User talk:Girth Summit

Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars

Hello Girth Mr Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars didn’t know that The Essential Human Nature was still On Wikipedia without a review. He keep it there and he didn’t get rid of it until later. He has been telling people off on Wikipedia for no reason. If you seen his messages in my talk page. He has been telling me off for the last whole week. I’m just letting you know what’s been going on. Thanks Ben and I have been deleting bad comments from Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars on my talk page because it have hurt my feelings.

Wikipedia Article translation - Is the enhancement and improvment of the original in terms of sources and references a requirement?

Hello Girth, I recently helped translating the following wikipedia page from Spanish to English.

Spanish Version https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Sociedad_Espa%C3%B1ola_de_F%C3%ADsica

Translation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Spanish_Royal_Physics_Society_(RSEF)

The entry was rejected with the following comment. Comment: I appreciate that this is a translation from another Wiki site, but we still require references to support the assertions and demonstrate notability. Are there no references at the Spanish wiki article that could be used? Girth Summit (blether) 14:52, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

But it’s an almost EXACT copy of the Spanish original which is alive and published. As reference it redirects to the original page in Spanish, since it’s a translation I am confused of what better reference than the original webpage I can provide.

Both Versions (Spanish and English) have been reviewed by the current president of the Spanish Royal Society of Physics. Jose Adolfo de Azcarraga - azcarrag@ific.uv.es

If the original content needs to be expanded for it to be published then the translation effort becomes more than just translation. I will look for additional sources to add but can it be published, as is, for the time being as a translation of the original with exactly the same content? Can you review the decision? Thanks in advance Guillermo

Hi Azwikig, thanks for reaching out. I confess that I'm not specifically experienced in vetting translations, but I would normally reject a draft that only contained external links rather than cited refs, but I definitely don't want all your hard work on the translation to go to waste. Let me check on the policy with regard to translations and get back to you. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 10:36, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello again Azwikig, I've had another read through the draft, the external links, and I've discussed this with a very experienced reviewer about the best way to go forward.

First, I should emphasise that different language Wikipedia sites have different standards and requirements - they are decided upon locally by consensus. I don't know anything about Spanish Wiki, but since this is an article on English Wiki I will have to apply our community standards to your draft.

Now, I have no doubt about the notability of the organisation - the Spanish Royal Society of Physics is certain to be notable. However, my problem is with your sourcing. Please take a look at WP:NCORP, which applies to this article - we require reliable, independent sourcing for all but the most basic facts about any organisation, and an article about an organisation must have as an absolute minimum two sources that meet the guidelines at WP:CORPDEPTH. Your article has no in-line citations at all, and the only links are to the society's own websites (which are not independent), and to the Spanish Wikipedia article (which, as WP:UGC, is not reliable - that's nothing about it being a Spanish site, we would apply that to an English Wikipedia article too.) So as it stands, I'm afraid that I can't approve this article.

I genuinely don't want all your effort to be wasted - what would be ideal is if you could find the time to add some sources to support the assertions, as described in the guidelines above. I'm sure such sources must exist for such a society - it's just a case of identifying them, and adding them to the article - I'll be happy to help you with adding the inline citations if you're not sure how to do that. Sources in the English language are preferable of course because of our reader base, but Spanish-language sources are allowed for material you can't find in English.

On a related matter, since it's clear you have a connection with the president of the organisation, you presumably have a conflict of interest with the subject of the article, and indeed may be being paid for your efforts here? You should read the guidelines at WP:COI and WP:PAID, and take the necessary actions.

There's one more question I would like to ask before proceeding. I couldn't help noticing the similarity between your username (Azwikig) and the e-mail address you gave for the president of the society (azcarrag@ific.uv.es). Can I ask whose account this is - yours, or Jose Adolfo de Azcarraga's? Please see WP:UPOL - each account must only be used by a single individual - accounts may not be shared or used by different people, and indeed they are generally blocked if it becomes apparent that more than one person has access to the password. I'd urge you to create your own account, and contact me here before proceeding.

I hope that all makes sense - please let me know if you have any questions, and how you'd like to proceed. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 17:37, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello Girth, Thanks for your note, will see what I can do to provide additional references. In terms of the conflict of interest. My father happens to be the President of the Spanish Royal Society of Physics and as such has an interest on the site being available in English. As his son I am trying to help him in this being available, I am a Physicist too and happy to help in this being possible. I am certainly not being paid for this. The account is my own wikipedia account. Hope this is OK. Best Regards Guillermo

Hi Guillermo, I'm happy to trust that the account is your own, and that you are not being paid; as the son of the president of the society though, you appear to have a clear conflict of interest -this is not a major problem, and you are doing the right thing already by going through the WP:AfC process - but please do note the guidelines at WP:COI and take the necessary steps with regard to disclosure - basically, you are advised to put a note on your userpage declaring your relationship with the subject of this article.

If you would be willing to find some sources to support the assertions in the article, I would be happy to help you with the in-line citations, and to work with you to get the article published. Do please drop me a line when you've got some to work with. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 20:41, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Some Counter Vandalism Training

Hello, it said on the list of trainers in the Counter Vandalism that you had a slot open (Albeit, last edit was 10 days ago and has not been updated frequently) and I was wondering if I could get some training in the realm of Counter Vandalism. Thanks. ^^ James-the-Charizard (talk) 03:02, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

@James-the-charizard: Sure, I'd be glad to take you through the course. I'm pretty busy this weekend, but I'll set up your training page and ping you from there on Monday. You might want to start out by reading WP:Vandalism and WP:Twinkle. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 06:35, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

@Girth Summit: Great, thanks! I'm actually somewhat busy myself this weekend. James-the-Charizard (talk) 08:25, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Actually I forgot to mention, I have school on weekdays too, so I will reply and get stuff done on it when I can, so apologies if it takes me a while to reply back. James-the-Charizard (talk) 11:09, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

​ No worries - we will go at your own pace, just ping me when you update the page so I know to go and look at it. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 11:11, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

CVUA Training request

I was thinking about taking a CVUA training. Could you please train me? Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 01:47, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi User:Masumrezarock100, I've just agreed to take on a second student, which is normally my limit - however, if you don't mind going slow, as I'll have less time to share around, I'll be happy to take you through the course. I'll set up your training page tomorrow, but in the meantime you could take a look at WP:VANDALISM and WP:TWINKLE. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 07:52, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

I am more than happy. As I have witnessed your teaching to Aryan, I say you are a good teacher. Well the school hasn't started yet after the entrance exam. I say I have two months to spare for full Wikipedia editing. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 09:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Cragend Farm and Silo

Hello, Firstly I am a woman (Lou) Hi again! Secondly, thank you so much for all the help I am getting to get this listing onto Wiki. We are farmers and just wanted to put right was was incorrect on wiki about the Cragside listing and add somethings that are relevant. Also Cragend Farm and Silo are all the same thing, its just that the Silo is listed. Ironically we have more machinery within the farm that is not, which is an over sight by the listers, for example the Weighbridge by Pooley and the Gilkes Turbine no 490. in the barns. I would be very happy for uou to help me with this listing and get some better acurrate photos upload to please? Whast do I have to do? best wishes from Lou . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lou Renwick (talk • contribs) 08:24, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi again Lou - first, I'm so sorry for assuming you were a man! I'm usually pretty good at using gender-neutral pronouns, I've no idea why I didn't do that in this case.

Did you read my instructions further up the webpage? I put some suggestions for what to do with images in bold - I you can follow those, we can use the image immediately.

Thanks for providing that additional source. Once I've read through that, and all the other sources I've been able to find, I'll consider whether the article should be called Cragend Silo or Cragend Farm. Just to be clear, this decision will be based upon what the sources describe as being notable. I appreciate what you are saying about the silo being a part of the farm, but we have quite strict rules about notability (see WP:NOTABILITY), and one of them is that notability is not inherited - so, the farm as a whole does not become notable just because it has a notable building in it - I would need to be able to demonstrate that the farm itself is notable, independent of the silo, in order to write an article called 'Cragend Farm'; if I can only demonstrate that the silo is notable, then I can mention the farm in the description of the silo, but the article will have to be called 'Cragend Silo' (or whatever name the sources give it). We can't go on what Historic England or Northumberland Council officers say, unless it has been published somewhere, so again, if you have any other published sources that would help in writing the article, please point me to them now. Cheers, and sorry again for my rude assumption before. GirthSummit _(blether) 17:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Lou - another question. I noticed on your blog that there was a SSSI on your farm - presumably there is documentation online pertaining to that? It would be an interesting thing to include in the article, if we can identify a source discussing it. If you know what the SSSI is called, if should be possible to identify it here, which would give us another good source. GirthSummit _(blether) 10:36, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Cragend Farm and Silo

Hello, I would like it to be titled Cragend Farm, as the whole is what is important as listed in our building conditions of 2012 when the barn buildings were granted domestic use status. Northumberland County Council Conservation officers are in agreement with Historic England that the Farm is of heritage importance not just The Silo. The Silo and the Weighrbidge are sperate buldings on the farm, and within the barns is a Gilkes Turbine which drives the Silo. So all the buildings are relevant to the whole. The conservation officer said that the farm in its entirety was of importance. There are two documents recording the farm importance, 'An archaelogical building recording of Cragend Farm' by ARS for Northumberland County Council, and https://www.academia.edu/6936461/Recording_Farmworkers_Graffiti_at_Cragend_Farm_Rothbury Cragside also have a document done in 2010 which lists the silo and buildings but not the weighbridge (originall derelict and buried under earth) and turbine, which they missed, due to the fact it was not their property. We are now working with Cragside to add further detail to then history of the proerty and estate. Hope this all helps, from Lou . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lou Renwick (talk • contribs) 08:42, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of the Mesozoic life of Wyoming

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of the Mesozoic life of Wyoming. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Superconductivity

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Superconductivity. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Lady Roos

I added information that is easy for any person to validate. I am not going to help someone write their term paper but it should be enough added information to deduce important property and kinship ties.

Frankly, a perspective such as yours is why ancient information becomes obscured and eventually destroyed. Consider citations as a spectrum from 100 percent reliable to zero percent reliable. Even when a citation is added as a reference to a Wikipedia article, the value is negligible as a primary source. There should be multiple sources.

Rather than just remove factual information, use your intellect and investigate before deleting. Add the reference yourself if it exists in such a simplistic form. Or perhaps just look at the genealogy charts like any tenth grader would do.98.243.51.84 (talk) 12:01, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi - if you want to work collaboratively with other users, you need to drop that attitude - comments along the lines of telling me to do something 'like any tenth grader' are not appreciated.

You didn't add any citations at all to support your substantial addition of content - the requirement for assertions to be referenced isn't my perspective, it's the policy of the project, per WP:V and WP:RS. If the information is easy to validate, please go ahead and do so by citing a reliable source, being mindful of our policies on WP:OR. If there is no such source that you can cite, then the information doesn't belong here - our goal is not to collect ancient but unverifiable information, but is simply to reflect what reliable published sources say. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 12:19, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the details. I will add a reliable reference as a starting point.98.243.51.84 (talk) 12:43, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Let me know if you need any help with inserting in-line citations. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 23:12, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Userbox

Hey I saw the diff of Dante's Inferno in your userbox. Was it a joke or attack? Seriously, they were comparing you to the Devil! Sincerely,    Masum Reza^☎ 12:28, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Yep - that was a vandal I'd reverted a few times. I reverted it, of course, but it made me laugh so I thought I'd record it with the userbox. It's  not something I do regularly - it's not within the spirit of WP:DENY, but  just this once... GirthSummit _(blether) 12:53, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Guess you are famous for vandal slaying. Oops it is vandalism slaying. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 13:01, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

​ Ah, now - remember what I said on the CVUA page - vandalism clean-up, no slaying involved! We don't have weapons, just a broom, a bucket of soapy water and a big sponge ;) GirthSummit _(blether) 14:41, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for mentoring me. Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 10:39, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

		CVU Anti-Vandalism Award
		Mentoring all those students, reverting vandalism, It is not something that an ordinary editor is capable of. You deserved it. Sincerely, Masum Reza☎ 13:45, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Masumrezarock100 - in truth, I enjoy taking people through the course - it's fun working together with people who are eager to help maintain the project. I'm really glad it was helpful for you. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 16:26, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

It certainly was. Hey Girth how many students you have in real life? Just asking. Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 16:29, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

I teach a few different classes - 15-20 kids in each of them, ages 8-13. GirthSummit _(blether) 16:39, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

I see. Hey let me ask one thing. Am I the only one who completed the course within a week? Sincerely, Masum Reza^☎ 02:28, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Ah, sorry - did you mean how many people I've taken through CVUA? That info is all on the CVUA trainers page - you're the third Wikipedian I've gone through it with. Certainly nobody else has completed it so quickly - I think that's down to the amount of time you've been putting into it each day, and also the fact that it was a holiday here, so I was able to respond to your updates more quickly. (When I did the course, I generally had to wait a few days each time for my trainer to find time to respond to my answers!) Cheers! GirthSummit _(blether) 06:00, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

The removal of my comments

My section was removed on the Richard E Jackson wiki page. It was supposedly removed for lacking a source. my addition to the page, however is a first hand account of Richard E Jackson. I would like to have my section added back o the article.

Hi User:Ya boi Wynn, thanks for reaching out. Did you read the links in the message I left on your talk page? Wikipedia is not the place to publish first-hand accounts or personal knowledge about any subject, most especially living people. Our mission is to reflect what reliable, published sources say about any subject. If the material you added cannot be supported by citing a published source, it can not be added to the page. Please do review the guidelines I linked to, they should help you get started with contributing to the project. Thanks again, and welcome to Wikipedia. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 15:10, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Quit pretending that only left-wing views are "neutral"

Your continued censoring of established facts as "not neutral" belies your pretense that you support strictly "neutral" editing. Nonsense. You only approve of leftwing delusions.

Hello anonymous editor from IP 67.78.207.202, thanks for reaching out. I'm assuming that I reverted an edit that you made, but since I don't know who you are or what article it was at, I have no way of knowing what you're talking about. If you'd like to explain your concerns, or provide a link to the article, I'd be happy to discuss them. GirthSummit _(blether) 17:26, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Silage

Hi Girth Summit,

I was looking through RC and your edit summary caught my eye -- thought I'd drop you a note that Wikipedia does actually have an article about silage. aboideau^talk 17:40, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

​ D'oh! Thanks - you have sharp eyes. It's not a word I use every day, and it doesn't give me a red squiggle - I did think it was a bit odd that we didn't have an article... Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 17:45, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jean-Pierre Petit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jean-Pierre Petit. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cragend Silo has been accepted

Cragend Silo, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Zanhe (talk) 08:12, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Concern

Hi. In reference to your edit here, can you take a look at this new edit here? He seems to be granting himself admin rights again. This isn't good, especially a second time around. Also, while he often makes useful edits, almost as often Yarfpr and I have seen him do strange things with PR road articles (which seems to be the subject matter where he mostly edits). Yarfpr and I have left him numerous Talk page messages, but he has never responded. We have offered him our help, but to no avail, because he doesn't respond.

Then I noticed his edits are almost exclusive to Infobox road parameters which would require little or no English. Since I also discovered he had been editing the Spanish WP here, it occurred to me that perhaps he speaks only Spanish, so I wrote to him here, but using Spanish w/English translation (a bilingual message, so to speak). In the process, I also realized he seems to be the same user as Anonyn IP 24.50.193.43, who had been making similar strange edits concurrent with Harrison Canyon (See Here).

At one point, here, Yamil had to request page protection (I sort of talked her out of it) because of addition of bogus Puerto Rico road route marker shields by this user. Also, Yamil has been trying to do a really nice job with all Puerto Rico road articles, but she (as well as myself) spends a lot of her (precious, I am sure) time fixing bad edits by HC or explaining to him in his talk pages (we have written him here too (the Anonym user's Talk page).

I think we have reached a point where this user should be considered for some serious disciplinary action such, perhaps a block or some other action. I hope you can investigate or send this to someone who can. Thanks, Mercy11 (talk) 21:34, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Contrary to what Mercy11 thinks, I believe that Harrison Canyon and the anonymous user aren't the same person because when HC makes an unconstructive contribution, the anonymous user changes it for the previous version (see what happened today in the List of highways in Puerto Rico and Puerto Rico Highway 30 revision histories). On the other hand, when HC makes an appropriate contribution, the anonymous user doesn't always intervene (see what happened today in Puerto Rico Highway 6 and Puerto Rico Highway 866 revision histories). What I can see is a war between both editors and that warrants urgent disciplinary action. Yamil Rivera (talk) 00:51, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

It doesn't matter any longer. Please see here. Mercy11 (talk) 00:59, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Mercy11 - thanks for letting me know about this. I'm afraid I was in bed while all this was happening (I'm in the UK), so have just seen the messages. You did exactly what I would have done, i.e. take the matter to ANI, and I see that the account has been blocked as a sock of a blocked user. No action has been taken against the IP - if disruption continues from there, you could potentially raise a sock puppet investigation based on behavioural similarities - I can help you to do that if you're not sure how (it's much easier to do it using Twinkle than trying to fill in the form manually!). The alternative would be to ask for action to be taken to stop the disruption -again, if you feel this is necessary, let me know if I can help. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 05:49, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Holly Knight

Sorry for the confusion. It was not your edit that I referred to as vandalism but an edit prior to yours that removed mention of the Grammy wins. That same person had earlier claimed she had lied about them. I couldn't just revert that edit so I had to do it by hand and added a ref to go with it. Sorry, again, for the confusion. Hondo77 (talk)

​ OK, understood - no worries, I was probably a bit over aggressive there. If you check the article history you'll see that I reverted their edits, and warned them on their talk page - they went on to stalk other articles and remove Wikilinks to her. I made the edit when I was clearing up after them, because in fairness she didn't actually win those Grammies - they were awards for vocal artistry, won by the singers, rather than awards for the songwriting. I tried to make that clear in the lead - if you happen to know who the third artist who won with one of her songs was, we could add that to the lead? Cheers, and sorry for snarling :) GirthSummit _(blether) 16:07, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Therapeutic abortion

Good morning Girth, how are you? I'm back to you after a while as I need a hint about the following issue. A newly regitered user replaced the content of Therapeutic abortion with a redirect to Abortion#Induced, claiming that they made it in accord with a decision taken in 2010. The page has been restored in 2015 and nobody complained for that until now; does this imply that there is a silent consensus for keeping the page or should the 2010 consensus be considered still valid? Your comment will be very appeciated. Thanks in advance and cheers, Horst Hof (talk) 08:38, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Horst Hof - good to hear from you again. This is a slightly complex case - it's certainly not a clear cut case of vandalism, and the redirect is arguably valid. However, a decision made in 2010 does not necessarily bind us today - consensus can change, and one could argue that the fact it was recreated and survived for so long reflects a consensus to overturn the previous decision. Having said all that, a quick look at the version that preceded the redirect showed a pretty poorly sourced article, with a lot of POV issues. The best thing to do might be to start a thread at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine, and describe what has happened - editors with knowledge and interest in this area would be able to chime in. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 09:58, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

​ I see you raised the question - Doc James is an admin, and one of the most experienced/prolific editors in medical areas, so I think the issue is in safe hands now. Well done avoiding the edit war trap here - a new account removing lots of content from potentially controversial pages is always red flag, but in this case it looks like it was a valid redirect. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 11:24, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the good suggestion (as usual, by the way). When I meet a puzzling situation I'm used to ask myself "what would Girth do in this case?", and when I have no answer by myself... I ask Girth directly! :-)

A last question, do you think I better do a dummy edit on the redirect page indicating in the edit summary the link to the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine? This may inform other users about why the content removal has been accepted. Cheers, Horst Hof (talk) 11:43, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

​ That's not a bad idea actually - in case any other patrollers investigate the redirect, it would be useful to make the connection. Good thinking! GirthSummit _(blether) 11:47, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Casualties of the Iraq War

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Casualties of the Iraq War. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Girth Summit. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Padavalam Kuttan Pilla  Talk  18:29, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Padavalamkuttanpilla, I got your e-mail. I'm afraid that I don't have any slots open at the moment, as I'm currently working with two other students. You could approach one of the other trainers listed here; alternatively, you could spend some time going through one of the training pages listed on my talk page in the 'How to edit' section - the Wikipedia Adventure is a sort of game that takes you through the editing process; the Tutorial is a more straightforward on-line tutorial; and the 'Student Training' page is aimed at teaching university students how to contribute to the project. Any of these might be a good way to develop your understanding of our pollicies and guidelines. If you have any questions, you are always welcome to ask them here - no need to e-mail me unless there's something sensitive that you don't want to post publicly. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 06:53, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rigel

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rigel. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Still researching

Thank you.Yes you are right it does not have much.But am still finding out about her birth date, where she grew up,her education and also her family.This also includes her acting an presenting career.But thanks for the comment.. Charlotte Peek (talk) 19:19, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Charlotte Peek - thanks for reaching out. The main thing you need to do is to provide references for the article - all articles on Wikipedia require references to reliable sources to make sure that the information is verifiable and the subject is notable. Those rules apply everywhere, but are enforced very stringently with articles about living people, for obvious reasons! Please add some reliable sources to your draft before re-submitting it - there is a 'Cite' tool just above the editing window, but if you have any questions about how to do this, feel free to drop me a note here. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 19:38, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

I would appreciate some help so please help me out.. Charlotte Peek (talk) 21:31, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

​Sure - how can I help? If you have some references to add to the article, if you paste the links below I'll take a look and explain how to add them to the draft. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 21:34, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Ooh ok.I really appreciate what you are doing for me but I don't have time to give you the links but I will do so when I get time. Charlotte Peek (talk) 21:40, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

​OK - let me know when you want to proceed. By the way, there's no need to start a new section every time you leave a new post - just edit the existing section. I've edited your posts so they are all in the ones section, and they are indented - you can read about how to do that here, it helps make talk pages more readable. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 21:55, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Father Richard Augustine Hay - new page

Hi there, thanks for your message. I am a newbie at this so I thanks you for your help and advice. I have updated the page and added some sources. However, a couple of the sources are my own published books (albeit from 15+ years ago). Is it alright to do that? I don't want to be accused of self-promotion! It is just that it is a subject that I am considered to an an expert in. Regards. Ericthearcher (talk) 09:25, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ericthearcher, you're welcome - thanks for writing the article. We welcome editors with expertise in the areas they want to write about, and there aren't any hard rules against citing work that you have written or contributed to. There are some relevant guidelines about referencing your own work that you might want to read at SELFCITE and REFSPAM - in general, provided that the sources are relevant, comply with the reliable sources guidelines, and you are not giving them undue weight within an article, there isn't going to be any problem.

I want to give you one other thing to think about - in declaring yourself to be the author of these works, you are effectively acknowledging your real-life identity. There are absolutely no rules against doing this, and many editors do it - however, should you ever come into conflict with anybody on-wiki, this connection might provide a way for them to harass you off-wiki. Many editors maintain their anonymity on-wiki to avoid this risk. It's entirely your choice, but it would be worth reading through HARASSMENT so you're aware of the steps to take should this ever happen. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 11:48, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18

Hello Girth Summit,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:

• Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
• Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

Reliable Sources for NPP

Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.

Backlog drive coming soon

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.

News

• Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Discussions of interest

• A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
• There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
• What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

---

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Girth Summit. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:50, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:International Mass Spectrometry Foundation

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:International Mass Spectrometry Foundation. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Another review?

Hallo Girth Summit, if you like it and have the time, there is another article for you to be rinsed in Thames ;-). Bye. Alex2006 (talk) 17:42, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

​ Hi again - no problem. I'm in the pub at the moment, but I'm looking forward to reading it tomorrow. Cheers! GirthSummit _(blether) 18:59, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! We had raclette with red wine yesterday evening (here winter came again in the last days), so I suppose that both of us had some concentration problem at the same time... ;-) Cheers Alex2006 (talk) 10:27, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

​ Hi Alex - what an interesting guy! Can't believe I'd never heard of him, I want to see the film now.

I've been through the article and tweaked some of the language. I've also tinkered with the spacing around the refs - just for future reference, normally we don't put a space before the ref, only after it. I haven't read through any of the sources - my Turkish is non-existent, and I don't really have time just now to use Google translate and try to make sense of the machine translation, but I assume that you have read through them carefully and are confident that they are reliable and support the assertions.

There are a few comments I've got about some of the content, which I'll put on the article talk page rather than here - hopefully they'll be easy fixes, but I think that's the proper place for a discussion about them. Cheers! GirthSummit _(blether) 11:59, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes, this guy actually is very famous in Turkey (especially among the "modern" Turks, much less by the conservatives), but unknown abroad (although there are a couple of Wikipedias besides the Turkish one with an article about him). You are right about the refs, it is a copy paste error of mine, sorry! I know some Turkish, and actually I checked all the sources at my best. I will correct the mistakes on the discussion page now, then I will add a couple of infos about his private life (I found out that he had a fiancé ;-)): thanks a lot for your help! Alex2006 (talk) 16:08, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Advice needed

Hi Girth, how are you? I feel I need your advice once again... Please, have a look at this. I rollbacked as unsourced and defamatory and warned accordingly, but I'm asking myself if a revdel would be also appropriated... Thanks a lot in advance. Cheers, Horst Hof (talk) 07:43, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

@Horst Hof: Hi - I would say that does need to be revdelled. Have you used IRC to do this before - that's the quickest way to get attention. There's a link to the IRC channel on my userpage. I can't access IRC from my work computer (it gets blocked), so I can't do this immediately for you - if you're not confident about IRC, the next best alternative is to e-mail an admin on this list. As you probably know, putting links to stuff like that on talk pages isn't ideal, due to the Streisand effect, so IRC/e-mail is better. Let me know if you need any help with this. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 10:03, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Girth. You're always very kind and helpful. Cheers. Horst Hof (talk) 10:27, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

You're always welcome - thanks for keeping up the good work on counter vandalism! GirthSummit _(blether) 10:32, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Mission accomplished! the edit has been revdelled... Cheers and thanks again, Horst Hof (talk) 12:03, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	For going that extra mile to help out. Whispyhistory (talk) 17:55, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! It was great to meet you, I'm looking forward to working on the article. GirthSummit _(blether) 18:12, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Girth Summit! You created a thread called Is there anything like a 'Not to be confused with...' template for articles? at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Apologies for slow responses on Counter Vandalism

I quickly needed to get this off my chest, I wanted to quickly apologize for not getting the next section of the course done in a timely manner, I’ve struggled with inconsistent motivation, and school work, and I will likely have even less time in the coming weeks as finals come closer. James-the-Charizard (talk) 03:25, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi James-the-Charizard - no problem, I completely understand that real life gets in the way sometimes. What do you want to do now? I'll be happy to put this on hold until your finals are over, and then we can pick it up afterwards; on the other hand, if your interest has waned and you just want to terminate the training now, that's fine too - we're all volunteers, there's no onus on you to complete the course if you are no longer interested. Just let me know what you prefer - and good luck with your finals! Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 17:21, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

@Girth Summit: I would like to keep it going at the moment, but I will pause when the studying for finals gets underway. I will keep you up to speed when that gets to be. Thanks. James-the-Charizard (talk) 17:31, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

@James-the-Charizard: Hope the course don't interfere with your study. I recommend you to resume the course after your finals (that's what I did). It will be lot quicker that way. Also you don't need to ping Girth on his talk page, talk page owners get notified by notification automatically. Masum Reza^📞 12:48, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

@Masumrezarock100: My study for finals has not started yet (It won’t until the second to last week of school, which is starting from June 3rd) But I will time down Wikipedia a bit when we get to that point. I have education set first before this website. James-the-Charizard (talk) 13:00, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi James-the-Charizard - you've absolutely got your priorities right there! Whenever suits you, please read through the training page again to remind yourself where you are at, and pick up the next task. Ping me from there when you are ready for me to review your work, or if you have any questions you'd like me to look at. (Better to ask any questions about the content of the course there on the training page, so we can refer back to them later if necessary). Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 13:03, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Facebook

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Facebook. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Knights Templar in Scotland

Hi there. Someone, anonymous, has made an addition to a page I am watching (intending to update it in the future). The addition is pure speculation and no source is cited. I was going to change it back to the original (reverting?) but I am not sure if I have the authority or ability (!) to do that. The change page is at: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Knights_Templar_in_Scotland&diff=next&oldid=897681626 Your advice would be much appreciated. Ericthearcher (talk) 15:56, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ericthearcher - in a situation like that, you have two options. You can revert to the previous version, or you can add a 'citation needed' tag (you do the latter by typing {{fact}} after the unsourced assertion. In this case, I think that reverting would be fine - you should leave an edit summary along the lines of 'This is unsourced - please discuss on talk page before reinserting'. Let me know if you user reinstates it after your reversion - don't be tempted to get into an 'edit war' with them, I'll help you take the appropriate action if they're re-reverting and refusing to discuss. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 16:03, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Juan Arias (horse trainer)

On subjects about which you have no knowledge it's probably a lot easier and would save everybody a lot of time if you have doubts about "notability" just to leave a note on Wikipedia:WikiProject Horse racing which is always on the article talk page. They have editors who know these things. Any horse, jockey, or trainer who wins the Kentucky Derby (the most important horse race in North America) gets a bio at Wikipedia. If they win the Preakness Stakes then they are one race away from horseracing immortality. Juan Arias is not just a horse racing legend in his native Venezuela, he is in N.A. as well. Also, the refs you installed have no titles and are in a different format? Did you want me to fix them and if so, should I change your format or am I using the wrong one? Thanks, appreciate your effort to help out. Stretchrunner (talk) 08:58, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Stretchrunner - thanks for reaching out, although I confess I've had friendlier introductions. I accept that I don't know a much about horse racing, but I do have a working understanding of notability and sourcing - when I reviewed this article, I saw only two sources, neither of which gave the subject anything better than trivial coverage - not enough to pass GNG. I did a quick check and found some sources with more significant coverage, but real life got in the way last night and I didn't have time to work them up fully, so added them to the page as bare URLs to ensure that another patroller didn't come along and nominate the article for deletion. As I tried to explain in my edit summary, I intended to work them up properly shortly - which I have started doing now. Give me a few minutes and they'll be sorted. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 09:20, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Thames British School Draft

Thank you for taking the time out to review the article. I'll do my best to make the subsequent changes and resubmit it when I think I may have resolved the issues. Thanks again.

No problem Praevalebit - feel free to drop me a note if you want me to cast an eye over it before resubmitting - that might save you another long wait! Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 17:54, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

A comment on pinging: a notification is sent to a user if you enter a link to the user's page and you sign in the same edit. So when you fixed a link to User:Praevalebit above but did not add a new ~~~~ signature, then Praevalebit was not notified. --CiaPan (talk) 18:39, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi CiaPan - thanks for keeping an eye out - I actually knew that already, and even went as far as to type the word 'resign' in my edit summary, but for some reason I forgot to actually resign the post. My head must not be working properly today, I'll need to get it cleaned out... Hopefully Praevalebit will have see the reply following your ping. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 18:43, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

@Girth Summit:  :) CiaPan (talk) 18:50, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

I didn't check the 'talk page' here and didn't alert you of the changes before resubmitting. It would have been good for you to cast a glance over the article (I would have fully appreciated it!). Anyway, I think I managed to make the necessary changes... Praevalebit (talk) 19:23, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Praevalebit - I took a quick look at the sources you added. I'm afraid my Polish is non-existent, so I can't really assess the Przeglad document (it's a PDF, so I can't get Chrome to translate it for me), but that might be the best source - the Kuratorium source is a simple directory listing (not significant coverage), and the 'Our Kids' site has obviously been written by the school (not independent). I'll leave it for another reviewer, hopefully with appropriate language skills, to make the assessment, but anything else you can find and add would strengthen the case. BTW, I notice that your user page indicates that you work at a school in Warsaw, but you haven't specified whether it's this school. In my decline notice, I gave you some links to WP:COI and WP:PAID, please do review these - if you have any connection to this school, especially a financial one, it's important for you to declare that if you are going to write about it. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 11:21, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks again for checking. I thought those links may work, I can remove the OurKids one as it is a listing of the school but with an opinion written by OurKids itself (and I thought that might add some form of independent aspect to the page). The Kuratorium listing is a government website that lists the existence of every school registered in Poland so I thought that might be useful as well. The newspaper article is just a small article within the middle section of the newspaper which announces that there's a new school in Piaseczno. As for the school, it is true that I work for the school (and there's no financial incentive!) so I've just gone through with the declaration process (quite interesting!). Also, I would like to mention other school wiki pages (of international schools in Poland) link to their own websites but I thought those links I added might be enough as I'm having difficulty finding any better links. Please let me know what to do with the links I've submitted (now that you know my reasoning behind them :) ) Praevalebit (talk) 11:42, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Praevalebit, sorry if I wasn't clear - I don't think you need to remove those links, just that in and of themselves they aren't the best possible sources for the reasons I mentioned. If you can find anything else that's independent of the school that would be even better, but don't feel that you need to cut them at the moment. Thanks for clarifying your connection to the school. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 12:07, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

I suppose the issue is that we're a new school and we've relied on a lot of marketing to promote us via social media... They are the only 'independent' links I could find without having to delve into online forums ;). I've also had a look at the WikiProject/Schools guidelines and I'm trying to follow them step by step. Praevalebit (talk) 12:27, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Cullen Old Church

On 28 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cullen Old Church, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the internal organs of Elizabeth de Burgh, wife of Robert the Bruce, were buried at Cullen Old Church? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cullen Old Church. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Cullen Old Church), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

wrong accusation

it should be blindingly obvious why my edit was an improvement for neutrality and basic correctness. a foolish biased editor reverted it so i changed it back. then you issue a warning. are you dumb? use your brain, else wikipedia will be a junkyard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎86.141.32.224 (talk) 10:47, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi - you're going to need to drop that attitude if you want to edit here - calling another editor 'foolish and biased' is a personal attack (see NPA), and if you continue with your WP:BATTLEGROUND approach to content disputes your IP address will very soon be blocked from editing.

I'm afraid that it's not blindingly obvious to me that your edit was an improvement. This isn't the place to discuss that however - the section on the relevant talk page, which I created for you and directed you to, is the proper place for that. I warn you though that if you continue to make personal attacks and uncivil remarks, you will get pretty short shrift. GirthSummit _(blether) 11:06, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

please note that your blind reverting of my reverting of some other fool's reverting of my good improvements to an article, was rather uncivil in itself, so you warranted my response. also note that while i am an expert on the subject matter i originally corrected, which was stupidly reverted, am not a wikipedia expert, so the proper place for me to do stuff is not jump hoops and hoops, it's to drop a message back to you in the only easy way i know, which happens to be the same gesture in how you dropped a message to me. the buck stops with you, the foolish editor, so you can clean up your own mess - i've worked enough on it which you've uncivilly blindly reverted.

OK, first things first - there's no need to create a new section each time you post - just append comments to the existing section. You can read more about how to conduct talk page discussions at WP:THREAD.

Now, if you want to carry on any kind of discussion with me, or any other editor, you need to drop the attitude and stop insulting people. In your last post here you made a personal attack against another editor; I warned you about WP:NPA, and you've gone on to make one against me. I am not going to engage in any kind of discussion with you about content while you are insulting people. If you do that again, I will ask for administrative action to be taken against you. If you want to generate consensus for the changes you want to see made, I suggest you do it in a civil manner on the article talk page. GirthSummit _(blether) 11:40, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

you need to own up to your mistake of blindly undoing my good work. i see why you're so foolish now: you did a course in counter vandalism so think you have a formula to roam wikipedia undoing everything based on stereotypes even in subjects you know nothing about. and you want to go on about admin action? what a dickhead.