User talk:Ammarpad/Archive 2

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

Speedy deletion declined: Poynting Physical Society[edit]

Hello Ammarpad. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Poynting Physical Society, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: notable founder, claims significance as the oldest society of the university. Both the founder and the university would be suitable merge targets per WP:ATD-M anyway. Thank you. SoWhy 15:04, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SoWhy: Well, I've no cause to contest your judgment as I didn't tag it to be deleted arbitrarily. However, I am not that all way off point since it still didn't merit standalone page by your own standard, plus currently it is "prodded" by another editor, which wouldn't happen if it were straight notable. Also I am not aware of WP:ATD-M before, but now I know. Thank you. –Ammarpad (talk) 18:41, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Help talk:IPA/English[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Help talk:IPA/English. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

08:07:38, 15 October 2017 review of submission by Aqsatahir[edit]


Hi, Would you mind explaining a bit more about the rejection as the subject does have legitimate sources and the links provided are not just mere mention info the name. The is very frustrating because all you guys are doing is rejecting and article without reviewing it properly or even bother leaving proper comments to explain that in a bit more detail.

Welcome. @Aqsatahir: We're not rejecting your submission because we don't want your contribution but because Wikipedia has certain criteria and guidelines on contentcreation. Biographies of Living Persons (like your draft) generally have higher or stricter criteria than most article you see on Wikipedia, you can see why here. All the 3 editors who declined it previously have left rationale for their rejection which are primarily concerns about notability and reliable sources. Also, when your article was declined, the best thing to do is to try to find new sources and add content but now you've just resubmitted without adding a single word. See for example, this article Krzysztof Antoni Meissner was rejected in February but after it is rejection the creator didn't reubmitted it in split second but worked to improve it, and you can see it is now accepted. I may advise you to continue improving it now pending when another editor will review it. If it is accepted then that's good. If (unfortunately) it is declined again you can left it and find any other notable thing or person to write about. Thank –Ammarpad (talk) 17:47, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Carl Paul Pfleiderer
Hi Ammarpad, you recently declined the above article at WP:AFC, which is well notable and is worthy of being moved into main space, with some extra work. There is a truly monumental number of papers, whitepapers, patents, gbook entries, which makes him notable, and that doesn't count the books he has written. He also has a worldcat entry, which makes him automatically notable on WP, and that alone makes it worth an article. Please be more careful next time. scope_creep (talk) 13:31, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Scope creep: First: as an experienced editor, you "should" know more work is done in the Draftspace not Mainspace, that's why I moved it back to draft space for extra work you admitted it needs. I didn't declined it to remain in Draft space for perpetuity.
Second: In the entire draft I didn't see the "truly monumental" "papers," "gbooks," "whitepapers," "books," and "patents" you just claimed he has. Reviewing is done for what is actually presented not what is assumed.
Third: you repeated the word 'notable' three times and then underpinned the rest of your comment on notability. Well, I did not declined the draft because of notability neither do I contest his notability; It is good for you to check reason for rejecting draft and predicate your complain on that to avoid complain on false premise. Also you "should" know, Notability is not the only the only reason of declining draft according to AFC STANDARDS of which every reviewer is basing their judgement –Ammarpad (talk) 16:45, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Carl Paul Pfleiderer

As regards the Carl Paul Pfleidererm draft you seem to have taken the strop about me not replying back, when I asked you why it had been declined. You were right, but it wasnt the outcome I was looking for. Looking at the article, you declined it at Afc, even though the man is world famous, completed the theoretical mathematical foundations on centrifugal pumps, which are used everywhere, and his equations are still used today, has an article on the German Wikipedia, with appropriate references, has numerous entries on Google books, about him and books. In the Reviewing Instructions of WP:AFC, it says, Main task: If this article were nominated for deletion at WP:AFD, would it be likely to survive? In this case, he would have, if it went to WP:AFD. He would have been kept as he clearly notable, even with few reference, which would have been added during the process. If has came across it, I would have whipped it out, added the references from the German article, and the filing editor would have expanded it out, as has several articles, which I have put through. scope_creep (talk) 14:51, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well actually I am not taking anything on you, but it is reasonable for me to assume you've no intention to reply after 7 days (168, hours) and within the period you logged in everyday. And note that, if you had not repeated similar invalid argument here, I may not talk about the issue again. Even there, albeit I saw your comment first, I refrained from replying, until when Bearcat (who is an admin, and fairly long timer here) corrected you and faulted your (miss)understanding of World at entry. Nonetheless, later you wrote to Legacypac and pleaded with him to resubmit it so that "[you] pass it, once it is out." I am not privy to what happened next, but Legacypac didn't obliged, then you resubmitted by yourself and moved it. This is recounted for posterity and transparency, since you already understand you were wrong and and even asked me to forget and "move on", there is no basis to continue to argue, that's good enough, I welcome the offer and signals archiving of this discussion.  — Ammarpad (talk) 13:07, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2017-42[edit]

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • When you edit a template with the visual editor it follows the template's format configuration on how to save it. You can now change the format in more powerful ways if your wiki wants it. [1][2]
  • The TwoColConflict extension is a new way to solve edit conflicts. It makes it easier to copy and paste the relevant text to the text field. It has been a beta feature for the last five months. You can now try out the new interface on a page where you will actually get simulated edit conflicts. You can give feedback to the developers.

Problems

  • There is a problem with recent changes pages and your watchlist that show a large number of pages. Until it is fixed, Wikidata edits will not be shown on recent changes or in your watchlist on Commons or Russian Wikipedia. If necessary, Wikidata edits will be removed from all wikis. [3]
  • Notifications are not working for some actions. For example some users don't get a notification when they are mentioned. The developers are working on fixing this. [4]
  • Users on some wikis could not change their preferences. This has now been fixed. [5]

Changes later this week

  • Editors and readers who still use Internet Explorer 8 on Windows XP will not be able to use Wikipedia from 17 October. Internet Explorer 8 on Windows XP can't connect securely to the wikis. When we allow them to do so it means that we get less security for everyone else. If you use Internet Explorer 8 on Windows XP you can install Firefox 52 ESR instead. Around 0.1% of the traffic to the Wikimedia wikis comes from Internet Explorer 8 on Windows XP. [6]
  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 17 October. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 18 October. It will be on all wikis from 19 October (calendar).

Meetings

  • You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 17 October at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
  • You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 18 October at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

15:31, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

20:29:26, 16 October 2017 review of submission by Aqsatahir[edit]


Hi Ammarpad, First of all thanks alot for getting back on my query and explaining it in so much detail. I really appreciate that. As for the notability factor, all the references provided are either renowned newspapers, ebooks, TV channels and all the reliable sources i could fine on the internet. I have re-submitted the article because i don't believe there is anything that could be added more to prove she is worthy of being on wikipedia. Also, to my amazement i stumbled upon so many wiki pages that have been moved into the space without even a single reference provided. This makes me question the huge dissimilarity between the way all the content is being move from draft into the space. I have to give an example here, i have no personal problem with the person but this is just to highlight the vast difference between notability standards. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naveen_Waqar ... Please check this link and then i would appreciate if you can clear the dissimilarity between the standards on which articles are being moved into the space or being rejected.

Hi, @Aqsatahir: Thank you for coming back. On English Wikipedia all encyclopedic contents are held at the same general standard with no discrimination for anything or preferential treatment of any subject above others whatsoever. And on more specific level it is the same standard for everything covered therein. For instance, category of content like Biography of living people we talked of, covered any biography including this example and your own without any bias. Then, Thank you for bringing that article to notice. But let me explain one thing for you. Currently there are "6,818,314" articles on English Wikipedia. You see it is over 5 million, so it is reasonable that some articles like that one remain, that's why once they are identified they're deleted or rescued by finding sources for them. Now that you bring that article with zero reference to notice you did a great service to Wikipedia; in one week time you'll see the article either well sourced or deleted entirely. –Ammarpad (talk) 21:26, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bariene surgeonfish, listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Bariene surgeonfish,. Since you had some involvement with the Bariene surgeonfish, redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Plantdrew (talk) 03:39, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Autoblock of User:Officialumaryusuf[edit]

This user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.
Ammarpad (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Ammarpad (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Officialumaryusuf". The reason given for Officialumaryusuf's block is: " Your account has been blocked indefinitely because the chosen username is a clear violation of our username policy – it is obviously profane, threatens, attacks or impersonates another person, or suggests that you do not intend to contribute positively to the encyclopedia (see our blocking and username policies for more information). We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia, but users are not allowed to edit with inappropriate usernames and we do not tolerate 'bad faith' editing such as trolling or other disruptive behavior. If you think there are good reasons why these don't describe your account, or why you should be unblocked, you are welcome to appeal this block – read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text {{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the end of your user talk page. ".

Accept reason: Appears to be a false positive. Not a CheckUser block. Unblocked. Huon (talk) 13:45, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think you are blocked. Can you edit any pages?--Ymblanter (talk) 06:59, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like it is indeed an autoblock; we probably need to wait for @KrakatoaKatie:. Sorry for that. I am completely incompetent in CU issues.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:03, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I can't edit any page, I even tried to tell you I sent this email using TalkBack less than minute ago, but I can't. –Ammarpad (talk) 07:05, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK thanks for coming –Ammarpad (talk) 07:06, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop discussing my AFC Help desk posts on the Help desk.[edit]

By starting such discussion on the help page you are just confusing the OPs by posting messages that are not directly relevant or useful to them. If you feel the need to raise a point about another helper's post (such as mine) you should do so on that person's (my) talk page, not on the Help desk itself. By the way, the issue with the Mike Potter draft has to do with the way the help posts are created by a script, the OP has no control over it. You do not need to explain basics to me, I'm an admin with more than ten years experience and over 80,000 edits on WP. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:18, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dodger67: Actually, you don't need to tell me, you are an admin, because I already know, albeit I agree, I don't know with what purpose you're letting me no now. 1. I am sorry for replying to your comments (both), I am not aware you don't like replies from people you're not directly talking with. 2. To be frank I am not the one who confused the new editor but your comment, and that can be seen in how he hastily replied informing that he didn't add the link (Because by no means he would no how the script works, and telling him, a redirect redirects to mainspace will surely confuse him). I made my second reply with "(it seems)" not because I've doubt, or I don't know from where the link come from but to append my earlier comment which I don't want alter. But all this is by no means, meant to lengthen argument, but only necessity to reply you. So you can delete all the replies as by no means I intended to teach you anything. Ammarpad (talk) 14:52, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great job[edit]

Hi Ammurpad, you are doing a very great job. Enjoy your passion and hope to see you at one of the Nigerian hub meetings. Why have you not come? Danidamiobi (talk) 19:58, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Danidamiobi: Thanks for your kind words. Well, most if not all, I am not aware. I used to only see that a Meetup was organized, and also actually school (espicially the phase, I am now) gives little time to move somewhere, but one day I will surely be there. Even now I remain with every attendee in spirit. Thank you so much. -Ammarpad (talk) 09:25, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So good to get a piece of your attention. We could link. See my user's contact. Danidamiobi (talk) 09:28, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Don't mention, I will contact you through any. -Ammarpad (talk) 09:38, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

20:03:30, 19 October 2017 review of submission by Aqsatahir[edit]


Hi Ammarpad, thanks for taking out the time and explaining everything so well. After your advice I have added references to the article. If you can please be kind enough and have a look to see those are enough? Or you think there should be more? Your help will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

@Aqsatahir: No problem, I have checked it. I only want you now to use these references and expand the article a little more, as of now it has only one paragraph. Like you can add sections; "History" and "education" giving some details about her accompanied by the sources you used or new ones.. One thing I also want you to understand is that even if article passes creation phase it can still be tracked any time and deleted due to several deficiencies. Also due to this long discussion on my talkpage, I am actually recusing myself from reviewing it. But I hope it get accepted. And I hope you'll understand me. Thank you. -Ammarpad (talk) 13:29, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 08:35:05, 20 October 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Uaria2008[edit]


Hi, I really appreciate your help on reviewing my draft article and thank you for putting a comment about it. However, I just wanna justify something. I believe that my references are reliable. I can see some article like this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ph7cms that has been published but also uses most of their references from their own website. That being said, I believe that my references are also valid and has cited properly. I will try to improve my article as the time goes by, but I am expecting for you to consider my draft to be published like the article I mentioned. Thank you.

Uaria2008 (talk) 08:35, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome @Uaria2008: As you can see from my explanation to one user above, there currently there are " 6,818,314" articles on English Wikipedia. You see, it is over 5 million, so it is reasonable that some articles like that one remain, that's why once they are identified they're deleted or rescued by finding sources for them or finding independent sources in your case. And yes, it is true you have sources which are not primary, that will means it remains some little work for you. And I am glad that you will work to improve it, that is how this whole Wikipedia is built up, by improving what is not up to standard before. Thank you. -Ammarpad (talk) 14:19, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Look before you shoot next time[edit]

Please. 2001:14BA:8300:0:0:0:0:661A (talk) 16:44, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for supporting the Sustainability Initiative![edit]

Read about the Sustainability Initiative in the Wikipedia Signpost!

Hi Ammarpad,

Thank you for supporting the Sustainability Initiative, which aims at reducing the environmental impact of the Wikimedia movement. There are currently over 350 supporters from all over the world – please encourage other community members to sign the page as well! You can also read an update from the Sustainability Initiative in the most recent edition of the Wikipedia Signpost.

Thank you, and kind regards, --Gnom (talk) 12:02, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2017-43[edit]

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • You can use ccnorm_contains_any when you create an abuse filter. This can be used to look for multiple words or phrases within a string. It will find words where some characters have been replaced. You can read more in the documentation. [7]

Changes later this week

  • When you search in some languages the search function could use specific other languages if the first language didn't work. This is called a fallback language. This didn't work properly and created bad searches. The search index is being fixed to work better. [8]
  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 24 October. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 25 October. It will be on all wikis from 26 October (calendar).

Meetings

  • You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 24 October at 18:30 (UTC). See how to join.
  • You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 25 October at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:18, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

08:27:52, 24 October 2017 review of submission by Matthew Sanders 73[edit]


Hi Ammarpad, Thanks for your comments on the Magic Lantern draft. I wondered if you could please help me as clearly I am new to this! I, and contributor Jimfbleak who was another of the editors of the page, believed that there were enough references that are suitably independent and reliable, including: - a major article about the charity in a national UK newspaper, The Independent - a chapter in a renowned art historian's most famous book (Marcia Pointon who has a Wikipedia page) - a section on the website of a famous author/illustrator (James Mayhew, who also has a Wikipedia page) - a page in the official London Olympics Inspire Legacy Book (page 247) - written by LOCOG, not by Magic Lantern I thought that these were independent and reliable sources and having looked extensively on the site, especially other educational charities (e.g. the Harpur Trust) I feel that these are at least as many if not more references than many other charities have. Any advice you can offer would be greatly appreciated as I have included every possible reference. Many thanks again for your help. Matthew Sanders 73 (talk) 08:27, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome @Matthew Sanders 73: Also bear with this belated reply, I only noticed this after he Jimfbleak mentioned me on your talkpage. Although the first thing I saw in the draft, is the comment of WP:COI by Caorongjin, I actually took it with a pinch of salt since I can't independently verify and I didn't visit your userpage then. So don't assume I've any predisposition when I reviewed it. Second, I think you shouldn't have raised the point of UK Independent paper ref, since I already duly acknowledged that in the draft. But you should know charities are organizations subject to WP:CORP guideline which Independent paper alone cannot satisfy. The rest sources are primary or closely associated, there is even. reference back to Wikipedia (though, it is now removed).
On your comparison to Harpur Trust article, you should first note that article was created more than 13 years ago, so it reasonable to believe standards become stricter over time. Also, anyway your argument is faulty; everything (or every charity in this context) is considered on its own merit, notwithstanding whether smaller, similar or less prosperous charity has a Wikipedia page. On your last note, I think good solution was already given on your talk page by Jimfbleak himself. But even after that keep in mind as I said above charities are organization that is why they are regularly deleted as they are created since they must conform with WP:ORGCRIT, WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:CORPIND among others, which even you admit are not easy to fulfill for this charity by saying you "..have included every possible reference". So add the ref suggested on your talkpage, I think that is OK. Thank you. “Ammarpad (talk) 10:04, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Dear @Ammarpad:, many thanks for your considered response, I appreciate your time especially as I am new to this. Your advice is invaluable. I have added the Mumsnet reference as suggested. I should be able to add a better reference to patron Will Vaughan's external website this week. Do you think these two additions will be sufficient? I am also expecting an article about the charity to run in First News in the next few weeks. Thank you again - I will keep working on it till it is right! Matthew Sanders 73 (talk) 10:55, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Matthew: Yes, I think that will be OK for now, you should resubmit. More improvement can come later. Thanks for understanding too. –Ammarpad (talk) 19:58, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ammarpad: Many thanks, will do! Matthew Sanders 73 (talk) 07:04, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ammarpad: Just to let you know that I have resubmitted as suggested having added an external reference to Will Vaughan's website, the Mumsnet editorial and the expanded info for the London Olympics Legacy Book. Fingers crossed... and thanks again for all your helpful advice.Matthew Sanders 73 (talk) 11:25, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

11:00:02, 25 October 2017 review of submission by 90.13.160.50[edit]


Hi, regarding notability: it seems to me that this should concern the value of one's work in the first place. Mr. Eisenhardt's work as an academic writer is internationally recognised. See the very positive (verifiable, though on-line) reviews of his 2015 book (links in footnotes).

His publications in peer-reviewed magazines such as 'Early Music' (Oxford University Press), and 'The Lute' show that he is a respected researcher on the field of the Early Guitar.

His recordings (Historically Informed Practice) were highly acclaimed in many magazines (see footnotes) and newspapers (for example in Dutch De gitaar-in-een-koninklijke-rol).

About his date of birth etc: Lex Eisenhardt , Lex Eisenhardt Teacher Lex Eisenhardt

Hope this helps

You're welcome. As you know this draft has been declined by 6 reviewers before me, including me 7 and all based on notability and reliable sources concerns, I think this cannot be solved by me or on this talkpage. Therefore I started this thread on the draft's talkpage so that all those who declined it previously can also comment so as to find final solution on whether your draft conform with necessary Wikipedia policies/guidelines of notability and verifiability and if not what should be done next. You are free to visit the thread and give your reasons. Thank you  — Ammarpad (talk) 08:36, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Democrat Party (epithet)[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Democrat Party (epithet). Legobot (talk) 04:29, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your revisions and the new guideline DOTY[edit]

Hi Ammarpad,
I came across these two revisions regarding January 2:
[10]
[11]
As a result of a discussion in WP:DOY there is now a new guideline which requires the same level of sourcing as the rest of wikipedia. See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Days_of_the_year#Style. This means that from now on every entry requires an inline citation. So the two edits you reverted are not in line with this new guideline. Do you agree? Regards Mill 1 (talk) 20:16, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mill 1: I agree. But I've reservations: There's undercommunication at informing the community about the "new guideline". These DOTY pages are well over 360 and each has editnotice but none was updated with the new guideline and second the template has not been changed up to now to reflect new standard. So it is reasonable I must act (and everyone else) according to what I know and what edit notice say not what I've no knowledge of. Secondly: you know edit summary and there importance, since Alanna the Brave know there is "new guideline" then they should at least link to it in edit summary or say so plainly, but they didn't Thanks. Ammarpad (talk) 02:00, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2017-44[edit]

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • You can now block users from emailing you through the Wikimedia wikis. [12]

Changes later this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 31 October. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 1 November. It will be on all wikis from 2 November (calendar).

Meetings

  • You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 31 October at 18:30 (UTC). See how to join.
  • You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 1 November at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

00:20, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Response to Important[edit]

Hi@Ammarpad:,
In response to your message "Please are you the person who wrote this draft Draft:Dr. Nalaka Gunawansa first? 2; or you copied it from another draft? 3; or do you know this user @Sandyprinith: or whether they're all your accounts? please answer these 3 questions as soon as you're here? Thanks Ammarpad (talk) 08:50, 31 October 2017 (UTC)"[reply]
Queries 1 & 2 - Yes, I created the Draft:Dr. Nalaka Gunawansa, it was not copied from anywhere. To answer your 3rd question, yes both accounts are mine. I did not think there would be a copyright violation because the draft was never published for the public. Since then I have deleted the initial draft I created and resubmitted it for review.
Thank you. Best regards --Sandyprinith (talk) 15:02, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've seen both replies. Ammarpad (talk) 11:09, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nikah misyar[edit]

Dear Ammarpad! You have deleted my explained suggestion on talk page of misyar marriage. I have suggested in good faith as policy says that talk page is used o give suggestions to improve the article. So kindly Explain your deletionNikah misyar (talk) 15:37, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome @Nikah misyar:, yes you're right talk pages are meant to discuss improvement of the tied article. But your edits are nothing but trying to turn the place into forum talk. The headline you wrote "Nikah misyar is prohibited" alone shows it is something unacceptable on Wikipedia as you're here to enforce your personal religious views on the article and that is blatantly against fundamental pillar of Wikipedia for neutrality. Wikipedia doesn't care and doesn't even know "prohibition" the way you did in religious prism. Many people have varying views and everything is treated according to what is verifiable in reliable literature. Also you made no other edit outside that page and you curiously chose the same username as the first page you want edit, why don't you try to improve any other among the million pages of Wikipedia?–Ammarpad (talk) 16:26, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Dear @Ammarpad:! I have suggested that if anyone have some Koran or Hadith which hints about legality of misyar marriage. I have added my research that there is no such Quran oe Hadith as original research is permitted on talk page. Further more there are millions of talk pages which have original research. I have not defiled Wikipedia guidelines on article. I was just concerned to improve article as article only have one sided view that misyar marriage is allowed but no view against which is in itself against neutrality. I wanted to point if someone have more information about topic he should come to neutralise article. If you wish I can point out other talk pages which have content similar to mine?Nikah misyar (talk) 11:50, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please review Talkpage guidelines first, and then repost your comment on the article's talkpage. Also make sure all Independent and reliable sources that you believe support the change you want make are ready and verifiable  — Ammarpad (talk) 15:22, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed but policy states that you should not remove others comments or modify them. But you have removed my comment please explain? Nikah misyar (talk) 12:48, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What you read is not policy it is a guideline. And off topic and forum chats are allowed to be removed as cases demand.  — Ammarpad (talk) 13:10, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you review you can see nothing is off topic as you have explained implicitly in your first reply and please explain which guidelines permit you this sort of behaviour and dodging. Or you are doing in bad faith and against Wikipedia guidelines and policy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikah misyar (talk • contribs) 11:11, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween cheer![edit]

Happy Halloween!

Hello Ammarpad:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – LinguistunEinsuno 18:43, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]



Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Request on 17:36:44, 2 November 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Shekar.76[edit]



Leoboy 17:36, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Ammarpad for guiding me thru the steps. I started off with cutting down everything and keeping it simple to put up the page on wikipedia...later i'll go thru each sections to make my page as an article. I re-edited and submitted the page in sandbox. Plz take some time to review and let me know how to make it live!!

@Shekar.76: Welcome here. I revisted the draft but unfortunately I saw that you've removed all the references!. In my comment and top header comments there is repeated mentions of reliable sources, verifiable and referencing all done to pull your attention to their importance. So please revisit the draft and provide more independent and reliable sources that reported or discussed about the company in detail. You can also read your First Article to get more tips.  — Ammarpad (talk) 08:53, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ammarpad Yes, I was trying to start with simple texts but didn't know how to be started. I just Re-submitted the article with a different approach. Hopefully you'll accept and publish this page. Looking for your helpful suggestion. Shekar.76 —Preceding undated comment added 23:32, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What's not clear about my edit request on Khan Shaykhun?[edit]

I literally wrote change x->y. Jakovjedan (talk) 18:26, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jakovjedan: This edit request that you made on 29 October is empty and it was answered by Cannolis not me. Moreover, now that you have made your 11th edit and have 9 day old account this mean you are automatically confirmed user and you can now edit the page by yourself.  — Ammarpad (talk) 19:08, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

History of Israel[edit]

Hi. Thanks for your edit, but apparently you made a mistake by writting the same text twice. Please remove the second redundant paragraph:

The Hebrew Bible describes constant warfare between the Jews and other tribes, including the Philistines, whose capital was Gaza. The Bible states that King David founded a dynasty of kings and that his son Solomon built a Temple. The archeological evidence for this period is extremely sparse, leading some scholars to suggest that this section of the Hebrew Bible (which includes texts written two centuries later) exaggerates the importance of these kings.[1]

Thanks--Mariolis MG (talk) 08:33, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Here. Thank you.  — Ammarpad (talk) 08:50, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/1.818795, "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Sacred Texts"

Deprodding of Persian Toon[edit]

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Persian Toon, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, proposed deletion is disallowed on articles that have previously been de-prodded, even by the page's creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{proposed deletion}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! —KuyaBriBriTalk 14:57, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2017-45[edit]

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • You will no longer see the patrol log on Special:Log unless you specifically select it. [13]

Changes later this week

  • The 2017 Community Wishlist Survey begins on 6 November. You can post proposals from 19:00 UTC and until November 19.
  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 7 November. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 8 November. It will be on all wikis from 9 November (calendar).

Meetings

Future changes

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:45, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Does username beginning with number effect anything?[edit]

How I sign 4musatov (talk) 06:30, 7 November 2017 (UTC) 4musatov (talk) 06:30, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@4musatov: But you signed this comment too. Just when you are on any talkpage and you made a comment it is expected for you to sign by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the the end. And for the name starting with number, I think if there's any limitation you wouldn't be able to create the account. Anything else?  — Ammarpad (talk) 06:41, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help With my Article to avoid Deletion[edit]

Hello @ Ammarpad, I appreciate your effort and help with my article Signal Alliance. I need your help to avoid deletion on my article though I have included verifiable sources and this article has made an impact in the society which it operates in Nigeria. This article is also good for the Wikipedia community and I will be needing your support to assist to remove the speedy deletion template on the article as I also intend improving the article overtime. Anyway you can help with this and how I can improve more on my other contents on Wikipedia. @ GMGtalk and KGirl (Wanna chat?) your help in this regard will also be appreciated. Thank you all.Shokoyokoto NG (talk) 11:19, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Shokoyokoto NG. I'm not totally sure that User:Xaxing has a terrible lot of experience with the relevant speedy deletion criteria, but a claim to have won an apparently national level industry award should usually suffice to avoid deletion in this circumstance. Additionally, I'm not terribly familiar, but at least the Vanguard source does not obviously appear to be unreliable, at least not at a passing review that I can tell. As such, I have contested the speedy deletion nomination. Xaxing may still nominate the article for a broader community deletion discussion if they wish. GMGtalk 11:51, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for your help. I sincerely appreciate your effort. GMGtalk Shokoyokoto NG (talk) 11:57, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@GreenMeansGo: I also know it definitely can't be deleted under CSD A7, and Xaxing (talk · contribs) hasn't edited for 7 months, just returning from his self-imposed break the first thing he did was erronous CSD tag. I just refrained from contesting it because I accepted it at AFC after I believe it has reasonable reliable sources (Which are major Nigerian papers, and all have Wikipedia articles). Now you another reviewer, contesting it means I am vindicated. Thanks  — Ammarpad (talk) 12:12, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, no hard feelings on anybody. Of all the CSD criteria, A7 is definitely the one with the highest learning curve. GMGtalk 12:28, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AGF please[edit]

As I'm !voting in the AfD I'm not going to address issues in it as an admin, but I am, as an editor, going to inform you that your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shake's Frozen Custard here are an egrerious flouting of WP:AGF. Given that it's based on a mistaken assumption I'd ask that you please reconsider and strike them. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:03, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@The Bushranger, I've struck it as you suggested but I am very sorry to say (again) these links all lead to the same website. I have asked two different people to try each ( [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] ) but they all confirm that they lead to the same website. They are not different websites, and this is clearly what I argued there there.  — Ammarpad (talk) 08:17, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Narragansett Council[edit]

Hello,

You have previously deleted my attempts to revise the Narragansett Council page. The edit I planned on changing was announced by the council on the council's Facebook page. As a former employee of the council and Rhode Island native, I can attest to the authenticity of the announcement and ask that you stop removing the content — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huskies.irish (talk • contribs) 05:39, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First let me remind you that Facebook is is not a reliable sources. There are warning dating back to 2016 on your talkpage about inserting unreferenced material but you care not till today. Whether you're Chief Executive of the council ( not talk of former employee) you must provide a source and reliable one for that matter. If you can attest to the validity of the content, I and other editors cannot, the only way we can is by you providing source to support your claim. You cannot add unsourced content solely because you believe it is true. I hope you can make yourself conversant with Wikipedia policies especially verifiability and reliable sources, before you attempt to reinsert the unsourced content  — Ammarpad (talk) 05:58, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs review by second editor[edit]

Please forgive-- I'm fairly overwhelmed by all the articles on submitting articles to Wikipedia! I inquired in October (and you were kind to answer) about a couple of articles I've been working on. I understand from you that I can publish directly without awaiting reviews. I'll go that route in the future. In the meantime, I have one article (Alice Wynekoop) that is still in the "draft" category needing review by a second editor. Is there anything I can do to facilitate that? Is there a reason it needs a review instead of going directly to live? I've also been extensively editing (adding information to) an existing article (Dwight Correctional Center), and it didn't need any kind of formal approval. I don't want to do anything that is out of process. I have another article on the murder trial of Alice Wynekoop that I submitted via articles for creation. I know that someone will eventually review that, so that article is not of concern to me at this time. I hope one day to catch on to the technicalities of contributing. I enjoy researching and writing..... Revalicejane (talk) 13:48, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome again @Revalicejane: and thank you for your contributions. You'll soon become ExtendedConfirmed User and have already created valid article Edgar Haynes which was reviewed and accepted at AFC. This is a great work. Next time when you plan to create new article just type the title in search bar when it returns redlink, just click on it and type all your new article. Once you click save it will go live. So you're encouraged to use preview button so as to see what it will looks like beforehand. For your article that's still in the draft you can now move it to the mainspace by following this simple procedure: Just at the top of the page, inside the draft, look at left side of the search bar there's "More" menu. Click on it and click "move" and fill the "reason" section. You'll also see dropdown menu at the top-left side. Make sure you select "(Article) " there that's the space for Wikipedia articles and finally hit "Move page". That's all.
To answer your question on rationale for review of articles before they go live, I will say; the main reasons –among others— are to help new editors and to keep off nonsense and terrible articles like this one, this one, this one and this one away from Wikipedia general readers. I am sure you'll not like these poor articles to be directly visible for every Wikipedia reader.
For the article Dwight Correctional Center which you've expanded, it is already in the mainspace live, it didn't need any approval or review now. Just keep updating it. I don't want inundate you with information to avoid confusion, but on final note I suggest you get some time and read about Wikipedia Namespace Structure. But if you feel confused by this answer, just continue your editing and creation of important articles slowly (but surely) you'll one day understand. If you've any more question don't hesitate to ask.  — Ammarpad (talk) 14:57, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you![edit]

To- Ammarpad

I have mentioned what is required to edit in Air India fleet. If anything wrong, please tell me.

Boeing 787-8: In-service=27 | Orders=0 | Note= Delivered on 11th October

Total In-service=115 | Orders= 7

http://aviationweek.com/awincommercial/air-india-takes-delivery-last-boeing-787-800-aircraft

http://indianexpress.com/article/business/aviation/air-india-takes-delivery-of-its-last-boeing-787-8-dreamliner-4885321/ 

                      -Arnabsaha2212 Saha 13:19, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

axiology revert[edit]

@Ammarpad I'm new to wikipedia so maybe I went through the wrong process in editing the axiology page. I posted a talk section pointing out the issue with that particular subsection (communication studies) to explain why I removed it. Should I have posted in another forum first? Haydencb93 (talk) 03:44, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Haydencb93:You're welcome. Talkpages are meant for discussing by many editors how to improve the associated page. So when you post a question on talkpage you should normally wait for some days so as to let other editors discuss what you posted. But you can't start discussion on talkpage and then directly go ahead to implement the changes once they're not minor edits. But Wikipedia do encourage editors to be bold most of the time; that's to implement big changes, but with condition, once you're reverted that is challenged by another editor, so you must wait for consensus to determine what next should be done. It seems that you are still not welcomed, I will post welcome message to your talkpage now which contains important resources to help you in understanding the place better. Thanks  — Ammarpad (talk) 04:12, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dfgvbhjk[edit]

All these accounts are socks of Nsmutte and I've already opened an SPI on that account. An SPI clerk should merge your page shortly, per my request there. Thanks. Home Lander (talk) 04:04, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Home Lander: No problem. Thanks too.  — Ammarpad (talk) 04:15, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2017-46[edit]

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Changes later this week

  • The diff you see when you compare two different versions of a page has changed on MediaWiki.org and the test wiki. This is to make it easier to find a text change in a moved paragraph. It will hopefully soon come to more wikis. You can report bugs in Phabricator. [22]
  • A new user group on Commons will be able to upload MP3 files. The plan is to have this user group from 17 November. [23]
  • Wikis using Flagged Revisions will get the New filters for Edit Review by default on the recent changes pages. It will be possible to opt-out in user preferences. [24]
  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 14 November. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 15 November. It will be on all wikis from 16 November (calendar).

Meetings

Future changes

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

19:19, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

not disruptive -- accurate[edit]

I'm sorry you think my changes are disruptive, but while they didn't follow correct guidelines, they are accurate, as I have consulted the person in questions, Prof. Stronach, about the original post's accuracy. While I am new to the Wikipedia process, I know the difference between fact and fiction, and the original post -- which had no citation either -- contained information that was simply incorrect. Joshstrohbaum (talk) 22:52, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits[edit]

There are 500 000 templates using Infobox settlement. Why do you think it is clever for entities called "state" to have a redirect? The type is specified by the field "type=". There are thousands of districts, provinces, counties, departments, divisions, even states, that use the direct call, so that each editor immediately knows which template is called. 77.179.208.224 (talk) 07:37, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

17:10:14, 14 November 2017 review of submission by Smores31[edit]


Hi Ammarpad,

It looks like my page was rejected again, so I was wondering what I would need to do to improve it. The Providence Singers are a choral group that has been around for awhile, but there aren't a lot of third-party sources other than announcements of concerts and the occasional review of a concert in publications like the Providence Journal, which is the paper of record for Rhode Island. Sometimes, looking back at older issues of the Providence Journal, I'll find an article about a new musical director, so I could certainly use those as references if you think that it would improve the article. My hope for the article was to have a place where some of the basic information about the changes in musical leadership, the works that have been commissioned by the chorus, and the music CDs that were created by the chorus are available. I didn't copy the information word for word from their about page and I quoted anything that was a direct copy from the site, but I removed the mission statement which I had quoted and cited from their web page and I set up the Musical Leadership portion of the article in more of a timeline fashion so that it would be in my own words and simplified. Will that make the article acceptable, or is there more that needs to be done?

Thank you, Smores31 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smores31 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome @Smores31:. Although you'll not be required to provide tens of third party sources, but they're very essential and and availability of them help to establish notability for a subject which is very crucial stage in getting article published in Wikipedia. Also the main issue as I wrote to you is that almost half of the page (precisely 44%) matched word to word to what was already published on http://www.providencesingers.org/About06/ The threshold of the matching is high that it cannot be coincidence. But you are lucky it is not high enough to be regarded as copyright violation entirely, because if it were, it would've been deleted since. My suggestion is that try and improve the article by paraphrasing in your own words and strive to find any Independent reliable source that reported about the subject, the source may not be necessarily on internet it may be print news or magazine, once you're sure it is verifiable. 13:01, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Metric[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Metric. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PS[edit]

PS: Are you sure drink had Sea urchin ? Unbelievable!--O1lI0 (talk) 11:12, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re[edit]

Unreferenced.If you can guarantee that this list will not show Indonesian scientists or Brazilian scientists, I have no objection to your restoration.--O1lI0 (talk) 10:58, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't think you answered my question and whether you object or not it has already been restored. My question still is; please why did you blanked an entire page?  — Ammarpad (talk) 12:20, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If anyone add Tiger in that list without source,can you know right or wrong?I do not want to assume that all of them are correct,and the number is too much so validation is troublesome.Just like Sea urchin.--O1lI0 (talk) 13:46, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Who added "tiger" in the list? And is blanking a page solution even if, for instance somebody added that??  — Ammarpad (talk) 18:32, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Finally, I just want to say that it is difficult to verify without reference. I think blanking is better way as long as there is a possibility of error when it is difficult to verify.--O1lI0 (talk) 22:28, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

Ammarpad, thank you so much for having sympathy about my article not being posted. Do you have any articles posted? If so, what are they? Thanks again, Louisanorris25 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Louisanorris25 (talk • contribs) 22:10, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, Louisanorris25. If I get you right, you mean articles I created myself? Well, I work more in expanding existing ones but nonetheless I created few myself like BBC Hausa, Jamila Tangaza and Shitta-Bey Mosque. Thanks  — Ammarpad (talk) 23:46, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft of my new article "Jens Björn- Larsen"[edit]

Hi! I'm new here! You changed the status of my new article on tubist JBL, obviously for a good reason, but I don't understand what it was! Please tell me what to do to get the article published! Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicholas Eastop - Scenkonstmuseet (talk • contribs) 09:59, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that was done as to save it from deletion because it is completely unsourced and poorly written. Moving it to draft now gives you more time and ease to add sources, content and organize it to have shape  — Ammarpad (talk) 18:11, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother you[edit]

Is it okay to move like this?

DragonflySixtyseven moved page Draft:John Deng Zhonghan to Draft:Deng Zhonghan without leaving a redirect: we only need one of these

Thank you! Cool-ying (talk) 20:27, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes , administrators and page movers can move page and delete the resulting redirect simultaneously. But I don't actually know what he meant by saying "we only need one of these". You can ask him on his talkpage.  — Ammarpad (talk) 12:42, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ammarpad, the "redirect" (which is now no longer a redirect) was created first, and DF moved a completely different page. Thus, we have two drafts. They're different enough to be considered separately, but ideally only one version should be worked on. Primefac (talk) 12:46, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Primefac. So @Cool-ying: I hope you understand now.  — Ammarpad (talk) 12:55, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Essay-like articles[edit]

Trying to avoid the creation of essay-like content was one of the main reasons why I created this. My next goal is to use this "what" to create a "how-to", so if you see any flaws in my logic, please let me know. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:55, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ian (Wiki Ed): Thank you for reaching out to me. I think you're referring to my comment in in this discussion. Well, I didn't by any means intend to belittle the efforts of WikiEd project, because I know how demanding dealing with newebies is and intriguing aspects of creating content on Wikipedia. But my comment is only informed by informal analysis like I said there. Let me go into some details here; we all know, one of the big discouraging factors for newbie creation output is when a newbies realize shortly that their articles are deleted, they will not/may not understand any rationale given or deletion notices all they'll see is their beautiful contents are deleted for no reason. So beside the normal newbie who would just jump into creating article (pre- ACTRIAL) that will be likely deleted within few hours there should be some sort of difference to those who participate in WikiEd program. Though, I acknowledge there's, but is below expectation. (Much like we expect difference between article submitted in AFC by non autoconfirmed user and 5-day autoconfirmed newbie who published directly (although the difference in them is negligible too). So after I started seeing those who participated in WikiEd are publishing article to mainspace together with the template, I started removing the templates and few small fixes then I reliaze some pages are deleted sooner than I can thought of. Because most are well referenced (at face value, since I can't confirm offline sources, and some don't even have) but the flow of essay-style narrative soon becomes clear to me. And the chosen topic sometimes do overlap. For instance a WikiEd student created article "(Escape response) while it already exists in mainspace. Initially he wrote it in subpage without these brackets but when he understood moving it to Escape response name is not possible so he just bracketed and moved it. You see the name is clearly unconventional and had it been tagged for deletion as duplicate of Escape response it may have been deleted. But on seeing some salvageable content I merged them and notified the editor to continue editing it at Escape response and he did so. So if it were deleted his experience would surely have been different. I followed most of the WikiEd series of "Digital divide in......" and later understand many were deleted while some are draftified. Most of move actions by WikiEd students who have few edits can be tracked in RC by filtering de-userfying tag, that's where I counted more than ten deletion/draftifing within 72 hours and all from WikiEd. And note many are not captured there, because even some of the articles listed at this discussion where I raised the issue is not captured. In conclusion of this long comment I hope you'll understand the spirit of my comment: It is simple; Deleting articles of newbies is discouraging content creation and may drive away people (and since deleting articles short of minimum standards in mainspace is necessary) then the way to reduce this to check it from the content creation stage. (And I understand that's what you're doing now, and is commendable).  — Ammarpad (talk) 08:53, 18 November 2017 (UTC

Rajpal Yadav Sanskrit serial[edit]

You undid an addition to Rajpal Yadav saying the below paragraph is more appropriate. Can you please elaborate? उज्ज्वलराजपूत (talk) 04:08, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because a YouTube link with unsubstantiated claim shouldn't be introduced within well-written and sourced paragraph.  — Ammarpad (talk) 08:07, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

page : DEST (English) - Diploma of Technical Studies France[edit]

Hi Ammarpad, you recently declined the DEST article, and say that "was also delivered by other universities according to the french site." witch is absolutely wrong because this diploma was only delivered by the CNAM since 1957 and should stop at the end of 2017, the Wikipedia french page only add the information that some establishments (and not universities) has delivered some DEST during 2008, but now since 2009 the diploma is not delivered anymore. For the record, in France CNAM has his establishments, and they are not linked to any kind of Universities. Regards, WikiXP — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiXP (talk • contribs) 20:47, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @WikiXP: I don't know where I declined it while it has never been an AFC draft, can you provide link or explain more? The article was created by you directly on mainspace on August 17, and it has been there since. I later added {{expand language}} tag since the French version is more developed; are talking about that?  — Ammarpad (talk) 18:02, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Message[edit]

Got your message. I'm not collaborating with anyone, I'm independent of any other user. --American Canadian Expat In London 10404 (talk) 12:30, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, SPI case Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Designaccountforher has already been opened, you can explain more there.  — Ammarpad (talk) 13:09, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

TiE - PROD[edit]

Hello Ammarpad, just a quick notice that I have removed the PROD nomination for this article. I fully agree, that this article has a lot problems and abysmal sourcing. However, the article talkpage mentions a long list of search results, some of them may be usable. Unfortunately I don't have the time or ressources for an in-depth check of these books and scholarly mentions, but a PROD deletion doesn't seem appropriate in this case. Please see the article's talkpage for more information. Best regards. GermanJoe (talk) 14:25, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tourmaline edits[edit]

Hello.

As an infrequent editor of wikipedia who has intention of learning how to edit competently, I tried to insert well-known information. The paragraph on tourmaline is standard in the curriculum of Ayurvedic physicians, in which I did my PhD, and the info on tourmaline appears in at least 6 textbooks of rasa shastra. I need to figure out how to enter references and the superscripts. All these are found online.

References. 1. The most ancient texted, dated to the 8th century is Rasa Ratna Samucchaya. Shastri A. Rasaratnasamuchchya of Vagbghata. 9e, Varanasi: Choukhamba Sanskrita Publication; 1995.

Dole VA, editor. English Translation of Rasaratnasamuchchya of Vagbghata. 2e, Varanasi: Chowkhamba Sanskrita Series Office; 2008.

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

2. It is part of the Government of India's catalogue of minerals used in Ayurveda. The Ayurvedic Formulatory of India. 1st ed., Vol. VII., Part I. New Delhi: Dept. of AYUSH Govt. of India; 2008. p. 8-9.

3. It is part of a textbook of modern chemistry interpretation of Ayurveda. Rasatarangini: Sadananda Sarma Moti Lal Banararsi Das, New Delhi 6th Ed., Samvata,2016

4. Scientific research Sharma VN1, Singh RS, Ulabhaje AV, Sen SP. Studies on identification of 'vaikranta' used in ayurveda". Anc Sci Life. 1982 Jan;1(3):146-54.

Please help me get these references in, if it is easy for you.

Thanks!!

Dr. Bhaswati Bhattacharya Clin Asst Prof, Dept of Medicine Weill-Cornell Medical College and PhD candidate, Dept of Rasa Shastra Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi Drbb (talk) 15:19, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome @Drbb:. I have readded the content together with the reference. You can take look at the page again Tourmaline. And thankbfor understanding why your first addition was rejected. Asa scholar and medic yourself I am sure you are well aware of indispensability and importance of "citing sources" to support content we add to any real academic work. That is why Verifiability of information ks among the core pillars of Wikipedia. Then, on referencing and these superscripts you see; there are many help pages that can show you how to cite sources like this and this. The work from your part is not much as most is automatically generated. I hope you'll learn that and continue contributing no matter how infrequent. Finally, don't hesitate to ask questions on anything you find confusing here. Thanks  — Ammarpad (talk) 17:43, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Collective investment trust article[edit]

I got a note that my submission was rejected because there is already an article on this topic. That is not the case. I plugged in "Collective Investment Trust," "Collective Investment Fund," and "Collective Trust Fund"--the three possible terms used in the industry for these vehicles--and there are no Wikipedia articles under any of these terms. I also cruise the web regularly for information on collective investment trusts since i work heavily in this area, and am sure that Wikipedia has nothing on these investment vehicles (although there are articles on other types of competing funds, such as mutual funds, which are quite different). That is one of the reasons I drafted the article on collective investment trusts--to start filling the knowledge gap. I plan to expand the article incrementally over time.

Feel free to ask any questions.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glins1 (talk • contribs) 16:37, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2017-47[edit]

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • If you use the Chrome web browser on Android you can see a download icon on the mobile website. You can download a formatted PDF. It will work in other mobile browsers in the future. [26]
  • The abuse filter now has a function called get_matches. You can use it to store matches from regular expressions – one of each capturing group. You can read more in Phabricator.

Problems

  • Last week's MediaWiki version didn't come to all Wikipedias because of a database crash. It will be on all wikis on 20 November. [27][28][29]

Changes later this week

  • There is no new MediaWiki version this week.

Meetings

  • You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 21 November at 19:30 (UTC). See how to join.
  • You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 22 November at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • Language converter syntax will no longer work inside external links. Wikitext like http://-{zh-cn:foo.com; zh-hk:bar.com; zh-tw:baz.com}- must be replaced. You will have to write -{zh-cn: http://foo.com ; zh-hk: http://bar.com ; zh-tw:http://baz.com }- instead. This only affects languages with Language Converter enabled. Examples of such languages are Chinese and Serbian. This will happen next week. [30][31]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

19:19, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Request on 04:06:23, 21 November 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Toyiab77[edit]


Hi Ammarpad,

Thanks for your review. I want to wrap this up and I had a few inquiries: When you reference the content reads like an essay versus an encyclopedia, can you provide me examples of the difference? If you have examples of living bios that are acceptable by wiki standards this will be sufficient.

When you reference to site independent resources are you able to confirm how many independent resources are required? In addition, what qualifies as an independent resource? Can you provide examples?

All of the photos in which I had placed on this wikipage have been removed due to copyright issues? All the photos were pictures of Mamadou and the photos were distributed to his attention with no copyright infringement notice. Can you explain why personal photos of himself with dignitaries, at work and with school representatives, that all included Mamadou are noted as unacceptable? How do I make these photos acceptable? Also, can I create a personal gallery to store all his files and photos? If so, how do I accomplish this?

Thanks in advance for your guidance.

Toyiab77 (talk) 04:06, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Toyiab77: You can take look at Abdou Diouf page who is another Senegalese politician. Also I have already suggested to you what you should've done. Overt promotional sections like "Political Vision, Mission and Ideology" where you explained his vision, mission and what have you is totally incompatible with the mission of Wikipedia itself. Second; "independent source" means any source that is not directly or indirectly associated with the article subject; you can find detailed explanation and examples in this essay. Third; Wikipedia has very strict criteria on images upload and use. Majority of photos (almost 90%) that you see on the internet are not free and cannot be unloaded to Wikpedia. The images you uploaded were either deleted because you just saw them on his website or Facebook, or you failed to show you are the true copyright owner of the work. If you want upload these photos again; there's simple procedure. Read "Image use policy" thoroughly and make sure you understand it well. Then you can always come and (upload your image here). This process will make your upload easier and assisted by people experienced in files and its related licensing and copyright issues. Thanks.  — Ammarpad (talk) 04:38, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some baklava for you![edit]

Some baklava for you! Cool-ying (talk) 08:59, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Tumi Masemola for deletion[edit]

Hi there,

I have noticed that the above-mentioned page is up for deletion, however it does not explain or express details on why it is up for deletion and or how this page can be edited to be notable. If it is content related, all the info was provided by the client herself and its a bit hard to cite information that she provided herself. So how do I make it work as she really wants the Wikipedia page up? Big Bite (talk) 09:00, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So you're even paid by "client" to write the article? And the client "really needs the article"?! That's why you're adamant to move it to Article space?. You bypassed AFC review here and after I saw it very poorly written and unsourced I moved it back to draft for you to work on and save it from deletion but because it is a client work you reverted it back to main space whilst it is still unsourced and badly written. So first you should know if something is not notable; no amount of editing that can make it notable. Notability cannot be created. And, the most important thing ahead of you now is to read Wikipedia policy on paid editing and guideline on COI editing. After that follow the procedure of disclosure and made the necessary disclosure on your userpage.  — Ammarpad (talk) 09:26, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewing[edit]

Hello, Ammarpad.

I've seen you editing recently and you seem knowledgeable about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 17:56, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Botched move of Luang Pradit Pairoh[edit]

Hi. It appears that you made a mistake when attempting to move User:APgangsater/sandbox to Draft:Luang Pradit Pairoh, and instead moved it to User:Luang Pradit Pairoh. You then CSDed the erroneous user page, and copied-and-pasted its contents to Draft:Luang Pradit Pairoh. This should not have been done, as it breaks the page history. As a result, the page now shows you as the creator of the article. I've asked the deleting admin to sort it out, but please be careful in the future. For more details, see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Fixing cut-and-paste moves. --Paul_012 (talk) 02:39, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The same goes for Tumi Masemola. You might want to look at your contributions for other similar cases and use the {{Histmerge}} template to request a fix. --Paul_012 (talk) 03:14, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you contest dratfication of particular stub, it doesn't mean you forage into the contribs of the draftifier to find any inane mistake so as to give warning, and at the end, ended up with stale  Resolved mistakes. I am old enough to know {{histmerge}} which I have used many times before to resolved both my mistakes and mistakes of others e.g. I CSD'ed User:Luang Pradit Pairoh because it has one edit and it must be deleted at the end while the previous draft has it's history intact; read about this.  — Ammarpad (talk) 19:38, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you probably made a mistake, because before the histmerge was done, User:Luang Pradit Pairoh did not have one edit, but contained the entire history of the draft, which was left incorrectly showing you as the original contributor, as I explained above. Sorry if the message appeared patronising. I didn't know if you were aware of the issue, so I just pointed it out. For the record, I came across this independently of Wat Sai Yai. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:20, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re: How the chicken got its name[edit]

Hi, this is my first time, I just signed up. If you would please read it, and let me know what I need to do.

The thing is, I have no sources, but if you read it, you will understand.

If you have ever watched a chicken in action, you would agree.

Doctor Nocturnal (talk) 22:41, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Doctor Nocturnal: Please can you explain more on what you actually mean? I don't understand what you're saying.  — Ammarpad (talk) 23:01, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Atiku Refrence[edit]

Hello, I'd like to point out that the profile of Atiku that I updated was properly done to the best of my knowledge, could you please point out were I erred? Please see the source here https://www.naijanews.com/news/32931-breaking-atiku-dumps-apc-pdp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Opeedo (talk • contribs) 11:07, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is the blog source naijanews.com that's completely unreliable on itself. That kind of exceptional claim can only be inserted if supported by 2 or 3 established Nigerian papers that have editorial board and corporate headquarters like Daily Trust and Thisday or their peers; but not that blog. In fact the spam article of the link Naija News which you created barely 4 days ago, will soon be deleted.  — Ammarpad (talk) 11:16, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah AlSalim[edit]

Hi, could you please explain what you think is the claim to notability in this article? Founding a blog as a programmer and having 250 customers? I'm seriously confused by your edit summary. Thanks, Melcous (talk) 11:09, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for asking @Melcous:. I am in full support of its deletion and will !vote delete in the AfD shortly after this. However I removed the #A7 because it cannot be deleted that way but not with any intention as I see both of you mentioning me that I removed CSD tag. I also didn't nominate it for AfD because I have nominated 3 already today and l know they– Lourdes –will surely do that. But I have 2 things; first please reread WP:CSD#A7 perhaps you've not for a while. Then read this essay. Second let me ping @Primefac: and @GreenMeansGo: for them to please opined whether A7 can be applied in that case, also by persons who just wrote this asked this. However, I am wrong at the end I will surely apologizing for causing you stress of punching more keys to make a point at AfD. Thanks  — Ammarpad (talk) 11:40, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... There's actually a pretty good case here for A7/G11. It's kindof just a resume, and not a very impressive one at that. GMGtalk 16:20, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks GMG, it is nonetheless already at AfD. 16:44, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
Meh. I probably would have A7'd that myself, but being a co-founder of something and getting 250 customers as a small business is reasonable (ish). I'd say that since it's a clear "delete" at AFD I think we can just go along our merry ways. CSD isn't an exact science. Primefac (talk) 23:03, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Ammarpad[edit]

Are you from northern Nigeria? Clayalc (talk) 19:16, 24 November 2017 (UTC)clayalc Clayalc (talk) 19:16, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you do that?[edit]

You did an edit in List of Game of the Year awards that he did not need, he had not done anything wrong, admittedly accepted later, but it was unnecessary to have deleted, it was correct information https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Game_of_the_Year_awards&diff=811814138&oldid=811813654 Respawner267 (talk) 22:32, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

Hi

hopw you fine. am traying to make a article for my friend who acting in Indian film and Nigerian files. i started the article and its deleted. can you help me to make the article

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Samuel_Abiola_Robinson

https://metromatinee.com/soubin-shahir-play-hero-sudani-nigeria/ http://movies.indialivetoday.com/2017/11/03/parava-director-soubin-shahir-sudani-nigeria/ (INDIAN LEADING NEWS PORTEL) http://www.newindianexpress.com/entertainment/malayalam/2017/nov/04/soubin-shahir-to-play-the-lead-in-sudani-from-nigeria-1691437.html (INDIAN LEADING NEWS PAPER) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nabeelkallayil (talk • contribs) 03:08, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you know this article has already been deleted twice here and here, both via AfD, a process of deleting articles considered unworthy of inclusion. So first I'll advise to read about conflict of interest editing since you admit you're writing about your actor-friend. Second; read the guidelines on notability of actors and general basic notability. If you still believe he fulfilled these conditions, then start start writing the article afresh here in Draftspace. Read this help page for writing article too. When you're done, it will be reviewed, if accepted it will be moved to main article space, this is the only easiest way of recreating this article now. Thanks. –Ammarpad (talk) 03:29, 25 November 2017 (UTC)][reply]

Minecraft: The Movie/refimprove template[edit]

Your edit was fine; I was attempting to revert to an earlier version altogether, and accidentally reverted only your edit. Sorry about that! Trivialist (talk) 04:43, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, no problem –Ammarpad (talk) 05:14, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sanskrut[edit]

Why my edits are "automatically"- not manually- reverted on page, that is supposed to provide information on Sanskrut language. On that note, who spelled S-A-N-S-K-R-I-T? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamalyesh (talk • contribs) 07:21, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So you don't see your disruptive edit and series of revert, what bothers you is why you edit is automatically reverted and not manually??! –Ammarpad (talk) 07:38, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sanskrut[edit]

How my edits are "Disruptive" and "Unconstructive"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamalyesh (talk • contribs) 07:27, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Puvi (actor)[edit]

Hi I'm create a article for actor puvi Burnt it doesn't come to public space How am I do for public space? Give some ideas and help me to solve my problem — Preceding unsigned comment added by SSangeertha (talk • contribs) 17:45, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SSangeertha, new articles are not immediately searchable via Google or other search engines. This is to ensure that the article meets our quality and notability standards. A member of the New Page Patrol will review your page in due time, after which it will be indexed. Please be patient. Primefac (talk) 17:48, 25 November 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]
Thanks Primefac –Ammarpad (talk) 18:13, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank for your information. But I have a doubt My article confirm accept by Wikipedia viewers After my article goes to public space How am I sure that after few days it comes public space? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SSangeertha (talk • contribs) 18:07, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Look, your article is currently tagged {{BLP sources}} meaning it urgently needs more reliable sources for verification. I am advising you to focus on trying to find more sources and add, when it is time to be reviewed it will be, no need to panic. –Ammarpad (talk) 18:18, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red World Contest[edit]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Read below thread please[edit]

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-business/india-to-help-mauritius-on-digital-locker/article20744252.ece Veeraswamy A (talk) 05:32, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Veeraswamy A: That's good, but this not the place to put the source. Go back to the article and insert it together with the content. You can use this basic method of ref like this <ref>put your source here</ref> and also it is good to read referencing for beginners so as to learn more ways of citing sources. –Ammarpad (talk) 06:10, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Eager[edit]

Hello, I just corrected a information on Ben Eager [32] he's 6'2" just like the sources told it [33][34] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.20.64.94 (talk) 14:56, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actor's name.[edit]

Sorry but it's true: see [35] and [36]. These are links I didn't post onto the page. 100.37.125.19 (talk) 05:49, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2017-48[edit]

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

Changes later this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 28 November. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 29 November. It will be on all wikis from 30 November (calendar).

Meetings

  • You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 28 November at 19:30 (UTC). See how to join.
  • You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 29 November at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

20:30, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

In my draft the word of kra pao moo/gai[edit]

I has explain the word of moo and gai in my article already, gai and moo is thai word, its mean chicken and pork — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garfilld1 (talk • contribs) 13:36, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kosmos Energy[edit]

Hi Ammarpad, thanks so much for your review of my request at Kosmos Energy a little while back. I'm wondering if you'd be open to revisiting it as I had a couple of tweaks / additions to suggest based on some more coverage. The request is here, if you have a few minutes to take a look? Thanks in advance. 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 15:03, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seaman 2[edit]

Thanks for you thanked my seaman edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Borjitasstoi (talk • contribs) 21:00, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Special Barnstar
Thanks for all Borjitasstoi (talk) 21:02, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Atkinson edits[edit]

Hi Ammarpad - just wondering where I've gone wrong in editing the page of Michael Atkinson - you've removed an updated edit to current events; but I've provided a number of sources, and think that a position of neutrality has been maintained. (forgive me as I'm new to all this ! ) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Atkinson Stavros Gamer (talk) 04:05, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Stavros Gamer: the reason is that "adding controversy section to BLP" is not as easy as other edits like correcting typo or expanding existing paragraph with sourced content. In this edit –which is also your first edit– you introduced something which is controversial fact. So I am not against complete removal or outright insertion and I agree you've sources, but the more appropriate thing to do is post at its talkpage and get some views from other editors and those who routinely edit the page especially since you've just started editing. –Ammarpad (talk) 05:03, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for the advise Ammarpad - I'll do just that. Stavros Gamer (talk) 00:24, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted changes to coal[edit]

Hi Ammarpad, You reverted my changes to coal, updating the data to more recent information - why? Thanks! Prymal (talk) 05:44, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How to delete one account[edit]

hi i have 2 accounts can i delete it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SSangeertha (talk • contribs) 07:43, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot delete an account, but your problem has already been solved here at Administrators' Noticeboard. –Ammarpad (talk) 13:37, 29 November 2017 (UTC)== Tech News: 2017-42 ==[reply]

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • When you edit a template with the visual editor it follows the template's format configuration on how to save it. You can now change the format in more powerful ways if your wiki wants it. [40][41]
  • The TwoColConflict extension is a new way to solve edit conflicts. It makes it easier to copy and paste the relevant text to the text field. It has been a beta feature for the last five months. You can now try out the new interface on a page where you will actually get simulated edit conflicts. You can give feedback to the developers.

Problems

  • There is a problem with recent changes pages and your watchlist that show a large number of pages. Until it is fixed, Wikidata edits will not be shown on recent changes or in your watchlist on Commons or Russian Wikipedia. If necessary, Wikidata edits will be removed from all wikis. [42]
  • Notifications are not working for some actions. For example some users don't get a notification when they are mentioned. The developers are working on fixing this. [43]
  • Users on some wikis could not change their preferences. This has now been fixed. [44]

Changes later this week

  • Editors and readers who still use Internet Explorer 8 on Windows XP will not be able to use Wikipedia from 17 October. Internet Explorer 8 on Windows XP can't connect securely to the wikis. When we allow them to do so it means that we get less security for everyone else. If you use Internet Explorer 8 on Windows XP you can install Firefox 52 ESR instead. Around 0.1% of the traffic to the Wikimedia wikis comes from Internet Explorer 8 on Windows XP. [45]
  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 17 October. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 18 October. It will be on all wikis from 19 October (calendar).

Meetings

  • You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 17 October at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
  • You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 18 October at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

15:31, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ammarpad/Archive_2&oldid=1028311871"