Jump to content

User talk:S0091

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

Your draft article, Draft:Clarissa Street

[edit]

Hello, S0091. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Clarissa Street".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 18:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: DVT IDE

[edit]

Hi @S0091! Thanks for taking the time to review my submitted draft. Two quick questions:

1. You mentioned "Sources are primary, not independent and/or not reliable (user-generated content such as wikis or blogs)". Other than the Cadence Community source, which is an interview with the founder, would you catalogue other sources as being not reliable? Asking since the SemiWiki article is from their news section, not their wiki or forum sections, so I'm curious whether that would also be considered user-generated.

2. You included adv as the second reason, could you provide a few more details with regards to the parts of the article that don't follow NPOV guidelines? Would like to correct that.

Thanks! WikiAlexandra (talk) 17:56, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @WikiAlexandra in order for a source to be reliable it needs to at least have editorial oversight and a history of fact-checking (like PCMag for example) which none of the sources meet. In addition, sites where one can install DVT IDE or they offer other services are primary and not independent. Same for press releases. As for SemiWiki, it is ran by a single individual and is essentially a blog. Using such sources inherently leads to promotional content such as the Features section. It is essentially a copy of this source which was likely written by AMIQ. For each claim you make, the question to ask is "according to whom?". The answer should be a reliable secondary source by a named author based on their own independent research and analysis. Otherwise, it is not worth including as a Wikipedia article should mostly be a summary what reliable secondary sources say about a topic. S0091 (talk) 18:29, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Got it, I think I have a better idea now. Would this be a reliable secondary source? It's an independent research paper on comparing the main IDEs for SystemVerilog, including DVT, published on the site of one the main industry conferences. WikiAlexandra (talk) 23:04, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiAlexandra see WP:SCHOLARSHIP. If it was published in a peer-reviewed journal or the like, then it would meet reliable source criteria. You might check Google Scholar as well. While not everything there meets the criteria you might find usable sources. S0091 (talk) 14:02, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@S0091 thanks for the advice. I've rehauled the entire Features section to remove or minimize reliance on primary sources, and have added several secondary sources such as conference proceedings, industry textbooks and journals. Would it make sense to resubmit? WikiAlexandra (talk) 14:58, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiAlexandra sure! Another reviewer will take a look. S0091 (talk) 21:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrator elections

[edit]

Hello , I really admire your work and believe you’d make an excellent admin - we needs more dedicated people like you. Would you be open to me nominating you? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliment and offer, @Saqib! It means a lot coming from you; however I don't think I would enjoy being an admin. S0091 (talk) 22:58, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can keep on doing the same stuff you're doing now, just with the ability to view deleted revisions and occasionally do your own RD1s. Every little helps. Just saying. :) -- asilvering (talk) 18:09, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the note @Asilvering. Me being me, I would feel obligated to do more which is also the reason I am not an NPP reviewer (enough to do as is). I also think even if I did want to be admin, my RfA would be similar to Significa liberdade's RfA except I am not a content creator so it would be even worse. S0091 (talk) 18:54, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, I know and sympathize with the "obligated to do more" feel. (Observe: my edit count in September as I learned the admin ropes.) Regarding RFA... sigh. Yes, perhaps. I'd like to think that since we've already had that fight, we wouldn't have it another time, but I suppose even I am not quite that naïve. I hold out hope that the three-day window of the discussions in the elections format helps with this problem. -- asilvering (talk) 19:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Asilvering what happened to Significa liberdade is a continuing battle that's been going on since Draft space and the AfC process as we know now it was introduced (AfC existed before but it was mostly for IPs because autoconfirm didn't exist). Onel5969, who was one of the most prolific NPP reviewers and kept the backlog down, no longer reviews because of the strife they received though they still have the perm and MB's RfA tanked for the same reasons, who has not edited since, as have other RfAs. Like everything else on Wikipedia it depends on who shows up and what their pov is. That's not to say their aren't valid criticisms, both about the processes and the editors, but RfAs are often used as platform for WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Not that I have ever wanted to be admin but these instances, among others, have certainly influenced me about what and how much I want to do here in various ways. S0091 (talk) 20:01, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Though I think SL's was uniquely messed up in this regard, since it's possible to view Onel as brusque and MB as rude, but no one can say with a straight face that SL is bitey, unless you simply define draftification per se as bitey. Lays it somewhat bare. -- asilvering (talk) 22:54, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin October Issue 1

[edit]
Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation over the first half of October 2024. Please help Translate.

Upcoming and current events and conversations

WikiArabia 2024
WikiArabia 2024

Talking: 2024 continues


Annual Goals Progress on Infrastructure

See also newsletters: Wikimedia Apps · Growth · Research · Web · Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia · Tech News · Language and Internationalization · other newsletters on Mediawiki.org


Annual Goals Progress on Equity

See also a list of all movement events: on Meta


Annual Goals Progress on Safety & Integrity

See also blogs: Global Advocacy blog · Global Advocacy Newsletter · Policy blog


Board and Board committee updates

See Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard · Affiliations Committee Newsletter


Other Movement curated newsletters & news

See also: Diff blog · Goings-on · Wikimedia World · Signpost (en) · Kurier (de) · Actualités du Wiktionnaire (fr) · Regards sur l’actualité de la Wikimedia (fr) · Wikimag (fr) · other newsletters:

Subscribe or unsubscribe · Help translate

Previous editions of this bulletin are on Meta. Let askcac(_AT_)wikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!


MediaWiki message delivery 23:30, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HEC Paris

[edit]

Hi. Nice to meet you. Following the discussion here : Wikipedia:Teahouse#HEC Paris contributions , please would yo be so kind to correct your contributions on the article HEC Paris with what is mentioned : MOOC section was correct, as well as few others. I suggest you to check what you have done slowly nicely. Thank you very much in advance. Kind Regards. 110.232.86.40 (talk) 10:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Hope you have a nice day. We start to do it ourself, if you want you can join the discussion : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hoary#HEC_Paris ; Otherwise the job will be done soon. Have a very nice day.--110.232.86.40 (talk) 02:12, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Dr. Amarjit Singh Manhas

[edit]

You rejected the previous drafts in the name of unreliable sources. I'm making this page for my uncle and things about his life or career can be sourced through his own website which I have linked in the external sources section. Is it not enough? Can you please guide me how can I cite things for his page ? Rheemaa Gangwani (talk) 05:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Rheemaa Gangwani, no, his website should mostly not be used outside of very basic facts should as his date of birth. It is not enough that he exists; you need to show he meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines which requires in-depth coverage about him in independent secondary reliable sources. If no such sources exist, an article about him is not possible. I suggest reading Your first article. S0091 (talk) 21:40, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karin Van Der Laag (2nd nomination)

[edit]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karin Van Der Laag (2nd nomination). You've been invited because you took part in the first AfD discussion. Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:06, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do not censor

[edit]

Hi {{{S0091}}}, it appears you removed content without discussing it on the article talk page. Please note that Wikipedia is not censored, and content should not be removed because it is controversial. If you believe the information is inaccurate, please reach a consensus on the article talk page. Raghav 1048 (talk) 17:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @S0091: To give perspective, I believe this is about the University of Lucknow article you both edited.
@Raghav 1048 I think you are misreading/misapplying WP:NOTCENSORED, especially the part about ignoring Content will be removed if it is judged to violate Wikipedia's policies (especially those on biographies of living persons and using a neutral point of view). If content is inserted without a citation, it fails WP:V and can be tagged or removed. I don't see anything out of the ordinary about S0091 removing something without a reference, and would not consider that 'removing because it's controversial'. Please see WP:EDITCON regarding the process once text is removed in an article and how the process normally goes.
One thing I want to point out - On October 4, you were reverted by multiple editors and restored the same removed text four times from the same article. Please be mindful of WP:3RR, which is an offense that can get one blocked and contrary to the consensus building process.
Awshort (talk) 13:08, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to clarify that S0091 has been actively trying to remove the brief history of Canning College, which later transformed into Lucknow University. I provided several citations to support the information, demonstrating its relevance and historical significance. Despite this, S0091 removed all references without valid justification, seemingly attempting to erase important context about the institution’s past. It’s crucial for us to maintain a comprehensive and accurate narrative in the article, reflecting both the history and evolution of the university. Raghav 1048 (talk) 13:58, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Raghav 1048 what I removed was largely unsourced. Please be aware the WP:BURDEN (read that) is on you to provide appropriate sources and you have been reverted and warned by several editors about adding unsourced content, yet you continue. At this time, most of the History section is still unsourced which makes it vulnerable to removal by any editor. No one needs to start a discussion with you or get consensus to remove unsourced material. S0091 (talk) 16:24, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @S0091, my edits were based on thorough research using British newspaper archives about Canning College's transformation into Lucknow University. The previous history section mainly mentioned Mohammad Ali Mohammad Khan, but key contributors such as various nawabs, rajas, and Harcourt Butler’s government were overlooked. I included citations and historical photos to provide a more comprehensive view. Instead of revising specific issues, you deleted the entire section. It would be more constructive to address inaccuracies rather than reverting well-sourced content that aims to enrich the page. Raghav 1048 (talk) 16:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 11:34:40, 18 October 2024 for assistance on AfC submission by Mofembot

[edit]



Hi there, "S0091," I'm trying to create an article about Dr. Larry Glasser, a retired professor of physics and mathematics. I am not a mathematician (to say the very least), though since your review and rejection of the initial draft, I've gotten more info about him that I believe must qualify him as a "notable" person worthy of a wiki entry; for example, this from an incomplete PDF I received a few days ago (I need the sender to provide the entire PDF with the endnotes):

"Glasser has published over 400 research papers and three books in physics and mathematics with nearly 100 co-authors, including Norman March, Freeman Dyson and Jonathan Borwein. His Erdos number is 2. His eponymous results include Glasser’s Master Theorem, The Glasser Transform, the Glasser function, the Glasser-Lehman Theorem, the Onsager-Glasser Theorem and the Kaplan-Glasser State."

Given the number of hits I found just for "Glasser's Master Theorem" alone, Larry's work seems to be pretty important. I'm not sure how to go about proving something that I'm not really qualified to analyze myself, hence my reliance on the input of his nephew, who is a now-retired math prof.

(I am writing this article as a favor to his daughter, whom I have known for many years; I am acquainted only slightly with Larry himself. After I receive the complete PDF I mentioned above, I will finish the second draft and resubmit it, though having your input first would obviously make sense. Thanks in advance for any and all advice. —Lynn aka Mofembot) Mofembot (talk) 11:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mofembot first some "paperwork". Given your relationship with the family, you need to declare your conflict of interest. See WP:COIDECLARE but if you need help, let me know and I will add the declaration to your user page. I will also leave some additional information about rules regarding those with a COI, which also extends to Glasser, his family members and anyone associated with him. In a nutshell, having a COI does not preclude you from working on the draft but once it is an article, those associated with him should not edit it directly but rather make edit requests. I strongly suggest you make the family aware of the rules.
I agree he very likely meets the notability criteria and we actually have an article about Glasser's master theorem, which I have also linked in the draft. However, we cannot use what his nephew says so that needs to be removed. What is needed are published reliable sources that are accessible to the public (see WP:PUBLISHED) so anyone in the world at anytime can access the source(s). Therefore, the PDF his nephew provided you is not usable. See Your first article for some additional guidance about writing a Wikipedia article. As it stands now, it is not appropriate for an encyclopedia.
Like you, I am not a mathematician but that's ok because we have editors who are. I am going to post a note at WP:WikiProject Mathematics to see if an editor active there is willing to help get the draft up to acceptable standards. I will ping you there. S0091 (talk) 15:28, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mofembot, I'll just add to what S0091 already said that I too am pretty confident Glasser meets the standards at WP:PROF. This is doable - you just need to properly source everything. -- asilvering (talk) 18:05, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 October 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin October Issue 2

[edit]
Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation over the second half of October 2024. Please help translate.

Upcoming and current events and conversations
Talking: 2024 continues

WikiForHumanRights
WikiForHumanRights


Annual Goals Progress on Infrastructure
See also newsletters: Wikimedia Apps · Growth · Research · Web · Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia · Tech News · Language and Internationalization · other newsletters on MediaWiki.org

  • Tech News: In issue 2024/42, read about the removal of the Structured Discussion extension (also known as Flow), work on making text searches easier, and more. In issue 2024/43, read about improvements to mobile app navigation, temporary accounts pilot details, the Content Discovery Experiments, and more updates.
  • MediaWiki: The latest monthly MediaWiki Product Insights newsletter is available and include updates on Wikimedia’s authentication system, research to simplify feature development in the MediaWiki platform, and more.
  • CampaignEvents extension: The CampaignEvents extension provides tools to create, manage, and promote collaborative activities on the wikis, such as edit-a-thons, meetups, and more. You can visit the Deployment page to learn how to get the extension on your wiki.
  • Research: The Research team and collaborators are launching new research on editors with extended rights.
  • New Content Translation feature: Translators using Content Translation on wikis with mobile support can now customize their article suggestions with 41 filtering options. This feature helps translators find relevant articles based on their interests for translation.
  • Wikifunctions: We are collecting feedback on the "About" widget that shows more info about the functions. Also, status updates from October 11 and October 17.
  • Temporary Accounts: Temporary accounts will begin rolling out on October 29 to production wikis with an aim to do a complete deployment by May 2025. You can see the deployment plan and timeline on the project page. As we rollout this change, it is likely that some tools (gadgets, user scripts, templates and bots) will be impacted by it. We have a developer FAQ to help developers with making necessary changes to their maintained tool(s). Please let us know on our talk page if you have any tool in mind that may need updating or if you need help with updating your maintained tools.
  • Knowledge is Human campaign: The Communications department has just launched a public awareness campaign (landing page) to showcase how real articles are edited and highlight Wikipedia as a source of information ahead of the 2024 “Big English” fundraising drive.


Annual Goals Progress on Equity
See also a list of all movement events: on Meta-Wiki


Annual Goals Progress on Safety & Integrity
See also blogs: Global Advocacy blog · Global Advocacy Newsletter · Policy blog


Board and Board committee updates
See Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard · Affiliations Committee Newsletter


Other Movement curated newsletters & news
See also: Diff blog · Goings-on · Planet Wikimedia · Signpost (en) · Kurier (de) · Actualités du Wiktionnaire (fr) · Regards sur l’actualité de la Wikimedia (fr) · Wikimag (fr) · other newsletters:

Subscribe or unsubscribe · Help translate

For information about the Bulletin and to read previous editions, see the project page on Meta-Wiki. Let askcac(_AT_)wikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!


MediaWiki message delivery 23:52, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added citations to page

[edit]

hi a page i submitted was denied due to citations and i've added them, thank you: Draft:Venhue Warshipnyc (talk) 16:47, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Warshipnyc please see my response at WT:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk#15:11, 21 October 2024 review of submission by 98.116.99.122. The sources are not sufficient with some being unreliable so should not be used. S0091 (talk) 16:52, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thanks which are unreliable so I can remove them and get approved Warshipnyc (talk) 15:24, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
hi, i updated sources and added sources thanks! Warshipnyc (talk) 20:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Warshipnyc it's clear you did not read my response at the Help Desk I linked to above and now that it's been archived, I am not going to go through the effort to dig it out for you. There's been no improvement with the sources demonstrating it meets WP:NCORP so the rejection stands. S0091 (talk) 21:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding a draft

[edit]

Dear, we have addressed your comment regarding "Sources written by Bazzi cannot be used to establish notability because they are not independent" here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ahmad_Bazzi

We have removed all references written by Bazzi. Randomreader162 11:00, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 November 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin November Issue 1

[edit]
Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation over the first half of November 2024. Please help translate.
WikiCelebrate Mārtiņš Bruņenieks
WikiCelebrate Mārtiņš Bruņenieks

Upcoming and current events and conversations
Talking: 2024 continues


Annual Goals Progress on Infrastructure
See also newsletters: Wikimedia Apps · Growth · Research · Web · Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia · Tech News · Language and Internationalization · other newsletters on MediaWiki.org


Annual Goals Progress on Equity
See also a list of all movement events: on Meta-Wiki


Annual Goals Progress on Safety & Integrity
See also blogs: Global Advocacy blog · Global Advocacy Newsletter · Policy blog

  • Global Advocacy: Reflecting on the anniversary of the EU’s Digital Service Act (DSA), Wikimedians share successes and public policy priorities at digital rights Global Gathering event, and more global advocacy updates.


Annual Goals Progress on Effectiveness
See also: quarterly Metrics Reports


Other Movement curated newsletters & news
See also: Diff blog · Goings-on · Planet Wikimedia · Signpost (en) · Kurier (de) · Actualités du Wiktionnaire (fr) · Regards sur l’actualité de la Wikimedia (fr) · Wikimag (fr) · other newsletters:

Subscribe or unsubscribe · Help translate

Previous editions of this bulletin are on Meta-Wiki. Let askcac(_AT_)wikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!


MediaWiki message delivery 22:33, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would this be acceptable to you?

[edit]

Hello, I am currently at work and on lunch but wanted to reply to the Abigail Williams & Liberty German talk page (Reliability of sources discussion) but realized that the conversation between us was going off topic somewhat.

I didn't know if you would be willing to, but since our conversation is between both you and I on that page with no responses that I could see needing either of our posts necessarily and has seemed more focused on user conduct rather than article content, would it be acceptable to you to possibly move both of our comments to one of our talk pages per WP:TALKOFFTOPIC and continue the discussion there? If not that is completely fine, but I don't have the technical know how to pull it off and don't want to touch another user's comments without their permission either way, and hatting the conversation without replying to you seemed rude. I figured I would ask before replying to try to keep the talk page more focused on content if possible.

I haven't gotten to write Valereee yet with the same suggestion, but wanted to at least write you before lunch was over. Thanks and have a good night (or morning, depending on your area of the world).

Awshort (talk) 03:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:S0091&oldid=1256218959"