Jump to content

User talk:TheSandDoctor/Archives/2017/May

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


04:46:48, 2 May 2017 review of submission by Edit king2


What am I supposed to do write a internet article or about whatever?Edit king2 (talk) 04:46, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

@Edit king2: Hi there! Please see Your first article as well as the Teahouse and WP:CITE. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:51, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

WP:UAA reports on users with no edits

Information iconGenerally, there is no reason to report usernames with no edits whatsoever. Per WP:UAAI :"Wait until the user edits. Do not report a user that hasn't edited unless they are clearly a vandal. We do not want to welcome productive editors with a report at UAA, nor do we want to waste our time dealing with accounts that may never be used." The exceptions are obvious hate speech or names that attack a living person/Wikipedia editor, those are blockable even without any edits, but other run-of-the-mill violations need not be reported unless and until they at least attempt to edit, and you should be able to clearly explain what the problem is if it is not immediately evident.

For whatever reason, every day dozens, if not hundreds of accounts are created that never make one single edit. It is our responsibility as admins to conscientiously review every report a user makes at UAA, so we have to check for contribs, deleted contribs, and tripping of the edit filter for every one of these reports, only to find out there's nothing there and therefore no problem to be solved. So we add the {{wait}} tag to the report, it goes to WP:UAA/HP for a week or more, and must then be reviewed again to see if the account has since become active before removing it. That's time that could be spent doing more productive things, but you basically obligate admins to do it by making such reports. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:55, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

@Beeblebrox: My apologies, I do not wish to waste the time of administrators (or any user). I only reported it as it does appear to be a username implying shared use. In the future I will not report accounts that have not made any edits for having a username that implies shared use etc (barring the above exceptions). --TheSandDoctor (talk) 19:58, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
It's fairly common for people not to realize this, to the point where I have this message saved so I can re-use it, thanks for your understanding. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:49, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
@Beeblebrox: I have a similar one for tendentious resubmission of drafts at AfC so I know the feeling in that regard. You are welcome. No hard feelings I take it? --TheSandDoctor (talk) 20:51, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Beeblebrox, saved as in "on my own copy/paste list" or as in "there's a template for it"? If it's not the latter, we should probably create one. Primefac (talk) 20:59, 4 May 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
Definently no hard feelings. @Primefac: The saved version is at User:Beeblebrox/username-no edits but if you think there's interest I could move it to template space. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:06, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Request on 08:34:58, 5 May 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Evanherwijnen


Dear SandDoctor I am trying to submit a new article "Search for Hidden Particles". The initial submission was rejected with a request to add more references. I did this, and I got an email informing me that the article had been accepted as a 'C'-class article. However, I then get another message saying that DCG left a message on my 'talk' page. On this page I can not see anything new, except that the link to the draft article is empty. Yesterday evening I got somewhere else (I can't remember how) and I figured out the article was removed because of copyright violation. I do not understand this, as I am the author of the web page http://ship.web.cern.ch/ship, and all material posted there is in the public domain. SHiP is a project under study at CERN, and once approved, it will become an experiment like ATLAS, CMS, LHCb, NA62 etc. They all have Wikipedia entries. It is clear that the SHiP Wikipedia page will get updated over time. So I am puzzled about what is going on. What should I do? Regards Eric van Herwijnen, CERN.

Evanherwijnen (talk) 08:34, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

This sounds like a question to ask DGG; I'll ping them so you don't have to post twice. Primefac (talk) 11:31, 5 May 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
@Evanherwijnen: --TheSandDoctor (talk) 14:34, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
I clarified how to indicate permission on his talk p. DGG ( talk ) 15:00, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your help Primefac and DGG --TheSandDoctor (talk) 19:10, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi TheSandDoctor. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback should never be used to edit war.
  • If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
  • Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Mz7 (talk) 22:37, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Mz7 (talk) 03:31, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

"Editing test"

Hi there, although my last edit did not change any major content, my intention was to change the format of the table such that the person with the most votes will show up at the rightmost of the table instead of the leftmost, as this was the format for the tables in all the other seasons. I just wanted to make everything consistent. Just wanted to let you know.

59.189.186.254 (talk) 05:36, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

@59.189.186.254: Thank you for explaining this. I have restored your edits and removed the notice from your talk page. In the future, please include edit summaries within your contributions whenever possible so that it is clear what is being done/why - it would avoid confusion like this. Thanks and happy editing. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 14:40, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Mick Jagger pics

Hi-I just returned from 5 months in 2 hospitals and 2 nursing homes for physical therapy.... not sure what is where on Jagger's page. Nearly all photos uploaded by me to Commons were the result of searching on Flickr, contacting the photographers and teaching them about what Creative Commons licenses are, and after they switch from copyright to one of the C.C. licenses are, either using the upload gizmo which automatically checks to be sure the license is correct, or copying it to my computer and then uploading the pics myself after seeing that they are correct. The problem with major illnesses I have had in the past 5 years is that often I didn't have access to a computer, and some of the photographers changed their photos back to an unusable license without my knowledge till it was too late. Those changes are illegal, and in the cases when the upload machine was in use, irrefutable. However when I couldn't use it, and saved it to my computer and uploaded myself, some eager editors would ask for deletion and I, having no knowledge of what was going on outside my hospital bed would return home to find hard-won photos deleted. I still see perhaps 3 pics I uploaded on Jagger's biography. I haven't had time to review the damage. Sometimes it sucks and the more I look over my deleted uploads, the angrier I get- having long ago decided I dislike confrontations and standing as an Admin on Wikipedia. Commons I view as a necessary evil, with only one Bureaucrat here and there offering a kind hand. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 22:15, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

@Leahtwosaints: I am very sorry to hear of your illnesses and wish you the best. I can totally understand why that would be annoying/frustrating and totally 'get' it as well. Have you tried contacting admins/bureaucrats to get the photos reinstated (since you have proof that you had permission to upload) and also mentioning why you have not appealed sooner? It might be worth a shot. Is there any way I could possibly help you? --TheSandDoctor (talk) 22:54, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Bro what did u change in my page..

I want the page to appear but it doesn't, can u help me... Teky500 (talk) 06:47, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

@Teky500: I left you a note on your talk page regarding this, it is now located at Draft:Ahmed Aboul-Fetouh. Without any references it could have been tagged for deletion as an unreferenced bio so I moved it to the draft namespace to allow you time to work on it. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 06:49, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Most pages about amall footballers like this barely have any structure other than the one presented. Is it OK if i change it back now? Teky500 (talk) 06:51, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
@Teky500: I do not believe so. If it does not contain any notable, independent references then it should not be within the main namespace. Only an administrator could change it back at this point as well. As Primefac (an administrator) said to another user on my talk page (replace 'ZoneMinder' with X article), "Just because one bad page exists on Wikipedia doesn't mean that we should go around creating more bad pages. If the page you're working on needs more sources, add some! If you think that ZoneMinder should be deleted, nominate it for deletion! Always look towards the betterment of Wikipedia." --TheSandDoctor (talk) 06:55, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Do you mean that i need links to refrence my sources? If so I am going to do that, but qill you move the page back once I put the sources? Teky500 (talk) 06:56, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
@Teky500:Yes that would be helpful. Please place {{subst:submit}} at the top of the page when you think it is ready and let reviewers take a look at it. Please note that in its current state it most likely will not be approved.
Primefac, you are tagged in this. Please feel free to weigh in if you have anything to say/add. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 07:00, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

How would this page for comparison?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ahmed_Aboul-Fetouh

Still not the full page ofcourse, but what can i improve? Teky500 (talk) 08:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

@Teky500:  Done Draft was accepted by Primefac at 15:46 (UTC) on 20 April 2017‎. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 05:27, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Is this article close to what you need?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ahmed_Abou-Elfotouh Can you tell me how to improve my article? I am pretty sure it's not good enough yet, but I'd appreciate if you take the time and tell me what i should improve. So far, these are pretty much all the possible sources, becuase the player is not well known. If I put anymore information, There will be no aource to reference.

Thanks in advance :) Teky500 (talk) 13:09, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

@Teky500: I have redirected the duplicate draft to the better draft, and commented on the submission (which I notice has already been declined). There are some issues that need to be addressed before the draft will be acceptable. Primefac (talk) 15:03, 20 April 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

23:44:30, 3 May 2017 review of submission by AmienDaouiji


Hi SandDoctor.

I added some citation/footnotes and links to my sandbox article of GUENTER MOKULYS as well as newspaper articles with fotos in the weblinks. The article already exists in the german wiki by this standard. Do you think it is good to go in the article space now? Thanks AmienDaouiji (talk) 23:44, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

@AmienDaouiji: Hi there AmienDaouiji, I apologize for the delay in my response. I have received a second opinion on the draft from SwisterTwister (which can be viewed here). Unfortunately, "sources are simply not significant enough". Please see WP:CITE, WP:RS, and the Teahouse. If you have any more questions, please feel free to let me know. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 05:22, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Anglo-Saxon Paganism

I did include sources, look. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TommyPF555 (talk • contribs) 04:42, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

@TommyPF555: I assume you are referring to Anglo-Saxon Paganism? I do not see myself in the edit history (meaning I never reverted an edit etc)? --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:47, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Oh I'm sorry I meant Magic in Anglo-Saxon England, you said I didn't include sources but I clearly have cited links after each of the claims.
No problem. What I was referring to was this part "They also appeared to have revered a number of local deities and spirits in addition to holding nature and specific natural formations in high regard". It does not have any attached citation/reference, the reversion reason given was not meant for the lower bit. Unfortunately the software that runs Wikipedia has a limitation preventing the partial reversions of edits, only complete reverts are possible. By all means feel free to add back all of the content (which can be found here) once a citation is added to the first bit. Please see WP:CITE and WP:RS for information on sourcing (if needed). If you have any more questions, please feel free to let me know. Happy editing! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 05:21, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Reverted edit to article Gyroscope.

Howdy,

You reverted my edit on the gyroscope article, stating that you thought it was an editing test. It was not. I was trying to clarify a sentence which is awkward in its structure. The transition with simply an 'or' from examples to an addition to the statement two examples previous is awkward, slightly confusing, and creates a stumbling point for readers. It's also grammatically incorrect and should really be split into two sentences.

Thoughts? ATXFreedom (talk) 06:41, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

@ATXFreedom: You are correct and thank you for bringing this to my attention, I have reverted my revert ([1] [2]), therefore restoring the edit. I assume you were 66.90.152.36 at the time? For some reason I originally read it as "where a magic compass" somehow, which would be ridiculous/ludicrous and was the main reason behind the revert. Sorry for the confusion. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 06:51, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Article on John C. Moran

I am very confused over the rejection of my first article on John C. Moran. He was a notable editor, author, critic and historian and wrote in THREE languages and in TWO continents.

The reason you give is "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes." Please explain further because I have rechecked the article and I used the same structure and format from the "Russel Kirk" article that exists in Wikipedia (it could have been anybody as my example to go by but I chose him). Exactly the same just it was John C. Moran's biography material not Kirk's.

I footnoted and referenced from John C. Moran's book "Seeking Refuge in Torre San Nicola" which I have physically with me, and from other sources like newspaper articles that were about him. How can using one of his books not meeting Wikipedia's minimum standards? How does referencing newspaper articles that talk about him not meeting Wikipedia's minimum standards? Please understand my confoundment over this matter.

Is it a technical matter then? Is it because I wrote the references badly? If that is the case I will see to it it is written correctly. Do you want me to write something like "(qtd. in Weisman 259)" for example ?

Please help me get through this matter because this is the affair that has been the main roadblock to having it published.

Thank you for your attention given to this desperate inquiry and request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JCMR (talk • contribs) 01:29, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

@JCMR: I apologize for not being clearer and causing confusion. I have commented on the AFC submission as well as added citation needed templates (that look like this[citation needed]) in areas that I feel could benefit from additional citations. Please also note that the article does require some copy editing and is potentially not Neutral in its point of view (NPOV)/has potential tone issues. If you have any more questions please do let me know or ask at the Teahouse or let me know and I will do the best I can to help. Please also see WP:CITE, WP:RS, and WP:CITEKILL - and CITEKILL's solution, WP:CITEBUNDLE (click the links). Those are standard ones that I refer people to and (in case of last one) does not apply but is still good to be aware of. Hopefully this helps! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 01:47, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

A1/A3

Please do not place "empty tags" just 5 min. after the article is started. The contributor might be in the process of writing the rest of it. I suggest waiting an hour or do--it is sometimes more efficient to patrol a little further down the list. DGG ( talk ) 04:44, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

@DGG: Roger, will do. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:46, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
thanks DGG ( talk ) 05:17, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
I hope you do not mind DGG, but I did format your response (but did not change any content of it, merely dropped it a line and indented it) as I found it confusing and did not immediately see it (I actually had to look at the editing difference to see it) --TheSandDoctor (talk) 05:20, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
@DGG: Would it now be suitable to tag? The article has not had any content added to it since before I initially tagged it (so just over 10 hours at the time of writing). --TheSandDoctor (talk) 14:24, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
yes, certainly. Allowing 12 hours or so is quite enough. What I sometimes do when looking at new articles:: if its the first hour or so, I add a tag saying {{underconstruction}} . It's dated for follow up, & it alerts the editor to the problem if they see it. After an hour, I generally do just tag A1/A3. But if what is written is not possibly going to be an article, I just tag--that it's incomplete is probably deliberate.
You're doing good work here. DGG ( talk ) 16:50, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
@DGG: I was beaten to tagging it by another user. What do you mean that it is dated for follow up? Thanks for the tip and compliment! I try my best and do what I can to help the project any way I can with the tools available to me. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 16:56, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
the tag automatically add the date and time it was placed, which add it to a category at Category:Pages actively undergoing construction. All maintenance tags have such categories for follow up, tho some are much too large for anything practical. DGG ( talk ) 17:18, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Ah, okay. Thanks for clarifying DGG and thanks again for the compliments :D Happy editing and I am sure that I will see you around :D --TheSandDoctor (talk) 17:21, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Article on John C. Moran (followup).

Thanks for the prompt reply. This citation thing is boggling me down but not impossible to get done.

You mentioned another point - tone, that it is not neutral enough. I knew him and the background and family history material was provided by him and nothing he has said has been false. The F. Marion Crawford Memorial Society and his mission of a Crawford Revival is evident in his material within the Society's magazine "The Romantist" and outside, which I list in the section "John C. Moran Bibliography". His involvement in Italy is evident in "Gennius Locci" magazine in Sorento, Italy. His historical works (done in Spanish) is manifest in his published works and unbublished posthumus works (which I have seen). Nothing I put has been invented or embellished.

What I did was incorporate how his life went and how it played out in his scholarly endeavors. Like any "Man of letters" family, personal experience, etc - they play a role in the academic and literary production of the individual. Could you let me know exactly which areas you think it is not neutral? I am trying to present the full and complete individual - which is what a biography is isn't it ?

Thanks for everything so far. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JCMR (talk • contribs) 15:34, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

@JCMR: If I was familiar with him I might have been able to assist more with the citations but will see what I can come up with in some google searches citation wise. Yes, you are correct that that is what a biography is. to elaborate on what I meant by the tone, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and as such its (article) content should be written in as neutral a tone as possible (see WP:NPOV). When you feel that the draft is ready, I could ask for a second opinion on this for you from another reviewer if you would like. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 15:47, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

May 2017

Hi ! I just read your post on my talk page. My contribution on Dan Fante did not intend to be a "test" modification. Anyway, I think it is just a vocabulary problem we are dealing with. Indeed, Dan Fante's work involving his alter-ego Bruno Dante is composed of four books, isn't it ? Then I guess it must be called a "tetralogy" and not a "trilogy". Please do not hesitate to respond to this message on my talk page if you think I made a mistake. Alexandre7584 (talk) 21:14, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

@Alexandre7584: My apologies. I googled the word and came across a heart disease as the most prominent result, that is why I reverted it. Didnt see the alternate use and thought it to be meant as calling his books a disease. Sorry about that. -TheSandDoctor (talk) 21:19, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
@TheSandDoctor: Nevermind. I did not know the use of that word for a heart disease. Thank you for your time ! Alexandre7584 (talk) 21:27, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
@Alexandre7584: This is the top hit on google.ca [3] --TheSandDoctor (talk) 23:13, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Infobox song/single merger

Your comment during the recent Merger RfC is interesting: "Conditional merge but it should probably be done with some sort of a parameter added to distinguish between the two (i.e. single=y/n) so that the text in the intro box reads correctly (i.e. you don't want it to read 'single' from X album on a song that isn't a single and visa versa)." It seems like a simple solution, but adding single=y to 58,000+ articles would be difficult. Are you aware of a bot that has handled something similar? I've been trying to get some ideas, but there hasn't been much response on the template talk page. Any suggestions? —Ojorojo (talk) 19:13, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

@Ojorojo: You are correct that it would be indeed simple but also insanely difficult to get through every single article with the template. Sadly, I am not very familiar with bots and do not know of any. Do you know what final form the merged templates will take (ie will they have a type= parameter?) Worse comes to worse I would probably be one of the volunteers to switch them - would probably only take a few hundred editors a day or two (since switching wouldnt take that long per page). Either that or a couple editors months haha. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 19:18, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
More fun than spearing flies! This is the latest combined infobox with some tweaks (the documentation refers to the existing infobox song). Right now it has type=, which the existing infobox song can use, but single doesn't. So, I set infoboxes with no type or type=single as defaulting to "Singles". Infoboxes with type=song, promotional single, instrumental, and composition would continue to function as they do. The problem is many Infobox songs don't specify type or use many different designations, so these would also seen as "Singles". The one positive is that there are far fewer Infobox songs to check/correct (6,700 vs 53,000). Do you see a problem with this approach? I'll continue to look into a bot. —Ojorojo (talk) 20:20, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
@Ojorojo: That's for sure! Haha. I don't see an real issue with this approach at the moment but need a bit of clarification: so the new one defaults to single but the problem is that they don't always use single? Am I missing something here or am I 'getting' it correctly? --TheSandDoctor (talk) 20:24, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
This new territory for me, so I might not be explaining it well. All the singles (which don't currently use type=), would display "Single" and yellow (I added type=single to this group to catch any mistakes or for possible future use – would it be easier to leave this out?). Songs, which use type=song (or others on the list, such as instrumental, etc.) would show up as they do now (blue, with the type as the heading). Unfortunately, songs which have no type= parameter in the infobox or type=[is empty] would also be grouped in with singles and display "Single" and yellow. Whatever is in the type= parameter would be used for the header (including gibberish); if on the list it would appear blue, if not yellow. Is there some other way for the new infobox to recognize the former infobox single from the from the former infobox song? —Ojorojo (talk) 20:39, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
@Ojorojo: Asking a template editor directly would be a good idea. I shall ask a template editor (that is, someone with the user group). --TheSandDoctor (talk) 20:44, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Ahecht do you think you could possibly answer Ojorojo's question? If not that is fine, just let us know. Thanks for your time! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 20:44, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Ojorojo, your approach sounds good. While this will mean that pages using {{infobox song}} without a |type= specified will show the "wrong" header, if you throw in a tracking category (i.e. "if no type, put in this cat") then they can be modified accordingly. re-ping Primefac (talk) 12:52, 10 May 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

@Primefac: I tried to clarify the current sandbox version above (maybe reviewing the coding would be easier). If I understand your suggestion, 1) it would identify current infoboxes that lack the type= parameter and/or those that have one, but are empty (or possibly any infoboxes that don't have type=song, type=instrumental, etc.) 2) then it would be a manual process to fix those boxes to facilitate the merger. According to the current parameter report, there are 1,756 infobox song with type=[something][4] out of a total of 6,613[5] (the other 4,857 must be empty or not included in the infobox). These are manageable numbers, but it seems there may be an automated solution.

—Ojorojo (talk) 19:11, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Sure, it's still an automated solution, but it's always best to crunch the numbers to find out the "best" solution, and at the very least figure out how many pages you'll be affecting! Primefac (talk) 19:40, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
@Ojorojo: --TheSandDoctor (talk) 19:42, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
@Primefac: My one-time experience with a bot showed that they can be thrown off by several unanticipated factors and a fair amount of hands-on editing is still required. The first step was to establish a category with all the targeted infoboxes. I think this is a similar code: "hastemplate:"Infobox song" insource:"|type=|" prefix::" However, it will show type= that are used in subtemplates, such as {{Extra track listing}}. These might be the tracking categories:
  • Category: Pages using infobox single with no type= or type=[is empty] (about 52,633)
  • Category: Pages using infobox song with no type= or type=[is empty] (about 4,857)
  • Category: Pages using infobox song with type=[something] (about 1,756)
It would seem easier to design the new infobox around singles and try to fit the songs in. So either by bot or manually, type=song would have to be added to about 4,857 infobox song. An additional 1,756 would have to be checked manually for improper uses of type= (there are too many possibilities for a bot). —Ojorojo (talk) 21:01, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Well, adding something to a template call is much easier than removing one. For now I'd say go forward with sandboxing and testcases, and when everything's just about done and the dust clears we can see what the actual implementation of the merger will involve.
Also, while I'm thinking about it, there's another merger proposal, so it might be worth doing the above merger until that RFC closes (saves two mergers). Primefac (talk) 21:06, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
I was thinking the same. Any suggestions about who could take a good look at the sandbox version? Maybe a fresh look might see a better approach. —Ojorojo (talk) 21:15, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Aye, I can take a look at some point. Primefac (talk) 21:17, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to STiki!

Hello, TheSandDoctor, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Here are some pages which are a little more fun:

  • The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users!
  • Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes!

We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Vanamonde (talk) 05:20, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: Having a username change after you start using STiki will reset your classification count. Please let us know about such changes on the talk page page to avoid confusion in issuing milestone awards. You can also request for your previous STiki contributions to be reassigned to your new account name.

Definitely spam, I say! — PaleoNeonate — 05:38, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
PaleoNeonate --TheSandDoctor (talk) 05:46, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Page mover granted

Hello, TheSandDoctor. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, and move subpages when moving the parent page(s).

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! Swarm ♠ 06:04, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much Swarm! I was concerned that not having my account for the full 6 months might block my application. Thanks! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 06:05, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
No worries! This is exactly why we're allowed to ignore the rules if we need to. :) Thanks for all your work! Swarm ♠ 06:16, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
@Swarm: I did not know about that page for administrators. Makes sense (if not abused of course). Thanks again and thank you for the compliment! Just trying to do what I can to help the project and to be able to not bug administrators with CSDs as often haha. I do have one question though, I have seen others using the suppress redirect to suppress it when moving a draft from an editor's sandbox, is that allowed/ok? I did that about 3 times but then realized I better double check (sorry I did not sooner). --TheSandDoctor (talk) 06:19, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
@Swarm: To clarify, I have read the guide, I am just asking as I have seen other editors with the right do it on occasion (there aren't many editors with the right so I don't see them that often but have in the past) --TheSandDoctor (talk) 06:25, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
As a page mover you're allowed to suppress redirects. However, per WP:R#SUPPRESS, redirects should generally be left by default to maintain ease of navigation and prevent confusion; in other words, don't suppress redirects unless you have a reason. For example, you wouldn't leave a redirect on somebody's general sandbox because they'll probably be using it again. You're allowed to use your judgment when exercising that right. You're not required to leave a redirect if no one will ever use it. Swarm ♠ 06:53, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
@Swarm: Thank you for the clarification and that was the scenario I was most interested in and thanks again for the compliment. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 07:01, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

removal of article

Why this article has been removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by BAL JATT (talk • contribs) 06:48, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

I assume you are referring to either Mohammadpur Khudaliya, Buxer, Khagoi, or Hirdaypur? If so, please refer to the messages on your talk page. The articles were not deleted, merely moved to the draft namespace as they did not contain any references (please see WP:CITE, WP:RS, WP:Referencing for beginners, and the Teahouse). If you have any further questions, please feel free to let me know. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 07:04, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Committed identity

Hello again. Perhaps that this may interest you: Template:Committed_identity. It does not protect your account and is not failsafe, but it permits you to include a personal photo hash as part of the final hash that is displayed. This would allow to contact a trusted user via videoconference in the future, if necessary, to prove that you were the actual original account holder. It also allows sending via email those secrets which were used to produce the hash in order for the third party to assemble them and compare if it all matches that hash. It does not require to initially issue any private information, just a cryptographically safe hash (like SHA-512, you keep all that was used to produce it private and off-Wikipedia). You will see such a hash on my user page via a user box. It's of course important not to lose the original file(s)/information used to produce that hash. In case your account is compromised, it may be easier to regain your trust/status/history with this, if you decide not to cleanstart from scratch... — PaleoNeonate — 06:55, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

@PaleoNeonate: Thanks for letting me know about that, I shall look into it. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 07:06, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Windsor Castle pub Maida Vale

Hi there I thoughtlessly added an edit today which has been removed. Please accept apologies if this caused a problem. During 1972 and 1973 I played many times at the Windsor Castle in a band called Fogg, we were very popular in the local community and always packed the place out. They were great days in a really great pub. Hope you dont mind me adding the edit again and hope for your understanding. Thank you, all the best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Triplelock2017 (talk • contribs) 19:36, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

@Triplelock2017: I checked with an administrator and they confirmed to me that "non-notable subjects are generally not kept in lists of notable X (performers, alumni, guests, etc)". Meaning that, most likely, it will be removed again if re-added as it does not have a citation or Wikipedia article (if it had a Wikipedia article, citation would probably not be necessary as it would be assumed that the article would have such information and citations within it). Additionally, it could be seen as promotional because your involvement with the band could potentially be seen as a conflict of interest. Before thinking of creating an article, please review WP:BAND and see WP:your first article as well as WP:CITE and WP:RS. If you have any further questions please do let me know. Thanks! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 20:22, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Article on MYD Labs Private Limited

Sir, I have included the TheHindu Indian national news paper link referring this company (http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-telangana/start-up-makes-tax-payments-easy/article18349997.ece) and it's services. Please review and provide feedback or accept. Cheers - bodepudi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lbodepudi (talk • contribs) 17:39, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

@Lbodepudi: Hi there! I cannot read Telugu so I used google translate, however, the reference does not appear to mention MYD, the founder, or the product anywhere in the listing [6]? Additionally, the majority of the references are still primary sources. With that said, telanganatoday.news is a good start - see if you can find more references like that? Also, I know I mentioned the language earlier, it does not matter what language the reference is in so long as it covers the topic. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 19:16, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

What level are you?

I found your name at Category:User js (probably because you posted the corresponding userbox on your user page), in the level-unspecified list of JavaScript programmers.

I was wondering how experienced you are at JavaScript, and whether you might be interested in getting involved with developing user scripts, hobnobbing with other JavaScript programmers, and organizing and improving JavaScript articles and support pages.

We do all of that and more at the JavaScript WikiProject.

Scripts undergoing development, and the state of JavaScript on Wikipedia, are discussed on the talk page.

For an overview of JavaScript coverage on Wikipedia, see Draft:Outline of JavaScript and Index of JavaScript-related articles. For everything on user scripts, see User:The Transhumanist/Outline of scripts.

The WikiProject also organizes every resource it can find about JavaScript out there, such as articles, books, tutorials, etc. See our growing Reference library. If you know of any good ones, please add them.

If you would like to join the JavaScript WikiProject, feel free to add your name to the participants list.

Hope to see you there! The Transhumanist 16:47, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

@The Transhumanist: I haven't coded in JavaScript in a couple of years. Only work I did with it was the context of Unity (game engine). I have since moved onto Unreal_Engine#Unreal_Engine_4 and stumble around (self taught) in C++ . I put it as I do have some knowledge of it but not enough to really rate myself haha. Although completely unrelated (save for name), I do have years of experience in Java and am studying it at the post-secondary (university) level. Most programming languages I know are self-taught. I taught myself Java before entering post-secondary, it is just a formality more or less (learn the odd thing from time to time though). --TheSandDoctor (talk) 19:05, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Nice. I'm jealous. Java is the programming language used for controlling WikiBrain: a platform for using AI algorithms on Wikipedia, for data mining, natural language processing, geospatial analysis, editor assistance, and a whole lot more. Whatever you can dream up – that's what the Java component is for. Here are some links, in case you are interested in this state-of-the-art use of Java:
Enjoy. And keep me posted if you dive into it. I'd be interested in hearing about anything you use it for. The Transhumanist 04:32, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
@The Transhumanist: Very cool. Just so you know, the github link does not work for me? --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:41, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Link fixed (it was a typo). The Transhumanist 07:38, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Slightly wrong close?

See my comments after your close at Talk:Gingersnap#Requested_move_4_May_2017. Dicklyon (talk) 04:45, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out Dicklyon. It should be fixed now. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:55, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft: land change modeling

Hey man,

I noticed you approved the Draft for "GeoMod" - that page was written as part of a class project, we also made some edits to TerrSet, stochastic matrix, etc. We have one more page we wrote, Draft: Land Change Modeling, if you could take a look at it that would be great! Thanks!

Cheers, Ganesha811 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganesha811 (talk • contribs) 19:02, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

@Ganesha811: I am more than happy to review them for you, but having links to the ones you would like me to look at would be helpful . Thanks! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 23:39, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Yali Saar - Wikipedia Edit

Hi SandDoctor,

Thank you so much for the help! It's my first time editing a page in the American section of Wikipedia and I appriciate help correction in whatever bad habits that stuck with me. I didn't know Wikipedia pages are not a cite'ble source. I've corrected the page and I believe it follows all the guidelines now. Would appriciate it if you can take a second look. Would love to follow any further recommendations.

Otherwise I've applied all the changes to Draft:Yali Saar. Would you be able to approve this time? :)


Thanks, Nate Nate.stancil (talk) 16:14, 19 April 2017 (UTC)


Hi @TheSandDoctor - Thanks for your feedback on the Draft:Yali Saar: as a new editor, I'm working on learning the ropes. Would you be willing to take another look at the article? Do the updates made improve it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nate.stancil (talk • contribs) 12:42, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
@Nate.stancil: Hi there, I am sorry that I somehow missed your messages until now. On to the draft: While possibly notable, the 'Early life and education' section does not contain any sources and the lead section appears to be a bit too short. With that said, you have made improvements to the draft and I shall let another reviewer review it based on their judgement. In the mean time, please see WP:CITE, WP:RS, the Teahouse, and (for good measure) WP:CITEKILL and (one of its solutions) WP:CITEBUNDLE. Those are all links to useful resources that I think a new editor should check out. Hopefully this helps some. If the draft is not reviewed relatively soon, please let me know and I may be able to expedite it (but no guarantees). Hopefully that helps you some and sorry that I somehow missed your message until now. Happy editing & good luck :D --TheSandDoctor (talk) 14:34, 9 May 2017 (UTC)


@TheSandDoctor: No worries! Thank you for the additional resources. I'll take a look asap and see if I can add any additional changes. I've went ahead and applied the additional suggestions you've made on 'Early life and education'. Looking forward to get it re-reviewd. Thanks again for the help!

Best, Nate Nate.stancil (talk) 16:14, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

03:10:42, 16 May 2017 review of submission by Tongolss


This page is filled with recurrent texts alluding to sex slavery and marriage of Non-CHinese women and focuses on trashing Korean people on a page dedicated to the Mongolian rule of China... if that needs to be a focus, it should be cataloguing Han Chinese female experiences under a Mongol rule. please keep the page free from political Chinese racism and sexism.

@Tongolss: In declining a draft, I was not being political in any way. Drafts without references (in most cases) simply are not accepted. Please see writing your first article and WP:CITE. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 03:15, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

If a text passage is irrelevant, even if it is laden with reference links, shouldnt it be rejected from entry if it is irrelevant, sexist, and racist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tongolss (talk • contribs) 03:18, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Kerr Cuhulain

His Youtube Videos are my proof. I am a Pagan. I pay attention to what the so called leaders in my community do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.196.84.47 (talk) 03:12, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

@209.196.84.47: Please see WP:RS and WP:CITE. You did not cite any sources, therefore making it an unsourced claim --TheSandDoctor (talk) 03:16, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Yuan Dynasty.. edited by Chinese trolls to skew history

why does this page condone irrelevant and sexist text. this is CHINESE history page, not a Korean one. There are repeated passages about Chinese men marrying foreign women and Han Chinese enslaving Korean women . This page should be focused on China and its interaction with Mongolian rule. Korea and other nationalities should not be the focus of this page, especially if it glorifies sexual slavery. If it must talk about these slaves, shouldnt the focus be on Han Chinese slaves? 

I have already recieved an apology from wikipedia editor Laszlo Panaflex and a commitment to keep this page free from the Chinese centric sexism and racism and historical revisionism rampant there.
@Tongolss: If you have an issue with this, it is best raised on the talk page of the article since I am not related to that page nor have edited it before and am unfortunately not the person to ask regarding this. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 03:21, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Corona Fossils

Hi Sand Doctor, I saw the fossils in my aunt's collection when she passed away. My mother told me that she would gather them from the hill behind her house. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Corona1991 (talk • contribs) 19:10, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

@Corona1991: Hi there. Please see WP:RS and WP:CITE. Your edit was reverted as it was unsourced. Hopefully this helps. If you have any more questions please feel free to ask me or at the Teahouse! --TheSandDoctor (talk) 19:15, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

12:40:07, 17 May 2017 review of submission by Deepikasundresh04


Hi, I was wondering what changes I could make in order to get published. Thanks!

@Deepikasundresh04: Hi there! Please note as well that external links are not allowed within the main body of an article (but are in an 'external links' style section WP:EXT). Also, (though not required) consider using inline citations (WP:CITE). Lastly, additional major news coverage (if available) would be beneficial to the draft. Hope this helps! Please also see the Teahouse. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 14:45, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - Newsletter No.4

Hello TheSandDoctor/Archives/2017,

Since rolling out the right in November, just 6 months ago, we now have 805 reviewers, but the backlog is still mysteriously growing fast. If every reviewer did just 55 reviews, the 22,000 backlog would be gone, in a flash, schwoop, just like that!

But do remember: Rather than speed, quality and depth of patrolling and the use of correct CSD criteria are essential to good reviewing. Do not over-tag. Make use of the message feature to let the creator know about your maintenance tags. See the tutorial again HERE. Get help HERE.

Stay up to date with recent new page developments and have your say, read THIS PAGE.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:42, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

15:27:25, 21 May 2017 review of submission by Bsureshgupta

@Bsureshgupta: Do you have a question? You made a blank post on my talk page. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 00:53, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

pcritcher/Lora Beldon page

I don't know how to fix my cite errors, Sand Doctor! please help and thank you, PcritcherPcritcher (talk) 00:25, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

@Pcritcher:  Done I fixed them for you. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 01:00, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

indexing of pages + googling

hi TheSandDoctor, could you please explain how the google chooses to index or not index Wikipedia pages?

You recently accepted the Bragi (company) page, but it has the <meta name="robots" content="noindex,nofollow"/> included. Will it be automatically removed if I improve the quality of the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LinardsLinardsLinards (talk • contribs) 15:20, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

LinardsLinardsLinards, newly created pages in the article space are not indexed by bots until they have been "patrolled" by a new page reviewer. This should happen in relatively short order. Primefac (talk) 15:48, 18 May 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
TheSandDoctor, as a note on that point, since you are an NPR, if you're accepting a draft then you'll also need to mark it as patrolled. Primefac (talk) 16:21, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
@Primefac: I have tried to mark ones I have accepted as patrolled however the side bar does not show up on them and I cannot see them in the new pages feed? --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:51, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
In that case they are already patrolled. I can never remember if AFCH takes care of the patrolling when accepting a draft. Primefac (talk) 12:12, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

08:38:35, 22 May 2017 review of submission by Sandra Weese


Hell TheSandDoctor, I added now citations in all the spots you indicated in your last review. I hope this should be good to be be aproved :-) thank you sandra

@Sandra Weese:  Done I have accepted the draft. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 13:50, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

thank you !!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandra Weese (talk • contribs) 13:59, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

My Post was Declined due to Peacock Language

Hi, my post was recently declined, citing peacock language. I read through it again and I indeed saw what I believe your were referring to, which was mostly in the career section of my entry. The language was mostly extracted from my sources, but I did remove it. Is there anything else I should be adding, removing, or rewording. Finishedfirst (talk) 21:13, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

02:24:40, 23 May 2017 review of submission by Finishedfirst


Hi, my post was recently declined, citing peacock language. I read through it again and I indeed saw what I believe your were referring to, which was mostly in the career section of my entry. The language was mostly extracted from my sources, but I did remove it. Is there anything else I should be adding, removing, or re-wording. Sorry about the double post.

Re

But Taiwan isn't a country's name.It's only an island's name.The ROC now is devieded into two province(Taiwan Fujian)&six Special municipality--Softyu (talk) 07:13, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Nag Pipariya

Just a note, but inhabited places are ...basically presumed notable. That being said, the draft does contain a heckuva lot of basically unsourced information that needs to be fixed. TimothyJosephWood 13:29, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

16:07:15, 24 May 2017 review of submission by Slooomotion


Could you please help me delete this stupid account? I really regret thinking I could work with wikipedia, it's obviously something I wouldn't be good at. I want all traces of my work that I gave you permissions for revoked completely and I want this account deleted. Thanks.

Slooomotion, we do not delete accounts from Wikipedia. If you wish to no longer be associated with this account, you can request to VANISH. Otherwise, simply abandon the account. Primefac (talk) 16:09, 24 May 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
(talk page gnome) @Sloomotion: there does not seem to be anything left of your contributions other than this message, which can be accessed by non-administrators. When pages are deleted, the edits which were applied to them and their associated talk page also disappear from the public contributions. If you are leaving, farewell. — PaleoNeonate — 16:53, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Trump coup d'état

Yeah, "support" was supposed to be "delete." Sorry about that. I don't hang out much at AfD.

BTW do you think his(?) daily resubmission of this thing is beginning to border on disruption? There's enough of a backlog at Articles for Creation without volunteers continually having to spend time on this. He makes hundreds of little gnoming edits but no real effort to deal with the core issues. I'm beginning to sense that WP:CIR is relevant. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 01:21, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

@Shock Brigade Harvester Boris: No problem and I agree, same as with WP:TE. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 03:17, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Question

Am I correct in interpreting the message as saying that a draft version can be linked to the published one? The draft version has more detail and references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeaglePower (talk • contribs) 14:36, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

@BeaglePower: I assume you are talking about Draft:Electrostatic and Covalent Equation? You did not mention a specific article/draft. If so, and you are talking about a specific edit, I am the wrong person to be asking as I was never involved with reviewing that draft and have never edited it. If not, what message are you talking about? --TheSandDoctor (talk) 20:32, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TheSandDoctor/Archives/2017/May&oldid=797108817"