User talk:MrsSnoozyTurtle

August Editathons from Women in Red

Women in Red | August 2021, Volume 7, Issue 8, Numbers 184, 188, 204, 205, 206, 207 Online events: New: Indigenous women | Women's leadership & empowerment Contest (Jul/Aug/Sep): Latin America contest Continuing: Olympic & Paralympic Games | Women's rights | #1day1woman See also: Interwiki Women Collaboration Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help plan and coordinate future events. Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:26, 23 July 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

The Signpost: 25 July 2021

• News and notes: Wikimania and a million other news stories

• Special report: Hardball in Hong Kong

• In the media: Larry is at it again

• Board of Trustees candidates: See the candidates

• Recent research: Gender bias and statistical fallacies, disinformation and mutual intelligibility

• Traffic report: Football, tennis and marveling at Loki

• News from the WMF: Uncapping our growth potential – interview with James Baldwin, Finance and Administration Department

• Humour: A little verse

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:12, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Paulie Gee

Hello,

I had written a draft article last year on Paulie Gee that was rejected and not moved to the Main Namespace. I’ve now re-written and re-vamped the previously rejected draft based on the feedback I had received.

May I please ask that the new draft be reviewed again for consideration?

Thank you very much, Alwayslp (talk) 20:08, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello Alwayslp, thanks for getting in touch. I'm not sure which draft you are referring to, could you please provide a link? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 23:45, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your reply. Here is the draft that I revised.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Paulie_Gee Alwayslp (talk) 00:33, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Alwayslp. In my opinion, the draft still reads as a biography rather than an encyclopedia article. But you are welcome to submit it for another review if you believe that it is suitable. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:43, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your reply and advice.

I won’t yet submit this draft for review since I would like to revise it so it's not biographic but instead encyclopedic.

If it's ok, may I ask which particular sentences stood out as biographic to you?

Also, once I’ve finished the additional revisions to make it more encyclopedic, what will I need to do to submit it for another review? I had been told that there was no “Submit for Review” button since the original draft had been rejected.

Thank you sincerely for your help, Alwayslp (talk) 13:19, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello -

I'm planning to work on the above-mentioned draft article to revise it further as per your advice, and I understand if perhaps it’s not possible to give details on how to make this draft article more encyclopedic and less biographic.

May I please ask how I can re-submit the draft once I’ve revised it again? What procedure do I use when it’s ready for submission?

I'm not sure how to do so, since the initial draft was rejected.

Thank you so much for your help. Alwayslp (talk) 18:18, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I've added the Resubmit button, so you can now do so if you believe that the issues have been resolved. MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:16, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello - Thank you for having added the Resubmit button to the draft. I'll continue to work on the issues in order to resolve them and then resubmit the draft soonest possible for review. Alwayslp (talk) 17:40, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kadir Mısıroğlu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Justice and Development Party. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Wongamat Towers

Hello! I removed the speedy on Zire Wongamat Tower A as I think it needs to go to AfD. I created a single AfD for it and for Wongamat Tower. Thanks. --- Possibly ☎ 06:51, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

• Hi! Thanks for letting me know. I have added my 2 cents worth at the AfD. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 04:54, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

BMW M51

Your anti-metric crusade is becoming absolutely ridiculous. Your edits to BMW M51 added a source which is factually wrong. Their software only allows them to enter kW, and then a calculator function converts it to PS and hp. Therefore, to get at the correct power (130hp metric) they contrived 95.5kW. This gave 95.5kW/130hp/128bhp. Not only is this wrong (every actual source for this car lists it as 130PS/96kW) but you used this source as a reference for a different data output (96kW/129bhp).

Again: you used an incorrect source as a reference for another set of incorrect numbers. Your disdain for facts is becoming very problematic and is in no way in line with what Wikipedia is meant to do.

Sources like these data farms (autoevolution, automobile-catalog, etc etc) are all over the place depending on which unit they use as the primary and are not the best references. Additionally, Vauxhall used PS in their own brochures and pamphlets back in 1997.

Additionally, adding useless boilerplate edits (for instance, you changed 1985–1987 to 1985–7 in BMW E30, which is in direct contradiction of MOS:YEARRANGE) to your removal of PS is clearly just an attempt to block anyone from restoring the correct units.  Mr.choppers | ✎  13:57, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

• Hello. I would be happy to discuss the content dispute at the article in question, especially if you would be so kind as to drop the accusations and stop insta-reverting my edits. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:50, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

This has been discussed numerous times at automobile conventions and at several other articles and you have no support for a blanket removal of PS. You are actively introducing erroneous information which is completely unacceptable.  Mr.choppers | ✎  09:09, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Both of your missions need to stop. BMW has been using SI since the 1970s, and their power/torque figures used to be DIN 70020 figures until the mid-1990s; now they are 80/1269 EWG figures. Both of these standards call for SI units, and in addition to that, SI has become the only legal unit system in 1978. This is, for example, a 1991 dia of the power and torque curve of the engine in question: [1], which can also be found in this 1994 BMW brochure [2] – unsurprisingly, BMW doesn't use either PS or hp with the M51 engine, and adding either of these two units to the article isn't really that necessary (since kW already is an SI unit). Even the 1983 E28 comes with SI (albeit that BMW added PS in parenthesis) [3]. They have even been using kW prior to 1978. Now, if you really think that it is very important to include hp or PS units, please just use the normal convert template and set its precision to natural numbers. Please don't do bizarre things that make the template display what you think are the "correct" hp numbers. Both of you have been tweaking the input numbers to manipulate the output figures and that is outright unnecessary. Simply look at what BMW says the rated figures according to either DIN or EWG are, add them to the convert template, and let it do its thing. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 11:55, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Article removing

You left me this note for Abdullah bin Sulaiman al rajhi article "The same account creating a mainspace article after the draft was declined at AfC is WP:GAMING the system" In fact, I did not find what was the mistake that made you remove the article, despite the passage of more than a month since the approval I request you to provide more clarification and advise me on the best solution for preparing the article