User talk:SkyGazer 512

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to my talk page!

Whether you want to discuss an edit I made, point out a mistake I made, want to comment on something, need help with something, want to chat, or whatever it is, please do so here! I'll try to respond as kindly and civilly as possible.
If you see that I'm actively editing but I have not yet responded to your talk page, PLEASE do not think I'm purposely ignoring you and please don't take it personally. 99% of the time it's because the edits I'm making may be easy to make but I don't have time to create a whole reply, or I don't have the time to think of a reply - almost all of the time I'll reply to it eventually, usually soon. :)
Click here, or click the new section button near the top of the screen, if you would like to leave me a message

Thanks everyone, and have fun wiki-ing!Face-smile.svg


Hi! I’m a bit new here, still trying to figure out the ropes 😁. I was wonder how can I protect a page? I’ve had to return to the Murad IV page multiple times because people continue to vandalize it and leave false information. That’s no the only one too, it’s starting to get a bit frustrating.. Thank you in advance! (Darling dearest (talk) 03:20, 3 July 2018 (UTC)) Darling dearest (talk) 03:20, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

@Darling dearest: Hi, and thanks for the message. Only administrators have the actual ability to protect pages from being edited. However, anyone is able to request that a page be protected at WP:RPP. In the case of the Murad IV page, it seems that it's only 1 IP who's made any edit that was reverted in the last 2 weeks, so it probably wouldn't be worth protecting. If that one IP is adding false information, there are a number of warnings that you can put on the user's talk page, which can be found here. In this circumstance, I recommend starting with {{subst:uw-error1}}, and if they continue, progress to {{subst:uw-error2}}. I hope this helps, and please let me know if you have any other questions!--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 12:37, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

(moved from the top of the page)[edit]

you are doing a good job!— Preceding unsigned comment added by About to be band (talkcontribs) 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! You seem to be doing this to a lot of users and bot-like speeds, though, so I guess I won't take this as anything special. :P--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 22:16, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
FYI: They're a sockpuppet. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:36, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Good to know, thx. Don't know why they were doing that, though. The only thing I can think of is that maybe they know about extended confirmed protection, and were trying to work up enough edits to get it. They ended up only getting up to 50, though, before they got blocked. :)--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 15:43, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
There's no telling what motivates people like that, but I suspect that with that account name (About to be ban[ne]d) they were just being disruptive for the sake of being disruptive. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:50, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Kindness Barnstar Hires.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thanks for the tip about my userpage! AnaSoc (talk) 01:15, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
@AnaSoc: Thank you very much for the barnstar - always happy to help! :)--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 02:17, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

AfC - decline based on the main reason[edit]

Hi. I saw your decline of Draft:Learntek. That's the right decision, and it is true that there are no references in the article and it would need them. However the main issue is whether the subject is notable or not. If you decline based on notability then the message to the submitter includes advice about proper references. In the case of Learntek, the risk is that the author spends time adding references that verify what is written, but they don't receive any advice about notability so when they resubmit, the draft is declined for a new reason. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:01, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Oh, and another tip: when you come across an article about a company such as this that looks like thinly veiled WP:PROMO, if you check the page history and there's only one contributor, as in this case, and that one contributor has only contributed to one article, as in this case, then you're looking at a WP:SPA that probably has a conflict of interest. If the editor has used their own name as their username then you can Google that and it will often show that they work for the company. If you come across that, which happens often, and they've not made a declaration on their user page then you can use the tag {{uw-paid1|Draft:Learntek}} on their talk page, as I've done now at User_talk:Tatavarthi_Anusha#Learntek. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:13, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

@Curb Safe Charmer: I appreciate you taking the time to give me these tips. Although I obviously agree with your conclusions, I had thought improperly sourced should be used when there are no sources to look at to see whether the article is notable or not, and the notability one is for when the article has sources, but they do not demonstrate notability.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 15:27, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
The notability decline will produce this guidance for the user:
So it covers both bases. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:35, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
@Curb Safe Charmer: Well, that is true. :) So do you think it's better to use the notability decline notice when there are no sources at all instead of the unsourced/improperly sourced one?--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 15:39, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Yes. If you think that, based on the subject and content, notability would be in question then go for that one first. In my experience, less than 10% of articles we decline for notability are ever edited further, and they end up being deleted after six months of inactivity. That is because of people thinking Wikipedia is for free advertising, and they don't realise there would be anyone vetting new articles against inclusion criteria. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:45, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Alright, I'll do that when I can in the future. Thanks!--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 15:50, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

List disco[edit]

Sorry, I did not intend to create that article. It was an accident. -- Tirkon (talk) 15:17, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Understandable - not a problem. :)--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:15, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Need to remove my photo from Commons[edit]

Hi SkyGazer,

Can you help, or put me in touch with the right person? I need to remove an image from Wiki Commons.

I have loaded an image into Wiki Commons at:

However, after re-reading the Copyright Act, I now understand that I need permission from the artist's estate, to publish an image of her work, even though the photo is mine and I owned the sculpture at the time of taking the photo.

Please can you remove it or tell me how to do so?

Many thanks,SurveyorMJF (talk) 00:34, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

@SurveyorMJF: I'm not an admin here or on the commons, so I can't actually delete anything (nor can you), but I do think I can tell you what I know as well as provide you with some links. You can view the Criteria for speedy deletion on the commons here. Unfortunately, general criteria 7 (author's request) won't work, because it was uploaded over a week ago. There are several criteria for file-specific speedy deletion, such as copyright violations and licensing laundering, but I'm not sure which would work well in this situation... it may be better to try to get in contact with a Commons admin directly and explain the situation. You can find a list of these here. There is a Commons help desk, so if you want to first post a new topic there you might get some helpful replies.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 13:25, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Thank you SkyGazer. That is very helpful. I have written on the Talk page of Jarrah Tree, who is an Commons Admin and often helps me. But my message has gone to his/her Archived Talk page, so I don't know if it will be seen. Could you possibly mention that Jarah Tree, for me? Thanks again, for your kind help. SurveyorMJF (talk) 19:55, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
@SurveyorMJF: Hmm, to me it looks like you posted it on the normal talk page and it's still there - I'm not seeing that it's been archived or anything. commons:User talk:JarrahTree. I'll ping JarrahTree to this discussion, though.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 00:01, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
hmmm, looks crazy to me... will consult someone who has better understanding. JarrahTree 04:15, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Thanks guys for all your assistance. Crazy but true - in Australia the copyright for a work of art is a separate property right to the ownership of the work itself. This is not posing a problem for me in the current case - the owners of the copyright are in the process of giving me permission to publish my photo of the sculpture.
More info at: SurveyorMJF (talk) 07:48, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
BTW, that restriction does not apply to works of art that are "public" - e.g. on display in public places.
Could the image in question please be taken down. I'll upload another, when the written permission gets to be from the copyright owners. Very sorry for the fuss. I live and learn! ... SurveyorMJF (talk) 02:52, 2 August 2018 (UTC)


Hi. PERM is not an RfA style discussion and commenting is generally reserved for admins. Also,many users never check back to see why their request has been declined. However, if you were to consider leaving a message on the users talk page, it would be much appreciated. Happy editing! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:06, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Kudpung, I am aware that PERM is not at all RfA-style, and non-admins generally don't need to comment on whether a user's request will be done, not done, or when they think the candidate should come back to request at PERM, etc. However, I wasn't doing that here. The user was saying that they wanted to improve Wikipedia by making it a more reliable source. All I was doing is pointing out that there are endless ways that they can do this without the NPR right. Of course, if you think even that's non-helpful, I can refrain from doing it - but I was just thinking that the user may be unsure of what they can do without NPR, so I was trying to helpfully inform them, and I really didn't think it would hurt anything. I guess are you thinking that next time something like that should always go on their talk page? That would be okay with me, it would just be nice to clarify. :)--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 13:08, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
For that very reason (keeping NAC off the page), two years ago, I had a very sophosticated bot developed for PERM by a software engineer to take care of all but the research and decision the admin needs to make. It even has a built-in script for accordind or rejecting with canned responses. Your comment is extremely helpful - but on the user's talk page please. It will have the most impact there. He needs it too, there was so much CIR, he hadn't even read the basic instructions. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:56, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Recreation of deleted material[edit]

Just curious, is there a relevant CSD tag for deleted articles re-created with the same content? --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 14:32, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Tyw7 - are you talking about ones that were deleted via AfD or CSD? If it was deleted via AfD and recreated after the closure, then G4 applies. There's not a template in specific for recreation of material deleted via CSD - but often the reason for the original deletion applies. You've already added the CSD template for the original reasons for deletion (G11 and A7), in this case.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:38, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Fair enough. I was just wondering if there's a more specfic tag for re-created articles. And I was talking about CSD as in the case of IKASI--Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 14:41, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
There isn't a more specific tag for speedy deleted articles that were recreated AFAIK, but there's not any problem with tagging the page for the previous reasons for speedy deletion, as long as they still apply. For example, if an article is speedy deleted per A7 and is recreated with very similar content, there's not really any benefit to tagging it with a criteria for "recreation of material that was speedy deleted" than there is just tagging it for A7 again. Also, if an article has been recreated multiple times, you can use {{Salt}}, to alert admins that the title probably should be protected from creation as well, once it's deleted. Hope this helps.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:46, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

NCORP and GNG[edit]

To be a bit pedantic, NCORP is really just an elaboration of GNG in an organization/company specific context. Both GNG and NCORP require significant coverage in reliable independent secondary sources. This is unlike SNGs, e.g. WP:NSPORT, which are designed to offer a "shortcut" to establishing notability through some accomplishment. If a page passes NCORP it's going to pass GNG too basically by definition (in my reading). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:06, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

There are some alternate criteria for WP:NCORP, but a lot of them are just variations on WP:GNG or reference another notability guideline instead. However, I did see a few guidelines that could possibly, in rare cases, allow for organizations to pass NCORP without pass GNG. Due to this, I thought it would just be helpful to specify that the specific article in question (IKASI) does not meet any of the criteria necessary to pass NCORP or GNG. But for the most part, you are probably right that if an orginization does not meet GNG, it's unlikely to meet NCORP.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 15:18, 10 August 2018 (UTC)


How about we sort out the sock's edits after they've been blocked? At this point, I will revert any changes they make. General Ization Talk 00:40, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi General Ization - if you think it should be re-reverted due to the fact that they probably are a sock after all, I hold no objections to you reverting my revert. I do agree that it seems likely that they are a sockpuppet, but the specific edit was actually constructive. Anyways, they've now been blocked indefinitely for disruptive editing.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 00:57, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Apologies for the terse comment. AirplaneHijackHacker is very likely a sock of SpicyCrazyJerk PornSexAssButtPiss (and a CU is looking into it). My point was that the numerous, ill-advised moves and changes the editor was making rendered any decision about the correct destination for a redirect moot until those changes were unwound and made consistent. The best approach at that late stage was to immediately undo any changes they made (even if some were later restored) so as to reduce the overall damage that needed ultimately to be fixed. General Ization Talk 01:03, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
I completely understand why you would do that and I agree. However, I don't see any problem with restoring the edit if another editor (me in this case) just happens to notice that it's a helpful edit. As for the SPI, I personally actually don't think check user evidence would be necessary -  it looks like a duck to me. But I guess it's always better to look into matters further, just to be safe, especially if it doesn't hurt to do so. Cheers, --SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 01:17, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Bot Request[edit]

Now filed - Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval#RonBot_8. Now we wait for a BAG member to approve a trial. I'll let you know when, as you will need to stop removing dates manually! Ronhjones  (Talk) 00:16, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Ronhjones. It will definitely be nice for those date headers to automatically be removed, assuming the BRFA succeeds. Be sure to let me know if you need me to do anything here.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 00:21, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Approved for one run - Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Mathematics looks like a candidate. Can't run until Scsbot has been. almost 2am here, will run tomorrow pm (if the page is OK for change) Ronhjones  (Talk) 00:49, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Bot approved Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/RonBot 8 (had to revert an edit by user:MarnetteD, so there was at least one page to work on!) Since Scsbot is a bit vague as to when he will add the next day, I've set Windoze Schedule Tasks to run it a 6am (UK) every day. Note that I wrote it to take out all unused dates (not just the previous day) - so if the PC throws a fit or similar, it will catch up the next day. Ronhjones  (Talk) 14:35, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Awesome, thanks again! I definitely think it will be appreciated, not having to remove those dates manually.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:52, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Thank you so much for helping me with the newly created article on Mary Locke Petermann! I'm still pretty new to Wikipedia and really appreciate the help. Biochemlife (talk) 18:03, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for the barnstar, Biochemlife! And great job with the article, it's coming along very nicely. I appreciate users who are able to create long, good-quality articles such as this one, probably because I'm not very good at doing so myself. Let me know if you need my help with anything. Cheers, --SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 18:28, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! Just doing what I can one bit at a time... Biochemlife (talk) 18:38, 25 August 2018 (UTC)


About two weeks late: Thanks for the Barnstar! I am embarrassed to be that lax. I have noticed you doing a good job at vandalism reversion. In looking quickly at your user page in particular, I see that you have also created articles and ventured into a variety of "maintenance" areas. You're doing a great job. I hope you are enjoying it and will continue to contribute to the project. "Enjoy" may or may not be the best word; perhaps getting satisfaction from working on the project is a better way to put it. Thanks, again. Donner60 (talk) 08:10, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Donner60. I do enjoy contributing and helping out with the project in any way I can, and I appreciate that others recognize that. I do think that reverting vandalism is one of the most important tasks to do on Wikipedia, and it looks like you've been doing a great job with that. I hope you keep up the good work as well!--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 12:42, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Template changes[edit]

Hey, ho! Just wanted to let you know that when you the documentation for {{Adopting}} to a subpage, you also removed the following code: <div class="boilerplate metadata" id="WikiAdoption" width=100%>. That broke some stuff. Took me a little playing it around to figure out what had caused it, hence the revert. Don't worry too much about it, this is just a courtesy notification so that you don't spend a bunch of time determing what I was doing. Compassionate727 (T·C) 23:50, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Ah shoot, you're completely right Compassionate727! I didn't look close enough at the coding - I had assumed that all the div stuff was the documentation (which at this time, of course, was part of the template), rather than coding for the actual userbox. Thank you very much for catching that and fixing my mistake there. Cheers, --SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 00:42, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted[edit]

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hi SkyGazer 512. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Minor user rights can now be accorded on a time limited or probationary period, do check back at WP:PERM in case this concerns your application. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encylopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

  • Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance. so that they are aware.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
  • If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term non use, (it is a 'use-it-or-lose-it' access) the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. Swarm 01:33, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Useful scripts for NPR[edit]

I just wanted to share a list of useful scripts for New Page Reviewing with you that I have been drafting for the next newsletter, as you can probably make use of them straight away:

  • WP:Twinkle provides a lot of the same functionality as the page curation tools, and some reviewers prefer to use the Twinkle tools for some/all tasks. It can be activated simply in the gadgets section of 'preferences'. There are also a lot of options available at the Twinkle preferences panel after you install the gadget.
  • User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js(info): Installing scripts doesn't have to be complicated. Go to User:SkyGazer 512/common.js and copy importScript( 'User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js' ); into an empty line, now you can install all other scripts with the click of a button from the script page! (Note you need to be at the ".js" page for the script for the install button to appear, not the information page)
  • User:TheJosh/Scripts/NewPagePatrol.js(info): Creates a scrolling new pages list at the left side of the page. You can change the number of pages shown by adding the following to the next line on your common.js page (immediately after the line importing this script): npp_num_pages=20; (I recommend 20, but you can use any number from 1 to 50).
  • User:Primefac/revdel.js(info): Is revdel annoying and time consuming? Install this script and deal with copyvios in the blink of an eye. Just have the Copyvio source URL and go to the history page and collect your Diff Ids and you can drop them into the script Popups.
  • User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js(info): Creates a "Page Curation" link to Special:NewPagesFeed up near your sandbox link.
  • User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/deletionFinder.js: Creates links next to the title of each page which show up if it has been previously deleted or nominated for deletion.
  • User:Evad37/rater.js(info): A fantastic tool for adding WikiProject templates to article talk pages. If you add: rater_autostartNamespaces = 0; to the next line on your common.js, the prompt will pop up automatically if a page has no Wikiproject templates on the talk page (note: this can be a bit annoying if you review redirects or dab pages commonly).

Welcome to the team. Cheers, — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 01:37, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Insertcleverphrasehere. I had already installed several of those, and plan to install many of the others that you listed, as they definitely seem like they would help me out some.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 01:40, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Articles at AFD[edit]

2020 games article are not article to review, or place extra tags - please get a handle on order - if there is something in question, please leave it alone JarrahTree 14:28, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi JarrahTree - are you saying that if an article is at AfD it shouldn't be reviewed or have tags added to it? If so, I actually disagree - from what I know, the point of new pages patrol is to mark articles as reviewed once problems have either been fixed or tagged for, and this is supported by the flowchart. Per WP:NPPLOG, "Any page that is tagged for speedy deletion, proposed for deletion, or nominated for discussion so editors do not waste time patrolling a new page that has already been patrolled." And as for the tagging part, it's still helpful for users who patrol maintenance categories to see ALL articles that would be in there, not just ones that are not undergoing AfD, and it's helpful for the page's creator to know what they can improve. Also, the point of a deletion discussion is to decide whether an article will be deleted or not - it doesn't make sense that we're not allowed to place any tags to indicate areas for improvement when there's a chance that the article is going to get kept. If this was not what you meant, a bit more clarification would be nice. ;) Thanks!--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:43, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
forget it JarrahTree 23:39, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Aregawi Sabagadis[edit]

Thanks for reviewing Aregawi Sabagadis. I added the source for the last sentence which is the Encylopaedia Aethiopica reference I used earlier. Turtlewong (talk) 15:07, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

No problem! The article is coming along nicely.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 15:13, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Hohlbach (Haidenaab)[edit]

Thank you for reviewing my new page Hohlbach (Haidenaab)! You asked on my talk page, whether I have more sources than just Google Maps. Actually, if you don't count OpenStreetMap and the disambiguation page Hohlbach on the German Wikipedia, I don't have any.

If you are interested in, I will tell you why I created this article nevertheless: I've noticed, that in English Wikipedia there exists a lot of German river articles that have simply been copied from the German Wikipedia, e.g. Hohlbach (Nidda). But in contrast to the German Wikipedia, the English Wikipedia did not had any other Hohlbach article. Therefore, either the article Hohlbach (Nidda) should be moved to Hohlbach, or one should create a disambiguation Hohlbach plus creating another Hohlbach (xxx) article so that this disambiguation makes sense. I thought the latter is more future-proof and also creating new articles about rivers is not a bad idea. Therefore, I've looked into the German disambiguation Hohlbach what Hohlbach (xxx) I could create. I've found there the Hohlbach being a tributary of the Nidda as well as a hin to another Hohlbach river being a tributary to the Haidenaab. Therefore, I've created then both the Hohlbach (Haidenaab) and the disambiguation Hohlbach.

Regards --Cyfal (talk) 18:13, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Cyfal! Thanks for letting me know. Yeah, unfortunately, many places like these really do have little or no sources with coverage about them. You could tag it with {{Refimprove}} to alert others that more refs would be helpful, but if no refs exist, I guess there wouldn't be much point in doing that. Cheers, --SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 22:34, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vision (Italian think tank)[edit]

Sorry, I just deleted this as soft delete, because I misread the date on your relist, thinking it had been relisted for a week with no comments, and hence it could be soft deleted since nobody seemed to care about keeping it. Open AfDs get put in a queue that gets updated every hour, and if you don't look at one carefully, it's easy to misread it. Are you okay with the soft delete, or do you want me to restore and restart the AfD from where it left off? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:56, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: I personally would say it's up to you. I have no particularly interest on the subject - I just was patrolling AfDs and noticed that this was a relatively new one which did not have any participation after a week of being open. The article can easily be restored at WP:REFUND, so I don't think closing it as soft delete with no participation is a huge deal.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:18, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
The article's creator hasn't been around for 10 years bar one edit in 2011. I'd prefer to leave it soft deleted as it's less work for me, and as you say it does mean it can be retrieved on demand at any time via WP:REFUND. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:20, 4 September 2018 (UTC)


Re your question : "Would you be able to source the Breeding section and the last part of the Progeny section, so that the information can easily be verified?"

Sure. The norm for the breeding info seems to be placing it after the "family" in the Pedigree box. So, that's where I've put it. Any suggestions? Progeny section : done Thanks. Stretchrunner (talk) 01:05, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Stretchrunner. I went ahead and added the same ref you had to the breeding section as well, and removed the tag. Thank you for taking the time to create these nice articles - keep up the good work!--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 01:27, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Advice on Jordan cummaudo[edit]

If this user removes the deletion template again (or if it is deleted and recreated again), I think you can also G4 it (the creator's talk page suggests that the article was deleted a few minutes ago). SemiHypercube 02:03, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi SemiHypercube, and thanks for leaving the message. According to the CSD page, G4 only applies if the material was recreated via discussion, not just if it was speedy deleted before. This would mean that the criterion wouldn't apply here, but it would if it were deleted via, e.g. AfD. Anyways, it looks like they've done something else with the page now - let me take a look at it so that I can see what needs to be done to it now.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 02:06, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
I think the user straight up copied (not even the source, just the article as it appears, that's even worse) another article . . . on LeBron James. I've A10'd it. SemiHypercube 02:09, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes, you're right, thanks for catching that. It looks they replaced all cases of "James" in the first few sentences with "Jordan," but left the rest the same.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 02:11, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Lodiwicus du Plessis[edit]

Hi SkyGazer 512

Kindly indicate to me where adjustments is necessary Barry Ne (talk)

Hi Barry Ne - I think you're talking about Lodewicus du Plessis (E instead of an I). It's close to not needing the copy-edit tag, but there are quite a few spelling/grammar mistakes throughout the article that should be fixed. I can help you out with fixing the issues some. Besides the few copy-editing issues, the article looks very nice - thank you for creating it.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 18:17, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
I've made quite a few copy-edits to the article and removed the tag now.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 18:25, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Thank you! Barry Ne (talk) 01:05, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Checking though[edit]

Hello @SkyGazer 512: I created these articles but they have not been reviewed as yet though most have. I am of belief that articles must be reviewed after a considerable amount of time, I have fixed changes to those that needed fixing and most. Check through them for reviewing and patrol and do let me know where/if I need to do some fixing to them. They are Nkrumah Mushelenga, Persecuted In Search of Change, Mangamu Saw Mills, Chifubu Secondary School. Best regards SkillsM674 (talk) 19:26, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi SkillsM674, and thanks for letting me know. I went ahead and reviewed Nkrumah Mushelenga and Persecuted In Search of Change, as I'm not seeing any major issues there. I think I'll leave the other two pages to other patrollers - I actually recently got the new page reviewer user right, and I would be more comfortable letting somebody else go through those. Jsyk, it appears that there's a grammar error in Persecuted In Search of Change: Namibia National Liberational of Veterans Association Nkrumah Mushelenga "African leaders can only be achieve investment if improvements of national strategic goals are focused on important sectors of a coun­try such as education, health, agriculture and technological skills are correctly managed at national level." Did you mean to add a said that after Nkrumah Mushelenga?
I also would like to ask you if you know about citation templates. They can be accessed by clicking "cite" in the editing toolbar, and pick one of the templates from the menu: cite web, cite news, cite book, and cite journal. It's somewhat standard to use these on Wikipedia - as they make references look nicer and easier to insert. Let me know if you have any questions, and thank you for creating all of these articles! Cheers, --SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 21:40, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, i noticed it. I honestly know nothing about that template. My twinkle has set features only for citations which shows on publish, preview, cancel and itself. Would like to know more. Thank you for the review. Kind regards SkillsM674 (talk) 22:42, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
I figured out how to use the template. Thank you for the help.
No problem, glad I could help out. Keep up the good work!--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 22:54, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Just so that others know, SkillsM674 is a confirmed sock and has now been blocked indefinitely (as well as globally locked), which is why all of their creations have been deleted.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:40, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you![edit]


The New Page Patroller's Barnstar

Looking through a sample of your recent reviewing, it looks like you have been doing great work. Keep it up! Cheers, — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 05:34, 11 September 2018 (UTC)


  • Disambiguation pages should not have a talk page created with the Wikiproject Disambiguation banner. Those guys will come and complain to you sooner or later, but consensus is that that banner should only b used where there is already a talk page with discussion on it. If it is a surname page, add the Anthroponymy banner though. Install the WP:RATER script to make adding Wikiproject banners super easy (if you haven't found it already).
  • Even if an article clearly meets criteria for inclusion (such as Taxodiomyia cupressiananassa), tag it with {{refimprove}} if it has less than 2 good sources. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 05:34, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks Insertcleverphrasehere! I never realized that about disambiguation pages, so that's definitely helpful to know. And yeah, I've been meaning to install the rater script, but I just haven't gotten around to it - I guess I'll do that now before I forget. As for the at least 2 sources part, I agree for the most part, but sometimes, when reviewing, I don't add a maintenance tag for sources if the article clearly meets the criteria for inclusion AND all statements are reliably sourced (like in this case), but I'm certainly willing to change that. Cheers, --SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:35, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

New page review[edit]

Hi SkyGazer 512: Thanks for reviewing Ella Florence Fondren and for the shout out. Cheers, Oldsanfelipe (talk) 09:23, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

No problem, Oldsanfelipe. Keep up the good work!--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 15:07, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
308 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Picadillo (talk) Add sources
943 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Jambalaya (talk) Add sources
589 Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: FA Puerto Rican cuisine (talk) Add sources
521 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Fried rice (talk) Add sources
3,319 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: FA Seth Rollins (talk) Add sources
260 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Turnpike Troubadours (talk) Add sources
2,328 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: FA The Shield (professional wrestling) (talk) Cleanup
4,222 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: GA Kane (wrestler) (talk) Cleanup
810 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: GA Viva la Vida (talk) Cleanup
150 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Arroz chaufa (talk) Expand
335 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Afghan cuisine (talk) Expand
51 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Bahraini cuisine (talk) Expand
180 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Wheat tortilla (talk) Unencyclopaedic
10 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start W B Motion Picture Artists' Forum (talk) Unencyclopaedic
197 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Red beans and rice (talk) Unencyclopaedic
107 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: GA Timo Weiland (brand) (talk) Merge
586 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (talk) Merge
49 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Thieboudienne (talk) Merge
6 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Stub Piedra (Mexican cuisine) (talk) Wikify
23,903 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Awkwafina (talk) Wikify
436 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: GA El Santo (talk) Wikify
10 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start George Oguntade (talk) Orphan
5 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Allen M. Thomas (talk) Orphan
8 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Yemi Idowu (talk) Orphan
266 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Craig Hall (actor) (talk) Stub
87 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Arròs negre (talk) Stub
26 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Andy Shepherd (talk) Stub
59 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Arroz a la cubana (talk) Stub
147 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Saurav Gurjar (talk) Stub
6 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Arroz atollado (talk) Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 17:25, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

So that's how it works. Face-smile.svg I'll look into those articles when I get the chance.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 17:26, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Article Re-assessment[edit]

Hello SkyGazer 512

I noticed you recently gave this new article a "start" quality rating. I appreciate this, and I was curious as to whether my other article Pajanelia should be reassessed as well. I say this as Pajanelia has a far more elaborated sections, has better sources and all around better and more information for the reader, but is still a stub, this review left over from when it had very little information. I feel as though a start class review would be more accurate and relevant for the reader. I appreciate your work, keep it up. RussianAfroMan (talk) 01:01, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi RussianAfroMan. Looking at the C-class criteria for WP:WikiProject Plants/Assessment, I think the article meets them, but barely, so I went ahead and reassessed it as C-class; though if someone else thinks it doesn't quite meet the criteria, I don't have any objections to them lowering it to start, but I definitely don't think it's a stub anymore. Jsyk, I didn't actually assess Ajuga orientalis - I marked it as reviewed, but NessieVL was the user who actually assessed it. Thanks for reaching out to me, and keep up the good work!--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 01:50, 16 September 2018 (UTC)