen again, and me editing for 7 hours non-stop not going to sleep tonight not going to work, that should show I'm extremely dedicated to this website and you can trust me with extended confirmed status. When I first got extended confirmed status my edits on Hamas I think were constructive too. HumansRightsIsCool ( talk) 13:14, 26 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ HumansRightsIsCool: I might not have communicated clearly enough: please do not rush on this. I'm going to be honest with you, the sort of edits you've made aren't a good indicator that you would be able to edit constructively in these topic areas.

You need to slow down significantly and gain a better understanding of our policies and guidelines. I get that you're here in good faith, and want to contribute to the site, but I don't think you would do well editing extended-confirmed topic areas currently. You could easily end up topic-banned, which is much harder to appeal compared to applying for extended-confirmed. I'm not going to give you a clear number of edits to make, or a clear time to wait, because if I do that it seems like you will try to game it, defeating the point. But it's going to take longer than a few days for you to get there. Elli ( talk | contribs) 13:21, 26 July 2024 (UTC) reply

You're making edits like He was considered to be one of the most powerful drug traffickers and murderers in the world. Most powerful murderers in the world? Based on a source that says in 2016 quietly dropped murder charges from the indictment and a second that doesn't mention murder? You left in teaching existed since 1436 when copyediting, a statement that makes no sense in or out of context. Rushing to get edits is not the right way to do this, and regaining extended-confirmed isn't a matter of numbers, it's a matter of demonstrating that you understand how to contribute constructively and properly use sources, not take a glance at a headline and assume it will suffice. That is behavior that we block editors for. As far as your other edits, I haven't looked at all of them. I haven't even looked at all of your edits after I removed your permission, but almost everything I checked was not an improvement, or was clearly incorrect. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 13:32, 26 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Elli if I wait a few days, that's going to be painful mentally, I bet it's going to bother me all day long 24/7. and out of the 80-90 edits I made, there was only problems with a few of them, most of my edits were constructive and some users thanked me for my edits. HumansRightsIsCool ( talk) 13:41, 26 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ ScottishFinnishRadish oh, didn't know know they dropped murder charges for El Chapo, i didn't see that part, I only read the paragraph where it says he got charged with murder. You know since I do make a few mistakes and I need to study Wikipedia rules a little more, I guess I can wait a few days to get extended confirmed access, but can you please put my edits back on Hamas so it won't hurt as bad mentally, if you add back my edits on Hamas I'll be really happy and satisfied HumansRightsIsCool ( talk) 13:47, 26 July 2024 (UTC) reply