User talk:Galatz/Archive 2017

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

PFLP and Hamas claim the attacker as their member

http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/Data/articles/Art_21130/H_010_17_79490171.pdf says that in addition to PFLP, ISIS ,Hamas and an unknown group have claimed him as their member(screenshots and text).37.19.116.113 (talk) 19:40, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Israel at the FIBA Basketball World Cup for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Israel at the FIBA Basketball World Cup is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Israel at the FIBA Basketball World Cup until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:58, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Srugim

Happy to help with updating the page. I just discovered the show recently and was surprised to see so little information around.

BTW, I saw that you changed "Shapira" back to "Shapiro." But, the only place Laizy's name is spelled "Shapiro" is in the subtitling. Everywhere else I've seen it, including his FB page, his alumnus page at Ma'ale, and most articles, it's spelled "Shapira. (See references, below.) Also, "Shapira" is the appropriate transliteration for the way it is spelled in Hebrew (שפירא).

Let me know if there's anything else I can do to help.

[1] [2] [3] Arianna1111 (talk) 19:56, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.facebook.com/laizy.shapira
  2. ^ http://maale.co.il/en/alumni-profile/1950
  3. ^ http://www.jerusalemite.net/blog/3183/a-conversation-with-laizy-shapira,-srugim-director
@Arianna1111: Thanks so much for all your help. I am working my way through the show now too and updating everything as I go.
As for Laizy I am basing his last name on the spelling of his page on WP Laizy Shapiro. I would suggest that if you disagree you put a request for move on his talk page. - GalatzTalk 20:15, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

This Is Us (TV series)

Good catch on that! I meant to move that to the end of Jack's bio, not Rebecca's. --Zpb52 (talk) 15:14, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

@Zpb52: That makes more sense, thanks :-) - GalatzTalk 19:41, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Jake Kalish

Just a heads up, WP:NBASE requires the player actually appear in the tournament, not merely be named to the roster for a future tournament. Kalish will almost certainly be notable come March, but he isn't yet, so I redirected it back to the Royals minor leaguers page, which will preserve the edit history. Once he actually appears in the WBC, that can be restored. Smartyllama (talk) 17:49, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

@Smartyllama: On WP you do not unilaterally decide if a page should be deleted. If you feel so strongly that its a month premature, than open an AfD and go through the proper channels. - GalatzTalk 18:32, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
Also I just wanted to point out that NBASE is vague on this. If you read #3 it lists playing in one game for a league, or participating in the tournament. Clearly it doesn't say playing otherwise they wouldn't make the distinction. Therefore I make the argument that by being named to a roster he has done some level of participation in the tournament. His name is being used in the press and there could be other items which happen prior to March. You seem to be defining participation as playing, which is one interpretation. - GalatzTalk 19:40, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
Redirects don't need to go through AfD as they're not page deletions. They can be made unilaterally, as long as they are not reverted. You have reverted it, so now if necessary we can discuss on the talk page rather than edit war. Smartyllama (talk) 19:58, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
As best as I can tell, AfD is the best venue for this discussion at this point even if the content should be moved rather than deleted. I've made that quite clear in my nomination, that I think it should be moved, and that this is the next appropriate step per the bold, revert, discuss cycle. Smartyllama (talk) 20:07, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
To be clear, however, my initial edit was within guidelines, as there was no deletion of content, only moving it somewhere else. You reverted, which you were also well within your rights to do, and now the appropriate step is to discuss rather than edit war. Smartyllama (talk) 20:13, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
@Smartyllama:I guess we will just need to disagree on that as well. I believe you are referring to WP:ATD-R, however that makes reference to WP:NOT. I don't believe the debatability of a baseball player falls within those criteria. - GalatzTalk 20:17, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
@Galatz: Again, though, the deletion policy doesn't apply, as nothing was deleted, only moved. It's an editing dispute, not a deletion dispute, in which case WP:BRD applies. That being said, I have reconsidered and feel having a lengthy discussion, only to recreate the article in a month or so, is pointless. I've withdrawn the deletion proposal, and hopefully someone comes along soon and closes it. If Kalish gets hurt or something and misses the Classic, we can discuss this again then. Smartyllama (talk) 20:27, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
I closed the debate based on WP:CLOSEAFD for the Non-Admin nominator withdrawal criteria. - GalatzTalk 20:35, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Jake Kalish for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jake Kalish is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jake Kalish until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Smartyllama (talk) 20:05, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Israel at the World Baseball Classic

Hi .. would you be able to get a copy of the 2017 article that was just deleted, and insert it in the article Israel at the World Baseball Classic? It has the roster, etc. Thanks.--2604:2000:E016:A700:2034:8BC3:688C:4357 (talk) 22:07, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

  • You'd have to ask an admin, probably. They can access deleted pages. Smartyllama (talk) 23:04, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
I put in a request for access to this and several others already as there was a lot of unique data lost. - GalatzTalk 03:17, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

It is now available at User:Galatz/Israel at the 2017 World Baseball Classic and User:Galatz/Israel at the 2013 World Baseball Classic

Thanks. I moved the 2017 one into the parent article of the Israel national baseball team. 2604:2000:E016:A700:1D6A:FC8E:B5D7:2ABF (talk) 19:34, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Israel at the European Baseball Championship for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Israel at the European Baseball Championship is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Israel at the European Baseball Championship until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 13:56, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

WP:ATD-R ?

What relevance does that policy have? How does that supersede the fact that the individual doesn't meet GNG, and will only meet WP:NBASEBALL if he does indeed appear in the WBC, which we can't guarantee per WP:CRYSTAL? – Muboshgu (talk) 22:03, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Your changes

Do this one more time, and I'm bringing this to the Baseball task force, or requesting enforcement of MOS:VAR--Retain Existing Styles.

You are going to pre-existing articles. Where the title has been established. And not respecting the pre-existing format -- something that we do at WP whenever there are two competing formats, if they are equally acceptable. See MOS:VAR--Retain Existing Styles.

As it states: "On some questions of style, MOS proposes more than one acceptable answer; on other questions it gives no guidance. The Arbitration Committee has ruled that editors should not change an article from one styling to another without "substantial reason" (see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jguk § Principles; Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/jguk 2 § Principles; and Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sortan § Principles). Edit-warring over styles is never acceptable."

You are edit warring over what is certainly acceptable style. This is never acceptable.

Worse, you are changing the format to a less acceptable format. As has been explained to you.

For one thing, the format you change it to focuses on a lower-level point of information. The team. That is not the typical baseball format. We focus on the level of competition. Thus, High School, College, Minor League, Major League, World Baseball Classic. Not Jones High School, Arizona University, Norwich Navigators, New York Yankees, Team Israel as that level titles.

I get that you want to trumpet "Team Israel." But you are deleting "World Baseball Classic."

At minimum, World Baseball Classic should be in that level header. If either is deleted, it should be Team Israel.

I'm however -- at this point-- willing for the header to reflect both. That's certainly acceptable under WP policy. Headers that are GA level not infrequently have semicolons, and "World Baseball Classic; Team Israel" would be fine with me at this point. But if we have only one, it should be World Baseball Classic.

If you persist, we will let other editors decide. But they may well simply delete all references to Team Israel. Or relegate it to a lower level header, that readers will not even see in their table of contents.

I think you're heading down the wrong path, but before I prompted this result I though I would reach out one last time to see if I could make you understand why if you continue down this path you are likely to end up with a result you like even less.2604:2000:E016:A700:AD7D:2694:725E:7118 (talk) 07:27, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Firstly if you look at the guidelines for section headings at MOS:HEAD it will tell you to use the same standards for article titles. If you look at WP:PRECISE titles should be precise enough to unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but no more precise than that. Meaning that the section headings should be as precise as possible. Listing both Team Israel or WBC is not being precise.
Second, if you look at the above mentioned guidelines, everything should be consistent among similar articles, meaning everyone on the team should have the same thing. Perhaps you should ask why I did something rather than making threats. My attempts were to make things uniform. For example, lets go through the qualifier roster (because you are using a new format for the players added, this gives a better historical view) and see what they have:
Based on my calculation we have the following as of last week:
    • Team Israel - 20
    • Israel national team - 2
    • WBC - 2
    • Neither - 3
Meaning out of the 27 articles, more than 2/3 of them used the heading "Team Israel". Based on this, please explain why me following the rules laid out is vandalism? You don't just unilaterally make decisions and assume they are correct. Unless you can prove why Team Israel is not concise enough and could add confusion, it should be the label given across all the articles. The heading of WBC would make more sense if they played for the US in 2013 and Israel in 2017, but thats not the case in any of them. People like Shlomo Lipetz and Dean Kremer however have played for Israel in multiple tournaments. Therefore the Israel heading definitely makes the most sense for them. Unless you can show justification for why Team Israel is not concise enough, based on the policy I explained above, it should be the heading used across the board. - GalatzTalk 13:42, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Shouldn't that be a colon and not a semicolon if we're going with both? Neither is a complete sentence, so I don't believe it's grammatically correct to use a semicolon to separate them. Smartyllama (talk) 13:48, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Smarty -- If we are going to use both, I am happy listening to why you think it's not grammatically correct to use a colon. The rule you point to I believe applies to text. Headings are a different animal. They rarely use a complete sentence, and in that way break a standard rule of grammar for text sentences, but instead use fragments which as a title stand for complete sentences. But we would not say: "That is not a full sentence, but just a fragment, so even though it is a New York Times article header we have to turn it into a full sentence" (by example). But I am open to hearing your thoughts. And if it should be a colon, to it being a colon.
Look at this New York Times article title from this week: "Robert Michel Dies at 93; House G.O.P. Leader Prized Conciliation" ... as an example. And also from this week from the Times: "https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/17/opinion/trump-meets-the-press-sparks-fly.html?ref=todayspaper Trump Meets the Press; Sparks Fly] ...
The main substantive (as to format) point from above is the level headline we are talking about, in baseball articles, over thousands of articles, does not delete the league/level as G has done. I'm flexible enough to say OK to reflecting both the level (World Baseball Classic) and the team -- but it is simply wrong to as G has done go about deleting the "World Baseball Classic" from that level header. Because that makes it non-parallel with the other headers in the article and across the wikipedia baseball articles. I can go back and look at the edit warring issue, but this is the substantive point. And G has not addressed it. 2604:2000:E016:A700:70D6:921A:3279:FBAD (talk) 03:47, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
I did address it very clearly. It says to be as concise as possible. It could be either WBC or Team Israel, however being as so many articles already had one common theme, it should be that one. There are tons of players who have played for only one team in their careers, such as Tom Brady, and his article doesn't use the heading of NFL or Patriots. Its very subjective, because based on your naming, Shlomo Lipetz and Dean Kremer should have a separate section for WBC and Euro, however it makes more sense to group them under one heading with subheadings. - GalatzTalk 03:07, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
With regards to the semicolon issue, both parts of each of those headlines are complete sentences without a transition word between them, so the semicolon is correct. (In the previous sentence of this comment, there is the transition word "so", so we use a comma instead of a semicolon.) And while headlines often use shortened versions of sentences, omitting words such as "is", or "the" that's not the case here. There's no verb in "World Baseball Clasic" or "Team Israel" and no way they could possibly be interpreted as complete sentences. Perhaps a slash (World Baseball Classic/Team Israel) would be better, but it's definitely not a semicolon. It's also worth noting that most soccer articles use the header "International career", and with very few exceptions, those players have only played for one national team. The text of the section specifies which team that is. Of course, it's a different WikiProject, so it's possible different standards apply. And given the relaxed eligibility standards for the World Baseball Classic compared to almost every other international sporting event, it wouldn't necessarily be obvious from the rest of the article which team it was. For instance, the lead for Cristiano Ronaldo says "Cristiano Ronaldo ... is a Portuguese professional footballer", which makes it quite clear the "International career" section refers to the Portuguese national team. On the other hand, the lead for Rhett Wiseman refers to him as "an American professional baseball player", not Israeli or Israeli-American. However, due to the relaxed eligibility rules for the WBC, he is allowed to represent Israel even though he is not an Israeli citizen. All but two of the Israeli players are not actually Israeli citizens, and therefore not referred to as Israeli in the lead, and one of those two is a dual Israeli-American citizen who was born in the United States. So the situation may be different here, at least for everyone except Lipetz and arguably Kremer. In the case of the others, "International career" would likely be incorrectly interpreted to mean representing the United States, since the articles refer to the players as "American". So I can see reason to clarify in the header that they played for Israel when a header omitting the country would cause the reader to believe otherwise. In Lipetz's case, "International career" should be clear enough, with subheaders for each tournament, and Kremer's a dual citizen so that makes things different. Additionally, something I just noticed is that Kremer represented the United States at the Maccabiah Games in 2013, so in that case it should probably all be covered under an "International career" section with separate subheads for the United States and Israel, and if necessary further subheads by competition. I don't believe any other members of Team Israel have ever represented the United States in any competition, but if they have, the same would apply. But there definitely shouldn't be a semicolon. That much I'm certain of. Smartyllama (talk) 22:25, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Also, the Brady article Galatz mentioned has the header "Professional career", further boosting the argument that the header here should be "International career" rather than "Team Israel" or "World Baseball Classic". In the case of Kremer, "Team Israel" or similar should be a subhead as he has also represented the United States. So I'd suggest having "United States" and "Israel" as subheads for him. I'd prefer "Israel" to "Team Israel" in this case since it would be clear from the main header ("International career") you're referring to the team as opposed to the country itself. Smartyllama (talk) 22:41, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
In short, I think Kremer and Lipetz should have the header "International career", in Kremer's case because he represented more than one country and in Lipetz's case because it's clear from the rest of the article that his international career was with Israel. In the case of the others, I'm undecided. On the one hand, "International career" seems more consistent, but on the other hand, there are special circumstances here and "International career" might not be sufficiently concise. If that's the case, making the header "World Baseball Classic" would have the same problems, so I'd definitely be opposed to that. Smartyllama (talk) 22:48, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Sorry for the fourth post in a row, but something I just thought of is that "Israeli international career" could be a good compromise. It's mostly consistent with other articles, and solves the potential issues with not specifying the country. I'd prefer that to "Team Israel" as a first-level header. Kremer should still have the more general "International career" first-level header regardless, as he's represented two nations. Israel and the USA can be specified in subheads, and the Maccabiah Games content moved under USA. Again, "International career" is sufficient for Lipetz since it's unambiguous it was for Israel. Smartyllama (talk) 22:52, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
While I agree with "International Career" being more in line with "professional career" I worry about the confusion as well. By saying that, I feel like it might think its someone playing winter ball in PR, as several of the players on the team have. I tried going down the US team from last time and no one that I checked had a section specific for this on their page. Checking soccer is a good idea. FYI its the Olympics rules they follow, not just WBC, however other sports are bigger in Israel so they dont bring in the Americans like they did for WBC. Perhaps the answer is something more like "international competitions" since its clear that its not a league, but a competition? - GalatzTalk 00:42, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean by the last part, but most sporting competitions, including the Olympics, require that you actually be a citizen of the country you're competing for. The WBC merely requires that you are eligible for citizenship, which, due to the Law of Return, includes all Jews in the Diaspora. Spain had something similar in 2013, as I recall, where all descendants of those who left the country during the Franco regime were eligible for citizenship, and thus to compete for Spain at the WBC, regardless of whether they were actually a citizen. On a more relevant note, "International competitions" would make sense for Lipetz and Kremer, and the others if that's what we're doing for them, but "Israeli international competitions" doesn't really make much sense, since the competitions weren't Israeli, they were international. They were representing Israel, but the competitions themselves were not Israeli so that phrasing doesn't make sense. Smartyllama (talk) 01:58, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
What I was saying was that under the Olympics rules anyone eligible for citizenship can compete for that country, whether they are citizens or not. Anyone who is eligible for Israeli citizenship can compete for Israel at the Olympics, that is the basis for the WBC rules. As for the naming, i was saying just "international competition" without Israel in the title. - GalatzTalk 03:31, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
No, I'm pretty sure you actually have to be a citizen to compete for a country in the Olympics. It's fine if you're naturalized, and naturalized citizens have competed for Israel and other countries, but you have to actually be a citizen. And "International competition" without mention of Israel creates the same ambiguity that "World Baseball Classic" would, so I'm not sure if that's best. Ultimately, I think we need to open this discussion up to more than just us, and gather broader input, perhaps take it to WT:BASE or something to gather a wider consensus. Smartyllama (talk) 14:28, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Good Heart Barnstar The Good Heart Barnstar
For your kind acknowledgement of my work on the Property Brothers topic today. It was the little boost I needed, especially after receiving a discouraging comment.Esprit15d • talk • contribs 23:38, 21 March 2017 (UTC)


I edited the Israeli template that way because

As it states on the rule you cited, it's very proper to do so in boxes and places with limited space. So my edit was done to follow the rule you cite specifically, as the box has limited space in it. And also the big dash – should be used. Bluesangrel (talk) 22:24, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@Bluesangrel: I would definitely not say the space is limited there, its a pretty small infobox. I would say if there was 100 seasons we were talking about, yes. But for 10? - GalatzTalk 22:38, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

2 Broke Girls

Why did you reverted my editions on 2 Broke Girls, the show is not longer running, so it's a "was" not an "is". --Marcetw (talk) 04:20, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

@Marcetw: What is it now if it no longer is a TV series, is it a monkey? It still is a TV show, its just not making new episodes. Look at any TV show M*A*S*H, Seinfeld, or Larry King Live are some huge former shows, why do you think those have never been changed? - GalatzTalk 13:28, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Israel EuroBasket record

Template:Israel EuroBasket record has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 13:46, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

A favor

If you have time, I would appreciate it if you would look at Palestinian Authority Martyr's Fund. The topic is certainly notable, but I admit that I had no idea how complex it was when I started the article. I had thought of putting it up for DYK. And I would like an educated opinion on whether it is ready for prime time. thank you.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:14, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

@E.M.Gregory:I will try and take a look but probably not until next week. - GalatzTalk 16:37, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Phoenix Companies

Thanks for your comments on the Phoenix headquarter's name. Did you find any source that still officially calls the building the "Phoenix Mutual Life Insurance Building?" Not sure if you are familiar with Hartford, but it is colloquially known as "The Boat Building." Phoenix Mutual Life was the name of the company when the building was officially opened in 1963. Today the building is the headquarters for Phoenix Companies, Inc. as well as our parent company, Nassau Reinsurance Group. What is the protocol for describing the location in the descriptive box? Thanks so much. Paul Pauldtyler (talk) 16:07, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

@Pauldtyler: Yes I am very familiar with it. While I understand the company has not gone by Mutual for a number of years, the WP page calls it that. One American Row as you had linked it would not have been helpful to someone viewing the page. Looking at their NPS filing from when they were added to the historic landmark (see here), they are calling it "Phoenix Life Insurance Company Building" so perhaps the other page should be moved. Phoenix only refers to it on their website as the Boat Building [9]. - GalatzTalk 16:20, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
@Galatz: Thanks. Thanks for explaining and sharing the link. You are correct - the NPS form officially calls the building the "Phoenix Life Insurance Company Building." What is the best protocol for getting the title of the other page corrected? Pauldtyler (talk) 14:52, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Done - GalatzTalk 16:24, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
@Galatz: Thanks so much! Will continue to make some small updates with recent news. Pauldtyler (talk) 20:19, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

WP:COMPETENCE

" 17 March 17 2017" Ethanbas (talk) 19:47, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

@Ethanbas:You should put a description, it was a typo, it should have been DMY format like the rest of the article - GalatzTalk 19:49, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Get

Fine. To be perfectly honest with you, if there is any one Jewish religious word that I almost always prefer to see in italics in real life, it's that one. English "get" is such a common word, the italics help the quickly scanning, coding eye see that the intention is different. So personally I'd ignore MOS in favor of italics here. But if you prefer to be stuffy about MOS on this, I'm not going to fight with you over it. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:09, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

@StevenJ81:I dont disagree with you on certain articles. For example on Ketubah where the word is used minimally it makes sense to, or even Heter meah rabbanim where its a focal point but not the main point, I would leave it italics. In an article solely devoted to a get, I just don't think it makes sense. I just feel like on an article on the word get, there wont be the confusion there is in other articles. - GalatzTalk 17:19, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
I take your point. But to me it's a matter of making it as easy as possible for the reader. And as much as this certainly won't be as much of a problem on this page as it would be on others, the fact remains that for the average reader in English, the letter combination g-e-t implies something other than a Jewish divorce document on first glance. And the purpose of italics in this case is exactly to make the immediate point that g-e-t isn't what it may seem on first inspection. In any event, I'll leave the decision up to you. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:27, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Team logos in rivalry articles

As I said in my edit summary, which you conveniently ignored, the team logos are not necessary. They do not increase the reader's understanding of the topic, all they do is provide unnecessary decoration. I realise that wordmarks are free to use, but that doesn't mean you should use them willy-nilly. – PeeJay 14:44, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

@PeeJay2K3:I saw your description, however I stated you gave no basis not no reason. I believe that if you are going to be making a sweeping change across multiple articles in the same theme you need a consensus. If there is an established consistent presentation, you should attempt to discuss the matter first. - GalatzTalk 16:05, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Prison Break (revival) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Prison Break (revival). Since you had some involvement with the Prison Break (revival) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 15:53, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

ARBPIA

Hi. Could you please take responsibility for this good edit? And maybe also this redundant one? Thanks--190.226.76.197 (talk) 20:50, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

If you believe it should be added make a request on the page's talk - GalatzTalk 13:09, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Reversion of Talk:Faction Talk cleanup

None of the other discussions on this talk page previous to the current ones posted were ever archived, besides that these are all DEAD discussions and just taking up space, so it makes sense to delete everything that is more than a year old. If you like to archive them then fine please do so ASAP otherwise I am going to clean up the page again. YborCityJohn (talk) 02:51, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

WP:COI

Hey, thanks for the comments I am still new to Wikipedia so I am not totally familiar with the rules. Thanks for taking a look at the edits I made to Michael Dorf page. I read through all the guide lines on neutrality before started and I thought I was doing everything correctly. However, the Issue I am having is your editing on the page. You are not editing like the guide lines specify to do. Which is something seems unbiases to edited according to the source and if the source is not credible remove it. Here are the neutrality rules about this;

Achieving neutrality[edit source] Shortcuts: WP:NPOVHOW WP:ACHIEVE NPOV See the NPOV tutorial and NPOV examples. As a general rule, do not remove sourced information from the encyclopedia solely on the grounds that it seems biased. Instead, try to rewrite the passage or section to achieve a more neutral tone. Biased information can usually be balanced with material cited to other sources to produce a more neutral perspective, so such problems should be fixed when possible through the normal editing process. Remove material only where you have a good reason to believe it misinforms or misleads readers in ways that cannot be addressed by rewriting the passage. The sections below offer specific guidance on common problems.


As you see it would be better for you to review all the new sources I added, and make changes based on that instead of deleting everything based on a strong suspicion. Eli theGreat (talk) 15:08, 11 August 2017‎ (UTC)

@Eli theGreat: You were warned previously and informed about the COI guidelines, on July 31, which you failed to comply with. Once you comply with the guidelines and properly disclose your conflict the above guidelines can apply. Until you are properly identifying your conflict, you cannot edit on this pages. Therefore the revert is proper. If you properly identify yourself and your conflict you can then edit the page and the above would qualify. - GalatzTalk 15:39, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Galatz and @Eli theGreat::

I get the COI issue, and I completely agree that Eli should disclose if he is being paid to edit Michael Dorf's bio on Wikipedia. That being said, the expanded content is better than the curt article that existed before, and was sufficiently cited. I've taken the liberty of toning it down somewhat, and cleaning up the grammatical errors. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:52, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Hey, sorry about this. like I said I am new and do not fully understand everything that needs to happen. Once I properly Identifying my conflict then will the changes be reverted? Also, I am unclear on how to properly disclose. Do I just do this " Edit your user page and type ""((UserboxCOI|1=Wikipedia article name))"", then click "save". - Eli theGreat (talk) 15:59, 11 August 2017‎ (UTC)

Take a look at WP:DISCLOSE and i recommend you take a look at WP:COISELF. - GalatzTalk 16:04, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

POV warrior in 2014 Gaza conflict

Hi. Don't you think words such as "unilaterally and illegally" or "are regularly killed by Israeli forces" should be removed? Is there a way to make the text a little bit more neutral? (also he wants to change the title for the POV "invasion")--Yajs (talk) 20:27, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

A beer for you!

You've earned it. You've got to be hot and thirsty after all the solid, hard work you do, sourcing, writing, and improving articles. Here's to you, for being an excellent editor. E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:59, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Old Serbian basketball issue the x-th

The old issue arose again at the basketball world cup page. Please is there a treatment how Wikipedia follows or has not to follow official sources like a world governing body or how actual sources have to stand against sources which are many years old and apparently are outdated? Would be thankful of your comment.--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 16:34, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

@Anaxagoras13:I am not familiar enough with the issue to understand the best way to treat it. I would suggest alerting Wikipedia:WikiProject Basketball of the ongoing discussion so people can jump in. - GalatzTalk 16:59, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Munich, Germany vs. Munich, West Germany

For your information, Munich is far more commonly referred to as Munich, Germany, than Munich, West Germany. You made reference to the 1972 Olympics Games in Munich. Frank Shorter of the United States won the Marathon at Munich. Coincidentally, Shorter was also born in Munich in 1947.

Click on the following link. You will set that Shorter was born in Munich, Germany, NOT Munich, West Germany.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Shorter

Anthony22 (talk) 23:19, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

@Anthony22:Yes he was born in Germany in 1947, 2 years prior to the establishment of West Germany in 1949. - GalatzTalk 14:49, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Matthew Simmons CCBB.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Matthew Simmons CCBB.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:39, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Comment - Original page was moved, updated rationale - GalatzTalk 16:43, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Property Brothers episodes

Howdy! The list List of Property Brothers episodes is out of date. I tried to take a stab at updating it, but I was way in over my head. HGTV Season 11 started last night. Do you think you could bring the page up to speed?--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 04:36, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:HaShamen Logo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:HaShamen Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Thank you. Begoon 11:04, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox IIHF Israel

Template:Infobox IIHF Israel has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 16:56, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Notability

I am opening up this section here in case TheGracefulSlick wishes to comment on my post in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murder of Reuven Shmerling. I have written the following which I did not want his response to bog down there. 

This really isnt a topic for here, so perhaps it should be moved elsewhere, so after this comment I will refrain from commenting again here. Firstly you should read the background section of WP:EVENT, which states that they are to attempt to help you navigate GNG, so how does GNG not trump it, if this is sub-part of GNG? You quote WP:EVENTCRIT but read the nutshell at the top An event is presumed to be notable if it receives significant, non-routine coverage that persists over a period of time. Coverage should be in multiple reliable sources with national or global scope. National scope is sufficient yet you argue its only national. Significant coverage, yup it definitely has that. Non-routine, I would say its not routine, how many of these attacks show Arab MK's going to shiva, I could give other examples but its a big one? Period of time is vague, but I would say its safe to say its premature to assess when the gag order is still in place, which is common sense, not WP:CRYSTALBALL. As I said before, I am happy to discuss further, but this is not the proper location. I have opened a section on my talk page, quoting my text from here if you wish to comment. - GalatzTalk 14:22, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
  • I just want to gauge your understanding of policy and potentially save myself some time. Do you consider the subject of this article notable? By their nature, murder incidents have sources because they are investigated by police, tried at court (for the most part) and sentenced, then reported on -- all routine (WP:EVENTCRIT also validates this statement). However, the series of events surrounding this tragedy is further in the past and gives us a chance to access if there was any lasting or wide-ranging impact. Can you, with the utmost sincerity, tell me this passes our notability guidelines for events and does not fall under what Wikipedia is not?TheGracefulSlick (talk) 17:08, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
    Note that the case is still under press gag, but notability is set to increase foĺlowing post gag pubs.Icewhiz (talk) 17:38, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
You actually chose a very interesting one. There are a lot of aspects to this case which need to be considered. One of the people murdered has come up in the news in future events, which you can see here [10]. The question at hand also is, does 3 years of coverage of the investigation make it not routine?
You seem to think that police coverage falls under WP:NOTNEWS. Most of what we have on most articles about criminal acts are based on police investigation. There have been many arguments about this exact same thing over the years. Here is a very interesting case Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not/Archive 35#WP:NOTNEWS vs WP:EVENT that is worth reading. A lot of people bring in different perspectives and they all disagree completely with how to read the same guideline and apply it.
Ultimately I think the point again comes down to, weather or not it meets the event and crime criteria, does it meet GNG, which is the ultimate top level it would need to meet. - GalatzTalk 17:49, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Icewhiz I am not interested in crystalballing as an excuse for possible notability in the future. But Galatz I will read through the archived discussion and provide a response to it and your comment here, for whatever that is worth.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 18:53, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
This is not crystallballing. Just because something has not been published yet, does mean it is not known. Nor is it crystallballing to surmise that articles pending publication to the lift of thevstandard gag will be published.Icewhiz (talk) 18:57, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Icewhiz "not published yet", "surmise", and "will be published": that sure sounds like crystalballing. I work with what we currently have in sources. Now please let me discuss with Galatz, as this thread was originally intended for.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 20:14, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
  • To Galatz, it appears NOTNEWS has been an issue long before I ever started editing. I believe police reports fall under the policy on an event-to-event basis. Suppose the investigation revealed a terror cell or mishandled evidence; that is notable. Then suppose they are just routine updates on the progression of a straightforward investigation; now, not so much. As for the archived discussion, I lean more toward the side of Masem: international coverage is much more easier to obtain for an event/incident with the internet, and news reports rehashing the same story does not truly establish notability. Without question, international coverage helps but if a writer is relying on that alone, I think the incident will fall short of the threshold. I tend to always keep WP:RECENTISM in mind; journalists write "good" stories with blood, controversy, or anything that sells papers but Wikipedians are supposed to be above that and handle events objectively. Take this article for instance: a bundle of coverage in late November, a notice on the perpetrator's indictment, and then the news is finished with the story. No long-term significance, no widespread impact, and the coverage was actually lacking compared to others (heck, I may take it to AFD). I tried in the past to merge articles that fall under NOTNEWS to preserve essential information but editors accused me of "stealthy deletion tactics". So AFDs have become my only option and I actually would prefer to repurpose the articles in merges, redirects, etc.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 20:13, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
  • User:TheGracefulSlick it appears to me that you are engaged in a sort of WP:FORUMSHOP, attempting to delete pages that you regard as non-notable terrorist attacks, then, if hey are kept or kept as "no consensus, dragging some quickly back to AfD for a second go, starting discussions on the talk pages of pages that close as no consensus proposing to merge to lists in violation of WP:PRESERVE, and filing ANI complaints against editors who oppose your deletions of terrorist attacks (including me), repeatedly starting new discussions at the Village Pump when prior porposals fail to gain consensus, and incessantly WP:BLUDGEONING User:Galatz and other editors with repetitive comments at AfD. Given the lack of consensus to delete articles on low-casualty terror attacks, despite your best efforts to gain such consensus, you behavior is looking increasingly like WP:DISRUPT.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:50, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Why did you feel the need to follow me here E.M.Gregory? I know you watch my edits but you probably could pick and choose better places to make it less blatant. Galatz invited me here to discuss notability and I appreciate the offer. You can create whatever conspiracy theory you want about my motives but it only remains true in your head. And I appreciate another laugh with the BLUDGEONING; the hypocrisy never ceases to amaze me.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 23:17, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
  • You are violating AGF. You technically followed him here, since he has edited this page first. While you may have been invited here by Galatz, that doesn't mean EMG followed you here. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:14, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
  • What an imaginative take on the situation Sir Joseph. Thank you. Here's a good word of advice. Now, is it alright if I return to what this discussion was originally about?TheGracefulSlick (talk) 22:19, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Again, considering he posted on this page long before you ever did, it's safe to assume this page is on his watch list, same as me. You're the one assuming bad faith. Sir Joseph (talk) 03:27, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
The biggest problems really come from being able to differentiate one case from the other, which isn't always easy. Eric Frein is considered a domestic terrorist, based on the 2014 Pennsylvania State Police barracks attack. Both he and the attack were deemed interdependently notable (note during the discussions on this I voted to merge here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2014 Pennsylvania State Police Barracks attack). If you look at the attack article, most of the content has to do with the police investigation. Does this become WP:NOTNEWS because of that? - GalatzTalk 17:50, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Why is Eric Frein independently notable? Was he known for something outside the incident? That reminds me of this discussion I started where a terrorist was notable for one event and the page was redirected to 2011 Frankfurt Airport shooting, rightfully so. I see little to no difference with Frein. The article on the incident does need better sourcing but the massive manhunt satisfies impact on a wide region. So to answer your question: no it does not apply; a 48-day manhunt is not typical of a police investigation.
Another similar example I can think of is how James Holmes (mass murderer) and 2012 Aurora shooting have their own articles. There both articles are much larger and better sourced, but not sure both need their own, however it has twice been nominated for deletion with keep as the end result. - GalatzTalk 11:38, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

FYI I opened a conversation topic on the talk page for NOTNEWS now that the AfD closed. Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Terrorism and WP:NOTNEWS - GalatzTalk 16:31, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Nice analogy

At What Wikipedia is Not. Perfect, really.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:52, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Please stop first

And read how the article contents, regardless of whatever my summary said, are all either Unsourced in clear form or primary sources, not accepted by WP:V. SwisterTwister talk 15:26, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

@SwisterTwister: As I stated at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Revert, you are welcome to remove it again, citing actual policy. - GalatzTalk 15:38, 6 November 2017 (UTC)


Self-reverting

When have I not been reverting? I have literally put every page back to normal after I was done getting the screenshot. I was in the middle of doing Fast Lane 2016 when you put it back, so obviously I did not revert that one because I was still editing it. You guys need to chill out and trust that I will revert back like I have been doing every single time. "a trend". Jesus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MazerTown99 (talk • contribs) 18:32, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

@MazerTown99: Wikipedia is not here for whatever games you want to play with screen shots, reverting it back or not is vandalism. - GalatzTalk 19:03, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

2018 New York Yankees season

Aaron Boone is the manager of the Yankees so it isn't vacant Devon1475 (talk) 12:31, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

The team hiring Aaron Boone to coach the Yankees in 2018 is not a rumor! There's no source more reliable than MLB.com and I doubt it would be lying about the Yankees' next manager. 100.37.125.19 (talk) 07:17, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Please change the vacant to aaron Boone as manager Devon1475 (talk) 12:32, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Until the Yankees confirm it, it's a rumor. The mlb.com article clearly says it's based on sources and not confirmed. - GalatzTalk 12:45, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

NXT being on USA Network 2017

Hi im TEAMNXT, I've edited over 100 or so pages that haven't been touched since last year and wrestling pages since I joined the Wikipedia community during summer. Just to let you know about whats happening with NXT i don't know if you have the USA Network since your apart of the Israeli community but it isn't a rumor its true that NXT is coming to USA Network on the December 13th its on everybody's cable (including mines too) and wrestling websites such as 411 mania,UPROXX, etc has since confirmed it last night I was editing the NXT Page tried to put a cite reference on it but it wasnt working so I edited the page without the CF so I could do it the next day but saw that you deleted the edit since you thought it was a "rumor". Well just letring you know it isnt and thank you. THA BOI IG:@BRAZYVANTE 17:14, 3 December 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TEAMNXT (talk • contribs)

Yes, I get USA network here in NJ. You need an RS to include it, which your post did not include. 411mania is not an RS. You can find a list of them here WP:PW/RS. - GalatzTalk 19:00, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

You saw what happened just now i would like an apology for deleting my edit THA BOI IG:@BRAZYVANTE 03:41, 5 December 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TEAMNXT (talk • contribs)

@TEAMNXT: haha good one. I suggest you familiarize yourself with WP policy especially WP:RS. - GalatzTalk 03:44, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Archiving editors talkpages

Hi, Do you have consensus for your archiving of other editors talkpages ?, if not you should undo each and every archive, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 15:24, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

@Davey2010: These pages belong to users who all have been inactive for 5+ years. The only content removed is an old newsletter (no posts directed directly to that person). The size of most of these pages is over 800,000 bytes meaning it lags like crazy. This type of removal is perfectly acceptable per WP:NOBAN which clearly states In general, it is usual to avoid substantially editing another's user and user talk pages other than where it is likely edits are expected and/or will be helpful. This is obviously something helpful, therefore allowed. - GalatzTalk 15:44, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Talkpages shouldn't be touched regardless of size so could I ask that you revert otherwise I'll have to take it to ANI which I really don't want to do, The general consensus is that editors talkpages should be left alone, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 15:50, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
@Davey2010: Please provide me with what bases you have for this? As I showed you, the policy clearly states that something helpful is an exception. YOUR opinion is reducing lag time is unhelpful, and I disagree. Please provide me with with that your policy basis is. - GalatzTalk 15:53, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. –Davey2010Talk 16:51, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Just a heads up but I've since closed that report, I only wanted clarification I obviously didn't want you warned, blocked and all that shizz, Anyway carry on lol and apologies, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 18:09, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
haha thanks :-) - GalatzTalk 18:13, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Israeli Wrestling League and non-free images

Galatz, thanks for all your work on this article. A problem; you've included a great many non-free images on this article. In fact, so many that it tied for 11th place on the project in terms of articles using the most non-free content. We have a guideline at WP:NFC#UUI which addresses this. While this page is not a discography, the principle still applies. We can not maintain these promotional posters for the various events. If the event is significant by itself such that a stand alone article is warranted, then a promotional poster might be appropriate for the article. For this article, they are not. I've removed all of these images and tagged them all as orphaned, which means they will be deleted in a week's time. Please do not re-add these images to the article. Also, in the future, think about the content you put in the "purpose" field of the rationale for any non-free image you use. In all of these cases, it was clear these rationales were copy/paste; all of them had "to serve as the primary means of visual identification at the top of the article dedicated to the work in question", which is false. None of them were at the top of the article. If you have questions about this, please let me know. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 17:09, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

@Hammersoft: The description and method of use is standard across many wrestling articles just like this one. Just to name a few, see Bash at the Beach, Road Wild, or The Great American Bash - GalatzTalk 17:36, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
  • I understand. Unfortunately, because it is "standard" on those articles does not grant it an exception from our WP:NFC policy and WP:NFC guideline. Years ago, it was "standard" to include album covers in every discography on the project. It took a lot of time and a lot of effort, but those articles saw their album covers removed. Today, there are none (or very, very few at least) that hose album covers on discographies. The underlying principle here is that we strive for the least amount of non-free content possible while maintaining encyclopedic integrity. This is codified at WP:NFCC #3. Further, since the individual posted images are not crucial to understanding the article, their absence does not detract from a reader's ability to understand the article. This is codified in WP:NFCC #8. Lots of discussions of this sort have happened before at WT:NFC. Some "light" reading. To shorten the time needed to read all that; the quick summary is the images have always been removed, and always stayed removed. Yes, this is not a discography, but the same principle applies. This article was 11th most user, as noted above. Extreme usage needs extreme justification. It's absent here, and would be for any like article, including the ones you noted above. Thank you for not just immediately reverting me, as many editors typically do. I appreciate your willingness to discuss. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 17:52, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
@Hammersoft: Thanks, its not a topic I am as familiar with. I have edited on WP for many years but images are something I don't typically upload. Thanks for helping me better understand it. - GalatzTalk 18:24, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
  • No worries, and thanks for being level headed in this. Such discussions are often contentious. It's nice to see someone approaching this as coolly as you are. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:09, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Defiant Wrestling

Hey again I was wondering if you and other wikipedians help me out day to day editing and updating The Official Defiant Wrestling wiki page i just made it and somehow im trying to put the official logo for the promotion and its saying some error but can you please help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TEAMNXT (talk • contribs) 04:32, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

@TEAMNXT: Judging by your edit history it appears you have not upload the image to wikipedia so I am not sure where your issue is. I suggest following the steps on Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard to upload it and use another promotions image details from something like File:WWELogo2014.svg to help you understand how to answer the questions. - GalatzTalk 14:33, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Stay off

Can you stay off my edits Joshuapine1993 (talk) 09:58, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

@Joshuapine1993: I have no idea who you are or what you are talking about - GalatzTalk 14:14, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

"That is way too much for a see also"

Why? Arminden (talk) 06:56, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

@Arminden: Firstly, you should read MOS:NOTSEEALSO. You added a bunch of random links without regard for whether or not it was already included in the article, a bunch of them have been and therefore do not belong in see also. Second you should read WP:NBFILL, which will explain to you using a navbox instead of see also, which is already done. Perhaps you wants to create a chronology navbox to add to these pages, which would be more proper. - GalatzTalk 14:04, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, no time for that. The "chronology navbox" sounds good, although I don't know what that is, but judging by its name that's exactly what I wanted to do: to put up a chronological list of Wikilinks meant to help the users navigate through the political history of 1916-1948 Palestine. Maybe you could create a "chronology navbox", based on the material I've put together? I would really be thankful to you for that. I do know for a fact that me and others who study or otherwise deal with the history of Late Ottoman & Mandatory Palestine, Israel etc., do need a ready-to-look-up chronology of the most relevant political events. That's exactly what I had started: a chronogical list of those political decisions (Sykes-Picot, Balfour, the many "white papers", and the UN taking over in 1947), all of them connected to conflicts (WWI, different revolts in Mandatory Palestine, WWII, and the 1947-48 civil war). I am sure some would like to add other links, and I was looking forward to that; but this list I have created is pretty much how things are presented in Israel, as a causal chain of events and reactions to them. In no way is it "a bunch of randomly added links". The argument that links included in the article are readily available does not stand up to the actual needs of a normal user. Some links are masked behind the editor's own formulation, all of them are strewn around among a sometimes complicated text, and anyhow, a chronological list in the way of a "table of contents" (which nobody considers superfluous) serves a very different purpose, that of an overview and starting point. Thank you for considering this. Now I'll be off for a while. Happy New Year! Arminden (talk) 19:11, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hello Galatz. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

  • URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
  • Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
  • Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Anarchyte (work | talk) 15:54, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!!!

★Trekker (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Merry Christmas, hope you're having a relaxing time during this period and that next year will be even better for us all here.★Trekker (talk) 13:12, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Ways to improve 1974 in professional wrestling

Hi, I'm Babymissfortune. Galatz, thanks for creating 1974 in professional wrestling!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please expand. Thanks.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Happy holidays! Babymissfortune 03:54, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

@Babymissfortune:Thanks. I have actually just created 1970-1984 and am adding to them simultaneously, and they are all pretty similar if you want to mark them all right now as curated. I am currently going through the entire WWE roster and adding the birthdays. I've got a fun night planned haha :-) - GalatzTalk 03:59, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Tamale and Tumu Colleges

Hi! I've added more refs for Tamale College of Education and Tumu College of Education. Let me know what you think. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjohas (talk • contribs) 17:28, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

@Bjohas: Thanks - GalatzTalk 17:47, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

New Years new page backlog drive

Hello Galatz, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1st and run until January 29th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

  • The total number of reviews completed for the month.
  • The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Galatz/Archive_2017&oldid=1089581380"