User talk:Steve M/Archives/2020/December

Disputed reversion

Hi thanks for your message on the article concerning Islamophobia in the Conservative Party. I disagree with your edit and request you undo it. The critiques quoted are by people who would happily describe themselves as right-wing. There is nothing controversial about this.

82.17.78.24 (talk) 23:19, 24 November 2020 (UTC) @82.17.78.24: Yes, but you need to source it. Wikipedia does not allow information that has not been sourced and only you know/think, even if it is true. See WP:NOR. Best regards, 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 23:22, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

No, it is only not me which knows/thinks this. Anyone who knows the British political scene knows this. I am concerned you are editing articles you know little about. Read the wiki entries for the relevant people described as such and the descriptions are entirely factual, sourced and non-contentions. The wikilinks within the section edited link to the relevant people who are described within their own wikipedia article as right-wing (click on the entry and you will see a well-sourced article on the individual). And you are misusing roll-back which is meant for vandalism not for good-faith edits. I think you make some decent edits elsewhere but this is not one of them. 82.17.78.24 (talk) 23:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

December 2020

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

• User contributions
• Recent changes
• Watchlists
• Revision diffs
• IRC channels
• Related changes
• New pages list
• Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Izno (talk) 20:57, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Let me very strenuously remind you of the importance of edit summaries. Your edits today, for example, at WP:CSD all should have had an edit summary. --Izno (talk) 02:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

@Izno: When are they needed? Almost all my edits have summaries.

I have yet to see an edit you make on any non-article page include an edit summary. Every edit in Wikipedia-space should have one, and I'd strongly recommend getting in the habit of including one everywhere else too. --Izno (talk) 02:38, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

You know how to do this. Do it *everywhere*. -- a ^{they/them | argue | contribs} 12:52, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

About your message

Hi! I'm sorry for censoring it tho. The thing is, I wanted to copy Trinidad James article, and save it, but filter gets triggered on n-word. Next time,if you agree,Im gonna do this:Im gonna edit the page to censor that,copy it like that then edit it again to like it was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.180.64.97 (talk) 21:10, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Here you go.

You said on the draft "Draft:Laksh Vaaman Sehgal" that if the "Laksh Vaaman Sehgal" section was turned into an infobox, you might accept the draft. Well, I did it for you. JJP...MASTER!_{[talk to] JJP... master?} 22:39, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

@JJPMaster:  Done

Handshake (HNS)

Hello, you declined my article for not having good sources. Could you please go into detail what ones are the issue, and if there is a way for me to find better sources for handshake? I don't know if a news station like CBS or something would cover something like this so I really don't know where to begin to look for sources if these don't work.

@Handshakeuser420: Github is not a reliable source; it is primary. A lot os the sources are primary. See the links provided in the decline reason. 4thfile4thrank (talk) 03:34, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

KikiWikiAuthor

Hi I am completely new here- in fact popped up my first post yesterday and you have sent me a message to state you removed my edit social media because it has no reliable source. I have been working on social media continually for the last 15 years and upskilling myself and my change is on Oxford English Dictionary. Please feel free to check it online, I have a paper version so unable to send you a link. I am unsure how to change it back, if you could kindly do so that would be great. PS thanks for the welcome, first interaction I've had. Best wishes. Feel free to message back on my talk page as I am learning how to use this.

Please explain

Hello, I submitted this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:L%C3%A1szl%C3%B3_Heltay for review, but you rejected it; the reason you gave was "All sources appear to be about his death." Given that these sources were, in the main, obituaries in world-renowned newspapers, or entries in authoritative works of reference (e.g. Who's Who) I do not understand what the issue is, nor can I see what else I have to do to get this article approved. Please explain in more detail why you rejected this article. simontcope (talk) 09:59, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

@Slim cop: see WP:BLP1E

Which actually says "WP:BLP1E should be applied only to biographies of living people". Theroadislong (talk) 13:07, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

It might be accepted, as I am rather new to this thing. Sorry for any trouble. 4thfile4thrank (talk) 13:08, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

4thfile4thrank, BLP or not, while the recent coverage was triggered by his passing, it isn't about his death. He is clearly notable for more than dying. Please slow down with your AfC work; for example, this person is inherently notable as a member of a national parliament (see WP:NPOL) – the only issue is that the article isn't adequately supported by references. Note as well that inline citations aren't strictly required for non-BLPs, so I disagree with this decline reason as well. Blablubbs|talk 13:37, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

@Blablubbs: What are the steps for an appropriate AFC review? I want to know the general steps. 13:40, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

You can find detailed instructions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions; I find this flowchart especially useful. Best, Blablubbs|talk 13:46, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

@Blablubbs: Was this an appropriate review? 4thfile4thrank (talk) 13:48, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

, yep, looks fine to me. Blablubbs|talk 13:55, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Theroadislong, 4thfile4thrank, noting that I have cleaned up and accepted the László Heltay article. Best, Blablubbs|talk 14:44, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Gender Variance article

I haven't even been to that page so I think I clicked the wrong button or something. Thanks for reverting it though! TigerScientist (talk) 16:19, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Cleanup

I think I cleaned up after myself with Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:ASIANPOPCHANNEL/sandbox and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion. Could you double-check to make sure I didn't miss anything? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:16, 4 December 2020 (UTC) @Davidwr: Looks like you did it right.

Question

Hello, I'm new to Wikipedia. What did you change? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MML1969 (talk • contribs) 09:59, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

@MML1969: I don't really edit articles. Rather, I patrol the recent changes for vandalism, and tag speedy deletions. 4thfile4thrank (talk) 14:02, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Your question

That question probably didn't belong on the page you put it on. If nobody else has edited the page since you last edited it, consider rolling back your edits. In any case, does WP:THANK answer your question? Because that's all I've got. I have no idea WHY he chose to thank you for that edit. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 02:46, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

My draft

Hey, I've got a question. You have recently rejected my draft ([[1]]). Can you please describe in more detail what exactly to change in it? Or maybe you can edit it to the point it would be accetable by the WikiCommunity? Tha main issue you mentioned were footnotes, but I added them to the text.

Best wishes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nataliagolisz (talk • contribs) 09:25, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Frida Leider

One would think that once an item is accepted in one Wikipedia, it would be fine in the others… The facts are reported in at least the French and German Wikipedias. Anyway, who cares, right? 24.136.4.218 (talk) 15:36, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

@24.136.4.218: See Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Cite a reliable source that says that. 4thfile4thrank (talk) 15:43, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Request on 13:40:09, 9 December 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Cureeight

• Cureeight (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:MarkMeets Media (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello 4thfile4thrank,

Thank you for taking the time to review my wikipedia page. As I am new to Wikipedia and devoted to have my own Wiki page go live, may I request some additional support please? I was using this page as an example to write my own - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popjustice You reviewed that 'Twitter and the official site aren't reliable sources'. That is understandable, what should I post then to clarify authentication, as I thought my own website would have been authentic enough? Any support would be dearly appreciated.

I look forward to hearing from you,

Yours Sincerely, Mark.

@Cureeight: See this. It will help.

Cureeight (talk) 13:40, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

GG Dr.Chuk (talk) 11:51, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Stop. Just stop.

Please stop dabbling in areas you are clueless about. You've been asked numerous times to stop doing things but now you're spamming WP:RFPP with baseless, ridiculous requests. Why did you request protection of this when neither the mainspace article nor the draft have been edited or recreated in well over a month? Or this when no one has even edited it in a week, much less had any disruption? Not to mention your request to protect an admins userpage, who is more than capable of doing it themselves. Oh and this for an article which hasn't even been touched since June. Praxidicae (talk) 19:59, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

@Praxidicae: When is it appropriate?

Was I not clear in my request to you to stop making silly requests at RFPP when things haven't even been edited or recreated in months? Why have you brought this back up?! Praxidicae (talk) 15:13, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

@Praxidicae: Sorry. I misread the date as December 7, not September. I will delete it now. 4thfile4thrank (talk) 15:14, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/TryToBeFunny

Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/TryToBeFunny, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/TryToBeFunny and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/TryToBeFunny during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Praxidicae (talk) 15:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

LTA pages

I don't think this is necessary. It doesn't offer any information beyond what's readily available in the sockpuppet categories, and per WP:DENY, we're better off avoiding drawing unnecessary attention to their disruption. – bradv🍁 15:24, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Oh I see it's already at MfD. Please don't create any more of these. – bradv🍁 15:25, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

@Bradv: Rather than a dedicated page, which can serve as a trophy, would it be more appropriate to simply write a short sentence like "He creates nonsense categories" on the sockpuppet category? And when are these pages okay to make?4thfile4thrank (talk) 15:26, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

I think they're appropriate to make when a checkuser or SPI clerk determines that an LTA page is necessary for the purpose of identifying socks, and that their usefulness would far outweigh the downsides of drawing attention to their disruption. – bradv🍁 15:30, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

@Bradv: Would it be abbropriate for those that have hundreds of socks and aren't "just" trolls? Like people that push certain viewpoints, advertise, and those who sneakily alter dates without being detected easily?4thfile4thrank (talk) 15:31, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

I think that's a determination best made on a case-by-case basis by those familiar with their habits and tasked to manage the disruption. – bradv🍁 15:36, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

@Bradv: Would it be apppropriate to write one short quick statement on the sockpuppet category, like done in [2]? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4thfile4thrank (talk • contribs) 16:31, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

You should leave assessing what is appropriate to people more familiar with SPI than yourself - there are plenty of other things you can do to be useful here. Also - Sign your talkpage comments. This is not the first time you've been told! -- a ^{they/them | argue | contribs} 13:03, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Saw your user page notice

While you have my sympathies and best wishes for the best health possible, consider using this existing template instead. It serves the same basic purpose: It alerts your fellow editors that you may have sudden unexplained possibly long absences, without revealing "too much information."

Another alternative is to WP:MOVE the template you created to your "user-space." You could call it User:4thfile4thrank/myhealthstatus or something similar. You would "use" it by putting {{User:4thfile4thrank/myhealthstatus}} or {{subst:User:4thfile4thrank/myhealthstatus}} on your user page. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 🎄 23:55, 11 December 2020 (UTC) I made it more accurate. 4thfile4thrank (talk) 23:58, 11 December 2020 (UTC) : Done

Thanks. My judgement isn't always the best either. Several times today I've prepared an edit, thought about it, and canceled before publishing it. Wikipedia is better off than if I had hit "publish." Looking back on the last month, there are a few times I published but shouldn't have. Those become lessons learned. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 🎄 02:45, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Slow down

Hi, I’ve noticed that you’ve been getting involved in a lot of areas recently, and in many cases it appears you are getting in over your head. You’ve recently edited another users edit notice, proposed a change to the oversight policy that had no chance of being implanted, tagged or attempted to tag user pages of blocked users that didn’t need it, and various other tasks that generally just aren’t helpful and tend to annoy people. Eventually annoying enough people will get you blocked indefinitely. I’d really suggest slowing down and focusing on one area of the project, and one that doesn’t involve adminy type stuff in particular. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:33, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni: Are recent changes patrolling and deletion discussions appropriate? 4thfile4thrank (talk) 02:42, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

I’d be cautious about anything that might involve ANI or SPI, but otherwise, yes. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:43, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Rollback friendly reminder

Hi there 4thfile4thrank. I am coming to comment about your use of rollback here, at which I'm clearly an INVOVLED editor. As you used an edit summary it's not actually any kind of rollback issue per se even though the edit you "rolledback" was not inappropiate under policies and guidelines. Using rollback because of problems elsewhere (in some kind of mass rollback) has been a contentious action in the past and so I would encourage you to be careful with that kind of edit in the future. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 05:26, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

False edit summary

What are you doing here?[3] Your edit summary does not match your changes. Why are you linking and unlinking random things? Natureium (talk) 23:14, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Please don't add empty parameters as you did with that edit, e.g. url= or pages=, or a pipe character immediately before the closing }}. There's no reason to do this, and it's not at all helpful. All it does is increase the page size and add clutter to the wikicode, which a bot or another editor will eventually remove. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 08:51, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

@Natureium and BlackcurrantTea: I was editing an old revision. I did not want to add all accessdates, and I did want to start over and revove the accessdates again. Sorry. I am also planning an extended break due to serious competency concerns. 4thfile4thrank (talk) 16:17, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Secondary / significant coverage

Hello! Thank you for your feedback on my recent recommendation for an addition to Aus film / theatre industry profiles. As this is the first submission I've made profile wise - and had several strong news sources as references including international sources such as Variety, I'd love more feedback on how to strengthen the 'significant coverage' credential to make this submission worthwhile. With thanks. A — Preceding unsigned comment added by AVGSydney (talk • contribs) 10:07, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

explain

You said here you removed the inappropriate links. You didn't edit it other than that comment. What are you talking about? GRINCHIDICAE🎄 02:59, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Apologies

Misclicked on your user page and accidentally rolled back some versions - should be fixed now. Pahunkat (talk) 13:57, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 December 2020

• News and notes: Year-end legal surprises cause concern, but Public Domain Day is imminent

• In the media: Concealment, data journalism, a non-pig farmer, and some Bluetick Hounds

• Arbitration report: 2020 election results

• Opinion: How to make your factory's safety and labor issues disappear

• Featured content: Very nearly ringing in the New Year with "Blank Space" – but we got there in time.

• Traffic report: 2020 wraps up

• News from the WMF: What Wikipedia saw during election week in the U.S., and what we’re doing next

• Recent research: Predicting the next move in Wikipedia discussions

• Essay: Subjective importance

• Op-Ed: An unforgettable year we might wish to forget

• Gallery: Angels in the architecture

• Humour: 'Twas the Night Before Wikimas

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:24, 28 December 2020 (UTC)