User talk:Harvici

note to say you reverted an edit on Baby Baby (Corona song) which was actually a good addition. I readded it and added citation for it and some other info on the subject. Cloudo (talk) 17:27, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry , it was a misunderstanding on my side. Harvici (talk) 17:31, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Altering titles of books[edit]

Please do not alter the titles of books as you did in this edit to Christian deism.-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:21, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Toddy1 This seems to be part of this editor's second rush to get ECP. User:Spicy this is not encouraging. Doug Weller talk 12:17, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Doug, I was surely trying to get ECP but not vandalise ECP protected pages but rather help to improve. I had a thought that I would make edits in sandbox and get the rights quickly and had no idea of WP:GAMING and I am regretting my decisions and I am promising to make no more edits in sandbox or anywhere with the motive to get the rights. I will try to make 500 new constructive edits to the mainspace before applying at WP:PERM. I hope you understand it. Thanks. Harvici (talk) 15:46, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where are you finding the articles you are editing? You haven't explained the edit User:Toddy1 links to either. Please answer both questions. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 16:14, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the newcomer tasks . I use the software QuillBot for editing some times it malfunctions and produces edits like this one so changing the book name was purely accidental and I did that to get ECP rights back . As I said before I will not longer rush to get ECP rights and make 500 new constructive edits and then apply to WP:PERM Harvici (talk) 17:27, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

8 edits in 5 minutes isn't rushing? What do you want to edit that requires ECP? Doug Weller talk 17:39, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those are reverts while I was patrolling Recent Changes Harvici (talk) 18:02, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What we want to see is editing, not vandal patrolling. That’s how you learn about ordinary editing . Doug Weller talk 18:53, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I will try to make more edits to articles but my exams are near so most probably I will be inactive around 2-3 weeks.Thanks Harvici (talk) 10:46, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can't add text with a citation needed tag.[edit]

As you did here.[1]. That shows that you are deliberately violating WP:VERIFY.. Doug Weller talk 12:19, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

? Doug Weller talk 17:39, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I made grammatical changes and added the template "Citation needed" because the statement was unreferenced and I couldn't find a reliable source so I thought to add it and someone can find a reliable one. Harvici (talk) 17:50, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:VERIFY states "In some cases, editors may object if you remove material without giving them time to provide references. Consider adding a citation needed tag as an interim step." So, I added the citation needed template accordingly. Harvici (talk) 17:53, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Harvici that’s for articles with numerous editors. Doug Weller talk 18:52, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nicolas Jackson's revertion[edit]

Hello, you recently reverted my edit with reason 'Vandalism'. Could you explain me how what I did was vandalism? Also, before reverting any edit, refer to the edits committed prior to the edit, you want to revert. Regards, Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 12:10, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First of it was a misclick ,actually it was an unconstructive edit. Secondly,as you mentioned in your edit summary that on we reached a consensus on the talk page but there was no consensus a single editor proposed , the company representing Jackson opposed and one editor supported.I think we can use other editors opinion on this. Thanks. Harvici (talk) 12:56, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Misclick? After you read the edit summary? It wasn't unconstructive, it was a content dispute. The other editor whose posts you reinstated is a paid editor by the way I've posted to Jackson's talk page to help clear up the constant dispute. Doug Weller talk 13:54, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"until consensus is reached" is my edit summary. And you yourself have mentioned that there was no consensus reached. I had the article reinstated to pre-dispute condition and asked User:Epicsports to resort to talk page to discuss. I advice you to understand that ECP rights are granted after 500 edits or so condition to make sure that the editor has had time with Wikipedia, understanding how it works. If you rush then you may not gather any knowledge and you may cause more havocs, which may lead to further issue for you. Thank you. Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 14:59, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your future edits must not be reverting edits you think are vandalism, etc.[edit]

You're getting them wrong as you are in too much of a hurry. This must stop now please. Stick to editing articles you are actually interested in. Doug Weller talk 14:03, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am really sorry , I was rushing to get ECP rights till yesterday but now I will not rush . I am making it an objective to edit 500 article constructively (Making a list of all pages I edit) and I will continue to patrol but with care and will no longer rush and be in hurry to get ECP rights.I hope you forgive me of my previous mistakes.Thanks Harvici (talk) 14:17, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am asking you not to patrol. You aren't experienced enough as is made clear by your draft article. Doug Weller talk 16:18, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Woodrow Wilson Skirvin moved to draftspace[edit]

 Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. A page you recently created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new pages, so it has been moved to  where you can continue to work on it. Please consider using the Article Wizard or the Articles for Creation procedure. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read "Your first article". You may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you.  --ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 15:23, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey can you tell me which guidelines it does not conform to, so I can work on it? Harvici (talk) 15:47, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than specific guidelines (that message is autogenerated), that article does not feel ready yet, and could be expanded and added more sources with. Also you may want to know that the article was deleted in 2021 for "Sourcing is limited to non independent ones, and a BEFORE indicates no further coverage that would establish his notability. Book sources are Wikipedia re-prints." Overall it could be made better while in draftspace. Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 16:06, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The two sources didn't meet WP:RS and none of the article met WP:V or WP:NOTABILITY Doug Weller talk 16:19, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violations[edit]

Hello Harvici! Your additions to December 2023 Libya migrant boat disaster ought to be removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.)

I ran Earwig's Copyvio Detector over your 15:20, 17 December 2023 version of the article on the December 2023 Libya migrant boat disaster. It is clear that what you did to create the article was to copy sentences from different sources and put them together. That is illegal. (Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows that the current version still has the same problem. It would be best if the article were deleted.)

There are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. -- Toddy1 (talk) 17:50, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces ((Article)) for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Doug Weller talk 14:25, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I told you to stop just doing vandalism edits to rush to ECP but you continued. You can still make constructive edits to talk pages, but they must be constructive. Doug Weller talk 14:26, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Doug , I am not rushing to get ECP, and I told you before that until I make 500 constructive edits (which I am recording here), I would not apply for WP:PERM. I am still patrolling Recent Changes and I am only reverting vandalism that is surely vandalism like adding abusive words and blanking. Harvici (talk) 14:31, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Harvici: Do you want to make constructive edits? If yes, the article you created on the December 2023 Libya migrant boat disaster needs to be rewritten so that it complies with rules on copyright. If you wanted, I could move the article into draftspace, and you could work on it there. We could then get admins to RevisionDelete all existing old versions, but the article would be saved, and later moved back to articlespace. I tried to explain to you about copyright at User talk:Harvici#Copyright violations, but you appeared not to see the relevance. We try to help you... but it is up to you.-- Toddy1 (talk) 15:51, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would be better if the article is moved to draftspace Harvici (talk) 16:00, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done - you should be able to edit it at Draft:December 2023 Libya migrant boat disaster.-- Toddy1 (talk) 16:34, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You asked me on my talk page to show you what edits were reverting vandalism. Hard to understand that given "User talk:195.194.103.135 ‎ Warning: Vandalism on EGX (expo)." and " Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism ‎ " - and more. Let's see how you get on with the draft. Do NOT rush. I don't want to see any more reverts. Doug Weller talk 17:29, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know that, but you said "vandal edits," and I thought I was doing vandalism.I am going to be inactive for the next 3 weeks and surely get on by March 14. I will try to improve the draft and just to be sure if I do good on the draft will you unblock me 😊 Harvici (talk) 18:05, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you do a good job of this one, I will suggest a few more pages for you to rescue.-- Toddy1 (talk) 19:57, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:December 2023 Libya migrant boat disaster[edit]

Hey Toddy, I have gone through the draft and added a few bits of new information, and I think it is ready to be moved to mainspace.Can you also provide me with more pages to rescue? Harvici (talk) 17:50, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That is an improvement. But there is more that needs to be done to improve Draft:December 2023 Libya migrant boat disaster.

It was a mistake changing the date format from day month year format to American-style month, day year format. Please change the dates back to day month year. This is an area of sensitivity; if the article had been about a disaster in the USA, American date format would have been best; but since it is not, please do not change from rest-of-world date format to American date format.
Please work on the citation templates for the citations.
- With news reports, the citation template has a field |date=, this should be completed with the date of publication. It is best to this in the format 17 December 2023.
- It helps readers to understand how reliable a source is, if there is a wikilink to an article on the newspaper, etc. For example Asharq Al-Awsat is the right wikilink for english.aawsat.com.
- Please check to see if any of the cited sources give the authors of the news story. If an article had two authors: John Smith and Janet Jones, you would complete the fields in the citation template like this: |first1=John |last1=Smith |first2=Janet |last2=Jones
  I did check, and at least one of the cited sources named its author.
- Check that the |title= field in the citation templates has the correct title (i.e. the one used the source). Sometimes people fill it in wrongly. If the title is in another language, you should give the original title in the |title= field, and a translation of the title in the |trans-title= field.
Your new version has fixed the copyright violations. Please ask an admin to RevDel all the old versions (15:20, 17 December 2023 to 16:21, 25 February 2024) because they contain copyright violations. I have always found User:Diannaa (talk) to be very helpful with this.
Read through the article and check that all the facts are supported by the citations given for them.
When the article is moved back to mainspace, you do not want it to be an orphan (Wikipedia:Orphan). So try to find two articles that you think ought to have wikilinks to the article on the December 2023 Libya migrant boat disaster. Please list them on this talk page, and explain what edit you would like me to do to them. For example, if you thought the 1999 Tempe military base shooting was the right place (it is not), you would need to provide some text and say what section I should paste it in, and where in the section. This is something you can do on article talk pages using Template:Edit semi-protected - but a lot of the time people get it wrong, and leave requests that are far too general. A good request would be something like this:

This edit request to Draft:December 2023 Libya migrant boat disaster and Please remove the space character after the "(" in the lead paragraph. has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:31, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is an edit request template Template:Edit partially-blocked that might be useful to you.-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:15, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

|last=Press |first=Associated is an error. Associated Press is an agency, not a person. It should be |agency=[[Associated Press]] (there is an article on Associated Press to link to).

|last=Times |first=International New York is an error. What they were doing was acknowleding that the article was copied from the International New York Times. Probably the best thing to do is to use the |agency= field for that.

One of the sources has By Katherine Hearst. You missed that one.-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:58, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Everything done; I just need to find wikilinks to the article and after that, I will read through the article Harvici (talk) 14:02, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One article - 2023 Libya migrant boat disasters

Another one- List of maritime disasters in the 21st century

Another one- List of shipwrecks in 2023

Are these articles fine? Harvici (talk) 14:08, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes.-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:15, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on the draft

Your article structure is as follows:

Lead
Background
Capsizing
See also
References

In one sense the lead is fine. But if you read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, it starts by saying In Wikipedia, the lead section is an introduction to an article and a summary of its most important contents. If the lead is a summary, surely the stuff in the lead will also be in the article. Does that make sense?

The background section makes it clear that this kind of accident happens a lot. I can see that the background section gives the article some context. That is good.

The capsizing section needs more work. It probably has the wrong section title. Remember the lead is a summary. So in evaluating the completeness of the capsizing section ignore the existence of the lead. Your capsizing section is the first place in the main body of the article that talks about this particular vessel.

Surely the section should start with when the vessel left Libya - i.e. where it left and when it left.
It should say what kind of vessel it was. (One of the sources you used does say.)
It should say how many people were on board, where they were from, etc. All of this information should in the capsizing section; it is OK that the lead (summary) repeats some of the information in the capsizing section.
I am confused - the section heading says that the vessel capsized, the text of the section says that high waves that engulfed their vessel. So which was it? Or was it both? Where is the citation for the cause of loss?
It says that 25 people from the vessel were rescued. How were they rescued?
Apparently there were such things as "rescue boats" - what do the sources say about "rescue boats"?

Once you have revised the capsizing section, please have a look at the lead. It says a Europe-bound ship. Do you understand the difference between a ship and a boat? Which was it? And if it was a ship, then the article title is wrong. If it was a boat, then the lead is wrong.-- Toddy1 (talk) 21:02, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Next project - Abhijit Iyer-Mitra[edit]

When you want to do another project, please have a look at Draft:Abhijit Iyer-Mitra. Please read through it, and read through the sources. Are you able to add to it?

Do you speak any language other than English? There might be sources on Abhijit Iyer-Mitra in those languages that would improve the article.

The article probably needs rewriting or restructuring. I do not know. If you think that would improve it, do so.

Look at the comments that User:Cabrils made in their review. Are you able to address these?

If you could improve or rewrite this draft so that someone like Doug Weller (or maybe Cabrils) was willing to move it to mainspace, that would be a real achievement.-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:30, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that Draft:Abhijit Iyer-Mitra has quotations. Quotations are not copyright violations because it is made clear that they are quotations, and because their source is cited. See Wikipedia:Quotations.-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:45, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would probably start it after 2 weeks and yes, I speak native level of Hindi and little bit of Urdu and French Harvici (talk) 14:14, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I tried finding secondary sources but all I could find were the sources that are already cited Harvici (talk) 19:07, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another draft article that you could improve[edit]

I realise that you are busy with exams during March 2024.

But some time this summer (no hurry), please could you try to develop Draft:Qayaamat Se Qayaamat Tak. There is useful comment in the review saying that someone needs to add citations to reliable sources to it, so the article complies with Wikipedia policy on verification. That ought to be a fairly easy task given that it is a current Indian TV programme.-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:25, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Today was the last exam, nailed them.I will get to them starting from tomorrow. Harvici (talk) 12:41, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Toddy , it appears that there is already an article on Qayaamat Se Qayaamat Tak (made on March 10th). I am going to work on Draft:Abhijit Iyer-Mitra Harvici (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:20, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where we are now[edit]

You were going to read through Draft:December 2023 Libya migrant boat disaster to check to see if anything else needed to be done to it before it was moved to mainspace. I have not heard anything about that, so.... ?-- Toddy1 (talk) 17:26, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is ready Harvici (talk) 18:23, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see comments above.-- Toddy1 (talk) 21:05, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are currently working on Draft:Abhijit Iyer-Mitra. When you think it is ready to move to mainspace, please ask Doug to review it, and if appropriate move it. Do not be afraid of rewriting or restructuring the draft - if you think it needs doing, just do it.-- Toddy1 (talk) 17:26, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You did an edit request at Talk:Shakespeare's plays#Edit request as I am partially blocked (The unchanged part is in italics), and I gave you some advice at User talk:Toddy1#Harvici's edit request. Any news? -- Toddy1 (talk) 17:26, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have found another draft article that needs rescuing - I am not sure if it is worth rescuing, that will be a judgment for you - but you have enough on your plate at the moment.-- Toddy1 (talk) 17:26, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request[edit]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Harvici (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My account was partially blocked by Doug Weller and restricted from editing in the article namespace because of the reverts I made. I misunderstood many changes made to various articles and reverted them using Twinkle. After that, Doug suggested using talk pages for articles to make contributions. While trying to make useful contributions, it has been difficult for me to post every request as most of the edits I made were grammatical changes, and it takes a lot of time for others to complete the request. My ECP rights were removed by Spicy due to gaming (which I didn't know existed).I promise to make only useful contributions and only revert edits which are clearly vandalism, like cuss words and blanking . I hope the administrator who view my appeal will reinstate my ECP rights for I meant to make only useful contributions. I also reached Doug regarding the block by email, but both were unanswered.

Decline reason:

No. Build up a constructive history of non-trivial suggested edits (clearly demonstrating you have overcome the WP:CIR concerns), then (but only then) contest your block. Frankly, there's no chance we'll be lifting the block solely so you can make trivial grammatical changes. Yamla (talk) 20:48, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I've been busy and also thinking about what I should do. I finally decided that although you've been given a lot of advise and help by the very patient User:Toddy1 you've ignored it and seem to have no interest in actually editing articles to improve their actual content. I suggest you find another hobby and perhaps come back here in a few years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Weller (talk • contribs) 07:31, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]