Jump to content

User talk:Victor Schmidt

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rebellato (talk | contribs) at 08:15, 29 June 2020 (→‎Mark Ravenhill). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Hello, welcome to my talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom, as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!


pls don’t block me

Category:Belarusian music chart "LF Top Songs"

This page is not related to Alex9777777, please do not delete the category!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Billboard_Hot_100_number-one_singles there is , then let it be and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Belarusian_music_chart_%22LF_Top_Songs%22 The world is equal for everyone, the category has the right to exist !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The chart has official pages -> https://posts.google.com/share/ZazhHI6x — Preceding unsigned comment added by Music proekt (talk • contribs) 16:29, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please dont spread things over multiple pages. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:33, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please respect the work of other people and do not delete the category!!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Music proekt (talk • contribs) 16:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please: (1) Category aren't articles, so please Create at Belarusian music chart "LF Top Songs" or (better based on your text) Draft:Belarusian music chart "LF Top Songs" (2) It isn't exactly helpfull to bold your comments or end it with Exclamation marks, see WP:DS (3) Please sign your posts. (4) If you oppose the deletion of a page, please say why at the appropriate page where the discussion is taking place. The removal of the XfD tags is not allowed, and will you eventionally get blocked because this will appear like someone who wants to force that a particular page existing contradicting WP:OWN (5) The page was nominated because the nominator thinks it was created by the banned user Alex9777777 in violation of his WP:BAN. I dont know the case behind Alex9777777 exactly, but you will eventually know that better. Anyway, you may want to have a read of WP:FREE. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:54, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Victor! You're wasting your breath (well, your typing) with this one. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Alex9777777. This user has been creating pages to promote an online radio station, and its non-notable founder Pechkurov Aleksej, for several years. Most of the article-space names they used have been deleted and salted, so they have moved to making category pages. I ran into them back in August (see my talk page) after they created the same page under a different name (from a different, now-blocked, sock account). Same pattern of behavior - they will repeatedly remove deletion tags and completely miss the point of everything you say. I've added them to AIV since it is an obvious sock, may have to escalate to a full sockpuppet investigation if that takes too long. Thanks, and happy editing! PohranicniStraze (talk) 17:11, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@PohranicniStraze: as I wrote above, I don't know the story behind User:Alex9777777, so I decided to use AGF, even if it might be not the right way, and I gave him a level 4 warning a while ago. If he resumes with this account, he will get blocked, if he resumes with another account or IP, he will get blocked, if he is indeed not Alex9777777, well, then he had a bad start editing here. Anyway, happy editing! Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:17, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Questioning your message to me

Hello matey, Sorry for the late response. You know how life is down the club but cause of lockdown I’m here to talk. I do not see how my editing was disruptive. Could you please explain this all to me. Don’t ban me I love it here on the wiki. ScarlettCheese (talk) 21:16, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh amazing. I diddn't even remember this until I saw it was 1 year ago... Well, as you may or may not noticed, I reverted not only your version but also the version by the IP before. Wikipedia as an encyclopedia doesn't simpy sax "XXX is gay this is the truth". The core principle here is Verifability, not truth. Futher, I don't see any reason why we should talk about some random Wiliam in a page titled Debel. Thats presumably why I warned you as well. You may want to have a look at WP:Vandalism. If you want to make further edits related in that way (including the ones from yesterday) please use the Sandbox for that. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:19, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect message

Hi Victor, hope you don't mind me asking for a bit of help. As you'll have seen I recently moved the article 'Helena Slizynska' from my sandbox to Wikipedia, but I still have a 'This page is a redirect' message in my sandbox. Any idea how to remove or rectify this please? Many thanks, Clare ClareB (talk) 11:05, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ClareB: Click "Edit", remove #REDIRECT [[Helena Slizynska]] along with {{Redirect category shell|{{R from move}}}} then hit save. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:11, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Victor, I was having trouble deleting but it seems to be sorted now. ClareB (talk) 11:20, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Victor, thank you for not only telling me how to fix my equation references, but also doing it for me! I'm brand new to editing Wikipedia as of yesterday. --LittleDinghy (talk) 16:24, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Victor, please see the sub-section titled "New equation citation problem". I can't figure out how to fix this issue.

23:07, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Question

Hello Victor, i need your help with my issue please i am trying to add an album page for an Egyptian singer, as i added the album songs list and all the info. about the album but my submission wasn't accepted at first, then i added an external link as a reference which was a link from the company produced the album website, but it also wasn't accepted and i got a msg from you which was "your draft currently does not establish how this subject meets WP:NMUSIC. You have a single non-independent source linked. We require at least three reliable, independent sources." but i really can't handle it as i added a trusted source for the album. Could you please tell me what exactly i have to do? Thank you so much. 23:07, 29 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by S.elrefaie (talk • contribs)

Hello S.elrefaie, you need to find at least three sources that are independent of the subject, i.e. not written by someone affilated with the subject. Wikipedia is not interested in what subjects want to say about themselves (as you could say anything) but only what reliable independent sources have written about said subject. The blue text in my message aare links, you can click on them to find out more. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:07, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

S.elrefaie (talk) 04:47, 31 May 2020 (UTC) Hello Victor, Thank you for your reply and thank you for trying to help me. I understood what an independent source means, i added all the sources links below the "EXTERNAL LINKS" section, is it the right place or should i add them to another place? Thank you. S.elrefaie (talk) 04:47, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

World Federation of ADHD

Hi Victor Schmidt, thanks for your feedback. AngusWoof gave me the advice to skip the mission statement and broaden the history section instead, which I am planning to do next. As I've added already several external sources and references, I am wondering why this article should be deleted without having the chance for further revision? It is my second Wikipedia-article at all and it would be nice receiving valuable feedback and chances for revision instead of having it deleted, not? We've used the article from "The Movement Disorder Society" as a model and I am wondering why this was published with only four references at all (internal + external) and using website paraphrasing mainly? However, I'll adjust it in the way AngusWoof has suggested and will submit again. Regards, VaJaMe — Preceding unsigned comment added by VaJaMe (talk • contribs) 08:03, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@VaJaMe: This still largely relies on references to https://www.adhd-federation.org/, which is the subjects own website and not acceptable. Per the rules for selfpublishes sources and the rules for independent sources Citing the subject's own website should be kept at the absolute minimum. I will check every source added since the rejection.
If @AngusWOOF: Is willing to help you, I would it leave it up to him for the most part, and only contribute advice if you explicitely request it. Howewer, he is not willing or able to help you, it will unfortunally take some time, as my time resources for Wikipedia are currently very limited. As for The Movement Disorder Society, Thank you for pointing it out. I have added a maintainance tag for now, maybe I do more when I have more time. For future drafts please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS for why it is not a good Idea to use such sorts of arguments in most cases. In future, when you choose an article as a template, you can ask yourself a few questions.
  • Has the article a maintainance tag (the yellow-borderd-box at the top)? If so, its probbably not a good example
  • Quickly check the article sources for stuff that fails WP:INDEPENDENT or WP:SELFCITE or even WP:RS. If you find more than five sources that fail the criteria, or you are at more than 50% of the sources that fail the criteria, its probbably not a good example either. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:39, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Justification Wiki Victor Schmidt

Thanks for your feedback @Victor Schmidt, which helps me to better understand the rules of Wikipedia. Please find my comments below yours:

• [1] appears to be a congress paper from a congress organized by the subject of the draft. They can generally be independent, but that depends on the circumstances and they re probbably not going to help the article survive an WP:AFD. • I understand. It’s written by the professional congress organizer who’s our German partner for managing our meetings. • • http://www.russellbarkley.org/factsheets/TheWorldFederationOfAdhdGuide.pdf appears to be written by Organisation staff and therefore fails the rules for independent sources. • There is no paid staff of the organization, there are only honorary assessors in the boards. They are elected by the members. The link opens the e-book of the federation, but the link has been implemented by Russel A. Barkley, who is not involved in one of the boards of the federation. • • https://research-repository.uwa.edu.au/en/publications/organizing-and-delivering-treatment-for-adhd is literally the previous one in a different container (E-Book rather than pdf). • Scientific article written by Coghill, Chen and Silva, published in the above mentioned e-book from the Federation, serves as an example. The federation is publisher of this guide, but not all chapters are written by board members of the organization, for example this one. • • https://aadpa.com.au/international-consensus-statement-on-adhd/ has the same issiues as #3 • Published by the Australian Assocation on ADHD, not our association • • https://www.springer.com/journal/12402 is from what I can access yet another one written by the organisation rather than on the organisation. •  No, written by the publishing house Springer • • https://journalsandcongresses.pubshub.com/ph/journals/28020/details-adhd-attention-deficit-and-hyperactivity-disorders is not accessible for me either • Scientific article published by the publishing house Springer However, the current version lists more references than the ones you’ve used as an example, please let me know if there are any questions, too: • [https://www.emedevents.com/organizer-profile/world-federation-of-attention-deficit-hyperactivity-disorder-adhd • ^ [https://zh.chregister.ch/cr-portal/auszug/auszug.xhtml;jsessionid=323f0e02b0732bb8e5111e28c5bd?uid=CHE-114.550.595# • ^ [https://www.adhd-federation.org/about-us/Who-we-are.html • ^ [http://www.cpo-media.net/ADHD/Final_Programme_2019/HTML/files/assets/common/downloads/publication.pdf • ^ [https://www.adhd-federation.org/congresses-meetings/congress-history.html • ^ https://www.npz-hamburg.de/adhdworld19.html • ^ [http://evaluation%20https://www.adhd-federation.org/_Resources/Persistent/2ff53b6da96f2d5ea7664348a3ca0773763a289f/Evaluation%20Lisbon%202019.pdf • ^[http://www.russellbarkley.org/factsheets/TheWorldFederationOfAdhdGuide.pdf • ^ [https://research-repository.uwa.edu.au/en/publications/organizing-and-delivering-treatment-for-adhd • ^ https://aadpa.com.au/international-consensus-statement-on-adhd/ • ^ [https://www.springer.com/journal/12402 • ^https://journalsandcongresses.pubshub.com/ph/journals/28020/details-adhd-attention-deficit-and-hyperactivity-disorders • ^ [https://www.adhd-federation.org/about-us/medal-of-the-wfadhd.html • ^ [https://www.adhd-federation.org/about-us/board.html • ^ [https://www.upstate.edu/news/articles/2019/2019-05-22-faraonepresident.php

Thank you very much! I look forward discussing this with you in order to change it according to the regulations of Wikipedia. --VaJaMe (talk) 08:28, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

17:29, 24 June 2020‎

I'm not being directly or indirectly compensated for my edits on the page I'm editing (Fausto J Pinto). I edited a few publications and I got spammed. I tried to reverse the changes I had made but those publications always get removed. Can I please reverse the editing without everything get removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ACFGaspar (talk • contribs) 17:36, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ACFGaspar: You can, if you adhere to the rules of Wikipedia. One of them is that substantial edits need a consensus on the talkpage. Another one is that we dont use ALL CAPS. Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Wikipedia is not a complete list of article subject's works. I suggest you start reading at WP:Introduction. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:42, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Victor Schmidt, thank you for your feedback! I only started editing on Wikipedia yesterday, so I'm sorry for my questions and mistakes. I don't understand how do I adhere to the rules. I recognize that I did a massive publication without Wikipedia approval and mostly everything was deleted even things that were changed before and by other user, the following appeared on history: Rv massive spam (TW). I tried to undo it, but the following appeared "No this is chock full of unreliable sources, we don't format headings in all caps and the rest is spam (TW)" How can I fix this? It's really important, if I could just redo the last changes and not have all of the other editings by others users removed it would be perfect. Can you please help? Many thanks, ACFGaspar (talk) 22:05, 24 June 2020 (UTC)ACFGaspar[reply]

18:31, 25 June 2020‎

Diebeckmama (talk) 16:32, 25 June 2020 (UTC) Hello, why did you delete a draft in a personal name space before it was finished or moved to the public encyclopedia? By the way Energiesprong is not the product, but a concept. There was no advertisement intention. Cheers[reply]

Advertising isn't allowed anywhere. Wikipedia articles should be mainly written from what independent reliable sources say about the subject, not what the subject want's to say about itself. I have decided to stop you while you weren't in mainspace yet because it will cause way more trouble if something promotional appears in mainspace. 16:35, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Mark Ravenhill

Hi Victor, I've had another go at the Ravenhill revisions, citing more sources and removing unsourced evaluative language. Hope it's okay now and you don't need to revert. The previous version of the page is incoherent and full of errors so does need to be substantially revised.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Victor_Schmidt&oldid=965078683"