User talk:Victoriasays

Welcome!

Hello, Victoriasays, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Shearonink (talk) 23:07, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, here's how to add references from reliable sources for the content you add to Wikipedia. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Adding a well formatted references is very easy to do.

While editing any article or a wikipage, on the top of the edit window you will see a toolbar which says "cite". Click on it
Then click on "templates",
Choose the most appropriate template and fill as many details as you can. This will add a well formatted reference that would be helpful in case the website link (web URL) becomes inactive (dead/link rot) after some time.
Click on Preview.
Then if the reference is how you want it, click on Insert.
And then Preview the page and Save as usual.

You can read more about it on Help:Edit toolbar or see this video File:RefTools.ogv. Hope this helps, Shearonink (talk) 00:50, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Azomite mineral ore.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Azomite mineral ore.jpg, which you've sourced to https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=504838392860915&set=a.133289596682465.22370.121643231180435&type=3&theater. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:46, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Stefan2 . I sent you two emails before finding this page (sorry) and have (hopefully) figured it all out. I have just sent an email with permission letter to the permissions department - and will tackle adding OTRS to the file page shortly. Cheers, Victoriasays (talk) 15:53, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Victoriasays. You have new messages at Stefan2's talk page.
Message added 20:34, 6 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Stefan2 (talk) 20:34, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article!

		The Original Barnstar
		For Azomite. Congratulations on your hard work and effort, continually improving the article to Wikipedia standards. A thoroughly good job! ^Alex J _Fox^(Talk)_(Contribs) 20:52, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Victoriasays. You have new messages at Jackmcbarn's talk page.
Message added 00:33, 30 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Jackmcbarn (talk) 00:33, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Google Graph and L'Wren Scott's birthdate

Under her information on GG, there's a button to click where you can add the correct date. It only requires a source. I can do it for you, when I'm on a better device. — Wylie pedia 03:07, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Coolio CAWylie - Super good to know. Thank you! Victoriasays (talk) 03:27, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I added the source link and correct date via 'feedback'. Gracias again! Victoriasays (talk) 03:34, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

De nada. — Wylie pedia 03:56, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to L'Wren Scott may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

'''L'Wren Scott''' (born '''Luann Bambrough''';<ref>[http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/17/us-lwrenscott-

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:11, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Brackenbot, Sorry! There was only one ( on the date so I assumed it needed two. I will have another look. Thanks Victoriasays (talk) 20:12, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. — Wylie pedia 08:42, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ! Victoriasays (talk) 17:10, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited L'Wren Scott, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pretty Polly. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

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

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

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

Ayurveda

Victoriasays requested on IRC for an uninvolved editor to have a look here. I think all that needs to have been said has been said and there's no point continuing to drag out a discussion that can be boiled down to be neutral and be nice. Please note that this does not constitute an exoneration on either side of the debate and if further actions are taken by either side with regards to more editing on the topic then this can be used in discussion. DrStrauss talk 19:45, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Ayurveda. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you.

Please also note that the article and the topic of what is and is not pseudoscience fall under WP:ARBPS. --Ronz (talk) 22:35, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not only that, 1RR is enforced at that page - so this is already blockable misbehaviour. Alexbrn (talk) 02:51, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not only did I not add my own point of view, I cited my edit. I did not contribute to blockable misbehaviour in any way, shape or form. Kindly explain 'precisely' of what you speak. (Victoriasays (talk) 19:29, 9 September 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Read the notice at the top of the page when you edit it. By repeatedly making the same edit you are risking a block. You are warned. Alexbrn (talk) 19:41, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What on Earth are you talking about? I have not done anything repeatedly. Not even twice. Again, explain 'precisely' of what you speak because I have done nothing you have mentioned and I find your messages approaching harassment. (Victoriasays (talk) 18:36, 10 September 2017 (UTC))[reply]

On 3 September, you made two attempts to remove the "pseudoscience" material. Doing in different ways won't exempt you. Alexbrn (talk) 18:42, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I actually spoke to some very even-tempered, non-judgemental admins in the KiwiIRC today that graciously — and with a normal, cordial conversational tone — pointed that out to me. I genuinely had no idea. I am traveling and there must have been a slow-connection error which created the action twice. So, my mistake. Although, my action of making a mistake doesn't make anyone else exempt from being respectful. Speaking of doing things in different ways, there were many other ways you could have expressed your concerns, other than as rudely as you have. I hope to never have an exchange with you again. (Victoriasays (talk) 02:21, 11 September 2017 (UTC))[reply]

You can have an exchange with me instead then.

- you made this edit on the third of september and left the following edit summary: (Removed citations claiming 'pseudoscience' that offered no actual citation that Ayurveda is pseudoscience. Added actual fact from previously cited source.). In this edit you removed several lines of text which were cited using reliable sources. You were reverted. Edaham (talk) 08:19, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- you made this completely different edit a few minutes after you were reverted. and left this edit summary, Classification and efficacy: Updated to reflect tangible growing popularity. In this edit you made sweeping changes to the section Classification and efficacy, related to and expanding on the changes you made, which had previously been reverted - in spite of the 1-revert policy on this page and without discussing your changes with anyone on the talk page.

Question: Is it respectful to turn up and start hacking apart the work of your colleagues without consulting them first and then to do it again when they tidy up after you the first time? I really feel like some people turn up here and see themselves not as part of a group of editorial staff, but as a unilaterally acting member of a have-your-say style bulletin board. Your editing practice wouldn't work in any work place. I'm not sure how you expect it to contribute to this project. Edaham (talk) 08:19, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're unnecessarily beating a dead horse. I already apologized for my mistake. My contributions to Wikipedia have all been productive and useful. Belaboring in a harassing tone is counterproductive and I will take no further part. (Victoriasays (talk) 17:46, 13 September 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Hmm, well this prompted me to look and the Azomite article looks very problematic, not least from a WP:COI / WP:PAID perspective. Alexbrn (talk) 19:30, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Dead links

Please see wp:KDL (keep dead links) Please either flag with {{citation needed}} (or {{cn}} for brevity) Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 23:51, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jim, is this re yesterday's edits? Also, thank you. (Victoriasays (talk) 15:35, 15 September 2017 (UTC))[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Victoriasays. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Azomite for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Azomite 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/Azomite 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. ^{Atsme📞📧} 22:36, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Victoriasays. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]