User Talk:Anarchyte

Need Assistance.

Hi Anarchyte,

I am trying to edit the page and as you suggested, I am trying to add citations but I need some help. I figured how to cite, however, I get a different number for the citation for extracts that belong to the same link that I add. How do I cite multiple sentences using a common reference link? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ForsakenRadical (talk • contribs) 11:06, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

@ForsakenRadical: See WP:REFB for a basic rundown of referencing. To add a basic website reference, do the following:
<ref name="example1">{{cite web|url=http://www.example.com|website=[[Example]]|access-date=6 August 2024|date=date of publish|title=title of post/website|first=first name of author|last=last name of author}}</ref>

I used {{date}} in the |date= parameter. You should never do this and instead insert todays date. I'm only using this as an example.

That will produce: (please note that I used 22 May 2016 as the date becaues there's no actual date for this website's publication -- if there's no publication date, don't include the date parameter)

References

If you wish to use that same reference again, all you do is <ref name="example1"/>

That'll produce:

References

As you can see, there are two parts using the same reference (a and b). Clicking on either of the letters will take you to where the reference is. You may also see that they are both defined as ^[1]; not ^[1] and ^[2].

For a full list of parameters when citing a website, see Template:cite web. I hope this helps you! Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:20, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Terrence Howard

What do you mean it does not appear constructive? I just quoted him from the same magazine that the source was from since the information was out of text. And you basically just edited the part out where he defended himself. Is there some conspiracy against him? You cant conveniently show the bad stuff about him and not the good stuff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lord NnNn (talk • contribs) 13:09, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

@Lord NnNn: In the edit I reverted, you added defamatory content without referencing it. That's a violation of WP:BLP. Contact Denisarona about the other revert. Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:17, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Page mover granted

Hello, Anarchyte. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, and move subpages when moving the parent page(s).

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving redirect. When you move a page, please remember to correct any double-redirects and make link corrections where necessary. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:

• Wikipedia:Requested moves
• Category:Articles to be moved, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, post here, or just let me know. Thank you, and happy editing! — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 01:21, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Mary, mother of Jesus

As an uninvolved editor, would you please consider closing the move request here and moving the page? My take is that supporters have outvoted the opposition, with superior policy-based arguments. Thanks either way. Deus vult (aliquid)! Crusadestudent (talk) 20:06, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

@Crusadestudent: Done. Anarchyte (work | talk) 22:18, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. There's a similar situation at Solus Christus and at Veritatis Splendor—in the first, the title is grammatically incorrect as is; belongs in Latin ablative, but is in nominative instead for no apparent reason. In the second, the capitalization is improper, since the title is really an incipit. Do you have permissions to fix these? Deus vult (aliquid)! Crusadestudent (talk) 22:25, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

@Crusadestudent:. I've moved Veritatis Splendor but I'm gonna leave Solus Christus for discussion because I know no latin and I'd rather not make a mistake with it. Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:13, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Closing RMs

Hey mate, thanks for your work making RM closures. Following up on your closure at Talk:Home economics, there are a few things I feel I should point out. If you're going to tag the move for CSD that's fine, but you need to keep an eye on the page until after everything has been completed. Some of the regular CSD admins are unfamiliar with regularly moving pages and in this case DGG left the talk page behind and also deleted rather than preserved the history of the target (this was arguably your responsibility to make clearer when tagging the page – I did note in my nomination that the history had to be preserved for attribution). I've cleaned it up now but it's something to keep in mind for the future. Additionally, you might want to consider adding rationales to your closes, especially in cases like this where it wasn't really unanimous (even if no one explicitly opposed). It doesn't have to long, it can just be a sentence or so for most cases. And just glancing at the "Mary, mother of Jesus" close, I wouldn't bother suppressing redirects for talk page archives – they can be useful to have and do no harm. Hope this doesn't sound overly critical, I appreciate the work you're doing. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 12:29, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jenks24, thanks for the kind words. As for the "Mary, mother of Jesus" close, I suppressed the edits because I moved a page back to the original location. As far as I know, when I don't leave a redirect, it'll delete all subpages and move them too. I can make redirects if you so desire. The process of moves was like this:

1. moved page Mary, mother of Jesus to Mary (mother of jesus) without leaving a redirect (make way for a move)
2. moved page Mary (mother of Jesus) to Mary, mother of Jesus without leaving a redirect (Talk page discussion)
3. moved page Mary (mother of jesus) to Mary (mother of Jesus) without leaving a redirect (temp page not needed anymore)

As seen in my logs. Please inform me if there's a cleaner way of completely this process.

As for not leaving rationale for the close, I normally only leave it out if the consensus is obvious, such as cases where there's no opposition and only supportive comments posted, and vice versa (although I normally say something like "not moved as this isn't the primary topic", etc). Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:39, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Yep, just glanced at a few of your other closes and saw that you usually leave an explanation so feel free to ignore my point about that. With the redirects, I see that now – it makes sense what you've done. I thought we might have a few little hiccups like this with the new page mover rights, but I suppose the benefits far outweigh the drawbacks. In this case, where there are subpages that you'd like to keep redirects for, I think the best solution would be:

1. Move Mary, mother of Jesus to Mary (mother of jesus) (or some other variant that is a plausible redirect) without leaving a redirect (you then keep this redirect rather than moving it elsewhere later)
2. Move Mary (mother of Jesus) to Mary, mother of Jesus with redirect
3. Done

So basically you avoid doing a full "round-robin" move, you just get the target title clear by moving it some plausible redirect. I think you'd only need to do this in situations where there are subpages, but it might also be handy in other situations. Jenks24 (talk) 12:53, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

@Jenks24: Ah alright, I'll try to do that from now on. Although I don't think it'd be possible to give out such a right, it'd be benificial if PMs had the ability to overwrite a redirect page. Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:53, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree with that completely. Jenks24 (talk) 13:50, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Careful with the page moves

Hey, Anarchyte, just a heads up: I see that you moved TBOF to The Battle of Fashion a few days ago. It was actually a hoax article that had been repeatedly deleted and recreated, and which had been protected against further recreation; your pagemove had the effect of bypassing the salting of the page (since it was only set to extended-confirmed protection). Not a big deal at all, the mistake was easy to make--it was an unusually legitimate-looking hoax--but it just might be worthwhile checking the target destination for protection settings before making a page move. Out of curiosity, if you happen to remmeber: was the move the result of a move request, or did you just stumble upon it? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:43, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Interesting, I could have sworn you used to get a warning message when moving to a salted title. I've asked at VPT to see if that was the case (and if not, if we can make it so). See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Warning message when moving to a salted title?. Jenks24 (talk) 21:20, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that'd definitely be a much better thing. I suppose I could write a script for it (similar to my script that warns about links from mainspace, redirects, and transclusions before deleting works), but that's nowhere near as good as having a real system message. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:33, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

@Writ Keeper: I found it while patrolling new pages, IIRC. Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:46, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Marc Clark (Sculptor)

Hi Anarchyte,

Thank you for your encouraging words after the rejection of my Draft "Marc Clark (Sculptor)".

I am writing to request that you have a look at the latest changes I have made and your thoughts before I re-submit,

Thanks,

JohnFlashpepi (talk) 21:49, 26 May 2016 (UTC)Flashpepi (talk) 21:58, 26 May 2016 (UTC) Flashpepi (talk) 22:01, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

@Flashpepi: Hi, after a quick read, you're might want to use WP:PROSE to list out his acomplishments, exhibitions, etc. The majority are also unreferenced, which is never good. Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:51, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi

thanks, will give it a go!

John

Flashpepi (talk) 07:49, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

thanks for the hard word

Wow you're whacking through them I thought I was on me own. Keep going old bean, thank you for it. We are not always going to agree but we can disagree civilly at WP:RFD I appreciate that someone else is helping me out. Si Trew (talk) 10:53, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

@SimonTrew: Aha, I got bored and decided to take a look at the task you set yourself; 5 pages of over 5 thousand redirects each. Decided I'd help you out a bit . Anarchyte (work | talk) 10:56, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Sorry for the typos my hands are very stiff of course I meant hard work I missed. It's fine I am trogging through them. I am kinda off work with poorly hands and the least I can do is to trog through these and clean up a few. It helps excercise my hands too. The bloody gum they put in them got in the trackball yesterday but fortunately I have a second one (I am a careful planning idiot) it was really hard to put it into the back of the computer this morning in the USB cable thing and so it is really frustrating something that would usually take seconds takes ages. Me missus yesterday made me put on a shirt and cufflinks. (All my shirts are double cuffed or french cuffed I think the Americans call it and need cufflinks) Now putting on cufflinks that was sodding hard. I just got a bit of a cut off the street some it of scrap metal or glass but it is taking a long time to heal. Si Trew (talk) 10:57, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

You know you can take under WP:G6 "Neelix concession" you can take these straight to CSD you don't have to bring them to RfD. That is really the entire extent of that concession in that if they are obvious nonsense you can take them straight to CSD. It's a hard call because none of us wants to clutter RfD obviously neither do we want to delete things that are genuinely useful (I keep) quite a few and rcat them this morning as it happens most haven't been that way but yesterday I reckon about 40% from the infamous User:Anomie/Neelix list went that way by me). I'll keep trogging through em, set me a job I will do it and this is kinda my job right now. I can do it with a cigarette and a glass of pálinka so it is not really too bad a job! Si Trew (talk) 11:07, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

@SimonTrew: Hi, about the glacier redirects, I'm slowly adding them to a massive list and putting them all onto the page at once. I don't think WP:G6 applies to them in this case. WP:RFD is gonna need to look bad for a few minutes just while I do some maintenance. See User:Anarchyte/sandbox/neelix glaciers Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:18, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

You don't need to RfD them. Read WP:G6 with the "Neelix concession". If they are created by User:Neelix you can take them straight to WP:CSD you don't need to list them at RfD. Some of them "bounce" as one or two of mine did this morning because the admins will disagree and that's fine, then you take them to RfD that is WP:BRD I have no problem with that. But if you take every single one to RfD apart from causing yourself work you are in danger of flooding RfD and they get quite bored of that and won't notice. Believe me, I do about a hundred a day. It also means that other people other than the Neelix list it kinda "floods" so that they can't see the ones brought that are not by Neelix. (I also tend to just write Neelix on the top or somewhere, and I believe truly that Neelix was in good faith in creating these, it is just shorthand as WP:G6 advises). That is why I try very much to limit the number I bring to RfD. You can take most as essentially WP:BOLD to CSD. Good luck! And if we're in edit conflict I will just choose another list so we're not always treading on each other's toes. Si Trew (talk) 11:52, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

I actually went through all the glacier ones yesterday and I am making this up but we had absurd things like glacializing or something which I took straight to CSD. I killed about thirty so what you're doing is the ones I thought were just about plausible. Keep going, you won't get any thanks for it, except from me. You'll probably be called a "Neelix basher" taken to WP:ANI and lots of other things just to try to make a decent index in an encylopaeidia. As I have stated in many places i believe Neelix in good faith created these to make the encylopaeidia better when the search engine was not as good as it is now. Now the search engine is kinda well half as crappy thanks to the folks over at MetaWiki a lot of these things get in the way of readers trying to find information. I am just the librarian kinda at the back saying why is the index seven times the size of the book? Keep going. Si Trew (talk) 11:57, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Aha, yeah, I also believe Neelix was entirely in good faith but if people wish to see the bad sides of something like this, that's their opinion and they're entitled to it. Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:03, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

About the move of "Snowy Dunes" to mainspace.

Hi Anarchyte,

I appreciate the swift move. Could you please help me out with how I may improve the article, in order for it to not get nominated for deletion under WP:A7?

Thanks in advance!Yasir.alsaffar (talk) 12:43, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi, read WP:NMUSIC. Also, if it is deleted, use WP:REFUND to get it back. You can use Articles for Creation to make sure the page is okay for mainspace next time.

In case you didn't know, you can move pages yourself. On the top bar (next to view history, edit, watchlist, etc) click/hover over the "More" button and click move. Then find whichever namespace you want to move it to and write in the new name. Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:48, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

deletion of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:GITM

Then why this page is there https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Northcap_University which says it is top college. and one another page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Institute_of_Technology_%26_Management,_Gurgaon.

standard should be same for all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamalthakur12 (talk • contribs) 13:29, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I have provided two sources in my article which are managed by Indian Govt. Why this comment of not using reliable sources then. Third one is the Website with gives all the information regarding the Institute. ~~kamalthakurKamalthakur12 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:02, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello Kamalthakur12. It has not been nominated for deletion, only declined. Please read WP:RS to find out why I declined the draft as relying on unreliable sources. I hope this answers your questions. Anarchyte (work | talk) 10:05, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Anarchyte, this editor appears to have ignored your advice and created Gurgaon Institute of Technology and Management, (GITM). 220 of ^Borg 15:12, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

article "raceroom" notification

hello anarchyte,

i found a notification about my first try to crate an article. it´s my first article here @ wiki and i try hard to follow all rulez, wiki has. the article is far away from ready, i know. i edited it several hours, maybe you would read the article again and help me laeving some suggestion to give readers a better experience reading the article?

best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.8.66.25 (talk) 10:51, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

@77.8.66.25 and Inspektor-marek: Your best bet is to leave a comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raceroom. If you wish to work on it, either do
'''Draftify'''. I wish to continue working on it. ~~~~
or find some more references and do '''Keep'''. I've found more sources at link the references here. ~~~~. Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:07, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

@77.8.66.25 and Inspektor-marek: Actually, scratch that. With the new references uncovered by Hahnchen I'm gonna withdrawl the nomination. If you're still working on the article I'd recommend adding {{under construction|date=May 2016}} to the top. Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:57, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Request on 13:37:09, 28 May 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Singha.sanat

• Singha.sanat (talk · contribs)
  • User:Singha.sanat/sandbox/About Sanat Singha (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi Anarchyte, First of all, many thanks that you visited my article page - "About Sanat Singha" and left your comments. Since, I am a newbie in creating Wiki page, I need to understand what kind reliable sources will help authenticate my profile. So far, I have added a few references of my profile from different blogs and social media sites where I have accounts. If I need to provide additional references, please suggest me the names or their types. Once the suggestions received, I will work on them and then re-submit the page for your re-review. Your guidance will assist me and I shall be thankful to you for your help.

Singha.sanat (talk) 13:37, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

@Singha.sanat: You draft was declined because it wasn't backed up by reliable sources. A reliable source is written a published article written by a third-party which displays why the topic is notable. Blogs, LinkedIn profiles, etc aren't considered reliable because they are self-published. You also need to add inline citations to your article. Anarchyte (work | talk) 02:35, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

@Anarchyte Thanks for replying to me with the feedback. Right now I only have one source - http://nancybadillo.com/interview-sanat-singha-websigmas-com/ where I was interviewed by Nancy Badillo. Will that be counted here? As far as inline citations are concerned, I have articles on web technology, software development published by renowned blogs and tech communities like CMCross Roads by Techwell, DZone, Techgig by Times of India Group, Search Engine Journal, Skyje as well as the tech companies for which I wrote articles. Will they be accepted for creating inline citations? Please let me know your feedback. Thanks once again. Singha.sanat (talk) 04:02, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Southern Air Command (India)

Hi Anarchyte, could you revisit your close at Talk:Southern Air Command (India)? I have a couple of concerns. For one, there was only one oppose !vote and I don't think it spoke to the support arguments and evidence very clearly - at least, I don't see it "outweighing" the support arguements. I also don't see the relevance of MOS:MILMOS#UNITNAME which you cited in your summary to the primary topic question. Thanks,--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:17, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

@Cuchullain: Hi, I closed it with the WP:MILMOS#UNITNAME reasoning because of the 4th paragraph there. For units, the optional disambiguator should be the common name of the country whose armed forces the unit belongs to (as in 4th Infantry Division (United Kingdom)), or, if such usage is still ambiguous (or where the unit does not serve a country), the name of the service branch to which the unit belongs (as in 1st Panzer Division (Wehrmacht)). The disambiguator is not necessary in cases where the name of the country is already present in the name of the unit (as in The Queen's Own Rifles of Canada), or where the name is clearly unique (as in Preobrazhensky regiment). I agreed with DaltonCastle, when they said I think its important to keep the nation in the title for military units. For example, simply looking up "Marine Corps" or "Marines" brings up an article about marines as a type of unit - NOT the United States Marine Corps, which is viewed far more than both the "Marines" article and the articles of other nations' Marine units. Per UNITNAME, I left the page unmoved because there are (or were) multiple armed forces using the same name (mentioned by Buckshot06). Per WP:TPTM, I think it'd be a smarter idea in the long term to leave the pages as-is and keep Southern Air Command as a disambiguation page. If you have any more questions, feel free to respond . Anarchyte (work | talk) 02:28, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

I think those are reasonable points to raise in a !vote of your own, but I don't think it's really a fair reading of the consensus in the discussion. Most of us were talking about whether or not the subject is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, which is a question of whether or not disambiguation is even needed. No one had mentioned WP:MILMOS#UNITNAME, which offers guidelines on what to do in the event disambiguation is needed (my argument, and that of other participants, is that it's not). Perhaps you could reopen the discussion and add your points as a vote?--Cúchullain ^t/c 03:19, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Okay, if you wish for me to undo my edit and add a vote, I shall. (Also, it was Buckshot06 that linked WP:MILMOS#UNITNAME). Anarchyte (work | talk) 04:07, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

About your non-admin closure

I have the impression that, at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Wikicology/Adopt/Copyright, you missed the fact that User:Wikicology/Adopt/Copyright is a blattant copyvio. Best regards. Pldx1 (talk) 23:03, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

@Pldx1: Lay off Anarchyte, please. The closure was a procedural measure only, as the MFD had been withdrawn by the nominator and speedy-keep votes all around, and was already due to be closed for this reason 87 minutes before you !voted. (This is the actual definition of WP:SNOW, by the way; you really should read that page some time, because you keep quoting it inaccurately.) If you think the page is a copyright violation of User:Worm That Turned's work (and I suspect you are right), then please feel free to open another MFD or template it to be speedy deleted. The initial MFD rationale made no reference whatsoever to copyright, and was a form of grave-dancing. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 23:59, 28 May 2016 (UTC)