User talk:DoubleGrazing/Archive 1

References

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Remember that when adding content about health, please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations (There are several kinds of sources that discuss health: here is how the community classifies them and uses them). WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a built-in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:34, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Avoid sea of blue

Project opera does it like this: when an opera has a link, no need for one for the composer. A reader who really doesn't know who Beethoven is can be sure to find it in the opera article. Similar, a university and the town it's in. Please help to avoid a sea of blue. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:00, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks... I think. I'm not sure who or what 'project opera' is, and how come they 'do it like this', but if they have editorial etc. policies others need to be aware of, perhaps they need to communicate them better. On a purely personal note, I also don't quite see what harm wikilinks do, I would have thought they improve ease of use. But that being said, I've no need to enter into edit wars, either. DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:45, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject Food and drink

Hello, DoubleGrazing. You are invited to join WikiProject Food and drink, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of food, drink and cuisine topics. Please check out the project, and if interested feel free to join by adding your name to the member list. You can also sign up to receive project newsletters and notifications at the notifications list, even if you choose not to join. North America1000 07:52, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Pickled herring

Regarding diff 844103166, "sild i lage" is Danish/Norwegian/Icelandic. For Swedish, it would be "inlagd sill". 212.3.4.130 (talk) 12:49, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Danish, yes. Not sure about Norwegian (I think it's lake, not lage?). But Icelandic, I doubt it. Anyway, happy to leave this to those who know such matters better than me. I was mainly correcting the earlier language reference which was 'Nordic' - no such language AFAIK. DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:57, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Plumped plumpers

I appreciate the help on ]the plumping page as I don't know enough to be helpful. Thank you. Davidlwinkler (talk) 22:12, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Alleged results

The information was taken from these news portals:

https://www.sozcu.com.tr/2018/gundem/milliyet-de-secimin-sonucunu-3-gun-onceden-acikladi-sonra-ozur-diledi-2479440/

http://www.yenicaggazetesi.com.tr/4-gun-onceden-secim-sonuclarini-aciklayan-milliyet-ozur-diledi-196142h.htm

https://odatv.com/secim-sonuclarini-onceden-yayinlayan-milliyet-ozur-diledi-22061857.html

Bibilili (talk) 13:56, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

@Bibilili: That's great, please add those citations into the section, if you haven't done so already. I'm not familiar with any of the titles so can't comment on whether they can be regarded as reliable sources, but no doubt someone will be along soon enough who can help make that judgment. Thanks, DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:05, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Inappropriate

This posting is not OK. 3O is for content disputes. When you write Dispute over the neutrality of the editor who created the article you are making it a behavior issue. What I have said is that the content I removed is promotional. It would be appropriate to ask something like - "we are having a dispute over whether the content removed in this diff series is promotional or not."

I further note that you have not even addressed that content on the talk page, so the 3O is premature in any case. Jytdog (talk) 22:49, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jytdog: Fine, I may have got the exact procedure wrong, but I stand by my point - I'm not an 'advocate' or 'fan', and I resent your unfounded accusations against my character (calling me a spammer and what-not) without any evidence whatsoever other than your say-so. I think the onus is on you to make your case and show some proof, rather than just pointing out that I may have used the 3O procedure 'inappropriately' as you put it. DoubleGrazing (talk) 23:04, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Your editing is that of a fan or someone with a COI. What you should be concerned about are your edits. Everybody comes to WP with some perspective; the goal is to put that aside when you edit. That is what WP:ADVOCACY and well as WP:YESPOV teach. If you use high quality, independent, secondary sources and summarize them neutrally, you will have fewer problems. Jytdog (talk) 00:20, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

User:DoubleGrazing - Just the facts as seen by reliable sources. However. did you question the neutrality of User:Jytdog when you and they were editing the same contentious page? You can learn from Jytdog. They know more about neutrality than you. If you don't have an affiliation with Olio, you don't need to write as if you do. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:01, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Do you have a connection with Olio? Sometimes I run across text that just can't be neutral. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:01, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Hi and apologies for the late reply, I've been otherwise occupied. In answer to your question — no, emphatically, I've absolutely no connection whatsoever with the company or the app — don't know any of the people involved, don't work for them or on behalf of them, haven't ever even used the app, or even know anyone who comes under any of those descriptions. I simply saw a short video 'article' on BBC News recently, and that was the first I'd heard of them. I thought the app sounded like an interesting solution to a pressing (IMO) problem, so I came on Wikipedia to read more. Turned out, an article had been created (possibly by someone with a more direct interest in the matter) and subsequently promptly deleted a year or two ago, therefore I thought (having first flagged this up with the admin who deleted the earlier article) I'd create a new one on the basis that a) I've no such affiliation with the company in question, and b) the app now seems to be better established and hence arguably that much more noteworthy. Trust me when I say this: I wholeheartedly regret having done that, given the ensuing hullabaloo, and especially the adversarial nature of it (talk about encouraging editors to contribute!), but now I've dug in my heels and feel like I must stand my corner. Alas, it is infinitely easier for someone to make throwaway accusations than for me to prove my innocence (how exactly do I do that — swear in front of a judge with my hand on the bible, followed by a forensic audit into my financial etc. affairs?), so I fear this will only ever end badly for me. And as for any "text that just can't be neutral", as you put it, I never said the text was perfect, I'm sure it could be improved in countless ways, but any bias you're detecting is entirely unintentional and down to my shortcomings as a writer. Please do not hesitate to make any and all edits you wish, I've no issue with that; I'd much rather others improved the article in a sensible way, as per the usual practice, rather than just deleting entire sections (not to mention, then engaging in a smear-campaign against me). So PLEASE, do feel free to change anything you don't like. (Sorry about the long rant, I'll go lie down in a dark room now.) Thanks & Regards, DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:50, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Pineapple juice

@DoubleGrazing: You are invited to vote on Pineapple.Catfurball (talk) 16:57, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:OLIO-logo.png

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:11, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Conquest of Shewa

Hi! Thank you for your talk-page note, most helpful. The whole thing was copied from the two books cited (this and this, in case you're interested). Now to see what other contributions he's made ... Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:42, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello am mindful my article was erased for copyright which was not my intention however I may have cited directly from the book any advice on what to do going forwards thank you.Yacoob316 (talk) 21:22, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Yacoob316, you may not copy-paste here any content from non-free external sources (such as virtually all published books). If there other pages where you think that you may have done that, please list them at User talk:Yacoob316 so that they can be cleaned up. Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:34, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

@Yacoob316 and Justlettersandnumbers: Yacoob, you seem to have recreated this article, and again there appears to be a copyvio, so I'm tagging the article for speedy deletion again. If the article content is substantially NOT copyvio, then please elaborate on the article talk page. And if you haven't yet familiarised yourself with the rules regarding copyright (at WP:COPYPASTE etc.), you really ought to do so before you get into trouble. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:09, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

I've finished editing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquest_of_Shewa/Temp could you move that here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquest_of_Shewa, there shouldn't be a copyright issue any longer.Yacoob316 (talk) 17:33, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Your comment

I've noticed your comment here. Did you get any reply to it, or was it just deleted? If you review the talk page of that editor, you'll note that over the last few years many people have made the same complaint, which he tends to dismiss. It is unfortunate, but WP:PROD does not require that any rationale is provided :( --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:27, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Piotrus: he deleted that comment (of mine), and replied instead in the article talk page. The bottom line: his estimation of when "opposition to the deletion is expected" trumps mine, apparently. Ho hum. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:40, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, his criteria are very vague. Shrug. I recommend taking the article to AfD. If you don't use it, I also recommend WP:TWINKLE, makes prods/afd easier to use and keep track of. Cheers, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:03, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

@Piotrus: thanks for the Twinkle heads-up; I'm not using it, but looks like a useful tool, so will defo look into it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:06, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Beeni

Hello DoubleGrazing,you have recently deleted a lot of our work from the Wikipedia page entitled Beeni.As far as I know, you have no experience or knowledge about the sport of Benni which is very popular in Northern Pakistan and Kashmir. I myself am from Kashmir and have knowledge of the sport of Beeni.So with kind regard do not remove any of our work spontaneously and unnecessarily and do take the time to message us for any queires.Do also take the time to study the sport of Beeni and understand its cultural and historic perspective. If you do not cease, i shall report to higher authorities for you misadventure and misrepresentation of our sport in your summary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Islamdefence (talk • contribs) 14:23, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Islamdefence: Thanks (I think) for your comments. A few thoughts in response:

• You're absolutely right, I have no knowledge about the sport in question, and I am not from Kashmir — nor is either of those required for me to edit this article. Likewise, I don't need to seek your approval, really.
• I did what I did, because I found the article in pretty poor shape, full of unreferenced statements, incorrect layout and formatting, repetition, incomplete sentences, peacock terms, etc. I actually sorted out a number of issues with it, as flagged up by the various tags. If I didn't do it, someone else would have — or possibly worse: the article could have been deleted. I'm not expecting you to thank me, but at least no need to get hostile.
• If any genuinely useful content went missing as a result of my edits, you're always welcome to add it back (supported by proper citations and otherwise in line with Wikipedia policies and guidelines, of course).
• I notice that you didn't comment on the image you had added to the article, which I was asking about. The problem, in a nutshell, is this: if the image is a copyright violation, it has no place being there; and if it genuinely is your own work, as you've claimed when uploading it, then you could have a conflict of interest (which I notice you've already declared on your user page, but still). Either way, it would be good if you could help resolve this.
• Finally, I have no intention to 'cease' editing: I did not 'misrepresent' anything, as you claim, my edits were constructive and justified, and they were accompanied by explanatory edit notes. But of course, if you continue to have a problem with any of that, you're welcome to report me to whatever 'higher authorities' you wish.

Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:30, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your response and please try to understand that it is a new article which will of course need improvement.Others have tried to delete and distort it which does not help and is the reason why the page was locked.Please help to expand and together we can make Beeni page better Islamdefence (talk) 10:37, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

I need some help.

Hello. On your talk page, you have emblems on your user page which show you are Finnish, part of Wikiproject Turkey, etc. How would I add a badge to my talk page? Thanks :) NinjaWeeb (talk) 10:55, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @NinjaWeeb: they're called userboxes, see WP:Userboxes — there are literally hundreds and thousands to choose from! AFAIK you can only put them on your user page, though, not talk page, but I could be wrong. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:01, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! NinjaWeeb (talk) 11:14, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Help with RS

Hi! As I recall, you speak Turkish, right? (If not, feel free to disregard.) I wondered if you think Biyografya.com is reliable. I saw a new page citing it and wasn't sure if it was. Thanks, and hope you're well. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:36, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey @AleatoryPonderings: I'd say I 'vaguely understand' Turkish rather than speak it per se, but all the same, thanks for thinking of me. :) As for the source in question, I've never heard of it before, but on a quick glance it seems like a decent enough site, and probably okay as a secondary source, although I wouldn't call it RS or want to rely on it as the one and only source for an article (or any major statement therein). Not sure if that helps much, though? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:47, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Definitely does help! The article is Mehmet Şeref Aykut, and Biografya is indeed the only source. Basically, I wanted to know whether I should pass it as reviewed, and the answer seems to be "no". Thanks again. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 16:54, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

@AleatoryPonderings: Hope this doesn't further confuse things, but IMHO the nature of the article is such that I would be minded to accept even a less-than-RS reference like that — it's not like there are any wild claims etc. being made, which would need strong substantiation. Also, interesting to note that the Turkish article cites many more sources, most of which seem more reliable than Biyografya.com, which makes you wonder why they've not been used for the English one? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:19, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Nope, no confusion—and it looks like someone else recently reviewed it, so I have no more agonizing choices to make haha. I just tagged it with {{Expand language}} per your note, but I have no idea if anyone actually checks those maintenance categories … AleatoryPonderings (talk) 19:31, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

@AleatoryPonderings: We can but try, yet in the end it will all have been in vain and the dust shalt cover us. Or summat. :) Cheers (and I mean that literally!), -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:36, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Ah, just what I needed—some cheery existential musings in these dreadful days … Hope you and yours are keeping well :) AleatoryPonderings (talk) 22:46, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

@AleatoryPonderings: He he :) Good to have a friendly exchange, thanks for that. I've had a couple of not-quite-so-friendly ones lately which make you wonder what's the point of 'collaborating' when some people seem so hell-bent on doing just the opposite. Oh well, hey ho... -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:53, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Re

I've reverted and oversighted the edits in question, and I've blocked the /64 of that IP. Next time you see something, send an e-mail to [address]; oversighters monitor this and are quick to act. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 14:15, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@The Blade of the Northern Lights: Thanks for that; and noted. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Ways to improve Rio Monterroso Culvert

Hello, DoubleGrazing,

Thank you for creating Rio Monterroso Culvert.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Grammar, style, usage, and capitalization

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Robert McClenon}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Robert McClenon (talk) 15:47, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Robert McClenon: Thanks for your comments, but I'm not the creator of that article; I only moved it to draft space, because of its many issues, most notably the complete lack of references. It was then twice rejected for publication, but appears to have been recreated (copypasted?) by the original creator — personally FWIW, I don't think it's anywhere near ready for that, but I also don't want to go to edit war over it. Cheers, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:55, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

User:DoubleGrazing - Yes. I didn't intend to put that notice on your talk page. I saw what the history was also. I didn't realize that the Page Curation thing was going to put this message on your talk page. The editor has created two copies of the article, in draft space and in article space, and is ignoring reviewer comments. At this point it can't be pushed back into draft space because another copy of it is already in draft space. Normally I would nominate it for deletion, but it is a special case because it is geographically notable, but at the same time is very far from being ready for article space. I will ask for advice about it. Yes. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:15, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Yeah, I figured it was the curator tool that sent this my way. No worries. :) RE draftifying the article, I've once in a similar situation done it by appending the article name with number 2 so it doesn't clash with the earlier draft. Is that not allowed/recommended practice, do you know? Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:20, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

I have requested advice and assistance from the other AFC reviewers. (It appears that you encountered it as a New Page reviewer.) If I were to draftify another copy of it, I think that the author would simply move it into article space a third time. I think that the problem is that the author doesn't understand the feedback because it is in English, and needs to be given advice in Spanish. One of the problems with the article is that the English is of poor quality. I may wind up sending it to AFD anyway. The best result of AFD would for another editor to improve it while the 7-day discussion is running. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:19, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

About Andromeda Loans Wikipedia article

Dear DoubleGrazing

I am writing to you to talk about the recently moved Wikipedia page Andromeda Loans. You have mentioned that the article "does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published". I have used sources from independent, verifiable, and noteworthy news portals such as The Wall Street Journal, Reuters India, Economic Times (part of the Times Group), and Business Standard, among others. I don't see how they are not verifiable and reliable third-party references.

If you see any statement not in line with Wikipedia guidelines, or does not carry substantial proof of reference, please do let me know so that I can change/delete it accordingly. Please advice how I can proceed next.

Regards Jagadish

Hi @Jagadish.praj: Thanks for messaging me. As I noted when adding the more citations needed tag, only the M&A section is referenced, the earlier sections are almost without references. Every material statement should be backed up by a credible source, otherwise it's just conjecture. I'm not saying the contents of the earlier sections are not true, I'm saying they need to be substantiated, and the article was moved to drafts to allow you to do just that. Hope this helps, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:43, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Autopatrolled granted

Hi DoubleGrazing, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. However, you should consider adding relevant wikiproject talk-page templates, stub-tags and categories to new articles that you create if you aren't already in the habit of doing so, since your articles will no longer be systematically checked by other editors (User:Evad37/rater and User:SD0001/StubSorter.js are useful scripts which can help). Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! – Joe (talk) 08:50, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Joe Roe: many thanks, I guess mainly on behalf of NPP :) but I of course also personally very much appreciate the level of trust this signifies. And thanks for the pointers to the scripts, I'll definitely have a look. Cheers, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:40, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Vivo Y3/Y3s citation style

Hey,

In regards to the tag that you put on the article for the Y3/Y3s, what sort of changes should I make to square away the citation style problem? SwirlySolid (talk) 00:24, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi @SwirlySolid: Thanks for your message. There's a list of citations on the bottom of the infobox, but it's not clear which of them support which particular parameter, or conversely which parameter is sourced from where. I think it would be clearer if each statement made was referenced immediately by citing the relevant source. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:56, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Naonobu Ahagon

The article Naonobu Ahagon has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:42, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi @UnitedStatesian: There seems to be some sort of a glitch in the system. When an article I've moved to drafts and which has subsequently been (re-)published gets PRODded, I get this notification although it's not 'my' article in any sense. (It's not the first time this happens.) Hey ho... :) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:00, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Please do not use "sample" ref-tags within angle brackets on Talk pages

Hi, DoubleGrazing, if you want to explain to someone about the proper use of ref-tags on a talk or project page as you did in this edit at the Tea house (perma), please do not code an *actual* ref-begin tag within angle brackets because in general, the rendering engine will then assume everything up until the next ref-end tag is reference content and trigger the software not to render it inline, but rather at the end of the page as a footnote. Instead, please use any of these solutions:

• type, "ref-begin" or "[ref]" or "(ref)" or anything that gets your meaning across that doesn't include angle brackets
• you can code it like this: <nowiki><ref></nowiki>, which generates this: <ref> without affecting the page or triggering the MW software to treat what comes after as a footnote
• you can escape the left-angle bracket with the html entity "less than": < (or: <, or <) and code this: <ref> which generates this: "<ref>"

As a result, when the Teahouse discussion "Where to put references" was archived to Archive 1083, although the size of the Archive went up by +54,847 bytes, the number of sections visible on the page (as numbered in the Table of Contents) went down from 166 sections in the Archive revision 988609586 of 05:37, November 14, 2020 immediately previous, to 95 sections in rev. 988779453‎ of 05:27, November 15, 2020. Note, that no sections were *actually* removed from the wikicode; those 72 sections were still there in the code; they simply weren't being shown by the rendering engine.

I'm not casting blame, this was obviously inadvertent on your part; I just wanted to say that something as apparently simple as this can have outsize effects, and it took me some effort to analyze, which started when I was looking for a discussion recently archived from the Teahouse archive that seemed to have disappeared into thin air. After I found it in the wikicode, but not on the rendered page, it took me a while to find out why, because the discussion I was looking for that disappeared, had nothing to do with yours. And then, I needed to implement the fix,, which involved altering a Teahouse archive 1083 (diff) with enough description in the edit summary that I wouldn't be instantly reverted for editing an archival page against policy. So, please just be aware in the future about using anything that looks like an html tag in angle brackets, and escape or disable it somehow or use an alternative. (If this seems like rather more detail than warranted here for a simple warning about ref-tags, you're right; this is a tricky situation, which I'll raise at WP:VPT for some expert opinion for my own edification, and I wanted to include a full explanation here, just in case.) Thanks, and happy editing! Mathglot (talk) 06:18, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Notes

Hi @Mathglot: Wow. What can I say? I'm so sorry for having caused all that unnecessary trouble; I really had no idea. :( Thank you for taking the trouble to explain it all; I will certainly bear this in mind. Sorry again, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:47, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi, DoubleGrazing; no, actually, I'm sorry; that must really look over-the-top, which it kind of is, but I wanted to detail it somewhere, so some gnomes could have a look. Feel free to archive or remove, if you like. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 08:41, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

@Mathglot: Not at all, I found that genuinely interesting and helpful. :) Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:53, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

DCeased

Regarding the DCeased, I fixed it because there were inaccurate information. Also the plot was too big and there was too much information about the actual stories.205.223.223.86 (talk) 17:22, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi — I agree, the 'Plot' section was/is very long, relative to the rest of the article. (As for what's accurate or not, I won't comment on that, as I'm no expert on the topic.) However, deleting half the article is quite a drastic move, and usually needs discussion on the talk page first, to ensure community consensus. As there was none of that, and the edit note you left wasn't entirely helpful, I thought it better to revert. Which, as you will have noticed, wasn't the first time today. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:44, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Well can I edit it because I am very informed on the topic of DC comics. I see inaccurate information that can be misleading towards people that are just learning about the topic or who wants to know more. Also the plot is way too long. That is not fair to the artist and creators of the story because instead of investing in the books, you are reading the whole story off of wikipedia. It will be very helpful for me and the DC comics community if you let me edit it. 2601:4C0:4003:2530:E0BE:9C2:C1D9:738A (talk) 22:06, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi DoubleGrazing. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have temporarily enabled rollback on your account until 2020-12-20. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

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

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! ~Swarm~ ^{sting} 02:16, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Swarm: Thanks for giving me this opportunity to try out Rollback, which I look forward to doing over the coming weeks. Thanks also for the pointer to the guide, saves me trying to find it! :) Cheers, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:27, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

The One Man Army

I read your reasons in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 17#The One Man Army for wanting this redirect changed, and as I stated there, I agree with them. As I am the person who originally created the redirect, and the TV show it refers to has been off the air for 8 years, having it go to the disambig page makes more sense. As there is no dispute, I have made the changes you asked for, granting your request, and asked the ticket be closed. Thank you for advising me and asking me first. Paul Robinson (Rfc1394) (talk) 11:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Rfc1394: Thanks for putting that one to bed, and for notifying me (I'd already forgotten!). Cheers, :) --DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Re Furuya Kōrin

It is not "impossible to verify / establish notability with no sources" when you have access to Google! In future, please do some work to establish whether or not notability can be established before either nominating for deletion or moving to draft (which is often equivalent to a delayed prod). Espresso Addict (talk) 02:02, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

There's even less excuse to draftify Judy Attfield where a valid source was present that states the importance of the subject! Please stop this; it is disruptive. Good faith new editors should be helped, not hindered. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:29, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

@Espresso Addict: What is disruptive - draftifying an un(der)sourced article that never should have been published in the first place? You seem to suggest that a new editor can ignore the rules, and the onus is on others to find sources and generally sort out any problems. That's not how I see it, the rules are accessible to everyone and should be followed, but hey - what do I know? I'm just a minion and you're an admin, so I'd better do as I'm told. Thanks, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:43, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

"[A] new editor can ignore the rules, and the onus is on others to find sources and generally sort out any problems." In practice, that's pretty much the wiki process, yes. It would be great if everyone contributed beautiful B-class articles in perfect English about notable topics that increase the encyclopedia's diversity of coverage, but few people do. If the inexperienced editor is working in good faith, it is always productive to try to help them, rather than put them off, in the hope of future contributions downstream that are (even) more useful. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 07:58, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

@Espresso Addict: Quite. Putting off editors should be reserved for the more experienced ones, it seems. Thanks again, I'm now firmly back in my box. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:19, 25 November 2020 (UTC)