User talk:Gryllida/Archives/2014-2018Q1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2014

Talkback

Hello, Gryllida. You have new messages at Cyphoidbomb's talk page.
Message added 07:02, 25 January 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:02, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Drycroft4 (talk) 19:24, 4 November 2016 (UTC)Hi. Gryllida. I hope this is the way to send you a communication? I have not used 'visual editor" in my edits. I had put an edit on the Michael j. freeman article before it was stubbied and COI. I am knowledgeable of his work. Also, should I stop any of my future edits on various articles until I understand better? Are the edits I have done what is needed? If not I am happy to go down for early retirement! Drycroft 4

barepunts

Hello Gryllida, you can call me 74 please. Barepunts got fed up back on the 12th, and posted their goodbye-wikipedia-forever message to WP:RETENTION on the 13th, which I just noticed today (no watchlists for anons). They said on the 14th or something that they had lost their password, and were posting from 82.* over on the WP:RETENTION project-talkpage... maybe we can drop them a note about passwd-resets on their 82.* user-talkpage, and get them to return. But as it has been ten days now, it seems unlikely to me, and of course, I'm not sure their IP isn't shared with other folks.

  Anyhoo, the point of my green box is to seek some lessons-learned, for future Barepunts-like-beginners, so we drive fewer folks away. Nobody did anything wrong; your message to them, was already after they had ceased to edit under that account. Hopes this is clear as mud, let me know if all is still confusion.  :-)   — 74.192.84.101 (talk) 12:07, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

You're right. I left some thoughts on the talk page where you asked this question; the discussion had motivated me to shape them into an essay at Meta which I linked. Gryllida (talk) 12:51, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

AfC Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Niall Sheehy (actor)

I see that you reviewed and declined Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Niall Sheehy (actor). Part of your decline reason was "I could not complete a full review, because {{cite web}} is not used in ref tags making the references list unreadable." You should be aware that cite web, or other citation templates are not required in Wikipedia articles, and that AfC reviewers are free to add such templates if they so choose. The reference list in this version of the draft is a bit cumbersome perhaps, but I don't see anything unreadable about it. One might have to follow links to see where they led. DES (talk) 18:31, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

  • DESI figured out I can see review comment I left here; the template barbarously doesn't show the comment in the version you linked. This edit, made after my review, addressed the citeweb issue, but the article appeared to be published without addressing the problem previous reviewer mentioned before me, which I had re-iterated.
I think I would try to work through the poorly formatted references, and continue to mention {{cite web}} in future reviews, but as an optional thing. --Gryllida (talk) 23:51, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
My point was that non-use of {{cite web}} should not, in my view, be part of a decline reason, as that implies that it is required. (Mentioning it as a very good idea in a comment is reasonable.) My further point was that I would have thought it quite possible to conduct a full review even when all citations were to bare URLs. The article is now at Niall Sheehy (actor), having been accepted to mainspace. This was just a suggestion that you might consider in future reviews of other AfC pages. DES (talk) 01:27, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
DESHmm. I don't understand the purpose of your last message: it appears to re-iterate what I already promised to start doing, in my previous line. If I misunderstood please point me to the difference of our understandings. Thanks for the feedback, by the way. (Thought I'd already have said that, but I didn't.) --Gryllida (talk) 04:49, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps i misunderstood your msg, then. If you feel that what I advised is what you already intend, then all i can say is thank you for doing AfC work, which is often fairly thankless. I fear I do sometimes reiterate points beyond when i should just stop writing. DES (talk) 06:27, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

AfC Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Oruththi ‎

Hi . Thank you for reviewing the article that I had created . I was able make some edits based on your suggestion . Request you to review the article again and approve . The references are in a local language and can't be added to English wikipedia so I wasn't able to add more third party references and add some detail to reception section . Thanks again for taking time to review AFC articles and for making sure only good articles are published to wikipedia . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajeevanand (talk ) 13:16, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

RajeevanandI've replied to your messages, in the review comment box. --Gryllida (talk) 23:16, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing the article again and I have made all the necessary changes as suggested by you and replied to the review comment box. Kindly review the article again and approve. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajeevanand (talk • contribs)

I've left further verbose feedback; I didn't find it ready to meet the inclusion criteria and left it in the drafts queue to not risk deletion. Verbose feedback included at the article top. —Gryllida (talk) 11:01, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

it seems sufficiently good to have a likelihood of passing I have accepted it. BTW, where does the list of reasons in the template you are using come from? Some of the reasons it gives are not policy based reasons for declining an AfC . The instructions at WP:AFC are not to decline because of format and similar fixable problems. Also, "Weak focus" seems totally undefined to me. There's no reason not to make suggestions for improvement, including style and formatting, , but the ones that are critical for acceptance need to be distinguished. If you reply, please reply on my talk page ( or leave me a talkback message ) — otherwise I may not see it. DGG ( talk ) 17:30, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
  • It comes from this page. Substantial reason was not addressing previous reviewer concern about lack of references but I prefer to give full feedback — it is nicer for the author than rejecting for various reasons multiple times. (When speaking of format issues, I think I try to leave a note that they're optional; I can add the "(optional)" to the bullet point before the colon.) Another thing that motivated me to write the script was that I do not appreciate removing the review history instead of moving it to the article talk page.
You might notice that the page has copyright issues now, which I had missed during my review. Gryllida (talk) 23:28, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

FYI

A proposal has been made to create a Live Feed to enhance the processing of Articles for Creation and Drafts. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC to create a 'Special:NewDraftsFeed' system. Your comments are welcome. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:21, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I have voiced an opinion there. --Gryllida (talk) 10:17, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your thoughtful welcome in my User Talk, Gryllida!

I figured out my IRC problem. I did not realize that the white strip at the bottom of the screen was where to place my cursor and type text. It looked just like part of the background.

Is posting here the right way to reply to your message to me in my User Talk page?

What does Gryllida mean, and why do you choose to use it as your name?

We adopted the name Meta Self because we are multiple personalities who healthily function as a collective. We wanted a shorthand to identify ourselves, rather than listing all fifteen of our selves by name, or listing whichever particular selves contributed to any given text. So the meta self is the overarching "self" that symbolically represents our fifteen collective selves. There is no actual individual who is "Meta Self." It's an analogy.

We have typically used the first person "I" to blend into the popular illusion of a neurotypical world. That's our rationalization, anyhow.

So thanks again for the welcome. Your welcome helps us out!

Gryllida wrote in our User Talk:

Hi! WELCOME; what web browser are you using? In Firefox, typing "/at irc://freenode/wikipedia-en" in ChatZilla should take you to a channel. --Gryllida (talk) 08:09, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Meta Self (talk) 05:02, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Take a look at “Don't lose the thread”, the thing, Gryllidae (plural)... --Gryllida (talk) 08:28, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

P.S. Whoa. What is this? It looks like something we could really use. But it doesn't work. Is that because you are in the process of making it? If so, great idea!

User:Biosthmors... and training pages idea (relevant discussion; it's a Perl script with source included, so you can run it to produce the output). --Gryllida (talk) 08:28, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Dear Gryllida,

Thanks for your message and sorry for replying in late. As i have mentioned earlier i am new to Wikipedia.

As you wanted to know about the relation with the person called Dr. Mangala Prasad Mohanty, i just know him as a good person who is a cancer patient and despite of many challenges the person is leading the Odisha Red Cross since 2009. As a red cross volunteer i am deeply inspired by Dr. Mohanty, nothing else therefore i am trying to create a article in his name for that person, Who has dedicated his life towards the betterment of society and for the poorest poor.

Also he got 2 times prestigious prize from the honorable president of India. I think we should add his wikipedia.

Though, If You want to know more about me for clarification of your doubt you can find me on Facebook - manoranjanbehera5@gmail.com and my name is Manoranjan Behera.

Therefore i am requesting you kindly modify the article if necessary and please please approve it. It would be great help for me.

Thanks!!

Regards, Manoranjan

Manoranjan.ajsa (talk) 14:43, 7 February 2014 (UTC)


Can you help me?

Can you voute for "keep" my page? There some biased opponents, so i can`t do it alone.
DesignContest SlavaBest (talk) 07:58, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

I have suggested that they move it to a sandbox. You have not addressed the important issue of article focus and I left a verbose comment on your talk page, where you were notified of the article deletion initially. —Gryllida (talk) 08:46, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Problem

Please remove the commented out AFC submission template encased in the following line from User:Gryllida/DraftsReview/v2.js.

$(templates).each( function (index, template){ // template = '{{AFC submission|||ts=20140113103528|u=Daniels Wembley|ns=2}}'

It is showing up in the Category:AfC pending submissions by age/Very old category on the report. If you do not correct this in 48 hours I will ask an admin to forcibly remove the line from the script or remove the script entirely. I note that this is not the first time you've been asked to remove this(Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation#User:Gryllida.2FDraftsReview.2Fv2.js). Please respond immediately as this is causing problems for the AFC review process. Hasteur (talk) 12:22, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Done. Is this page showing up also, now? Gryllida (talk) 22:52, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

I think I will move the script to some place everyone can edit. (I didn't realize that subpages of my page are restricted in editing like that.) Gryllida (talk) 22:54, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

It's disapeared now. Thank you. Hasteur (talk) 01:49, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Clarification on a comment you made

Hi Gryllida. In this comment, you singled me out, and appear to have implied that I was abusing people that don't like new features through mailing lists. I am not sure how sending an FYI about a poll to disable a new feature to the Product Development team at the WMF – the team tasked with delivering new products to our users – constitutes abusing people through mailing lists. Could you offer some clarification on your comment? Thanks. --Dan Garry, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:56, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

The thing I didn't like was you linking to the support section of the poll. Gryllida (talk) 00:00, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
That's the bit that's the most interesting; learning why people agree with the typography refresh isn't nearly as beneficial as learning why people disagree with the typography refresh. Either way, I'm still unclear on how any of this constitutes abusing people on mailing lists, and you didn't actually address that question in your response. --Dan Garry, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 00:04, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
(Redacted) You highlighting a point which you find interesting makes readers more familiar with it and more likely to support it. That's a problem. Gryllida (talk) 00:13, 5 April 2014 (UTC)


Sarah Archer

I would like to thank you so much for it you have made it much better but how do I add the citations as and her website is an authentic reference as she has copies of her certificate awards after your advise we released it to the public through her website copies of the original documents from the sources. Eeeeeek (talk) 14:51, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

It's better to add such information without revealing private documents of people. Please consider pulling the information you're concerned about from a public (or closed and peer-reviewed, available from a library) source: it is public within the community who can walk to the library at least. Gryllida (talk) 23:13, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

(If she already made a certificate public at a website, it's hard to verify without looking at an original. Posting certified copies to Wikimedia volunteers is outside of project scope.) Gryllida (talk) 23:14, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Module:Ping2

Hi! I think there should be added the error message from Template:Reply to (maybe it could also be converted to lua), that username isn't given, because if I'm using it without any username I get the pre tag: Error in Template:Reply to: Username not given. message --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 14:41, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Done. (Admittedly the diff view is unreadable; all I did was add about three lines, while it is also, quite redundantly, paying attention to the shifted lines; 13462; 13466.) --Gryllida (talk) 22:32, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! Now it looks good :) --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 08:35, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi, again! Would it be possible to add the |p= to the module (again, as in the template)? --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 06:36, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks!

I really appreciate the two links you left on my talk page. I'm going to copy them onto my list of important links on my user page once I fully reconstruct my system. This started off as just a routine question then it escalated to the point where I was pretty freaked out. the anonymous reply to your comment was mine before I re-installed Firefox. I'm not going to revert my edit where I removed that link, mostly because I'm scared to click on it to see if it is safe now. Trilobitealive (talk) 03:21, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome. Especially thanks to the people who got it removed from server, as you mentioned at your talk page... Gryllida (talk) 04:38, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Your comments on Draft:Reelkandi

Moved to the draft talk page. --01:15, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


further comments since you helpfully edited the article

from Jgscanlon2099 re: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Reelkandi

I have read all your comments on the draft-talk page, most helpful and really appreciate you taking the time to respond so concisely. So i have crossed out all the lines, you requested for deletion, added more online references and generally tidied up the article again, please can you have another look at it and see if you approve.

Jgscanlon2099 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgscanlon2099 (talk • contribs) 11:20, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Jgscanlon2099, hi! Could you do me a favour please and move this over to the draft talk page? I have it on my watchlist and it would be easier for you to read it all in one place a few weeks later, too. :-)
--Gryllida (talk) 11:38, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Jgscanlon2099 Gryllida, sorry but how do i do that? Jgscanlon2099 (talk) 13:48, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Jgscanlon2099, cut&paste everything from here to the bottom of there... Click save on both. :-) --Gryllida (talk) 14:09, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Gryllida, sorry im being completely stupid, i read your instructions above, but dont know where each of the start and end points are, nor where to put them, unless you mean on my DRAFT-TALK page, that would make sense, but how would you know when to look and check things?

Jgscanlon2099

Jgscanlon2099 (talk) 14:22, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes please, I'm watching the draft closely. --Gryllida (talk) 14:26, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

from jgscanlon2099 ok, Gryllida, awiating your comments from my latest edited draft, since your review yesterday on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Reelkandi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgscanlon2099 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

from jgscanlon2099 to, Gryllida, ive left a response for you this morning, on my https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Reelkandi asking questions on approach... many thanks for your help... Jgscanlon2099 (talk) 08:11, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

.

fromJgscanlon2099|Jgscanlon2099] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Reelkandi

Hey Gryllida, please can check my latest draft, with comments on my talk page, many thanks for your efforts and advice, as ever...

Jgscanlon2099 (talk) 18:13, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Not all AFC scripts...

Not all of them migrate the Draft talk: page when accepting am article. INdeed, the released script seems not to at all. I have no quarrel with your concept, but the implementation may be faulty. Fiddle Faddle 15:14, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I will leave my own comments on draft talk and link the contributor to them, but I will not touch or move the big ugly red templates. This should hopefully not interfere. --Gryllida (talk) 02:04, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
But, when the draft is accepted, the talk page does not always get moved. It depends which script (version) the accepting reviewer uses. This is a potential problem because the 'old' talk page is left behind as the talk page of the redirect. So, if you take this route, it is important that you keep track and correct this perosnally. Indeed, you may well need to request or perform a history merge of the two talk pages.
So, while your concept is sound, the good execution of it is fraught with difficulties. Fiddle Faddle 10:33, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
I'm not stopping to use draft talk pages "because someone doesn't figure out how to move them". It's not my mess. --Gryllida (talk) 10:41, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Nor did I suggest that. I am suggesting that, where you use them, you ensure, because you have used them, that they go with the article when it is moved. You seem to have taken offence, though it was not my intention to give it. I'm sorry that something I said was capable of being interpreted thus, and offended you. Fiddle Faddle 12:20, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Ah. Moving a talk page together with a main page is a default. Suppose none of folks who do things by hand, like me — and ideally, none of those who script it, either — would be concerned about overriding such default... --Gryllida (talk) 12:24, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
It is a hangover from the days when we used the Wikipedia talk: space for draft articles, thus there was no concept of a talk page for the draft. We depend on the volunteers who write the scripts to make things work. In the interim period we depend on folk cutting them some slack. Because I see your point completely I've raised it at the AFC talk page and pinged you to make sure you have seen it. Fiddle Faddle 12:34, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks.
FWIW, I have Echo disabled, for reasons described here. However, I am watching that page, so that got through. :-)
You might find it reasonable to look through my recent contribs (~3 articles reviewed today); I review them using this tool instead of a script. Hope this doesn't break things. --Gryllida (talk) 12:52, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

.

7th september 2014 fromJgscanlon2099|Jgscanlon2099] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Reelkandi

Hey Gryllida, please can check my latest draft, with comments on my talk page as to the changes i made, many thanks for your efforts and advice, as ever...

Jgscanlon2099 (talk) 10:20, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

I am unhappy that you have tampered with my talk page

Please reinstate that which you have removed. Fiddle Faddle 13:23, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

It seems I have had to do this myself. Never, not ever, tamper with any other editor's talk page. Consensus is against it. While I understand your good intentions I do not appreciate your action. I view it as vandalism to my talk page. Your interruption of a discussion is intolerable. Fiddle Faddle 13:38, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Sorry. I moved it. You moved it back. Could you make a copy at the article talk page please? I think it'll get archived on yours at a point (which would become unusable). --Gryllida (talk) 14:13, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Several points:
  • It was a conversation held on my talk page. Despite being relevant to the draft is is not and has not ever been part of the draft
  • It has no place on the article's talk page for the reason above
  • Archiving renders nothing unusable. It places it in an archive
  • By moving it to any other talk page, even by copying t, you lose the attribution and history
I view the entire process as wholly inappropriate as performed by you. Having it performed by me makes it no less inappropriate. Fiddle Faddle 14:22, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
We're not having it in two places. The discussion is precisely collaboration on the draft, and those belong to its talk. And having it copied to draft talk with a "moved from there" note is no less damage to history than archival of your talk page... --Gryllida (talk) 02:29, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
I remain uninterested in this option, and will not be doing it. Fiddle Faddle 06:13, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Help me please

Could you possibly review these articles Cabin (font) Lato (font) Irregularis? Are there any major differences between them and my suggested articles Eyadish or Sherbrooke?

Thank you so much for your highly appreciated cooperation and for requesting Keeping the articles.

Eyadnalsamman (talk) 21:26, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

  • (talk page stalker) @Eyadnalsamman: As I said at User talk:Fitoschido, there are no major differences, and I have tagged those fonts for deletion as well. Also, Wikipedia prefers centralized discussions over multiple separate discussions of exactly the same issue. Asking this question thrice (and asking for help from all over Wikipedia thrice) is rather redundant. Huon (talk) 22:29, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I mentioned it before that I personally don't see lack of sources a threat to adequate accurate verifiable coverage there. I did say so at the deletion discussion of one of these fonts, but my personal utopian opinions are not at all representative of the current project policies: and I can't veto application of community consensus there. Please consider asking at WikiProject Typography for more help. --Gryllida (talk) 23:11, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:WebCounter.png

(Redacted) Thanks for uploading File:WebCounter.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license. Kelly hi! 07:23, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I apologize, I've requested copyright holder for permission now. Gryllida (talk) 21:21, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews

Hello Gryllida/Archives. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).

       Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit, I already do such checks. Curiously though you pose legal implications as a part of your argument. What are they? Thought Wikimedia has a lot of disclaimers how it waves responsibility for its content (especially so in the draft namespace)... Gryllida (talk) 03:42, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Hey Gryllida. Yep, I received 11 notifications that day and 9 separate posts to my talk page and never noticed your message, though yours is in my log. Sorry about that. From Wikipedia:Copyrights: "Never use materials that infringe the copyrights of others. This could create legal liabilities and seriously hurt Wikipedia. If in doubt, write the content yourself, thereby creating a new copyrighted work which can be included in Wikipedia without trouble." First (putting on my lawyer hat), waivers, of whatever stripe, are nice but do not keep you from being sued if someone feels aggrieved. They may discourage some lawsuits, may keep some lawyers from taking the case if they deem the waiver likely actually effective – legally sound – but anyone can sue anyone else, even for ultimately frivolous reasons, despite that the legal basis might be shaky. As presaged, waivers also may be stated and nevertheless be totally ineffective at law or not clearly effective depending on the particular facts of a case. The law will not always recognize a waiver, just as contracts can say something but the law may define that term as ineffective because it's illegal, is against public policy, there's a precedent prohibiting it, there was fraud in the inducement, or for a host of other reasons such as that it was a true contract of adhesion. Taking off my hat, and I was just speaking theoretically there, what waivers of copyright liability are you talking about? The law may provide legal protection if we quickly remove infringing content, especially after we're notified informally or after a formal DMCA takedown notice, but the potential for legal liability is always present.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:23, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

2015

2016

Notification about disabling the Wikipedia collections tool

Thank you for using the collections feature in Wikipedia beta! Due to technical and moderation issues, we will be turning off this experimental feature. Your collections will be available for viewing and export until March 1st. If you would like to save your collection as links on a special Wikipedia page, please fill out the following form. If you are interested in giving your feedback about Wikipedia Collections please do so here.

Thanks,

Jon Katz
Product manager, Wikimedia Foundation
Jkatz (WMF) (talk) 23:54, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Gryllida. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Uncommented (and edited) this part:

Message sent by Mdann52 bot@enwiki using the list at spamlist.

--Gryllida (talk) 23:40, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi

I understand English, but I have difficult by write very well, I'm sorry by don't respond in e-mail I don't use this application. Regards.--Marrovi (talk) 04:22, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Responded by e-mail. --Svetlana Tkachenko / Gryllida (talk) 23:09, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Genetic method has been accepted

Genetic method, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:43, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
That's Horstbeyer's article; I've copied him/her this message. --Svetlana Tkachenko (talk) 20:28, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Maradinho 10

Sorry, but it's quite coherent and doesn't come under 'nonsense'. That is for things like 'dtydtrjjgggf tytrtgffgghhghghg' or 'aardvark intermezzo flighted greenly wozzat', which make no sense in English or any other language. If it were in article space, it'd be a clear A7, but there could be a chance under G11, given the wording at the end... All the best. Peridon (talk) 13:12, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. It is crap, so I've attempted G11 now as you advised. --Svetlana Tkachenko (talk) 20:26, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

2017

Speedy deletions of Randy Clark (abandoned), Y Screens (advertising), Dabhi Rajput (abandoned)

Hidden content

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft talk:Randy Clark

A tag has been placed on Draft talk:Randy Clark, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 22:37, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes I had tagged that draft with WikiProject tags and the draft is gone; its disassociated talk page is OK to delete. Thanks! --Svetlana Tkachenko / Gryllida (talk) 23:08, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Y Screens

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Y Screens, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Vin09 (talk) 05:57, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Dabhi Rajput

Hello, Gryllida. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Dabhi Rajput".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Legacypac (talk) 03:19, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

New Wikiproject Rater Tool

There is a new Rater tool available (User:Evad37/rater) which I think you will like. It also contains an option for auto-opening, similar to your annoying copy of Kephir's script. Except, Evad37 has intergrated a feature to only open on specified namespaces, and also to only open if there are no WikiProjects present on the talk page. The tool also requires very few clicks to use, and can mostly be done through use of the keyboard only, which is awesome. It also has a number of other awesome features, such as an autofill for 'listas' for WikiProject Biography, etc. Thought you would like to know about this one. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 04:34, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Insertcleverphrasehere. I'll compare and modify my copy accordingly. ("to only open if there are no WikiProjects present on the talk page" sounds bad - I may wish to look through the existing rating and possibly modify it even if it exists.) --Gryllida (talk, chat) 23:13, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

2018

MfD nomination of User:Gryllida/BiographyNotability

User:Gryllida/BiographyNotability, 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/User:Gryllida/BiographyNotability and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Gryllida/BiographyNotability 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. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:05, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Request on 10:27:45, 14 March 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Freshclover



Freshclover (talk) 10:27, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi! What's the problem with the draft? Please tell me what kind of assistance you would like. --Gryllida (talk) 00:15, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Request on 06:43:03, 15 March 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Freshclover


Hi Gryllida, I wrote a paragraph on your talk page commenting on your review of my article but it seems you did not receive it. The guide says to click the "Save page' button and the only button is a blue one called "Publish changes'. I am trying again and hope it works this time, then I will re-write my request. Please let me know if you receive this one. Regards FreshcloverFreshclover (talk) 06:43, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Freshclover (talk) 06:43, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Request on 23:23:16, 18 March 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Freshclover


Hi Gryllida I hope this message on your talk page will reach you, it seems my previous one got lost in the system. Thanks for reviewing the article I submitted and your comments. I will try to edit the draft according to your suggestions as much as I can. There are a few things I like to say before starting that. You have rejected the article based on three reasons: 1. Citations need to be inline, 2. Contains many vague statements. 3. Many sentences are not supported by sources

I will do my best to address the first and the third comment but I like to discuss some of the statements you referred to as vague. For example, I do not think the statement ‘ .... was born to an educated family’ ( unclear, please rephrase to specify what 'educated' means in this context ), needs much more detail. In the following sentence, it is stated that ‘His father (Javad) was a teacher and school principal’. To me, this makes the meaning of the previous statement clear. Later on, your comment on ‘Following a couple of casual jobs’ is to ( specify which and provide a citation ). I am not sure if it matters at all whether he was working in a post office or at a dairy shop. What matters is his achievement later in life. There are a couple more comments like these that I ask you to re-consider while I try to find more information and sources for them. I totally understand that we do not want to publish unfounded statements on Wikipedia but I believe I know enough about Dastgheib to write an article to acknowledge his contribution to Iranian literature. One last question, this submission has been waiting for publication for a long time, will it make it quicker to be reviewed if you (rather than other editors) do it again, as you have already commented on it? Kind regards Freshclover (talk) 23:23, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Freshclover (talk) 23:23, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for asking. :-) On the three specific items you provided:
  • "an educated family" is vague because it is difficult to define what is an 'educated' family and what isn't. For instance if they have completed university degrees this needs to be specified. As this is an encyclopedia we can not just write hearsay, we can only write facts.
  • Anything that you want to say needs to be specified straight from the beginning, we can not be vague in one sentence and then clarify it a few lines below.
  • If you don't know which casual jobs he had you need to at least provide a citation which allows to verify that he had some sort of casual jobs, otherwise this sentence has no source to support it.
Hope it helps. --Gryllida (talk) 23:32, 18 March 2018 (UTC)


Thanks for your help

I was able to fix my preferences thanks to your prompt assistance. Jaquestheripper (talk) 21:37, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome. Glad it helped. :-)
--Gryllida (talk) 21:41, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

OW

Please, for the sake of my eyes, do not underscore in this manner. --Dlohcierekim (talk) 11:15, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it is ridiculous. :-) I'll perhaps do that in a talk page message next times (someone told me the comments may be difficult to remove which may complicate editing of the article). --Gryllida (talk) 18:56, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Non-existent WikiProject banners

Where are you getting your WikiProject banner template names from? Several of your recent edits have added redlinked templates to pages, such as: 2000 Humboldt State Lumberjacks football team; Rodrigo Hübner Mendes; Terry and Barbi Franklin; Lieutenant Colonel David T. Cloft, U.S. Army Retired.

If you WP:PREVIEW your edits before saving, it will help to prevent such redlinks. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:10, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, error checking (with 1 or 2) is better than guessing (with red links at talk pages and edit summaries).
Thanks for the corrections. --Gryllida (talk) 09:21, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Talk pages

Hi there. I saw that you expressed confusion as to why this edit was deleted, and the editor who did it, didn't exactly explain things well. So, FYI, what he's getting at is, please see WP:NOTAFORUM - talk pages are for discussions in relation to writing an encyclopedia, not about asking for personal help. So, you'd want to use WikiProjects for things like assistance in writing an article about a band, or to ask for help in an editing dispute related to music. Not...help on a crossword puzzle. Hope this helps. Sergecross73 msg me 12:35, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes, thanks; they replied in an edit summary too. Gryllida (talk) 00:10, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Dwen article

Hi Is it possible if you could help me source and edit the draft for dwen gyimah please 799Applepod (talk) 10:40, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi 799Applepod.
  • Please understand there is a 'draft' and 'talk' tabs at the top of your draft. Please practice clicking them back and forth to navigate the draft page and the draft talk page.
  • Please see my comments at the draft talk page. They need to be fixed.
  • Some of these comments require addition of new information or clarification.
  • I can fix them for you but it would take me a long time because I do not know the topic well.
Thank you. Gryllida (talk) 04:25, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Rating nonexistant drafts

Is there a reason you rated a bunch of drafts that don't exist? They all have actual articles, so I moved the ones that didn't already exist (Talk:Yama Raja Siri, Talk:Kalyn Schwartz) but deleted the others (Draft_talk:Trephionus_abiba, Draft_talk:Trephionus_inexpectatus, Draft_talk:Trephionus_shibataianus). Not sure how you did it? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:25, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Ah, you rolled your own script — presumably something isn't working in there. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:28, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Yes, it's broken. :-) I noticed this today and attempted fixing the mess. --Gryllida (talk) 10:49, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gryllida/Archives/2014-2018Q1&oldid=835518280"