User talk:The Mirror Cracked/Archives/ 2

Accidental removal of vandalism report

Dear Railfan23,

I was reporting a user on the noticeboard but I accidentally pressed the wrong revision. Sorry for the inconvenience. I apologise for the accidental removal. WikiAviator (talk) 14:53, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

I apologize for putting the Star Wars memes on the category Railfan. :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephenfisher2001 (talk • contribs) 17:34, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Jewishness of Anton Lavey

Here is the citation https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_LaVey Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2407:7000:9C3D:4800:85D1:6095:A0BE:14E (talk) 20:28, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Also https://www.timesofisrael.com/in-haunted-salem-a-jewish-church-founder-preaches-the-art-of-satanic-social-change/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2407:7000:9C3D:4800:85D1:6095:A0BE:14E (talk) 20:33, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Invicta (locomotive), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Firebox (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:46, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Buthidaung

Hello! You asked me some days ago, why I deleted your content on page Buthidaung. Your sentence says that there are no Rohingya left in the Buthidaung township. Fortunately, it is not so and many Rohingyas still live there. Yyysky200 (talk) 16:33, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Welcome brother

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:55, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

June 2019

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --37.152.231.90 (talk) 05:32, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

User talk:Ssodl

What works even better than blanking is tagging for deletion under WP:CSD#G11.  Dlohcierekim (talk) 08:13, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Cool, thanks, I'll do that in the future. Railfan23 (talk) 08:17, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Kindly intervene in page of 2019 Delhi Temple attack

Hi,

Kindly intervene on the page of 2019 Delhi Temple attack. As some users are removing genuine sources by citing that they’re propaganda websites and hate websites and all. The onesided picture is created being here. Hereby, I’m requesting you to interfere and kindly look at the edits from other users, undoing aggressive edits. I want to solve the disputes and I’m requesting you to keep watch on it.

Thanks! —Harshil169 (talk) 17:16, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan discretionary sanctions

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:48, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

2604:2000:14c3:6229:2958:9a19:6481:288e

Hi. This IP is Daniel C. Boyer and editor and sockmaster who was site banned from Wikipedia for adding his non-notable name to many articles. He socked before the ban, and has continued to sock after it. See User talk:Daniel C. Boyer, where myself, ((ping|EEng}}, and ((ping|Cyberpower678}} have been keeping tabs on him since the ban. He's now following me around, claiming that my reversions of him are "vandalism" -- a claim he made prior to his ban as well (he also claimed that EEng and I were sockpuppets of each other!!) -- when, of course, the edits of a banned user can be removed at any time. Thanks for keeping on top of him. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:22, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

@EEng:, @Cyberpower678: - Fixing pings. Damn my fat fingers! Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:23, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

@Beyond My Ken: thanks for the update. His edits looked very odd - certainly looks like a sockpuppet of Boyer to me. Glad I could help. Railfan23 (talk) 23:25, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

I;ve filed an SPI here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:27, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Removal of non-Indic script

As WP:INDICSCRIPT makes it clear, the "avoidance of Indic scripts only applies to articles that are predominantly India-related and is excluded from, among others, articles about Hinduism, Buddhism, Pakistan or any of India's neighbouring countries" Sri Lanka isn't a part of India. Please refrain from removing Indic scripts from Sri Lankan articles.--Obi2canibe (talk) 13:08, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

@Obi2canibe: Thanks for pointing that out, I misread IDICSCRIPT. I'll self-revert and be more careful in the future. Railfan23 (talk) 13:21, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Former LGBT People

Railfan23 I believe that you have censored my submission because of your political bias. I entered a substantiated counter point to the LGBT Rights movement and you have taken it down. There ARE two clear, formal 501(c)3 organizations, The Changed Movement and the Freedom March that voice the issues and experiences of formerly LGBT people and they deserve to have their experiences shared on equal footing to people who are still self-identifying as LBGT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LarryEdmister (talk • contribs)

@LarryEdmister: You can believe what you like, of course, it doesn't change the fact that your edits were against Wikipedia's core policies. I urge you to read and follow them, otherwise you are not going to get very far. In particular your edit to the LGBT rights in the United States was not verifiable because it lacked reliable sources. It was also not on the topic of the article - the article you may want is Ex-gay movement. Railfan23 (talk) 16:48, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for cleaning up after that annoying vandal. I just reported their new IP to AIV. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 00:16, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Al Amin Shehzad

Hello Railfan23. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Al Amin Shehzad, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: not promotional, playing for notable team and national team indicates significance. Thank you. SoWhy 07:25, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

That user at CoochBehar

It seems this guy wouldn't cease adding copyrighted material. Have you complained against him? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:58, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: Yes, I've just added a report at WP:AIV. Hopefully he'll get a longer block this time... Railfan23 (talk) 16:59, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Nice. Some people never learn. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:00, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Ferret has blocked him for 2 weeks. By the looks of his contrib. It is likely that he/she will start it again. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:03, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: Yes, I agree that's a real possibility. I'll keep an eye on the Cooch Behar article, and if that user continues, I'll push for an indef block next time. Thanks for your help! Railfan23 (talk) 19:03, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks man. And thanks for taking care of vandalism in Darjeeling article as well. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:08, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Sam Heughan information - all correct.

Why would you change the information I added about Sam Heughan’s awards? It was all correct and should be listed.

Please change it back. Tracy is here (talk) 04:30, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@Tracey is here: Your changes had multiple problems. Biographical articles should refer to the subject by their last name (after the first mention), something your edit changed. You added way too much detail about the episodes of Outlander into the lede of the article - ledes should be short summaries about the subject, not exhaustive details of a different subject. So, not "all correct", I'm afraid. Railfan23 (talk) 04:50, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

list supplements from RuneQuest

Hi Railfan, I am French and my English is not very good. I do this work for the French version of the Runequest wiki and I wanted to share it with the Anglo-Saxons. I thought it important to write an exhaustive and documented list of Runequest supplements, as this does not exist on the internet. I wouldn’t seek consensus. If you think my text is too long, that’s fine. The French will have their list. As I said, it is important for amateurs, collectors, to have a list with the production numbers, the authors, the illustrators and the contents of the boxes. Thank you for explaining to me why my text was disappearing, I thought I was misusing Wiki, it’s my first text, so I find out. thanks to you and good luck. Yamsur — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yamsur (talk • contribs) 22:18, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you !!!

Thanks for that with that IP Jack90s15 (talk) 05:35, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@Jack90s15: You're welcome. Sorry they vandalized your page. Railfan23 (talk) 05:38, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

@Railfan23: It happens but at lest there are good people that undo it like you !!Jack90s15 (talk) 05:41, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Why

why are you removing my edits mr brown — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:9000:a704:3600:ccba:935e:b392:ab61 (talk • contribs)

@2603:9000:a704:3600:ccba:935e:b392:ab61: Because they are vandalism. Railfan23 (talk) 06:11, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Scott Shaw films

Hi Railfan, appreciate your work here. I noticed you did the nomination for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/9mm Sunrise. Do you have any time/interest in looking at the other films listed on Shaw's biography that have their own articles to see if they have enough notability to be kept? I think perhaps one or two of them do, but the majority may be in the same situation as the one already deleted; I'm just not 100% sure myself about what to look for before nominating and/or how to nominate a bunch of them together, so wondered if you might be up for it. Thanks Melcous (talk) 02:09, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Melcous:. Thanks for the pointer. I came across 9mm sunrise while new page patrolling, but I'd be more than happy to take a look at the related articles. In general, I'm not a fan of nominating articles as a group. I think its' much cleaner to look at each on one its merits. I'll take look at the Scott Shaw films over the next day or so. Best, Railfan23 (talk) 02:12, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Great, thank you! Melcous (talk) 01:48, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Urban planning articles

About your concerns on Urban planning, you might have a legitimate concern. I was just adding more details in the caption. And this I was only restricting the caption text to describe what's in the image. Nothing more. Anything else that I intentionally add outside the scope of the image in the caption will be cited, which I am working on. Please be patient as digging out sources in this topic area is a bit tedious. If you see the caption text contradicting the image; especially without a source, feel free to notify me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.71.5.251 (talk) 22:57, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

@76.71.5.251: thank you for the reply. I think you need to exercise a little more caution. As a good example, the image of Barcelona that you added to Technical aspects of urban planning shows a crowd at the 2008 Christmas lights in Barcelona. Crowds gather at events, you cannot say this is "An overcrowded area of Barcelona." Your caption also said that "Barcelona has the highest-density city design in Europe" but that is not what the source says (I checked last night). The sources says that the highest density square kilometer in Europe is in Barcelona, but that is not the same as the city being the highest density overall in Europe. Density varies widely across a city, so you cannot conclude anything about the overall density from a single square kilometer. Barcelona is over 100 square kilometers in size. Good luck, Railfan23 (talk) 23:05, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Unfortunately you are stating what I am stating and then using it as an argument to undo my edits. When I stated most Western countries, that's exactly what I meant, which you repeated in your edit summaries. Germany does not fit in this example as I already explained before. You removed all this while paying no attention to my previous edit summaries where I clarified this. You also removed reliably sourced edits and argued it's because the cities are old and not because they have a policy favoring this city design. This is pure original research and is not an acceptable argument right there. Do you have a source supporting this?

Please explain your problems with the sources I added. Don't just write "they don't support what you state." You need to explain it. Point out where like you did with the Barcelona image. I should have checked that one through on commons and I'd like to check it again. We can skip that image altogether, but I'd like to the source for other uses as it's a website devoted to this topic area and is considered reliable.

Also please note, when reverting me, you ended up removing a number of edits, including a see also being left in the section body when it should go on top of the section under the title. Please take care to remove objectionable edits individually rather than an entire body of edits.--76.71.5.251 (talk) 01:26, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

@76.71.5.251: See above, where I very specifically and carefully explained that the source says Barcelona contains the densest square kilometer in Europe. That is not the same as saying (as you did) that Barcelona is the densest city in Europe. It is incorrect to state that a type of road is a "style of high-density city planning". I maintain that the claim that "most Western countries" use this style of road planning is indeed untrue. Germany is not the only counter-example. Canada and the United States are other counter-examples. "Most" is wrong. Why do you continue to insist that the Barcelona image shows overcrowding and is an example of urban decay. It is neither of those things. Railfan23 (talk) 01:37, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I told you already, we can skip the Barcelona image altogether. But you're wrong about Germany being a comparable to North America. It's city designs were quite different from Canada and the USA, which are not comparable by any means. Downtown New York is of the most densely populated place in the world. I can provide sources for that, but it's probably already mentioned on Wikipedia somewhere and cited. And that is not what I want to add into the articles, just to correct you. Besides if you want to support your claim that Canada and America had the same urban density design as Germany, you'd need a reliable source to back that up.--76.71.5.251 (talk) 02:02, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Then why did you put the Barcelona image back into the article?

I did not say that Germany is comparable to North America, I said that Germany, the USA and Canada are counter-examples (in different ways) to your claim. Here's the List of cities by population density with neither Manhattan nor Barcelona on the list. I have never said anything remotely close to "Canada and America had the same urban density design as Germany". I don't make that claim. I simply dispute your claims that: 1) Barcelona is the densest city in Europe 2) Barcelona's density is an example of Urban decay, 3) That single-carriageway roads are a "style of high-density city planning" and 4) "most Western countries" use that style of urban planning. You have already agreed about 1) and 2) though you continue to add them to the article. 3) is clearly true, since road planning and urban planning are not the same thing. 4) is open to debate, but you must provide a source that says that specific thing (not something else that you have drawn your own conclusion from) and so far you have not provided a source for that. Railfan23 (talk) 02:17, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Germany cannot be included with Canada & America to serve as counter example. And besides your claim needs to be backed by reliable sources. About point three, road planning is a part of urban planning. Point four: since you oppose it, you must provide sources that agree with you.--76.71.5.251 (talk) 03:19, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I also just noticed in urban density that the same section continuing there agrees with what I put there, but explains it and has sourced it as well.--76.71.5.251 (talk) 03:29, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

This is not how Wikipedia works. The onus for providing sources is on the person adding to an article: see WP:BURDEN: "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material" (emphasis in original). You have to provide a source that supports the text you are adding. In this case, you must provide a source that agrees with your assertion that "most Western countries" use that style of urban planning. Without a source you cannot include it. Road planning is indeed part of urban planning, but you wrote that it is urban planning. If you mean "part of" then write "part of". Railfan23 (talk) 03:54, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting that IP.

I tried reporting him before on WP:AIV, but looks like you got the formatting right. Thanks for everything. ― Дрейгорич / Dreigorich Talk 04:12, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

@Дрейгорич: No problem at all. The AIV formatting is a little complex. I use Twinkle that makes reporting vandals to AIV fast and easy. You might want to install it. Best, Railfan23 (talk) 04:19, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Mars came from Mars you silly

Yes Mars came from Mars --2001:8003:A951:8B00:A49E:ECC6:6AA5:40E4 (talk) 01:39, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

@2001:8003:A951:8B00:A49E:ECC6:6AA5:40E4: hilarious, but 1) no it didn't and 2) if you continue to vandalize Wikipedia articles, you will be blocked. Railfan23 (talk) 01:40, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Moorish science temple of America inc.

African American is a misnomer. ArawakNomad (talk) 06:52, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Editing Basij

Sometimes there is no good source on the web. I was member of Basij, I'm the best source myself and I deleted something was not real. as I said there is no source on the web. If I write everything I know in a weblog it will become a good source? don't let Wikipedia become a bulk website with fake information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mry21 (talk • contribs) 07:19, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Top Gun: Maverick

Hi, someone added a rather bizarre "Chinese censorship" selection to the article, filled with original research, undue weight, and unreliable sources including a quote from Trump's son. I tagged it as a POV but it needs far more trimming.--60.242.159.224 (talk) 19:39, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

user talk:87.20.67.65

user:87.20.67.65 has the right to blank her talkpage. Please do not revert her edits anymore unless they are something that can be considered offensive. CLCStudent (talk) 00:06, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

@CLCStudent: I did not revert that IP blanking their talk page, and yes, I think the edit summaries, including this one are indeed offensive personal attacks. The IP has now been blocked for repeated personal attacks and vandalism. Railfan23 (talk) 00:08, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh yeah, sorry about that. CLCStudent (talk) 00:09, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

@CLCStudent: No worries. Railfan23 (talk) 00:10, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Yardie Muzik

how can i get my company logo added to wikipedia so i can add it to article i can writing? Yardiemuzik (talk) 00:38, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

@Yardiemuzik: That's complex, and you might not want to take that on right now. Even experience editors can get tripped up when uploading images. The basic problem is the loco is copyrighted, and you'll need to overcome that, either by releasing the loco under a Creative Commons license, or by making a Fair Use claim. Images should be uploaded to our sister site called Commons. Here's their starter guide to uploading images. Again, I'd recommend not starting with images. Best luck, Railfan23 (talk) 00:41, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Railfan23 i thank u again u have been the most helpful everyone else just deletes my article without providing any information in what i am doing wrong — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yardiemuzik (talk • contribs) 00:43, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Pluricentric languages

Hi, I'm HenriquQ, who revised the page detailing the nature of pluricentric languages. I myself am a Portuguese native speaker and have had no trouble communicating with Brazilians. However, since my personal experience is rightfully not considered a reliable source by Wikipedia standards, I would like to forward you to another page which speaks of the differences in vocabulary and accents within Brazil itself and how they relate to the Portuguese language spoken throughout Portugal. The page explains how the differences between Brazilian and European Portuguese are comparable to the ones you'd find between the mutually intelligible varieties of English spoken both in the US and the UK, meaning that differences in vocabulary and spelling are usually negligible between their respective formal written forms, even if there are differences in colloquial speech, which may differ quite significantly and even if Brazil experiences some degree of what could be considered a diglossic situation. It is part of a larger compendium of different pages relating to Brazilian culture, History and Legal System, taken from the US Library of Congress. It is also used as reference to back up information detailed in another page, that page being the one about Brazilian Portuguese. There is also another wikipedia page (Portuguese Dialects) which confirms that all Portuguese dialects are mutually intelligible and that only the most distant pairs may hinder rapid speech at first. Anyone who has been exposed to both varities will be able to understand them both. I shall put forth the links below:

http://countrystudies.us/brazil/39.htm

Rex A. Hudson, ed. Brazil: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 1997. Pages 230 and 231

Best regards, HenriquQHenriquQe (talk) 02:57, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Acknowledgments

@HenriquQe: I'm glad that you're providing a source for your proposed changes. By the way, this is a much better URL to use to refer to this source: https://www.loc.gov/resource/frdcstdy.brazilcountrystu00huds_0/?sp=230. The book I cited can be found at: https://books.google.com/books?id=hsvuCwAAQBAJ. It is a much more scholarly work, published nearly 20 years after your source. It supports the assertions I added into the article. Take a look. If you wish to debate which of these sources is better, please do so at Talk:Pluricentric language rather than by further editing the article. Thank you, Railfan23 (talk) 03:03, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pluricentric language, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Creole (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:49, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! General Ization ^Talk 04:24, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Urban density article

Please check the source image information. The caption is in accordance with that. Please don't restore to what you placed earlier as it's WP:SPECULATION. Thank you.--76.71.5.251 (talk) 02:21, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

@76.71.5.251: The caption is not a reliable source so we have no reason to perpetrate the mistake it makes. The foreground is low density, the background is high density. WP:OR does not require us to mis-state the completely, blindingly obvious. Railfan23 (talk) 02:23, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

CCI revert- No hard feelings

Ah it's fine, It's my fault. I just got too caught up in the song I was listening to, and CCI is like a whole different world than regular wikipedia. Thanks, 💵Money💵emoji💵^💸 02:54, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Eisenstein triples

You undid my work because there is no source. I am the source. I'm the only person on the planet that knows about this. What do you propose I do? Nobody is going to publish this.

https://www.khanacademy.org/computer-programming/spin-off-of-mandelbrot-explore-ellipse-z2/4953235278102528 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tejolson (talk • contribs)

@Tejolson: I suggest you find somewhere else to publish it. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. We explicitly require verifiable sources for material in the encyclopedia. We write articles about information that is sourced to independent, published sources. If nobody is going to publish it, it cannot appear in Wikipedia. Sorry, Railfan23 (talk) 05:48, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Are you retarded? What I published is a mathematical fact. That is the only thing in this world that doesn't need a "reliable" source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tejolson (talk • contribs)

Again, please read WP:OR and WP:V. These are non-negotiable requirements of Wikipedia. If you are unable to abide by these tules, please find somewhere else to edit. Thank you, Railfan23 (talk) 16:14, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Splitting 'Weight loss' into 2 articles

Hi Railfan: if you read the talk page of the original "Weight Loss" page, you'll see many people requesting that it be split into "intentional" vs "unintentional" and no-one arguing the contrary. This will enable us to shift all the headings up one level. Fingers crossed you agree with me (us). Tcotco (talk) 03:36, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@Tcotco: Those comments were from 2010 and 2014. In the 5 years since the article has changed a lot. There is not current consensus for the split. Even if there were, you should read and follow Wikipedia:Splitting about how to do this properly. Thanks, Railfan23 (talk) 03:38, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Marianne Williamson

Hi Railfan23,

The edits that I made were based on web searches that I could easily make in a second. Since the edits were made based on Facebook pages, I checked the wikipedia page on how to cite facebook pages - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Facebook_page which said that these should go into the 'external links' section, which was where I added links to the facebook pages. Could you let me know if that was a mistake? If so, should I add those links to the 'references' section instead?

Nitul 1995 (talk) 10:51, 28 July 2019 (UTC)Nitul1995

@Nitul 1995: Facebook pages are not reliable sources. The fact that someone made a meme about Williamson on Facebook is not in any way notable unless it became a big enough deal that it was covered in published, independent sources, at which time you could use those sources in the article. Links to a non-notable Facebook meme page should never be included in an article, either as sources or in the "External links" section. Railfan23 (talk) 20:00, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for issuing a warning to the IP that blanked one of the pages on my User page! :) --Giooo95 (talk) 02:52, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

@Giooo95: my pleasure, glad I could help! Railfan23 (talk) 02:54, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Indian English dictionaries

Hi Rainfan23 - umm, I was just going through those links and connecting them up with their Wikipedia pages. Many of the authors of those dictionaries are prominent orientalists. I cannot see any reason to not have links. I mean, that's one of the great things about Wikipedia. So will you please kindly allow me to do it? - Sonofcawdrey (talk) 01:07, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@Sonofcawdrey: I've reverted my edit. Go ahead, but please be aware of WP:OVERLINK. Best, Railfan23 (talk) 01:09, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@Rainfan23: Thanks. Will do. Best - Sonofcawdrey (talk) 06:28, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Momo Hirai

No signs to show its notable, redirect in case of future activities. Coolbruh123 (talk) 14:23, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

@Coolbruh123: First, there are sources on that article that might show notability. You don't get to decide this on your own, it has to be discussed and consensus reached. You didn't redirect Momo Hirai you blanked it. Please stop these unilateral changes. Railfan23 (talk) 14:28, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

extreme science required, sorry, no unexplained edits allowed

I have no way to message you directly. Please provide proof that my "disruptive" edits were not propaganda from a baseless and totally shit website. These edits and the interactions here are being saved for posterity for a future date - namely one in which their corporate (non-profit?) edits are allowed and reasonable edits based on fact are removed. So far, this looks terrible for the website as a whole. Interactions with my IP are also tracked, so be aware that your reversals - baseless, due to no documentation - look VERY bad. I personally don't care what happens to wikipedia or the people involved, I care about the people around me. So. Justify your reversals and document their credibility, please. Your response will also be documented :)

My IP is visible, which means you know exactly who I am, thanks to shitty websites like this. Who are you?

Once again, unless you have validated the citation-worthiness of those websites, I will continue to revert them. And, unless you can provide some kind of intelligible, verifiable reason for removing them, you're on your own.

edit: holy shit, the "talk" page is really revealing! I'm gonna have to save this bullshit for the NYT and LAP - not to mention the feds — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.66.19.70 (talk • contribs)

Huawei page

Fair comment so I looked again. Per comments, reviewed my changes and accepted reversions in many cases. I left things clearly historically accurate even if old. But most of what I took out was not just old but never belonged, i.e. the Nortel section, on which I reported heavily at the time. The claim of "crucial government support" is disputed and not neutral, as the question of whether Huawei is government-supported is part of the attack. This is unbalanced. Did pull old non-neutral and possibly inaccurate claims, such as Nortel destruction and crucial government support. Because "white label" is much less important today, I replaced "provides" with "has provided." Preceding unsigned comment added by Daveburstein 22:56, 30 July 2019

Nant Ceiswyn

I believe Pont Cymerau is the stone arch bridge adjacent to the yard of Cymerau Quarry, where the Ratgoed Tramway crossed Nant Ceiswyn, not where Nant Ceiswyn joins the Dulas about a half-mile downstream. It is also the only place where the tramway crossed the Nant Ceiswyn. RGCorris (talk) 10:34, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

@RGCorris: You're right about the tramway only crossing the Ceiswyn once. Thanks, I'll update the article. If you look at the 1887 OS map, Pont Cymerau is lower down, at the confluence of Nant Ceiswyn and Nant Llwydiarth where they form the Dulas. Railfan23 (talk) 13:48, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

While I concur that the old map you quote has the Nant Llwydiarth joining the Nant Ceiswyn at Pont Cymerau to form the Dulas, modern maps have the Dulas commencing upstream where the Nant Lociau and Nant Cwmgerwyn meet. It is then joined by the Nant Llwydiarth, Nant Cwmcelli, Nant Ceiswyn and Nant Esgair-neiriau. See http://streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?x=277198&y=309936&z=120&sv=Aberllefenni&st=3&tl=Map+of+Aberllefenni,+Gwynedd+[Town]&searchp=ids.srf&mapp=map.srf RGCorris (talk) 09:09, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Having looked at the 1887 map, the quoted references, and visited the site, I believe the Pont Cymerau referenced has long gone. See the Nant Ceiswyn Talk page. RGCorris (talk) 15:33, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Page Deletion

Are you the same guy who appeared on my talk page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Personisgaming

(talk • contribs)

@Personisgaming: If you mean, did I leave you warnings about your behavior before, then yes, I did. Railfan23 (talk) 23:28, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

@Railfan23:Edit1:Not the first time a guy appeared see Garuda28 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Personisgaming#July_2019 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Personisgaming (talk • contribs)

@Personisgaming: User:Garuda28 is a different editor. You can look in the history of your talk page and see that. Please sign your comments on talk pages Railfan23 (talk) 23:38, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

@Railfan23:Edit:How and why did you even find me making an article... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Personisgaming (talk • contribs)

@Personisgaming:I saw one of your edits on new page patrol. Railfan23 (talk) 23:49, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

@Railfan23: What is NPP... oh and what made the article be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Personisgaming (talk • contribs)

@Personisgaming: I linked to the new page patrol article right there in my comment. Click on the blue link and you will get to an article that explains what new page patrolling is. Your BlueNorOff article has not been deleted. I changed it to a redirect. Of the two sources you added, one did not mention BlueNorOff at all. The other contradicted what you wrote, so isn't a source for your addition. So the article was unsourced and had not evidence that BlueNorOff was notable. It appears to be another name for the Lazarus Group, so I redirected the BlurNorOff article to the Lazarus Group article. Oh, and please SIGN YOUR COMMENTS on talk page. Railfan23 (talk) 00:08, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Edits by you on article Ivo Pogorelić

Hello dear Railfan23,

I added content to this fairly impoverished page with an abundance of attention to being impairtial. All my edits are mostly just facts that this outdated page hadn't caught up on. I do not have an external relationship with this person despite my username. There was no advertising or intention thereof in any form or shape.

You probably should go cross-check my edits against a bit of research before throwing it away altogether.

Ivo Pogorelich (talk) 19:55, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ivo Pogorelich: unfortunately your changes to the Ivo Pogorelich were very far from impartial. Here are a few examples of problems in what you wrote:

• "He has been leading an international career essentially after the scandal in which he was reportedly undeservedly eliminated at the 1980 Chopin International Piano Competition in Warsaw, Poland, and achieved significant success" is both poor grammatical construction and contains unsourced claims like "reportedly undeservedly eliminated" (who says that beyond you?) and unsourced and flattering claims like "achieved significant success"
• "According to his own accounts, he was blocked by the Soviet authority from progressing into the final who had allegedly attempted to poison him" is highly problematic. The "according to his own accounts" clearly violates our standards for reliable sources. And the account of an alleged poisoning attempt cannot be allowed on a Wikipedia article without fully independent sources. Please read WP:BLP
• "Pogorelić has consistently given successful performances world-wide" - this would absolutely need an independent source. You are definitively not a reliable source for the purposes of Wikipedia. This is a pure peacock term
• "His personal web page has been all but renovated in 2018 to provide much more detailed and up-to-date documentation of his concert repertoire and other relevant information" is purely promotional and has no place in an encyclopedia article

And so on. There is very little of what you added that could be used, even if you had provided reliable sources. Which you did not. Sorry, but this is very, very far from impartial. It is a hagiography. Railfan23 (talk) 00:36, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

@RailFan23:

• "eliminated" is factual; that the competition was rigged is, yes, a claim, made by himself in the documentary Why Competitions(2011) as well as in interviews from books that are publicly out there which I COULD cite.
• "Success" - overall positive reviews versus negative ones, praise from critics and audiences alike over the span of 40 years, isn't the least bit of "success"? What other words should one use - be explicit please, I'm not being sarcastic. Or how many pieces of / what sort of proof would I need to put on. Articles on many businesses do use the word "success", therefore I thought I could, too. I don't know why even if I had provided reliable sources it still wouldn't be acceptable.
• Website - how should anyone state the situation regarding the changes to the website without being "promotional"? Is any form of mention of website of persons / businesses considered promotional on Wikipedia? Ivo Pogorelich (talk) 02:47, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ivo Pogorelich: If you could cite books, please actually cite books. Read WP:V and WP:BLP. You need to cite your sources. Just claiming on a talk page that unspecified sources exist it not enough. As for "overall positive reviews", that's entirely different from "achieved significant success" which is what you wrote. If you want to cite specific positive reviews, cite them. If you want to say he achieved significant success, then find an published, independent source that says that and cite the source. At the moment it is simply your conclusion that he achieved significant success, and Wikipedia does not allow original research by editors. The updating of the subject's website is irrelevant to encyclopedic coverage of the subject. Railfan23 (talk) 03:02, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

@RailFan23: Alright. Incidentally, many articles of pianists and other artistic figures are overrun by such flattering elements. Here are only two examples. With your consent I will proceed and attempt to modify the language in those articles so that they are more stringent.

• In [Trifonov], many occurrences of the word "success" do not come with external references but in some cases with borderline "flattering" words like "major", "considerable" no sources are provided to "In 2016, Trifonov recorded the complete piano etudes of Franz Liszt in his next album for DG, which was a major success. It reached the number one position in the Specialist Classical Albums Chart in the United Kingdom in October 2016, was designated one of "The Best Classical Music Recordings of 2016" by The New York Times, and won the 2018 Grammy Award for Best Classical Instrumental Solo. Trifonov has earned considerable commercial and critical success for his discography.
• [Sokolov]: under Biography it says "Despite the international prestige of his Tchaikovsky Competition success, Sokolov's international career began to flourish only towards the end of the 1980s". The editor has not given reasoning for the use of "international prestige" or specified how well the subject competed in said competition, neither the evidence for "flourishing", which by itself seems like a glowing term. Therefore they have the potential of intentionally talking up the subject. Ivo Pogorelich (talk) 04:10, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ivo Pogorelich: For clarity, yes the language used needs to adhere to a neutral point of view. Also (and more importantly) you need to cite your sources (see WP:CITE) especially as this is a biographical article of a living person, so it must adhere to WP:BLP. I strongly urge you to read that policy before you edit the Ivo Pogorelich article further. Good luck, Railfan23 (talk) 04:17, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Alfred Hughes

I'm unclear why you think Hughes was born on 1 July 1864 when the monument quotes 31 July 1861 and FreeBMD has an Alfred William Hughes born in Dolgelly (sic) in the third quarter of 1861, and no-one of that name born in 1864. RGCorris (talk) 09:06, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

@RGCorris:} The article in The Lancet [1] gives 1864. Though that should be a reliable source,I suspect this must be a typo. I'll amend the article. Thanks, Railfan23 (talk) 14:20, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Pont Evans/Evans Bridge

Have you come across any information on when Pont Evans, which crosses the Dulas south of Corris and north of Esgairgeiliog/Ceinws, was constructed, and who Evans might have been ? It appears on a plan of 1852, so certainly pre-dates that year. RGCorris (talk) 12:54, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

@RGCorris: I've had a quick look and haven't turned up anything yet. I suspect it dates from around the time of the construction of the turnpike from Corris to Mach, ie the 1840s, but haven't found definitive evidence of that yet. Railfan23 (talk) 05:41, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Objection to proposal for deletion of J.P. Allen

FYI, I believe he meets the requirements for BLP, have updated bio, added citations, please reconsider. Thank you. Reechard (talk) 16:27, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

@Reechard: While I was editing it to make a number of improvements, another editor nominated it for deletion on the same ground. You have certainly improved it, but it does not yet appear to meet Wikipedia:FILMMAKER, which is the relevant part of WP:BIO. Which of the four criteria listed there does J.P. Allen meet? If he does meet at one, you need to cite at least one reliable source to show that. Good luck, Railfan23 (talk) 16:38, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Railfan23, I feel he should meet the BLP criteria, but maybe he just doesn't. Anyway, I appreciate your help and understanding. But I still have a few days before the hammer drops, right? :-) Reechard (talk) 10:30, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

You need to undo your ill-advised moves·

There were 2 classes of Class 5 engines built by the LMS under Stanier; of a 4-6-0 type and the 2-6-0 type. If you are going to make lots of page moves, I think it's best first to have a really long hard think about what you're doing and be knowledgeable about the subject. Tony May (talk) 05:19, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

The article about the Stanier Class 5 2-6-0 is called LMS Stanier Mogul, so the article about the 4-6-0 could happily have sat at LMS Stanier Class 5. There aren't even redirects from Stanier class 5 2-6-0 LMS Stanier class 5 2-6-0 to the article on the Moguls. As to making "lots of page moves", I haven't. I have no idea what makes you think I have. Railfan23 (talk) 05:25, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

I think it is a well-establihsed policy that pages should be named to avoid ambiguity.Tony May (talk) 05:52, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Tony May and persistent criticism and belittling of other editors on British railways. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:21, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Locomotives and articles

Hello! Congratulations on all your sterling work putting in the Whyte template. I've seen you at quite a few articles I watch – it's an obvious improvement! I just wondered, looking at this lovely place, (boast: been there, done that, fantastic!) how you pronounce these engine types and therefore whether it needs an "a" or an "an" before? I was about to change it to "an" so that, if reading it out loud, we would say "an oh four oh" but then I worried that there's a technical point that experts know but that I'm missing! Do please enlighten me. Thanks again and best wishes DBaK (talk) 09:35, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

@DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered: thank you for your kind words. Usually you pronounce "0-4-0" as "oh four oh", so you are quite right that you should put "an" in front. I'm jealous that you've visited Driving Creek, it's not one I've been to! Best, Railfan23 (talk) 09:57, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Oh, thanks so much for the nice and fast reply! I am delighted that I was not being even more stupid than I usually am. Yes, it was absolutely lovely – and it does this wonderful trick, that I think is quite unusual in railways, of zigzagging across the face of the hill. (Map here.) You go into what looks like a siding – and at least one of them is quite hairily built out on trestles over the hillside so it's like a bridge-going-nowhere – then the points change and you come out onto the uphill leg. I mean I know you get it at places like, erm, Battersby Jct I think, but that's usually for some operational reason or where there used to be a branch or something. At the DCR it just feels like the most bizarre way of going uphill in a train! Oh and they have quite a nice spiral with a double-decker bridge too ... this was a wonderful place to visit. Cheers! DBaK (talk) 10:04, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

You mean like the Zig Zag Railway in Australia ? RGCorris (talk) 15:07, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Now the Zig-Zag I have travelled on. The other operating railway using switchbacks that I know about is the Roaring Camp & Big Trees Narrow Gauge Railroad in California. Railfan23 (talk) 16:12, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

So there are quite a few of these, if you look at the article Zig zag (railway). Not all still operating, of course. I can't believe I forgot the DHR! Railfan23 (talk) 16:17, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

So exciting, thanks Railfan23 and RGCorris – I suddenly have a load more articles to look at! Cheers DBaK (talk) 18:56, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Hey

I just wanted to say thanks for letting me know that. I truly did not know! --Wyatt2049 | (talk) 18:49, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@Wyatt2049: No problem at all. There are a couple of rules to know if you want to effectively deal with vandals, but once again thank you for helping out. It is much appreciated and makes Wikipedia better. Best, Railfan23 (talk) 18:51, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Ekpe Udoh

Ekpe Udoh is in the Nigerian National team So how am I vandalising.... Wiki Facts fixer (talk) 22:08, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@Wiki Facts fixer: There is nothing in the article that says he is in the Nigerian National team. He was born in the US, played college ball in the US, plays in the NBA in the US. There is no reliable source that I can find that indicates he has ever played on the Nigerian National Team. On the other hand, you have a very long and dishonorable history of vandalizing Wikipedia articles related to sportsmen whose families came from non-European/American families or who immigrated into American/European countries. You are obviously here to push a very specific nationalist agenda. Please stop. Railfan23 (talk) 22:18, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes it’s not on the article because I had to add it No reliable sources you can find? Have a look at the FIBA World Cup Instagram and social media pages or their website What is him playing college basketball in the US got any relevance And he does not play in the NBA — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki Facts fixer (talk • contribs) 22:29, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@Wiki Facts fixer: if you don't have a reliable source you cannot edit the article to reflect that. He played in the NBA for multiple years for multiple teams. Until you have a reliable source that says he is Nigerian, you should not change the article to say that he is. Railfan23 (talk) 22:34, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

What does him playing in the NBA have ANY relevance, Nowitzki played in the NBA is he American???? You are just ignoring my points and making inaccurate comments. Udoh is Nigerian and plays for Nigeria....... http://www.fiba.basketball/basketballworldcup/2019/team/Nigeria .... there is your evidence look at the photo and the roster — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki Facts fixer (talk • contribs) 22:38, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Then add the source to the article. Changing an article about a living person without providing a reliable source is not allowed. As you have been told multiple times, as you continue your campaign across Wikipedia articles. Railfan23 (talk) 22:41, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

My campaign! I have clearly shown evidence and now it is still a campaign!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki Facts fixer (talk • contribs)

Yes, the fact that you have misrepresented players' nationalities across multiple article is very clearly a campaign. I've reverted your latest unsourced edit to the Ekpe Udoh article, and added a very reliable source that he is American. If you continue to push your personal agenda on this or other articles, I will report you to the administrators. Railfan23 (talk) 22:48, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

And I sourced him with an UP TO DATE article from FIBA, so instead of throwing accusations and threatening me, Wikipedia considers the national team as the nationality! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki Facts fixer (talk • contribs) 23:13, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Removal of points

What is ur basis when removing those information? There are sources supporting the endorsements Chungha has been on. Too detailed? What about those in BTS or IU. Isin't both pages have even detailed and not have a neautral POV??? Coolbruh123 (talk) 05:58, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Fancruft? How about I was just stating those endorsements based on the sources?? Can you reply? Coolbruh123 (talk) 06:05, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Six Flags & Texas Railroad, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diesel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:08, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

user:2001:9e0:860e:b401:ece7:82cd:1f3d:523e

This user did a very bad edit to Jawhar Mohammad. --Wyatt2049 | (talk) 13:26, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

68.204.13.180

FYI, I already warned them about the personal attack; they wiped the warning from their talk page. I'm keeping an eye on the situation. :) stwalkerster (talk) 18:46, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I saw the page blanking as they're on my watchlist - hence the final warning. I've had some interaction with this IP over at Multi-frequency signaling before. Railfan23 (talk) 18:50, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Ceremonial

I am attempting to explain at talk:Peter1292 what the issue is, if you want to add anything. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:32, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

I have reached 3RR so would be grateful if you could monitor Milton Keynes from here. It may be that a reference to WP:ANI is needed. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 08:12, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

I have moved the discussion to take in the generic case, at wikiproject UK geography. Other editors are participating now so feel to let it drop if you wish. Thank you for your time. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:02, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Regarding my page shefali rana

When I can remove that add tag..Is there any chance that my article will survive Khusin26 (talk) 17:54, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Afd tag Khusin26 (talk) 18:05, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

What references I should give....To save my articles Khusin26 (talk) 18:08, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

@Khusin26: You cannot remove the AfD tag. Read what it says on the tag: "this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed". The discussion will be closed after 7 or more days by a non-involved user. Railfan23 (talk) 18:30, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you...What does this message means that your article has been reviewed Khusin26 (talk) 18:37, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

And after discussion is closed..How I came to know that discussion is closed. Khusin26 (talk) 18:40, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

@Khusin26: When the discussion is closed it will be clearly marked at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shefali Rana. You might want to read Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#How_an_AfD_discussion_is_closed for more details. Railfan23 (talk) 18:48, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

What references I should add to save my pages..3 or 4 references are from reliable sources times of india and bombay times aren't they enough Khusin26 (talk) 19:13, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

I know The result will be on the basis of arguments placed in discussion..Hoping for the best..Thank you. Khusin26 (talk) 19:15, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Please help in creating the article..please Khusin26 (talk) 11:00, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

What does this means that article is relisted for discussion. Khusin26 (talk) 04:45, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

@Khusin26: It means that the initial seven days of discussion had ended, but the administrator who went to close the debate found that there wasn't agreement about what should be done. So they re-started the debate in the hope that more editors would express an opinion. Basically, the debate will now run for another 7 days. You are welcome to express your opinion in the debate as well. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 05:02, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Khusin26 (talk) 05:49, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Please help in editing the table in article Khusin26 (talk) 06:05, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Langvar issues

Already replied on my own talk page, but checking in here since that thread has ballooned to multiple topics. So I'm a bit confused, is there any reason that MOS:TIES does not apply in the Welsh context (local consensus or otherwise)? Are there any similar langvar minefields I should be aware of before making additional edits? Thanks for your help. Tinkering Gnome (talk) 00:11, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

GeneralGrievousHero4Life‎

Well, I'll do what I can (just reverted his last edit); he is clearly an editor with a bee in his tiny bonnet & does not get the rules. But I'm editing from a public library since I don't have the internet at home, so constant vigilance is not an option.TheLongTone (talk) 14:59, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

User:Olywalle

I’m not trying to bribe because someone told me I could buy, sorry I didn’t know I’m new at this and my mistake was that I didn’t bother to ready some things before doing what I’ve just done, don’t be annoyed I’m honestly sorry Olywalle (talk) 22:29, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

@Olywalle: that certainly looked like a bribe. Wikipedia is the free encyclopedia. All the editors here give their time freely and voluntarily. I have asked you dozens of times to read and follow our policies. If you had ignored that advice once or twice, I'd be more than happy to assume good faith and help you. But you have repeatedly ignored not just my advice but the advice of other editors. When your pages were deleted because they go against our rules you repeatedly re-created them. You've said you were sorry before, but then kept right on ignoring the rules and damaging the project. Why would I believe you this time, when you've said sorry before and not meant it? The Mirror Cracked (talk) 22:34, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Ok I can see where you are coming from. I only repeated it because I added my Instagram link so I tried removing it because it said something like advertising, but then it’s gone now. Thanks for understanding me I just want to create my own Biography and how and where can I do that and what kind of content do you accept on this Wikipedia? Olywalle (talk) 22:40, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

@Olywalle: You cannot add your own biography here. This will be the last time I explain this, having explained it to you at least 5 times already. You should not write about yourself, see WP:COI. All the information you write about has to be verifiable from independent, published sources: see WP:V and WP:RS. What you write has to be written with a neutral point of view, see WP:NPOV. To write about a person, that person has to be notable: see WP:N. You cannot use Wikipedia to promote yourself or others, see WP:PROMOTE. I'm afraid you are not notable, you have a conflict of interest, you are not writing from a neutral point of view, you are not including any independent, published sources. If you are a notable enough person to be written about here, you will appear in published sources and someone unconnected to you will use those sources to write a neutral account of your life. Until then, there can't be an biographical article about you here. There are plenty of free web hosts available, I suggest you use one of those instead. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 22:46, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Ffridd Gate station

Where do you get the 1830s date for the toll house ? The turnpike road was on the Montgomeryshire side of the Dulas and would have been largely replaced in the 1830s or 1840s when what is now the A487 was built, suggesting the house may have been older. Also, why do you state there was no platform ? This is not stated in the quoted reference. RGCorris (talk) 08:34, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

@RGCorris: The date is from [2]. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 08:36, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Who is TMC

All the RF23 personas went missing and my talk page looks outdated … (Personisgaming (talk) 00:58, 2 September 2019 (UTC))

@Personisgaming: It took me a while to figure out what you were asking above. Please try to write in full sentences, and ask specific questions instead of leaving riddles. To answer your question, I changed my username from Railfan23 to The Mirror Cracked a couple of week ago, as I note on my user page. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 01:44, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

@Railfan23:I clicked on something and it directed me to a second guy named TMC, acronym for The Mirror Cracked--Personisgaming (talk) 14:48, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Ok to move your WP:AN remarks?

Mind if I move your remarks to the discussion section? I'm going to hide the 2 proposals as they no longer apply. Buffs (talk) 20:38, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

@Buffs: Yes, I'm happy for you to do that. Thanks for asking, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 20:39, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

No prob. Buffs (talk) 20:42, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Already done :-) A sincere thanks for the feedback. Buffs (talk) 20:47, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Can I just say it's refreshing to have a disagreement with someone so respectful that we can thank each other even though we don't agree?! :-) Buffs (talk) 22:29, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

I can only agree, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 04:12, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

A bit of a mistake on my part.

I didn’t consider that he was linking to real estate development, I thought it was missing brackets. (And I didn’t see his spam addition until after I tagged the page with page curation.) James-the-Charizard (talk) 16:44, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@James-the-Charizard: Not a mistake at all, I just happened to have a bit more context. Love your username, btw. Best, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 16:50, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

I see... And thanks! This is actually my second username (my original one was Charizard200) and it’s based from my favorite Pokémon. ^v^ James-the-Charizard (talk) 16:51, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Yesoe Yoon

Hi I'm Barkeep49 and I've declined your speedy deletion at Yesoe Yoon. Just because there is a draft doesn't mean it needs to be dealt with before there can be a mainspace article. Whether to keep this article (or not) may be decided at the AfD you've opened now - that's definitely the better route. If there are any questions I might be to answer please feel free to ask me by pinging me here or leaving a note on my talk page. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:04, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Yesoe Yoon mistake.

Hello there. It looks like while you were moving around the comments and such on the Afd page for Yesoe Yoon page you accidentally deleted my comments. Would you mind fixing please? Here's the dif for reference. Thank you. LandonRules ^(Talk) 02:13, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Landonrules Whoops. Really sorry about that. I'll go fix now. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 02:39, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Hey no problem at all, things happen. Thanks for the fix and have an awesome day. 😊 LandonRules ^(Talk) 03:05, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

my box etc

well stop people from vandalizing my box and stop bullying me..im really upset and need all this! Drew270 (talk) 02:30, 17 September 2019 (UTC) drew270 Drew270 (talk) 02:30, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

@Dre270: What do you mean by "my box". I genuinely don't know what you are referring to. I also don't see any bullying coming from anyone but you. You have been given kindly worded and sage advice and you have responded with threats and anger. If people are vandalizing something then they will be warned, and ultimately they will be blocked from editing if they persist. But that rule applies to you as well, and your editing has been hostile and disruptive. If you are so frustrated that you cannot control yourself, I suggest you step away for a while and do something else instead. Good lcuk, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 02:34, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

message

One I didn't personally attack anyone. I called a rule not a person hypocritical. Two then that person who thought it was directed at them, which it wasn't, threatened me. Oh right that person was you. So it isn't like you'll respond honestly. 96.31.177.52 (talk) 02:50, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

@96.31.177.52: You called Cullen a "do gooder" and a "back stabbing bully". So yes, a definite personal attack. I didn't threaten you, I warned you what will happen if you continue to break Wikipedia's rules. If you choose to ignore those warnings, do not be surprised at the consequences. Multiple editors have warned you multiple times. Now is the time to stop attacking people and start engaging with Wikipedia's basic rules The Mirror Cracked (talk) 02:53, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Apologies that was a reply to the wrong user. Your personal attacks were to call a user a hypocrite. I'm perfectly able to admit my mistakes. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 03:00, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Again I didn't call anyone a hypocrite you LIAR. I called the rule hypocritical. Now you are abusing you status with block threats. I'm taking this higher. You are now harassing me. 96.31.177.52 (talk) 03:02, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm contacting oversight, you have followed me around making snide remarks, lied about what I said and what it was directed at and now threatened blocking falsely. 96.31.177.52 (talk) 03:06, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

What you said is: "Can you be more hypocritical?" Note the word "you". You did not say "the rule is hypocritical". So yes, that is a personal attack. You are welcome take this higher, I'd suggest you try WP:ANI first, but you can try oversight first. I am plainly not harassing you, so I suspect you might want to read WP:BOOMERANG first. Just a thought. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 03:09, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

One a typo from dyslexia, two YOU you are jumping right to block over that, while ignoring your own actions. YOU are abusing your power. And I'm still taking it to oversight for that abuse. You can pretend you weren't snide and threatening all you want, I doubt they'll see the same. 96.31.177.52 (talk) 03:14, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

I am not "jumping straight to blocking". I've warned you twice. I am not an admin and cannot block you, so there is zero "power" to "abuse". I am telling you that you need to follow the rules, or someone else will block you. That's what happen when you continually attack people. As I said, I'm perfectly comfortable with you going to oversight, but I will mention again that oversight is the wrong forum, and you want WP:ANI instead. 03:18, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

You warned me twice for the same. And yeah you aren't an admin, you just threaten blocking even when you don't have that power. YOU are a bully, threatening anyone that doesn't cower to your views. And that is getting taken up to oversight. I suspect you might be the one ending up blocked with the false threats. And no you aren't following the rules with your snide response in the rules discussion, and pretending to be a mod in your messages. 96.31.177.52 (talk) 03:23, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

You not only warned me twice pretending to be an admin, you threatened me. Which is in the edits, surprised you'd think to try to cover that up. 96.31.177.52 (talk) 03:29, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

You might want to read up on Cool down blocks since you like to pretend to be an admin. 96.31.177.52 (talk) 03:31, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

The first warning was for this edit where you accused Alex21 of hypocrisy. The second warning was for this edit on my talk page. Oversight is for removing egregious comments that break Wikipedia's rules (see WP:OVERSIGHT) and I really don't think it's what you want, but you're more than welcome to try. I have at no point represented myself as an admin or pretended to be an admin . The Mirror Cracked (talk) 03:32, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

irrelevant to the fact you aren't an admin and pretended to be one, threatened me, followed and harassed me. And it is reported to the appropriate page. Your a bully that pretends to be a mod to force your views down others throats GL. Don't message me again or you'll be reported for additional harassment on top of the current report pending, and I'll stay off of yours. 96.31.177.52 (talk) 03:37, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

[De-indenting] Where exactly do you think I pretended to be an admin? You keep saying that, but since I haven't ever claimed to be an admin it seems highly unlikely that you have any evidence of that. I've responded to your report on WP:ANI. By the way, you failed to notify me of your report, as you are required to do. I don't much care, as I saw the report, but you should be aware of that as the admins generally take a dim view of users who file reports on ANI without following the instructions. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 03:44, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

for dealing with Tony May

Don't be afraid to be creative (talk) 18:46, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, much appreciated. Railfan23 (talk) 18:56, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Human Dignity and Humiliation Studies

Hello The Mirror Cracked. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Human Dignity and Humiliation Studies, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Having been founded by a notable person indicates importance/significance (WP:CCSI#CORP, WP:CCSI#ORG). Thank you. SoWhy 08:16, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

BlackRock

Hello, wondered if you could revisit your change on the BlackRock article. The date for the last reference is invalid and I do not have access to source to correct. Thanks. Keith D (talk) 11:45, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@Keith D: thanks for pointing that out. I'd managed to transpose the date, typing "61" instead of "16"! Fixed now. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 12:36, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for correction. Keith D (talk) 16:22, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Carnival Row

The talk page had a consensus on the nature of pointless, petty spoilers in the article. One, single, lone, power-tripping "super user" was opposing the consensus. It made absolutely zero sense to shove spoilers into every possible paragraph where one could be crammed unless you consider that the editor holding the article hostage had some kind of malicious intent or axe to grind. Paragraph after paragraph was written to refute them, until they eventually yielded and eventually just said, "find consensus then." Consensus showed up, but no changed have been allowed.

It's insanity and a strong part of why wikipedia has a problem with attracting new editors. A reason why dozens of news articles are written every year about wikipedia dying. Why would any of us new users waste our time studying the arcana that "super users" demand of us when we can never, ever, ever make a change that sticks because some "super user" or their moderator/administrator friend comes along and blocks it for no reason? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.78.10.140 (talk • contribs)

@139.78.10.140: The talk page did not have anything like the consensus you describe. In the section you contributed to, you and User:GwydionM made the case against including spoilers, while User:Alex 21, User:YoungForever, User:Axedel and User:Esuka made the case the other way. How is that possibly "a consensus on the nature of pointless, petty spoilers in the article" and how does that possibly support your idea that "One, single, lone, power-tripping "super user" was opposing the consensus"? You are grossly mis-characterising the discussion, the consensus is against you, and you are definitely not justified in that personal attack. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 16:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Very well said. We're just enforcing the guidelines here and nothing more. If Wikipedia suddenly became a place which prohibited spoilers in character descriptions or summaries, we'd have to adjust pages to fit with that. But as things stand now the IP editor is in the wrong and they need to tone it down just a bit. Esuka (talk) 19:10, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Predatory journal

Concerning your comment on Moringa oleifera, sources from a predatory journal are discouraged on Wikipedia according to WP:SOURCEWATCH. It usually means the editorial practices are suspect, including advertising to authors who must actually pay the journal to have their work published, a practice that may be abused to pad a CV. The whole process is contaminated - from the possibly misdirected author motivation to publish, to absence of editorial scrutiny in the interest of revenue. --Zefr (talk) 19:12, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

@Zefr: thanks for the explanation and the links - that makes sense. I've been through all the lists at WP:SOURCEWATCH, and none of them contain Journal of Food Processing and Preservation as far as I can see. I don't think this is a predatory journal, unless I've missed it somewhere? Wiley-Blackwell are generally well-regarded, I believe. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 19:59, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

As mentioned on my talk page, the journal in question is African Journal of Food Processing and Preservation and not Journal of Food Processing and Preservation. Cheers. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:21, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Regarding "Wright Brothers"

Hi, I noticed you reverted my edit on "Wright Brothers," stating that the grammar had previously been correct. Specifically, my removal of is from "He became ill on a business trip to Boston in April 1912, the illness is sometimes attributed to eating bad shellfish at a banquet."

The current form of the sentence is wrong. The use of a comma between two independent clauses without a conjunction is incorrect (comma splicing). While the is would be necessary if "the illness is sometimes attributed to eating bad shellfish at a banquet" was a sentence on its own, it is actually a clause in a larger sentence. Removing the is makes it a dependent clause, allowing the use of the comma without the conjunction.

If you prefer to keep the "is", I would suggest using a conjunction to remedy the comma splice: "He became ill on a business trip to Boston in April 1912, which is sometimes attributed to eating bad shellfish at a banquet." Otherwise, it may be split into two sentences: "He became ill on a business trip to Boston in April 1912. The illness is sometimes attributed to eating bad shellfish at a banquet."

Thtatithticth (talk) 17:09, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

@Thtatithticth: Thanks for the detailed reply, I appreciate it. I agree that splitting this into two sentences, as you suggest, would be a good solution. I am happy to do that. Best, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 17:20, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks my friend to add the template on the newly created article. But let me first complete it.Me2offo (talk) 06:05, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

• I didn't request to move the article to draft space. You really messed up. I'm really trying to contribute and you really make my way hard to contribute to Wikipedia. You missed understood my reply your talk page. Me2offo (talk) 06:17, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

@Me2offo: You asked to be left alone to complete the article. That is the purpose of Draft: space - so you can work on the article and complete it before you move it to Article space. Once the redirect has been removed, you can move it back (which is why it has the speedy deletion notice on it, which you unhelpfully removed). The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:19, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. And I'm sorry. If I'm rude. It's just that I'm trying to follow Wikipedia 3RR. And speedy deletion would take time. And the article is almost completed just finishing touch is required. Me2offo (talk) 06:23, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

The good news is WP:3RR shouldn't be a problem in this case. The speedy deletion process is usually pretty fast, in fact I see the page was deleted only a minute after you left the above page and you've already moved the article back, so everything should be working again. Good luck, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:39, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Edit Warring

Your recent editing history at Murder of Botham Jean shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Mfwitten (talk) 21:43, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Herbert Vivian

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Herbert Vivian 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 Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 22:01, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

@Amitchell125: Thanks for letting me know! This is my first GA nomination, so I'm sure there will be plenty of feedback. I'm looking forward to working with you on this and addressing your suggestions for improvements. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 22:55, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

hey

Those 3 bars are discontinued--Doremifasollatiso (talk) 06:20, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@Doremifasollatiso: Well then, it will be trivially easy for you to cite multiple reliable sources, since that announcement will make haedlines across the world. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:21, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@The Mirror Cracked: http://www.doterra.com/ HERE IS THE ARTICLE Doremifasollatiso (talk) 06:26, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@Doremifasollatiso: What on earth are you talking about? That says nothing about any of those chocolate bars. Time to stop messing about. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:36, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@The Mirror Cracked: http://fx.smtown.com/ what about this --Doremifasollatiso (talk) 06:39, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@Doremifasollatiso: Stop playing the fool. You're clearly not here to build an encyclopedia, so a report to AIV it is. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:40, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

hey

Those 3 bars are discontinued--Doremifasollatiso (talk) 06:20, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@Doremifasollatiso: Well then, it will be trivially easy for you to cite multiple reliable sources, since that announcement will make haedlines across the world. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:21, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@The Mirror Cracked: http://www.doterra.com/ HERE IS THE ARTICLE Doremifasollatiso (talk) 06:26, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@Doremifasollatiso: What on earth are you talking about? That says nothing about any of those chocolate bars. Time to stop messing about. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:36, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@The Mirror Cracked: http://fx.smtown.com/ what about this --Doremifasollatiso (talk) 06:39, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@Doremifasollatiso: Stop playing the fool. You're clearly not here to build an encyclopedia, so a report to AIV it is. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:40, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Regarding Webwork (software)

Lakerboy23 (talk) 06:26, 6 October 2019 (UTC)Can you advice me what other possible lacking on my article to stay on the mainspace? Thank YouLakerboy23 (talk) 06:26, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@Lakerboy23: your biggest problem are the sources. Most of them are blogs, and several of them are simple listings of the software. Per WP:BLOGS, blogs are not acceptable sources. The only potentially good source is Newsweek, but it simply mentions that Webwork exists; it is not in-depth coverage. Without in-depth coverage from multiple reliable sources, I'm afraid Webwork does not meet our notability criteria. I advise you to read Wikipedia:Notability (web) and see if you can find sources that show that Webwork is notable. Good luck, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:34, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@The Mirror Cracked: Okay only newsweek are the only good source? I will find more reliable sources online. Thanks for the advice. (talk) 06:39, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Incorrect coordinates for quarries near Dolwyddelan?

I found that the Ty'n-y-bryn quarry and the Prince Llewellyn quarry both had the same coordinates in WP. Reading the WP articles, those coordinates didn't match the description. I think that the Ty'n-y-bryn (or Penilyn) quarry is on the slope to the SE behind Pentre-bont, while the Llewellyn quarry is to the north of Dolwyddelan town. I'm going to fix the coordinates based on the OS map, but if you have better sources, that would be more than welcome. —hike395 (talk) 04:23, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Later --- now I'm not sure whether the Prince Llewellyn quarry is ENE from Dolwyddelan along the A470 (which matches the coordinates on the article and the coordinates on the photograph), or directly north of town on the slope (which matches the wording of the article). Would you happen to know? —hike395 (talk) 04:29, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Even later: found this which shows that Prince Llewellyn is along the A470, and this which says that Ty'n-y-bryn is at the base of Drosgol. So I believe that the coordinates are now correct. Thanks! —hike395 (talk) 05:41, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

References

regarding webwork (software)

Lakerboy23 (talk) 09:32, 8 October 2019 (UTC)I understand now why it's still declined maybe the resources are not enough to be called worthy for notice. Thanks again!Lakerboy23 (talk) 09:32, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Thanks for creating Cwm Ebol quarry.

User:Onel5969 while examining this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:21, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Category:Hot List: "LF Top Song"

the article is not an advertisement, expresses a neutral point of view, please do not delete! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Youmusic (talk • contribs)

@Youmusic: The only purpose of that category is to advertise your chart. You have created yet another sockpuppet account to spam Wikipedia. This is the very definition of being not here to build an encyclopedia. I am confident you will be indef blocked shortly, just as your previous accounts have been. There is not place in a serious encyclopedia for this category. Please stop adding it. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:06, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a huge number of music sheets, but they want to delete this one, it’s somehow strange ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Youmusic (talk • contribs) 06:09, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

@Youmusic: Even if that were true, other people breaking the rules does not give you permission to break them. Also, sockpuppetry, vandalism and clear advertising are all forbidden on Wikipedia. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:12, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

NPR - please read

Hi The Mirror Cracked. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encylopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

• Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:35, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

I have placed the standard message above because you were granted the right by Lourdes at admin discretion outside the normal process. Please ensure that you are perfectly familiar with WP:NPP, especially spam and spamusername, because I have noticed that some of your reviews are not complete. If you have any questions , don't hesitate to ask me. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:40, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

@Kudpung: Thanks for the notice and the explanation. Could you point me at one of the recent examples where I left a review incomplete? I'm eager to improve. Many thanks, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:46, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

See User talk:KWGroup93. You correctly tagged their user page for deletion, but failed to notify the noticeboard that their account should be rapidly deleted - which is even more important. Please also subscribe to the NPR newsletter, because this is also something that is done by the PERM script. Also please consider putting the WT:NPR page on your watchlist. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:06, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

On second thoughts, maybe you did notify the noticeboard, but I can't find it there. So my apologfies if you had been doing the right thing. I don't check AIV, I have a better and faster way of detecting spammers ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:17, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I reported that one to WP:UAA using Twinkle: [3], since it wasn't eligible for WP:AIV as they hadn't been sufficiently warned. Best, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 07:41, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Keep up the good work. If you have any questions regarding patrolling new pages, don't hesitate to drop a line at WT:NPR, or ask me direct. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:10, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Equilibrium

so, do you like my trims?--NeoBatfreak (talk) 06:17, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Indian English

Hello The Mirror Cracked. Why did you undo my edits to this article? Obviously Indian English is spoken outside of the Repulic of India. Also, why delete a reference to a published academic article about the hybrid words? - Sonofcawdrey (talk) 02:14, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

@Sonofcawdrey: Can you link to the diff you are talking about? I can't find the edit to Indian English you are referring to. Thanks, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 02:19, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

BNA template

Hello. Please can you test this more thoroughly before deploying it in mainspace. Currently, it doesn't display the contents of |newspaper= and |location= in the reference list, which is a fairly serious omission given that the newspaper is what we're actually citing, not the archive the url comes from. The url is only a courtesy link for the benefit of those readers who have access to it.

Also, I'm not sure that it should wikilink British Newspaper Archive in every reference in the list, where this was not done before; in the previous version of Ralph Makepeace, the first usage was wikilinked but not the other several dozen.

And I don't know what you'e using to apply the template, but at Ralph Makepeace it removed |url-access= and |via= from a Findmypast ref, and removed a |website= from a couple of refs citing Colin Jose's Canadian Soccer History.

I'm going to revert you at Makepeace, and at others on my watchlist. I'm not convinced that using an additional layer of template is a good thing just to replace a url with a template call, but it does need rather more thought before starting to apply it on live articles, especially if it's going to make the reflist output inconsistent in appearance. And perhaps should be available for editors to choose to use, rather than being imposed upon them? cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:21, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I agree strongly with the above - that BNA template is a disaster, and I have reverted it from two articles on my watchlist so far. Some of the BNA refs in articles created by me took many months, sometimes years, to track down - so when that template removes column, page, and other details from screen and printout, it can make it almost impossible for UK readers using microfilm machines (common in many libraries) to verify the citations. I second the request not to use the BNA template in mainspace so long as it continues to do harm. Thank you. Storye book (talk) 09:17, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I've rolled back all the edits. Thanks for pointing out the problem. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 13:56, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Much appreciated. Thank you. Storye book (talk)

And from me. thanks, Struway2 (talk) 17:52, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

MGTOW

Hi there - I think I reverted an edit of yours by mistake on MGTOW - only noticed now, and have reverted my reversion. Sorry about that. Britishfinance (talk) 15:12, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

No worries, thanks for letting me know. Best, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 15:17, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Lakewood Lancers

My page is not advertising a business. There is no monetary gain for me through the page I built on this platform. Lakewood Lancers does not differ from any of the other NFL pages you host, as mine depicts the history of a team like the pros. Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oakland_Raiders

I am the creator and owner of all of my page's content including text and images, therefore I'm not infringing on copyright protection. I ask that you read through and compare the two pages and explain to me how I am in violation of the regulations. Links and references were listed in my page. What else am I missing? I've also sent an email regarding the common uses policy to ensure that I am the owner of all work posted. Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigRed66 (talk • contribs) 04:26, 22 October 2019 (UTC) Lucio Arellano BigRed66 (talk) 04:28, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

@BigRed66: I never said your page was advertising a business. I said, as have numerous other editors that it is a copyright infringement. You have been warned 8 separate times to not create this page, and each time you ignored the warnings and recreated the page. One of the earlier messages said "If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license." So please follow that link to understand how to donate copyrighted material to Wikipedia. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 04:33, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

@BigRed66: even if you donate the material, Lakewood Lancers may still not be notable. Please read our criteria fo sports teams. There is a large difference between an NFL team and a high school team. You would need to cite multiple, independent, published reliable sources that had significant coverage of the Lancers. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 04:36, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

SPI reports

Your SPI reports on Ugly duckling 2019 CU erection offered no evidence, and accused a new editor of long-term abuse (their block was actually for username and vandalism issues, not LTA). Filing an SPI report without any evidence can be viewed as a personal attack and rebound on you. Please provide the requested evidence as a your first priority. Cabayi (talk) 08:30, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

@Cabayi: FYI, and if the archive looks sparse, it's because we don't usually bother documenting this one. You get the ping since you're a clerk, but no further action is required. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 12:56, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Help Please

Christie Lamb - Australian Country Music Singer Songwriter (talk) 05:58, 24 October 2019 (UTC) Hello there I am having trouble starting a page for a music artist. Her name is Christie Lamb. I tried to start the page under another name and it then told me that Christie Lamb had nothing to do with the page name. If you could pleased help or make any changes needed for me. Thanks you

(talk page stalker) Hello and welcome. I see you have done a copyright violation, That is a no-no and serious one at that. The place to ask is at the Tea House, where volunteers are standing by. I see you have a username issue here as you seem to be impersonalmente someone you are not. More on your user talk page. -- Alexf^(talk) 10:51, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Unless I'm mistaken Alexf this warning belongs at User talk:Christie Lamb - Australian Country Music Singer Songwriter. Cabayi (talk) 11:14, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Oh it does, and was also posted there of course. This was a response to the requester at this page. not to The Mirror Cracked. My apologies if it was mis-understood. -- Alexf^(talk) 11:22, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Twix

did anyone delete my twix talk page post because I know I talked in the page twix talk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:246:5880:12B0:D155:342C:8076:BBFE (talk) 11:19, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Unreliable sources on Paul Wheeler

There is a third source. Check it out on Google Books. Also, the CV is not strictly speaking prepared by him, but is a summary of his career prepared by his agency. It is just as reliable as a uni faculty page on a professor. --Peripatetic (talk) 06:36, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

@Peripatetic: the {{unreliable sources}} tag does not say all the sources are unreliable. It says "Some of this article's listed sources may not be reliable". So while 2/3rds of the sources on the article are unreliable, it should stay. IMDB is clearly unreliable since anyone can edit it. His CV is unreliable because it is published by his agency, which has a clear interest in promoting him and does not apply rigorous standards to material like that. Please read WP:RS and note that reliable sources are published and independent. The third source is reliable and at least prevents the article from being deleted. You should replace the other two sources before removing the {{unreliable sources}} tag. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:42, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

..at least prevents the article from being deleted. You should replace the other two sources before removing the unreliable sources tag. Maybe you could do the legwork yourself. Failing that, feel free to delete it. I'm no longer interested. --Peripatetic (talk) 07:48, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Review Page

@The Mirror Cracked:

Sir Please review my this article. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamz_Inkzone Is this acceptable or not??

Thank You Virenderthind2019 (talk) 02:41, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

@Virenderthind2019: I've done some minor cleanup, but it looks okay to me. Good luck, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 02:46, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

@The Mirror Cracked:

Thank You, Sir. Have a nice day Virenderthind2019 (talk) 02:49, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

@The Mirror Cracked:

Thanks for your guidance sir. As i checked, My recent article Kamz Inkzone has not reviewed yet. What is the process for it? Virenderthind2019 (talk) 06:44, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

@The Mirror Cracked:

Good Morning,Sir Please reply... I want to know why this article has not reviewed yet. Virenderthind2019 (talk) 02:02, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

@Virenderthind2019: I am in a different time zone to you, so I am not online at the same times you are. As to reviews, there is no guarantee your articles will be reviewed at all. Some of my articles have been reviewed months after I created them, and some of them have not been reviewed at all. Don't worry about it. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 02:08, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

@The Mirror Cracked:

Ohkk Sir But Is this important that article should be reviewed? As I know, Article shows on google after reviewed it. Am I right Sir? Virenderthind2019 (talk) 02:14, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

@Virenderthind2019: Google listing has nothing to do with the page being reviewed, as far as I know. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 02:20, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

@The Mirror Cracked:

Okkk Sir, But you reviewed the Dheeraj Jorwal page, soon after it started showing on Google, while Kamz Inkzone has not been reviewed yet and it is not showing on Google. I am not sure..but it seems to me that something matters. I am trying to understand. By the way, Thank You So Much Sir And whenever I need help, I will definitely come here. Virenderthind2019 (talk) 02:33, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Response

YouTube Is Where The GoAnimaters Are — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorarocks2003 (talk • contribs) 14:42, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

@Dorarocks2003: I don't know what that statement means. Do you have a question? The Mirror Cracked (talk) 15:01, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Hacker Public Radio

While I agree the article doesn't show importance, putting a speedy tag on it one minute after creation is kind of harsh.----Fabrictramp | talk to me 03:59, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes, but the article has been in Draft since February, more than enough time to source it and demonstrate its notability. I would normally have draftified an article like that, and used CSD instead because it was already in draft. I find it surprising that an admin would do a copy-and-paste move from Draft to article space, on an article that is improperly sourced and about a subject that doesn't show notability. Isn't that more of a concern? The Mirror Cracked (talk) 04:10, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

User:Har1990

Hi, i did provided source for changes I Made. One of the changes I made was that it is spoken in Ahirwal region. Even the name of language is based on Ahirwal . So I don't understand why would you remove that. It is common knowledge it is spoken in Ahirwal region. i can give you various sources for that. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Har1990 (talk • contribs)

@Har1990: the source you gave was [4] which doesn't mention Kotkasim, Kotputli, Bansur, Behror and Mundawar at all, and it does not say that they and Rewari, Mahendergarh, Narnaul, Gurgaon are "the centre of Ahirwati language speaking area" (sic). So yes, you provided a source, but the source does not support the text you wrote, which is original research. This is not allowed on Wikipedia. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:24, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Source does mention Ahirwati is spoken in Gurgaon, narnaul, mahendragarh, rewari district though...yes it does not mention some other places I included.. Source does not use the exact words of course like they are center of langauge but it does mention where ahirwati is spoken in haryana...the source was related to haryana, so it did not mention other places like behror, kotputli etc because they are in rajasthan. So is it allowed to at least mention places in haryana where the language is spoken? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Har1990 (talk • contribs)

Here is one source. It mentions different places where the Ahirwati langauge is spoken. Places mentioned in the source-Kotputli, mundawar,bhairod,gurgaon,mahanedragarh etc .....mostly same as what i mentioned... https://www.rajasthangyan.com/rajasthan?nid=55 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Har1990 (talk • contribs) 06:42, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

rajasthangyan.com appears not to be reliable. The basic rules is find a reliable source, read what it contains and write those facts in your own words, while citing the source. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:51, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Even wikipedia page of Rajasthani langauge shows Ahirwati is spoken in Ahirwal region of Haryana and Rajasthan...so I don't know what can be considered as reliable ..i have seen sources that Are way less reliable than what i have posted.. I am adding some sources.. please tell which one is reliable.,,thanks https://www.encyclo.co.uk/meaning-of-Ahirwati https://www.jatland.com/home/Introduction_to_Haryanavi_Language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajasthani_language http://pages.rediff.com/haryanvi-language/845421 https://www.ijccr.com/September2012/6.pdf

if you don't want me to write name of particular places, can I write name of entire region (ahirwal)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Har1990 (talk • contribs) 07:00, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Herbert Vivian

Hello The Mirror Cracked, Looking again at the article, I would say it's worth trying to take to FA. I have only managed two 2 FA myself, but I know you have to be prepared to do a lot of work. Herbert Vivian came across to me as unusual, as he was a prominent journalist and an ambitious politician, yet is now imo largely forgotten. When I looked, I found no biography or book about him, few surviving photographs, no obituary in the press when he died, and most of what was written about him was not by friends, but appeared in the newspapers. I was left feeling sometimes that the article lacked something because of this, but it didn't stop me assessing it as a GA. Perhaps the one area that might be picked up on at FAC is his interest in the Balkans, which could be developed. I would go through the FAC criteria yourself, and make any amendments you thinks reviewers might ask for, before nominating it. Hope this helps, and best of luck if you do go for FA, Amitchell125 (talk) 07:27, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

@Amitchell125: thank you for the thoughts. I will likely nominate it for FA consideration at some point. I agree that his Balkan interests are worth expanding - it is the one area where there is some modern interest in Vivian, and he does seem to have been influential. I have been looking for an obituary and like you haven't found one. I suspect that his pro-Fascist stance in the 1930s meant he was out of favor - unsurprisingly - in wartime Britain. Best, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 16:56, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

@Amitchell125: Thank you for pushing me on the Balkans aspect. In digging further, it is clear that I had underplayed that aspect of Vivian's life, and it is the one part of his work that still gets cited today. So it was well worth looking at that again. Let me know what you think of the additions, if you get the chance. I've also converted all the references to {{sfn}} format - which took a lot of time! I want to let it sit for a while and then do another full review of the prose, and double-check all the references. Best, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 21:01, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Herbert Vivian, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macedonia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:19, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter November 2019

Hello The Mirror Cracked/Archives,

This newsletter comes a little earlier than usual because the backlog is rising again and the holidays are coming very soon.

Getting the queue to 0

There are now 817 holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action.
Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If each reviewer soon does only 2 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by every reviewer doing only 1 review every 2 days - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.
Want to join? Consider adding the NPP Pledge userbox.
Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some really cool awards.

Coordinator

Admin Barkeep49 has been officially invested as NPP/NPR coordinator by a unanimous consensus of the community. This is a complex role and he will need all the help he can get from other experienced reviewers.

This month's refresher course

Paid editing is still causing headaches for even our most experienced reviewers: This official Wikipedia article will be an eye-opener to anyone who joined Wikipedia or obtained the NPR right since 2015. See The Hallmarks to know exactly what to look for and take time to examine all the sources.

Tools

• It is now possible to select new pages by date range. This was requested by reviewers who want to patrol from the middle of the list.
• It is now also possible for accredited reviewers to put any article back into the New Pages Feed for re-review. The link is under 'Tools' in the side bar.

Reviewer Feedback

Would you like feedback on your reviews? Are you an experienced reviewer who can give feedback to other reviewers? If so there are two new feedback pilot programs. New Reviewer mentorship will match newer reviewers with an experienced reviewer with a new reviewer. The other program will be an occasional peer review cohort for moderate or experienced reviewers to give feedback to each other. The first cohort will launch November 13.

Second set of eyes

• Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work, especially while some routine tagging for deletion can still be carried out by non NPR holders and inexperienced users. Read about it at the Monitoring the system section in the tutorial. If you come across such editors doing good work, don't hesitate to encourage them to apply for NPR.
• Do be sure to have our talk page on your watchlist. There are often items that require reviewers' special attention, such as to watch out for pages by known socks or disruptive editors, technical issues and new developments, and of course to provide advice for other reviewers.

Arbitration Committee

The annual ArbCom election will be coming up soon. All eligible users will be invited to vote. While not directly concerned with NPR, Arbcom cases often lead back to notability and deletion issues and/or actions by holders of advanced user rights.

Community Wish list

There is to be no wish list for WMF encyclopedias this year. We thank Community Tech for their hard work addressing our long list of requirements which somewhat overwhelmed them last year, and we look forward to a successful completion.

---

To opt-out of future mailings, you can remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Political Parties of the UK Edit

Hello "The Mirror Cracked". Thank you for your opinion on the edit that I made to the article listed in the headline. I made this edit with respect to Conservative's recent relationship with the right-wing Brexit party. A number of their policy announcements in the run up to the 2019 General Election suggests that this edit is correct.

If you still think that your reversion to the previous position is correct then I am happy to keep it, but I would like you to understand the reasoning.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rob Reiss (talk • contribs)

Thanks for the reply @Rob Reiss: the problem with the edit is it is your opinion of the Conservative Party's political positioning. One of Wikipedia's core policies is article reflect a }neutral point of view, not the perspective of any one editor. The List of political parties in the United Kingdom article should reflect the label used in the main article about the party, in this case Conservative Party (UK). The consensus on that page is that centre-right is correct. If you wish to change that, please make the case, based on reliable sources on the talk page. If there is a consensus to change it to "right-wing" on the Conservative (UK) article, then would it be appropriate to also change the List of political parties in the United Kingdom article to reflect that. Good luck, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 16:00, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Urdu edit

Hello The Mirror Crack. You recently undid my edits on the Urdu page. I just mentioned names of some famous Urdu poets as I couldn't find any names on the page and I don't know what source I could possibly cite for that other than that they have a Wikipedia page which I linked for all of them. And I added some parts of the Music section from the Ghazal Wikipedia page to the Urdu page as Music is an important part of Urdu poetry. I didn't cite a source for that as I had taken the material from another Wikipedia page itself. MassDestroyer (talk) 17:36, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

@MassDestroyer: here is a source for Javid Akhtar being an Urdu poet: Ali Husain Mir; Raza Mir (2006). Anthems of Resistance: A Celebration of Progressive Urdu Poetry. Roli Books Private Limited. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help). It took me a few seconds on Google book search to find this (it's the fourth result when searching for javed akhtar urdu poetry). It would be very easy to find sources for much of the material you added. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 17:47, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

2020 Chilean political reform referendum CSD

I've declined your CSD nomination. the article was recently created and moved to draft, then re-created in main space. Some advice: Please note the requirements for someone using draftification listed at WP:DRAFTIFY: "Other editors (including the author of the page) have a right to object to moving the page, and to have the matter discussed at WP:AfD. If an editor raises an objection, move the page back to mainspace and list at AfD [if appropriate].". Recreating in main space is essentially objecting to the draftification and you must abandon draftification as an option if this is the case (It also means that PROD is not appropriate). Therefore it should be restored, and definitely not nominated for CSD! From here your options as a New Page Reviewer are: Tagging, AfD, and/or finding sources yourself. The topic seems plausibly notable, so AfD probably is not the correct option. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 22:03, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

AfD for Carlsbad Village Drive

Hi — re your recent deletion nomination, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlsbad Village Drive already existed (the article creator had removed the deletion notice) so I redirected your second nomination there and copied your nomination statement into it. Sorry for all the confusion. I also started a discussion of their behavior at WP:ANI, in case you're interested. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:42, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks @David Eppstein:, I thoroughly agree, and apologies for the double AfD! It's hard to keep up with their actions! Best, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 06:49, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks...

for noticing that! Makes one wonder where that creep got his motivation from. Nowt as strange as people. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 21:25, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

@Elmidae: you're most welcome. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 21:26, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Institute of Communications Research Page review

Hi The Mirror Cracked. Thanks for leaving that helpful response about why my page was not approved. I really want to know if there's a way to create an informative page based on reliable primary sources. I have access to the Institute's founding documents which are residing at the University's archives where I am a student. They are not digitized but doing that may not be an issue. I am new to wikipedia and just needed some help with how to utilize the sources I have access to to create the wikipedia page for the Institute. Could you tell me how I could do this? Thanks. Bhetki (talk) 04:26, 23 November 2019 (UTC)Bhetki

Update regarding Sesame Street 50th Anniversary Celebration

Hello, The Mirror Cracked. I just wanted to let you know that I have revised the page for Sesame Street 50th Anniversary Celebration and put the sources on. TMBLover (talk) 12:31, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Adval Tech Holding

Hello, my work has been deleted becouse I have not provided a source of my info, and the source came from bloomberg.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivan2561991 (talk • contribs)

@Ivan2561991: You need to cite the source in the article. If you edit the article, you can see that there are a number of references which are inside the <ref> and </ref> tags. You can follow that pattern when you add the name of the CEO to include the source. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 19:08, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Nomination Deletion

Hi please do not delete the article Amir Aldaraji I’m still working on it and can you please remove the deletion tag everytime it comebacks and thanks for your help! Sunflowers2007 (talk) 00:14, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

@Sunflowers2007: You must not remove the deletion tag. It says quite plainly on the notice: "Feel free to improve the article, but the article must not be blanked, and this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed". Please follow those instructions. Removing the tag does not stop the deletion discussion but it is disruptive. You can improve the article, and those taking part in the deletion discussion will take that into account. The discussion will last for at least 7 days, so you have time to improve it. Here are some hints to help you. First, Wikipedia articles cannot be used as references, please stop using them that way. Second, please read Wikipedia's rules about notability and in particular WP:NFOOTY which tells you what makes a football player notable. At the moment it appears that Aldaraji does not meet WP:NFOOTY. You will need to reference reliable sources that show how Aldaraji meets the notability requirements if you want the article kept. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 00:20, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your help you’re the nicest editor so far Sunflowers2007 (talk) 07:14, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for fixing up the discography page I made and fixing the refs. I thanked your edits. CheatCodes4ever (talk) 06:08, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Awadhi language

You should explain your edits and reverts. I restored an unexplained removal by an IP. Also check similar Romanization in Hindi, Bhojpuri language, Magahi language, Gujarati language, etc. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:05, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: sorry about that, that was a complete mis-click. I had no intention of reverting you. Thanks for fixing my mistake. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 19:21, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Ohh... I get it. That's the problem with "rollback". Once I clicked it by mistake when I was trying to "thank" one editor . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:24, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

I've a feeling I've come across you previously. Did you get your name changed?

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:28, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the kitten! Yes, I changed my username a few months ago from Railfan23. I thin k our paths have crossed before (in a positive way!). Best, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 19:30, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Ah Railfan23. Yes, taking out copy violators at Cooch Behar. You are quite active with your new name too in that article.. Keep up the good work. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:36, 26 November 2019 (UTC)