User talk:Bonadea/Archive 19

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Funny animals

Thank you for removing that external link from the article funny animal. I actually checked to see where it led. The website it led to has nothing to with the funny animal genre. It is a website where you can post pictures or real-life animals that you find funny. Dimadick (talk) 19:54, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Ayla Cantora

Ola Bonadea, I am Thiago, I believe that a mistake was made yes. Ayla is a great singer who is becoming very recognized in Brazil. And like (Ayla (producer), German trance producer and DJ); I believe her name can not be left out. The site of the singer is in maintenance and soon will be in the air again. I kindly wanted you to add the singer again. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by AylaCantora (talkcontribs) 20:57, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Responding on the user's talk page --bonadea contributions talk 21:35, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Sock is back

FYI, The potential Amitbhb12 sock is back again, recreated Akshay Bardapurkar again. Still waiting on SPI confirmation. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Thanks for the heads-up - the article was already gone by the time I saw this, but it's good to have many eyes on this company and their employees' actions. --bonadea contributions talk 15:46, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

About Userpage

I Have Created Many Times My Userpages But Those Have Been Deleted.Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehata Aditya (talkcontribs) 15:32, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

For the reasons that have been posted to your user talk page by me and other editors. (And no, your user page has not yet been deleted. Several Wikipedia articles and other pages that you have created about yourself have been deleted, and your user page is now tagged for deletion because it looks like you want to use Wikipedia as a free webhost, which it isn't.) Please do not create any more pages about yourself, and please read the information that's been added to your user talk page about what you may and may not have on your userpage. Thank you. --bonadea contributions talk 15:41, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Please Send Me A Form Of Userpage Where I Can Mention Thing According To Form Instruction.-Mehata Aditya (talk) 02:39, 15 January 2017 (UTC) @Bonadea:

@Mehata Aditya: When you are posting to somebody else's user talk page, you don't need to ping them because they will always be notified anyway. Please stop focusing on your user page for now - it looks like an administrator has actually protected your user page from being recreated. I'm pleased to see that you are working on other article pages, and recommend that you use the Wikipedia tea house (where there's almost always somebody around to respond quickly) if you want to ask questions about editing Wikipedia. --bonadea contributions talk 10:59, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

contributions via app?

Hello, given your interest in mobile, did you check this discussion out? Thanks! --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 22:11, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! I don't use an Android phone though so can't add anything to that discussion. --bonadea contributions talk 17:58, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Hebah Patel wiki page

Brother what is ur problem Rathan Meshiek (talk) 17:48, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

@Rathan Meshiek: Thank you for discussing rather than restoring the unsourced information. I'm not sure what is unclear, though? There are several different notices on your user talk page letting you know that you can't add information without a reliable source to an article about a living person, and there's a notice on Hebah Patel (which you must have seen since you removed it) asking all editors to not add a birth date or year without a reliable source. Thanks. --bonadea contributions talk 17:50, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Ah, I spoke too soon, I see that you've yet again removed the edit notice and added an unsourced birth date. Oh well. --bonadea contributions talk 17:52, 17 January 2017 (UTC)


Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

...Yeah, I'm only leaving this template because the reporter failed to do so. I've already closed it and said that no action will be taken :-). Cheers - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:38, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Cheers, Oshwah :-) It looks like a sock of User:Badman200772 (that's what I get for assuming good faith! ;p ) --bonadea contributions talk 06:44, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
HA! I just noticed that a few seconds ago. Account is blocked as a sock puppet. Sorry for wasting your time with this. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 06:47, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
NP, you are always welcome on my talk page :-) --bonadea contributions talk 06:56, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Help on Harrison Rogers's Page

Thank you for the instruction. I understand completely now. What do you suggest be provided to satisfy the templates? I am very familiar with this gentleman, and know that these references and statements are valid, but I can't find additional articles, posts or resources online.

MLR1990 (talk) 15:44, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed this due to all the sockpuppetry on this page. As the page is now semi protected I'll respond on your talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 19:08, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

User talk:Favonian

You sure about that revert? Seems like the IP is thanking him (the obvious harassment was removed by someone else before you). Perhaps you know something I don't, so I won't revert, but please take a look to confirm that's what you meant to do. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:44, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) (including my own talk page). Too much of a coincidence that this IP from India just pops out of nowhere with such an ambivalent note. Favonian (talk) 18:46, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
@Floquenbeam: Here's the thing: the IP (from one of the more common ranges used by Nsmutte) copied a post of mine on BethNaught's user talk page, here, and that's classic Nsmutte trolling. But that's not necessarily obvious to other people, so I should have said it - sorry about that. --bonadea contributions talk 18:53, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Well, that explains the suddenly improved English grammar. ;) Favonian (talk) 18:57, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Oh, don't apologize to me; I thought maybe there was more to it than what I knew, hence the question. Thanks, --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:01, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Why is this guy even still trolling the project? Most spammers keep on spammin' and try to keep out of sight, but you never (to my knowledge) see them waging this kind of sustained harassment/disruption campaign. GABgab 23:51, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, I wonder about that, too. The guy is (or claims to be) a medical doctor - the idea of a professional healer who takes pleasure in harassing and attempting to hurt other people is not exactly reassuring. Unless, of course, we believe that he's created 500+ sockpuppets to spam Wikipedia over the course of several years, in order to promote somebody else!
Oh, and this is possibly my least accurate prediction about anything, ever. :-P --bonadea contributions talk 16:46, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

New Wikiproject!

Hello, Bonadea! I saw you recently edited a page related to the Green party and green politics. There is a new WikiProject that has been formed - WikiProject Green Politics and I thought this might be something you'd be interested in joining! So please head on over to the project page and take a look! Thanks for your time. Me-123567-Me (talk) 18:57, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

British Israelism

I don't know if you noticed, but that was copied from here. And since there's no personal identifying information that I can find on ] this Facebook] page, I think I can link to it without being accused of outing. Some weird stuff there! Doug Weller talk 11:33, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Hmm. No, I had not noticed - good catch. It takes all sorts of peculiar beliefs to make a world, I guess. --bonadea contributions talk 12:01, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


Sorry for that. (Jai Rajput (talk) 08:55, 2 February 2017 (UTC))

New Page Review - newsletter No.2

Hello Bonadea,
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg
A HUGE backlog

We now have 655 New Page Reviewers!
Most of us requested the user right at PERM, expressing a wish to be able to do something about the huge backlog, but the chart on the right does not demonstrate any changes to the pre-user-right levels of October.

Hitting 17,000 soon

The backlog is still steadily growing at a rate of 150 a day or 4,650 a month. Only 20 reviews a day by each reviewer over the next few days would bring the backlog down to a managable level and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
It didn't work in time to relax for the Xmas/New Year holidays. Let's see if we can achieve our goal before Easter, otherwise by Thanksgiving it will be closer to 70,000.

Second set of eyes

Remember that we are the only guardians of quality of new articles, we alone have to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged by non-Reviewer patrollers and that new authors are not being bitten.


This is even more important and extra vigilance is required considering Orangemoody, and

  1. this very recent case of paid advertising by a Reviewer resulting in a community ban.
  2. this case in January of paid advertising by a Reviewer, also resulting in a community ban.
  3. This Reviewer is indefinitely blocked for sockpuppetry.

Coordinator election

Kudpung is stepping down after 6 years as unofficial coordinator of New Page Patrolling/Reviewing. There is enough work for two people and two coords are now required. Details are at NPR Coordinators; nominate someone or nominate yourself. Date for the actual suffrage will be published later.

Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:11, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Broccoli Pizza and Pasta Ltd

I'm pinging you in light of your role in fixing the recent hijacking of Ullaste to Broccoli pizza and pasta. I thought you'd like to know that Broccoli Pizza and Pasta Ltd was created just one day before. (I'm not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 23:56, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

DRN Revert

You reverted an edit that posted a case to the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. Had that edit been made by a sockpuppet of a banned or blocked user? If so, thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:03, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: Yes, a sock of long-term abuser Nsmutte. The sock has been blocked. Cheers, --bonadea contributions talk 20:08, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

ANI- you commented on the discussion on my talk

Re: asanas, as discussed on my talk. It's up. Take care! O Fortuna!...Imperatrix mundi. 16:38, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review-Patrolling: Coordinator elections

Your last chance to nominate yourself or any New Page Reviewer, See Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Coordination. Elections begin Monday 20 February 23:59 UTC. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

COI Template

Quote: Do not use this tag unless there are significant or substantial problems with the article's neutrality as a result of the contributor's involvement. Like the other {{POV}} tags, this tag is not meant to be a badge of shame or to "warn the reader" about the identities of the editors. Lyrda (talk) 16:02, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, quite. However, that has nothing to do with the use of that particular template on the article in question. Thank you. --bonadea contributions talk 16:03, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
How so? May I also ask how you came to the discussion as I have a feeling that someone inappropriately called for backup. Lyrda (talk) 16:14, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
AfD discussions are logged and listed in various places, and any discussion that has a lot of activity is going to draw more attention, that's simply in the nature of things. I was not asked by anybody to participate in the discussion. There is no hint of "badge of shame" in the use of the COI template; like any other maintenance template it is a way to improve an article by flagging it for the attention of uninvolved editors. --bonadea contributions talk 16:25, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
The template documentation says otherwise, as quoted above. Per Wikipedia:Help_desk#COI-tag_abuse, would you please remove the template? Note that it should not be used at all when the neutrality of the article is not questioned. Lyrda (talk) 16:36, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
It has been removed by another uninvolved editor. --bonadea contributions talk 16:48, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - newsletter No.3

Hello Bonadea,
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Voting for coordinators has now begun HERE and will continue through/to 23:59 UTC Monday 06 March. Please be sure to vote. Any registered, confirmed editor can vote. Nominations are now closed.

Still a MASSIVE backlog

We now have 655 New Page Reviewers but despite numerous appeals for help, the backlog has NOT been significantly reduced.
If you asked for the New Page Reviewer right, please consider investing a bit of time - every little helps preventing spam and trash entering the mainspace and Google when the 'NO_INDEX' tags expire.

Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:35, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

can i put it? only link

  • Atheism is nonsense and atheists are irrational in their claims — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callofworld (talkcontribs) 13:58, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
@Callofworld: You can add the link to your user talk page. You just can't copy and paste the text from that website because it is a copyright violation. (The link could not be used as a reference in a Wikipedia article, because it is a forum post, but that doesn't matter on your user talk page.) --bonadea contributions talk 14:01, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Who's the master behind your attacker?

Can't remember the master who keeps going after you. User:Banedua just copied your !vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sara Li word for word. I've reported the name as a disruptive impersonation name. Seems to be part of a campaign to make it look like you are socking. User: is part of it and User:Emoletelavadu is getting in on on it. Emol is just possibly good faith, but I doubt it. Meters (talk) 05:26, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Ahh... Nsmutte. And no AGF left for EmolMeters (talk) 05:32, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Indeed. Thanks for cleaning up! --bonadea contributions talk 05:41, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

A strike back by inclusionists

The inclusionists have now opened an ANI in the attempt to intimadate me out of contributing deletion nominations.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:32, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Remorse eSports

Just a quick heads up that this editor created an article called Remorse esports which was speedily deleted back in February. Onel5969 TT me 13:55, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

@Onel5969: Well, there you go - I'm not surprised to see that. Seems like a young guy who creates articles about what he would like things to be like, rather than what they are. If it were only that easy to fix reality...! Cheers, --bonadea contributions talk 13:59, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
There's another interesting tidbit... I just posted this message on an admin's talk page.Onel5969 TT me 14:09, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Supermann's COI

Hi there. I am not affiliated with any employer that would undermine my impartiality when it comes to editing. Please note this fact. Everything has been well-sourced reliably to the maximum extent possible. Thank you so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermann (talkcontribs) 09:50, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

That was maybe not the best approach to take, Supermann. You have been posting on behalf of Bliss Media, so the conflict of interest was already shown quite clearly, and as you knew when you posted this (because the info was there on your user talk page) a conflict of interest is not limited to being a salaried employee. Disclosing your COI would have been a simple thing, but trying to pretend it does not exist... well, I see you've already been blocked for it. --bonadea contributions talk 13:17, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Are these sockpuppets?

Hello, trust that you remember our conversation over dummy accounts from here.
Was hoping if you could help with a very similar scenario. For reason listed below, article Elliott Marc Jones seems to be influenced by sockpuppets of Samsonite24 (user)
When a proposed deletion and later, a CSD was issued, MANY new users started removing and contesting deletion.
Now, I'm not a 100% sure if and how I'm supposed to report this to WP:CHECK.
The following usernames seem suspicious (you may refer the users from both the article & talk pages -

  1. Chris hastings au
  2. Guanjosegonzales
  3. Santaslisthelper1991
  4. Maxmoefoewiki

Regret the intrusion though.
TopCipher (talk) 12:17, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
cc: @GSS-1987:

@Topcipher: I think you are absolutely right about this, and you should open a sockpuppet investigation about it. Do you use Twinkle? That makes it rather easy to start a SPI, but it's not that difficult to do manually via Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations. Drop me a line if you run into any difficulties. Also note that sometimes it takes a while before somebody gets to an SPI, and when the article is vandalised like this one, with single-purpose accounts arriving in droves to remove the sd tag, you can also request page protection at WP:RPP. Cheers, --bonadea contributions talk 13:25, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
@Topcipher: Yes they are please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mrmeatboy123. GSS (talk|c|em) 13:30, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, GSS-1987! --bonadea contributions talk 13:38, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
@Bonadea: @GSS-1987: Thank you very much! For now, let me shadow the movements of it's usage (check user's) as I think it would allow me to first understand the processes better (trust that these acquisitions require intense proof and further actions/follow-up) and I better get a good hold of them before having myself involved. Thanks, again!
TopCipher (talk) 14:04, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

CSD tagging of AfD discussions

When tagging AfDs for speedy deletion, make sure to place the template inside <noinclude>...</noinclude> tags, so the template does not transclude to the log. The tagging resulted in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as attack pages having nine entries, even though only one was tagged. Just wanted to let you know. —MRD2014 📞 What I've done 15:13, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, MRD2014 - I will do that in future. --bonadea contributions talk 15:14, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

I really can't believe

That you didn't jump at the chance of buying bath salts online ;) — O Fortuna! Imperatrix mundi. 12:03, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Some of us can't see a good thing if it jumps up and hits us in the eye, eh? (ow, bath salts in the eye. Not a pleasant thought.) ;-) --bonadea contributions talk 12:07, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
They'd be no use to me. I'd have to have a bath first :) An even more painful image! Take care, — O Fortuna! Imperatrix mundi. 12:30, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
@Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: Btw, it always pleases me when I get to put a "Yo, Fortuna" template on a tp post. Makes me smile like the moon (see what I did there?) Anyway, sorry, I'm sure you have heard that one too many times by now :-) --bonadea contributions talk 21:28, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Reconsideration of Afd/ Hello

Hi bonadea! I recently left you a comment on your response to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lorenzo Doryon I kindly ask that you read my comment and reconsider your response. I noticed you were from Sweden, very cool!! I hope to be able to visit one day. I am also studying philosophy in school interestingly enough. I was wondering how you added the female badge to your page? Is that something I can just copy the source from on your page and post it to mine, or is there a better way? Thank you! MusicSource17 (talk) 07:15, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

@MusicSource17: Hi, I've replied to your comment in the AfD. It can be very discouraging to have an article you've created deleted, but it's not a reflection on you, simply a matter of the person not (yet?) being notable enough to meet Wikipedia's peculiar notabilty criteria. As for the user box (that's what those "badges" are called), you can copy the code from User:Bonadea/UBX - they are free to use :-) There's a lot of different user boxes created by different people, which you can find through this page. Cheers, --bonadea contributions talk 07:30, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi bonadea, Thank you for informing me about the policy regarding comment formatting. I have added some additional things to the AfD that I would love to have your opinion on. I truly believe that the subject of my article meets the notability criteria and I am enjoying championing for this article. I have spent a lot of time on this article and would love to see it succeed. Hopefully with my last comment I was able to demonstrate further why I believe this subject meets the criteria. If you have any suggestions for me on how I can improve this article, I would love to hear them!! That is very generous of you to make those badges available. It really helps because sometimes I can get a bit confused on which pronouns to use when talking to certain users :) I will definitely be borrowing one of those when I have a chance to build out my user page. MusicSource17 (talk) 08:09, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Teaching Trouble speedy deletion

Hi Bonadea, you just added a speedy deletion tag to the Teaching Trouble short film article. Can you please completely confirm why you did this.Superpilot123456 (talk) 09:37, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

The article (which I can no longer see, so I have to go by memory) contained only an infobox about the film, so there was no context at all. When I looked into the production company, I found that it was not in fact a company but a group of Grade 6 students who had created the film. Hence, the article was a candidate for speedy deletion as "something that was created by the article writer or somebody they know and has no claim to significance". I understand that one of the students won a school award for the film, but that still does not mean that it comes anywhere close to meeting Wikipedia's requirement for films. Please note that most things in the world don't meet Wikipedia's peculiar requirements. That's not a reflection on whether something is good or bad or worthy or unworthy - those factors are never weighed here. Hope that helps. --bonadea contributions talk 09:44, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Ok, I understand. Will it be more worthy if it competed in a film festival?Superpilot123456 (talk) 11:42, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
If it is a major film festival, quite possibly, but not necessarily. If it were to win one of the major film festivals, it would probably lead to a lot of media attention, and that usually means the general notability guideline is met. --bonadea contributions talk 17:48, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

OK, sorry for changing references title and I read about its on help page. ((World556 () 11:29, 18 March 2017 (UTC))

@World556: Thanks! It's not obvious how it works, or why it is like that - that's why I wanted to let you know. Happy editing! --bonadea contributions talk 11:36, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Sir, can I ask a question about deleting a page. ((World556 () 11:38, 18 March 2017 (UTC))

Sure, and I'll answer if I can. --bonadea contributions talk 11:39, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Sir, can I or any others delete a new wikipedia page using speedily deletion and others tag.if article is not follows Wikipedia's guidelines.Thanks ((World556 () 11:43, 18 March 2017 (UTC))

Only administrators can actually delete an article, but any editor in good standing can add a deletion tag to an article, if they genuinely do not believe it meets Wikipedia's guidelines. There are three deletion processes: one is called "proposed deletion". Anybody, including the article's creator, may remove a proposed deletion tag (but if the problem with the article is still present, one of the other deletion processes will probably happen). The second process is "speedy deletion", for articles that obviously meet the speedy deletion criteria. That can sometimes be hard to judge. The third process is "articles for deletion", or AfD. That is a discussion process, where an editor nominates an article for deletion and the community discusses and decides whether to delete or keep the article. Is there a particular article you wanted to tag for deletion? Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 11:51, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

No, I don't want delete any particular articles I want only only article, who don't' follows wikipedia's guidelines. Thank you so much. ((World556 () 11:57, 18 March 2017 (UTC))


Sir I am not a sock puppet of any Singer Jethu SISODIYA but the user GSS-1987 wrong accusation on me.this is his personal attack because I revert a edit of GSS-1987 in past. Please Help me . ((WORLDBOY () 07:18, 20 March 2017 (UTC))

Sara Li

Hi, you requested some expansion and more sources. I have provided that. You can at least take a look. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 14:43, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the reference #21 on

Hi Bonadea, the reference #1 is not a valid one & should be removed to make the Wikipedia more creditable.

The Ripoffreport is the place where everyone can register and leave any opinion without any evidence needed. The Wikipedia should not use it as the trusted source or reference. The Ripoffreport URL added on Wikipedia with the title wording may also be confused and seen as a misleading information of the company among other references.

Furthermore, the Ripoffreport page is clearly not a customer review or a trusted review:

1. Everyone can leave an opinion on Ripoffreport even a malicious-on-purpose one without any evidence backed; Ripoffreport is very controversial website; please see the Wikipedia page:

In 2015, the United States District Court for the District of Utah stated that, although the Ripoff Report homepage shows the tag lines "By Consumers, for consumers" and "Don't let them get away with it. Let the truth be known", the site allows competitors, and not just consumers, to post comments. The Ripoff Report home page also says: "Complaints Reviews Scams Lawsuits Frauds Reported, File your review. Consumers educating consumers", which allows a reasonable inference that the Ripoff Report encourages negative content. Moreover, Ripoff Report's webmaster affirmed that positive posts about a company are not allowed in the website. Therefore, the court concluded that the website's owner is not a neutral publisher, because, through large fees that companies must pay for the website's advocacy programs, it has an interest in, and encourages, negative content.

2. The Ripoffreport can most likely be a fake one:

  a. the user leaved opinion without any screenshot,or order#;
  b. the user can't provide further details after the employee rebuff with 'No Davy' agent in the company & asking for the order# on this case;
  c. the user is leaving an opinion for the service offered in the company's physical operating location, however the company is providing services online only (when publishing on Ripoffreport, there are options whether it is for physical or Internet online; the html title of the page is with the company's physical location while not the 'Internet' wording);
  d. there are good reviews also left by other users on this page;
  e. the user will be offered with a full refund if the issue can't be fixed:

These are my concerns regarding this reference link, which could be a fake/not trustable review on the controversial Ripoffreport website. And I do think this URL should be removed from the Wikipedia. Your help is really appreciate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnwiki23 (talkcontribs) 11:13, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. It is usually a good idea to keep discussions in one place, and as I mentioned on your user talk page I've started a discussion about this reference at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard. Could you post your arguments there instead? That way, it will be easier for other editors to find the discussion and weigh in. Cheers, --bonadea contributions talk 11:19, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi Bonadea, are you going to update/remove the refer #21 or maybe the #22 on this wikipedia page? Not wanna have a war edit on this one. Appreciated.Johnwiki23 (talk) 09:10, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

ANI close

Hey Bonadea, I'm sorry I removed the section just after you closed it- i didn't know you had, I'm afraid, and didn't get an edit conflict. I should, of course, been far more on the ball and not engaged. The link to the AfD eventually gave it away. All well? — O Fortuna velut luna... 10:36, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Hey, no problem at all :-) I didn't want to remove the section since you had posted in it, but I think removing it is much better than archiving. So thank you for doing that! --bonadea contributions talk 10:41, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Great! Thought it might look a bit cheeky otherwise :) take care! — O Fortuna velut luna... 10:46, 7 April 2017 (UTC)


My, what a lot of new friends you have. Can I interest you in a temporary semi? Bishonen | talk 16:03, 20 April 2017 (UTC).

@Bishonen: Yes, please, if you'd be so kind. --bonadea contributions talk 16:54, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
OK, you've got two weeks; let me know if you want more. This page has quite a protection log! Bishonen | talk 17:08, 20 April 2017 (UTC).
Thanks! It's like the old new saying: Many new friends make for many page protections. --bonadea contributions talk 17:16, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Bonadea - My talk page is always open to you. Feel free to message me any time something comes up and you need something. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:05, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
@Oshwah: Much appreciated :-) --bonadea contributions talk 07:20, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

:-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:03, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


I should be very glad if you did. I am not a professional linguist but have a love of languages, I speak French quite well, English natively, Hungarian daily. (I'm English). Because they are three only distantly related languages it gives me the talent, if you can call it that, to spot nonsense. Consensus is that buggering around with Scandinavian names is fine, I as you would go and get a bloody great dustbin from IKEA and throw the whole lot in there. The frustrating thing is we managed this with WP:X1 with User:Neelix for things like greenisholives, but now it seems to be so much struggle. Your humble editor Si Trew (talk) 11:30, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

I am probably one if not the only reg here who can speak some Hungarian comme une vache espanol. Your talents are wasted. It is never appreciated that you can parler espanol or voudre or whatever. It is taken for granted. I speak three languages every day. Not well, but every day. I have to "switch" when I walk out my door from English to Hungarian to German at work. I do it every day. Does not make me a professional translator. I just speak them au pied, az utca, on the streetm, napi, toujours, every day (mnott, please "everyday")
You could have a look at WP:PNT, if you want to do some voluntary, but that is a lot of work. I've done many off there over the years. You won't get any thanks for it. Si Trew (talk) 11:57, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Your reversion

Sorry if that edit was a little too bold, I have accepted your reversion and asked for consensus on the talk page. I guess when doing that, I should have assumed the assumption of BAD faith before doing something that required consensus and checking the minor edit thingy. I am currently in class and may not respond in a timely manner. Thank you for your patience! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SomeWikiuser999 (talkcontribs) 17:46, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

No problem :-) Wikipedia policies are taken rather seriously around here, and changing their wording or meaning without a solid consensus is not recommended. Thanks for starting the discussion on the talk page. Please give people time to weigh in - we're all in different time zones and have different amounts of time to spend here, so it's important not to close a discussion and assume consensus too early, especially when it comes to policies. Cheers, --bonadea contributions talk 18:12, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Cockell article

Sorry for the confusion. I had seen this earlier edit, which appeared to remove the only instance of the url from the refs. RivertorchFIREWATER 06:01, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited IOGT-NTO, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Klippan. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Recent ANI revert

Without giving away too much, how did you know this was our good friend? RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:35, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

@RickinBaltimore: As you say, it's best not to spell it out, but the early edit pattern, and some idiosyncracies in their spelling, are dead giveaways. Some of their language issues are general Indian English things, but the combination is unique. --bonadea contributions talk 14:40, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up, will look out for that in the future. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:42, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Socking at ANI

I'm pretty sure that there is a hate mission against you, constantly linking a fake report on WP:AN. And then they impersonate me, and start disrupting the page. The last week as been quite a wild ride with these socks. Huh. —JJBers 05:59, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

@JJBers: Yeah, it's Nsmutte, who was first blocked in March 2015 after he caused a bit of disruption in order to keep his autobio on Wikipedia - I'm sorry that you have also been drawn into this. I find it really unpleasant myself, to be honest. Vandalising ANI, and especially the tedious tag teaming with one sock creating a thread and another sock immediately removing it (and sometimes some extra back-and-forth) is a fairly recent thing, but the harassment of me and other editors has been going on for many months, in one form or another. Sometimes the socks create disruptive AfD pages, sometimes they post nonsense to articles created by me or another of their favourite targets, sometimes they vandalise user pages or user talk pages, sometimes they create bogus 3RR reports.... The sockmaster was community banned Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive914#Community_ban_for_Nsmutte here last February, so obvious socks can be reported straight to AIV. (The really scary thing is that they claim to be a medical doctor. One would hope for a modicum of maturity and empathy from someone in that line of work - but then again, it may not be true.) --bonadea contributions talk 10:07, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, now they're just linking some WP:AN discussion started by them a few months back, claiming their socks were yours. At this point, they're just being blocked immediately after they do this behavior. Really, this week at WP:ANI has been a rough week. —JJBers 13:04, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Add Image to Article

Hi Bonadea , You tag Speedy Deletion to Image file of Dan Caldwell , Can you Please Upload an Image for "Dan Caldwell" Article . He is founder of Tapout and one another thing can you describe the process of how to find the copyright of image and which image is suitable or complete the wikipedia permiss. Thanks Ntelabi Bukari (talk) 09:15, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Ntelabi Bukari, thank you for responding. No, I cannot upload an image for you, I'm afraid. The copyright rules are equal for all of us. I have looked at the article so I know who the person is - that makes no difference, though. You have received more than ten notices on your user talk page with links to the copyright rules; they are a bit complicated, but the basic rule is that the photographer owns the copyright of his or her own picture, and there has to be an explicit release of copyright of an image for you to be allowed to upload it - just including the URL of the website where you find it is not enough. Wikipedia has to remove copyrighted images for legal reasons, as you have noticed. If you get a professional photo by email from the person in the photo, it does not automatically give you the right to publish the image on Wikipedia, because first, the person probably doesn't own the copyright (again, that belongs to the photographer) and second, just stating "I got it in an email" is not sufficient proof. (Third, it means you probably have a conflict of interest - that's also something you have been asked on your user talk page to disclose. Please do that.)
I am not an expert on how to find out who owns the copyright of a picture and how to get it released. Check the information on your user talk page. You can also read this guide at Wikipedia Commons, and you can ask the people at the teahouse noticeboard. Thank you, --bonadea contributions talk 10:00, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Bonadea ,Ntelabi Bukari (talk) 10:07, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

How to cite data from

Hi Bonadea,

As it stands the user is denied access to info about Australian gambling legislation which is very relevant to this article. Can you explain the best way to cite which has this valuable data? The terms of h2gc's data are that you can't verbatim reproduce it and it costs $10k+ for a subscription. Therefore, my preference is to link to - this site I know has a subscritpion to and cites it as a source.

Let me know what you think.


Rich — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hthrcpr (talkcontribs) 10:26, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

I do not believe it meets Wikipedia's policy on reliable sources, and other editors apparently agree. If you disagree, start a discussion at the reliable sources noticeboard - if the consensus there say that it's ok to use the website in question as a source, I am not going to argue. Otherwise, it's generally okay to use sources that are behind paywalls, if there are no better sources. For this information, I would assume that this would be a far better source than h2gc or its copies.
But you cannot copy text verbatim to Wikipedia without indicating that it is a quote, and that goes for the source you cited as well, it's not unique to h2gc. You seem to have added a sentence straight from the source, so that's another reason it had to be removed, per Wikipedia's copyright policies. I assume that your preferred source is not in fact a verbatim quote of the h2gc article? ;-) Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 13:30, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

my apology to you from me user:Ukrainetz1! for that no sense ani report right...i just realised that ani report made no sense. i hope you forgive me and lets instead work together on the article? ok? Ukrainetz1 (talk) 08:40, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

sometimes i get bit confused it does not happen often Ukrainetz1 (talk) 08:45, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
No worries - it happens. --bonadea contributions talk 08:47, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
since you liked my new version i have made further improvements, i further removed the parts that made no sense Ukrainetz1 (talk) 08:57, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
made even more by now! please read and disuss! Ukrainetz1 (talk) 09:02, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - Newsletter No.4

Hello Bonadea,
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Since rolling out the right in November, just 6 months ago, we now have 655 reviewers, but the backlog is still mysteriously growing fast. If every reviewer did just 55 reviews, the 22,000 backlog would be gone, in a flash, schwoop, just like that!

But do remember: Rather than speed, quality and depth of patrolling and the use of correct CSD criteria are essential to good reviewing. Do not over-tag. Make use of the message feature to let the creator know about your maintenance tags. See the tutorial again HERE. Get help HERE.

Stay up to date with recent new page developments and have your say, read THIS PAGE.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:42, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

K. Badri Vishal

I don't think K. Badri Vishal is trying to edit disruptively, i think, as atrocious as his edits have been, he is trying to edit constructively and making (very bad) rookie mistakes. Tornado chaser (talk) 15:47, 22 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tornado chaser (talkcontribs)

Neither I nor bonadea used the word "disruptively". We said that his additions were "unsourced". --David Biddulph (talk) 16:25, 22 May 2017 (UTC)


If you could, that would be appreciated, but if you don't want to, no problems, I understand. Take care! — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 16:28, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Den första muminboken, Småtrollen och den stora översvämningen, kom till under vinterkriget Xx236 (talk) 08:30, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Please do not communicate in languages other than English, or if you do, please provide a translation. I am a Swedish-speaker, but most people here are not.
To answer your point ("The first book about about the Moomins, Småtrollen och den stora översvämningen, was {created/born} during the Winter War") - this is a very strange statement from the source, given that Tove started using the proto-Moomin figure in illustrations for Garm in 1943 (it did not exist prior to that), and she first mentioned that she "wanted to write about the back story of the Moomin figure" (my loose translation) in a letter to her brother Per Olov in 1944. That was, incidentally, a year after her first solo exhibition. As it is an undeniable fact that Småtrollen was published in 1945, and that it was the first book about the Moomins, it is anybody's guess what "kom till under vinterkriget" is supposed to mean. My guess is that the editor at was careless with their choice of words, and used "vinterkriget" (the Winter War) where they meant "andra världskriget" (World War 2). Or perhaps they were speculating about whether Tove may have already been thinking about the Moomins in 1939-40, but that would be a far-fetched speculation given that she did not mention them for four years. I am not going to indulge in speculations about speculations, not for a Wikipedia article in any case :-)
My main source for the above is Boel Westin's biography Tove Jansson: Ord, bild, liv (Albert Bonniers förlag 2007). I have also consulted Brev från Tove Jansson, ed. by Boel Westin and Helen Svensson (Nordstedts förlag 2014). --bonadea contributions talk 09:18, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Would you be so kind to move your comment to Talk:Moomin? It's not only .Xx236 (talk) 09:51, 25 May 2017 (UTC)


I read your user page and I wanted to ask: Can you speak Finnish? It's just something I thought about when I first read your page. I'm not sure if this is offensive to ask and I apologize greatly if it is. Dinah Kirkland (talk) 15:55, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

@Dinah Kirkland: That is not at all offensive :-) Unfortunately I can't. I know a few words of Finnish, but I can't read a Finnish text, or understand the spoken language. Do you know the language? --bonadea contributions talk 16:18, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

The most I can say is Fooxxe Jaa and Moi but if you read my user page I have boxes that tell you what I speak ^-^ Dinah Kirkland (talk) 16:25, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Nice collection of userboxes! :D --bonadea contributions talk 16:58, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! It took me awhile to find them all ^-^. You speak Swedish right? Dinah Kirkland (talk) 17:02, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that is my native language. --bonadea contributions talk 11:29, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Awesome! Oh do you know the book Alice In Wonderland? Specially the character Dinah Liddell? Dinah Kirkland (talk) 13:03, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm only wondering because I created a draft page that I co-edit with another wiki user but neither of us know how to upload pictures and we need some. Dinah Kirkland (talk) 13:29, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Nonsense in edit summary

You left a comment in an edit summary for me here, [[1]] which I couldn't fully understand. Could you please elaborate? Huggums537 (talk) 11:40, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Nothing in the edit you reverted had anything to do with MOS:BOLD - you presumably misread the edit I'd made. I hope you don't mind the rewritten lede; like you I am very much aware of the flood of spam that those pages are prone to, and so it is a good idea to point out that the list covers entries that are notable (per Wikipedia's peculiar definition of notability), but breaking up the title with a non-bolded word doesn't help readability, I think. Cheers, --bonadea contributions talk 11:47, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
I did misread the edit you had made and I approve of the rewrite to the lead. It's well done. However, there should be a distinction between someone who has made an honest mistake and someone who is clearly full of nonsense. Also, my reasons for wanting the notice about notability to be prominent are for the sake of the general public, not those Wikipedians who think notability applies to every sentence introduced into Wikipedia. It seems to me like most experienced users on here either don't know, or don't care about WP:NNC. Huggums537 (talk) 12:17, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
It serves Wikipedia well to have a PhD assisting with edits and editors. However, it might be more consistent with someone of your status to exercise some restraint when tempted to publicly ridicule others for making common errors. I almost didn't want to say anything because your contribution improved the article, and helped me become a better editor as a result. However, I didn't agree with your edit summary comment, and I thought you would respect me addressing it in this manner. Huggums537 (talk) 16:25, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
My degree gives me no particular status here :-) I am very certain that nobody has ever given that a second thought, when it comes to my work as a Wikipedia editor. Note that I never said that you were full of nonsense (or made any other comment about you). Your edit summary mentioned something that had nothing to do with the edit, but it's important to make the distinction between the person who edits and the edits they make. I will try to be more clear about that in the future, so thank you for the heads-up. Cheers, --bonadea contributions talk 14:45, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Well, I gave it a second thought! ;) While your degree may give you no particular status here, I hope that it would give you the "social" status you deserve for obtaining it. I realize that you didn't say anything about me personally. Nevertheless, I took what you wrote personally. I think perhaps we both may have been at fault. Will you agree that you could have approached the summary differently, if I agree that I didn't have to take it personal? Huggums537 (talk) 23:09, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

June 2017

I also did internal link like on the JavaScript library. Why did you revert it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Denis.doan (talkcontribs) 14:31, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Responding on the user's talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 14:46, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Creating biographies

Hey, how I can open a biography for someone? Is this good what I have done and what I should do next? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rolandi123 (talkcontribs) 14:58, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Rolandi123, two important things first: the page Template talk:Biography is not a place to create biographies, but a discussion page about a particular Wikipedia template; secondly, at the English-language Wikipedia, all content has to be in English. The text you added is in Shqip, I believe? (I apologise if I am wrong, I am only going by a quick look at the text - I don't speak Albanian or any of its dialects at all.) There is a Shqip version of Wikipedia at . To create a biography at the English Wikipedia, the subject has to meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability - those criteria are sometimes a bit obscure, and it can be a good idea to use the Articles for Creation process when creating your first articles. If you have questions about editing (in English) or want input on your articles, the WIkipedia Teahouse is a discussion board where friendly and experienced editors answer questions. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 15:20, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

The Danho Page

It's a real artist. Here; [spam links redacted] — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrFlamur (talkcontribs) 17:22, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Even if that were true, she would not be notable enough for a Wikipedia article. See this information. --bonadea contributions talk 19:37, 28 June 2017 (UTC)


Hello Bondadea,

I was the person who was suggesting that the phrase "alternative medicine" and "psuedo medicine" be removed from "Osteopathy". I appreciate your edits, but I wanted to explain why I would like those terms removed even though the rest of the article does explain osteopathy is different from osteopathic medicine. The concept of osteopathy cannot be completely separate from osteopathic medicine. Let's talk about osteopathic manipulation first. I am a medical student at a D.O school, and I don't believe that osteopathic manipulation works all the time. But extensive research is being done to find out how much of it is supported by evidence. There are some evidence that some components have therapeutic value and some don't. Therefore, I don't think osteopathic manipulation is alternative medicine or pseudoscience. Now let's talk about osteopathy. Frequently at school people use the word osteopathy, so I had no idea that "osteopathy" was different from "osteopathic medicine" untill I saw that there were two separate articles on Wikipedia. If a osteopathic medicine school used the terms interchangeably, I could only imagine a lay person confusing the two. Therefore, using the tag "alternative medicine and pseudo medicine" damages the reputation of osteopathic medicine and the descriptions are not even true. I hope you could consider keeping the terms "alternative medicine and pseudo medicine" out of this article. I have suggested ways to make changes but if there is no consensus, what's the next step?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jing3094 (talkcontribs) 17:08, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

@Jing3094: I'll just respond very briefly here, because the discussion should not take place in many different places at once, and the right place for it is the article's talk page. There is an existing consensus to leave the terms in the article, so we won't have to worry about there being no consensus. Since you want to change this consensus, you will have to present your arguments, supported by multiple reliable sources (please see WP:MEDRS for the type of source that is required) in the discussion on the article talk page. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 17:25, 29 June 2017 (UTC)