Jump to content

User talk:Xoak/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Xoak

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 21:48, 19 November 2024 (Archiving 2 discussion(s) from User talk:Xoak) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive 1Archive 2

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; however, please remember the essential rule of respecting copyrights. Edits to Wikipedia, such as your edit to the page Draft:Mehzeb Chowdhury, may not contain material from copyrighted sources unless used with permission. It is almost never okay to copy extensive text out of a book or website and paste it into a Wikipedia article with little or no alteration, though you can clearly and briefly quote copyrighted text in the right circumstances. Content that does not comply with this legal rule must be removed. For more information on this, see:

If you still have questions, there is the Teahouse, or you can click here to ask a question on your talk page and someone will be along to answer it shortly. As you get started, you may find the pages below to be helpful.

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! — Diannaa (talk) 14:08, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Kazi Azim Uddin College moved to draftspace

Information icon An article you recently created, Kazi Azim Uddin College, is not suitable as written to remain published. An article needs more information and citations from reliable, independent sources to remain in the mainspace. Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline, has suitable content and thus is ready for mainspace, click the Submit the draft for review! button atop the article. Silikonz💬 17:56, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

@Silikonz, hi i was in the process of creating it. It wasn't finished. please allow us at least one hour. thanks. X (talk) 18:01, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
If it's going to take more than a few minutes, then you shouldn't be working in main article space. You should instead work in draft or user space. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:23, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Forensic Magazine (February 16)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CNMall41 was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
CNMall41 (talk) 06:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
@CNMall41, hi can you review my latest one? Thanks. Hopefully this one passes. X (talk) 12:01, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
I am not sure which one is your "latest" one but if you can provide a link I will take a look. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:40, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
@CNMall41, here you go: Draft:Mufassil Islam.
PS: I've had a discussion on the subject with another reviewer, and they asserted their evaluation of the page, and stated that the notability of the subject is affirmative. (User talk:TheAafi - Wikipedia)
I hope you'd be kind enough to review the page. Thanks in advance. X (talk) 06:29, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
That draft is not submitted for review. Please submit if you wish to have me take a look. Also, if another reviewer already asserted notability, why would there be the need for me to look at it?--CNMall41 (talk) 09:48, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
@CNMall41, hi thanks for your response. "That draft is not submitted for review. Please submit if you wish to have me take a look". I'm confused, the draft is submitted for AFC review. if another reviewer already asserted notability, why would there be the need for me to look at it. Actually, that reviewer gave their evaluation on the page. And unfortunately, they refused to accept the submission despite it being suitable for main space in their evaluation, because the page is out of their interest, and they don't move drafts to mainspace that don't interest them.
But hopefully you'd be kind enough to review the page. Thanks in advance.
Best. X (talk) 18:18, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
You are correct. It is submitted for review. I apologize for the comment. I will pass on reviewing for a number of reasons but it is in queue so someone should be around to review it shortly. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:13, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Unfortunately you cannot undo a ping. At this point, I would definitely be unwilling. --CNMall41 (talk) 08:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
@CNMall41, Sighs. Never mind. Wish you well. X (talk) 08:26, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Teahouse logo
Hello, Xkalponik! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! CNMall41 (talk) 06:51, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Haji Saifuddin Ahmed Milon (March 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DGG was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
politicians must hold an elective office.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
DGG ( talk ) 23:07, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
@DGG,
states that "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline. Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage are notable". The draft's subject is a major politician, he's a presidium member of the main opposition and one of the biggest political parties of the nation. He's been subject to numerous press coverage throughout his career. Would you reconsider this? Thanks. X (talk) 06:20, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Minhaj Chowdhury for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Minhaj Chowdhury is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minhaj Chowdhury until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Oaktree b (talk) 01:53, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Mufassil Islam moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Mufassil Islam, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. UtherSRG (talk) 16:51, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Given the sensitivity of this restoration, let's put it to review first, please. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:55, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
@UtherSRG, sure. Mobasshir Rahman (talk) 16:56, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
So, I've had discussions with 3 reviewers on the page. One of them is an admin (User:Cullen328). And they advised me to move it to main space, and a new page patroller will review it. And an AFC reviewer evaluated the page and were affirmative on the subject's notability. You may see the discussion here: Wikipedia:Teahouse.
The page has received evaluation, and also as advised from another admin, I'm moving it to main space, and then a new page patroller will review it.
Best. X (talk) 09:05, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
@UtherSRG, Hi as you're previously familiar with me and an admin, so I'll seek for your help on this. So, this user (@আফতাবুজ্জামান), has been arbitrarily tagging my pages stating that I have some sort of close connection to the subjects.
I've replied to them on their talk page as well and will also state here: I do not have any sort of connection with any of the subjects whatsoever. I've created article on Mufassil Islam, as it fell under my radar, and I discussed with admins before creating it. Please see these discussions, links are given in the Talk:Mufassil Islam - Wikipedia. I noticed Minhaj Chowdhury on the list of awarded people by the U.S. Secretary of State, while creating an article on Muhammad Nur Khan, noticed him from this source. I also do not have any connection with Mehzeb Chowdhury either but noticed him on media.
I'm requesting for a solution here over this dispute, and getting those tags removed as they are untrue. Thanks. X (talk) 08:00, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Nabela Noor for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nabela Noor is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nabela Noor until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Oaktree b (talk) 16:51, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Organized Crime in Bangladesh

A tag has been placed on Category:Organized Crime in Bangladesh indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:19, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

August 2023

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Delwar Hossain Sayeedi. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Aoidh (talk) 12:16, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Edit warring

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

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. A.Musketeer (talk) 22:27, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

August 2023

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Delwar Hossain Sayeedi. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. LucrativeOffer (talk) 14:31, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey, read the edit summaries. I did not remove any sourced content per se, but these sources did not verify the claims. Just because there are a lot of links aligned, do not make the claims verified automatically, I invite you to check them yourself, which I did, and found the sources did not verify the claims. Then I partially removed those and rewrote some of those claims in other sections, that reflected objectivity. Please do not start an edit war. I'm a more experienced user than you. If you have complaints or would like to discuss or want me to further explain my actions, please say so. Thanks. X (talk) 14:39, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
If you have concerns, raise it in the talk page and reach a consensus. I don't see any valid reasons in your edit summaries to remove all those sourced contents which is why they have been restored. I have checked the sources and they look fine. If you really are experienced, I assume you are aware of the WP:BRD and WP:DE policies. What I'm seeing is you are trying to claim ownership of the article by reverting all the other editors which is quite disruptive. LucrativeOffer (talk) 15:00, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Yes I'm aware of those policies. I'm not trying to claim the page. And I have not reverted edits by all other users. Re-check the edit history, you'd notice there have been constructive edits by several users, which I did not revert, even I brought back constructive edits by other users myself, again, because they were "constructive." This is a fact, that you seemed to have altered, and I put your assertions and accuracy into question. I explicitly said, I did not remove those entirely, but I rewrote those in the latter sections in an objective manner. I even added new sources along with new lines that describe the claims better. And I removed and rewrote factual error claims. Those were comments by his supporters, and sources reported that saying, X and Y commented/opinionated "this and that." These do not constitute facts, but comments, which can be added in the controversy/reaction section. X (talk) 15:06, 15 August 2023 (UTC)


Information icon Hi Xkalponik! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Delwar Hossain Sayeedi several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Delwar Hossain Sayeedi, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. SpaceExplorer12 (talk) 15:29, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Delwar Hossain Sayeedi shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. LucrativeOffer (talk) 15:44, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Prod of D'Arcy Keating

Your WP:PROD of D'Arcy Keating is declined because it had a previously declined proposed deletion on February 8, 2018. Best wishes. Flibirigit (talk) 11:51, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of White House debate competition hoax for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article White House debate competition hoax, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White House debate competition hoax until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Georgiana, Lady De Tabley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Portrait Gallery. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 18:09, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Mohammad Nur Khan

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Mohammad Nur Khan. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Nur Khan Liton. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Nur Khan Liton. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 14:36, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

@Vinegarymass911, aah snap! Wasted efforts. Sighs. Although nice to see a more comprehensive version exist. By the way, shouldn't there be a redirect now? X (talk) 14:41, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Indeed. Since a redirect is viable, speedy deletion is not appropriate. I've gone ahead and made it a redir. Cheers! - UtherSRG (talk) 15:32, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Ramzan Miah

I had a look at Ramzan Miah as requested. I have made a few minor changes, but overall it looks OK. However, you must provide a reliable source for his date of birth, or remove that info. Regards, WWGB (talk) 04:54, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red - June 2023

Women in Red June 2023, Vol 9, Iss 6, Nos 251, 252, 271, 272, 273


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

  • Looking for new red links? Keep an eye out for interesting and notable friends, family, or associates of your last article subject, and re-examine group photos for other women who may still need an article.

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Ipigott (talk) 06:42, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Dirinaria confluens

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Dirinaria confluens requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://lichenportal.org/portal/taxa/index.php?tid=55033&taxauthid=1&clid=201. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Moriwen (talk) 19:46, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

@Moriwen, Hi there. Appreciate for addressing the issue. I've worked on it and it's fixed now. X (talk) 20:51, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Cristine Roux moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Cristine Roux. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back.PoisonHK Sapiens dominabitur astris (talk • contribs) 08:33, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@PoisonHK, Hold on for at least 30 mins. I'm an experienced editor and I directly create articles to mainspace, it hadn't even been 5 minutes. I was in the process of finishing it. It appears you're not a New Page Reviewer, hence you lack the knowledge regarding it. Next time, do not immediately move pages to mainspace, check the time, and how long it has been. X (talk) 08:35, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Your article Cristine Roux has been accepted

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing! PoisonHK Sapiens dominabitur astris (talk • contribs) 08:52, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cristine Roux (January 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
PoisonHK Sapiens dominabitur astris (talk • contribs) 08:45, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
Teahouse logo
Hello, Xkalponik! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! PoisonHK Sapiens dominabitur astris (talk • contribs) 08:45, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
@PoisonHK, Hey can you please stop making edits to the page while I'm still not finished? Thank you!! X (talk) 08:55, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
You should add the {{editing}} template on top then. By the way, I have introduced links to your article from related articles in order to remove the orphan tag. PoisonHK Sapiens dominabitur astris (talk • contribs) 09:00, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. Happy editing. X (talk) 09:02, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red March 2024

Women in Red | March 2024, Volume 10, Issue 3, Numbers 293, 294, 299, 300, 301


Online events:

Announcements

Tip of the month:

  • When creating a new article, check various spellings, including birth name, married names
    and pseudonyms, to be sure an article doesn't already exist.

Other ways to participate:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Ipigott (talk) 08:09, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Dirinaria confusa

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Dirinaria confusa requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Esculenta (talk) 14:03, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

@Esculenta, I'm not sure how it violates copyright (even the report shows it's clean), but I've made some adjustments furthermore. X (talk) 14:13, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
You can't just copy-paste the text from another source and change a few words; source material need to be substantially rewritten. Check out WP:Close paraphrasing for more info and guidelines. Esculenta (talk) 14:32, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
@Esculenta, The article is substantially rewritten IMO and I did not just copy-paste. When dealing with nomenclature articles, one can only rewrite too much, in lieu of mentioning/stating the facts and data. I can't just assert Original Research for the sake of uniqueness. The article drastically differs from the sources with headings, formats, etc, (I used multiple sources, and the facts are the same so it'd appear closely paraphrased to one or more particular sources). X (talk) 14:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Or rather, you gave the appearance of using multiple sources, when those sources weren't actually used. To wit: in the Dirinaria confusa article, the source Gasparyan et al. (doi:10.1017/S0024282917000226) is used as a "source" twice in the article. I checked this source, it does not even name the titled species anywhere in the article. So I suppose that example is more "citation fraud" then copyvio. Esculenta (talk) 15:02, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
@Esculenta, The source you mentioned, is the original source of the description. It is listed as the parent source in https://lichenportal.org/portal/taxa/index.php?tid=55034&taxauthid=1&clid=201 . Care to check, it lists: Nash, T.H., Ryan, B.D., Gries, C., Bungartz, F., (eds.) 2004. Lichen Flora of the Greater Sonoran Desert Region. Vol 2. and links the https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/lichenologist/article/abs/ramalina-europaea-and-r-labiosorediata-two-new-species-of-the-r-pollinaria-group-ascomycota-ramalinaceae-and-new-typifications-for-lichen-pollinarius-and-l-squarrosus/443C47B81BCEBE5C7B06F2257B561CC7 . So I use it as well since it is the parent source.
So be more careful before accusing someone of copy vio then of citation fraud. And another example of multiple citations is https://explorer.natureserve.org/Taxon/ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.123051/Dirinaria_confusa . I used a handful of data from the as well.
And if I don't use the parent source, then how come I include facts? The mentioned parent source contains the original description of that particular species. What better source do you have to write on it? And where it is prohibited that you can't use majority of the facts from one source? X (talk) 15:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
No the source of the description you included from the webpage is Lichen Flora of the Greater Sonoran Desert Region; the source I mentioned has nothing to do with this species. You have claimed to use this source for the article, when it doesn't even mention the species in question (= citation fraud). Your final question is a non-sequitur, as I did not claim that the majority of the facts cannot come from one source. The fact that the Consortium of Lichen Herbaria website mistakenly links to a non-relevant publication suggests that WP:Competence is required for editing. Esculenta (talk) 15:17, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
@Esculenta Consortium of Lichen Herbaria is generally considered a reliable source so I did not suspect they'd have linked to unrelated citations. I copied and pasted it and it auto-links to that Cambridge source.
You're appreciated for pointing that out. But first, you accuse of copyvio, then drift to "citation fraud".
We both are trying to do build and contribute to the encyclopedia. The pointed issue is a human error and calling me citation "fraud" is unwarranted and offensive.
Anyway, I'll now remove that source from this article along with 1-2 others I've used in. Take care. X (talk) 15:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Ways to improve Thelomma ocellatum

Hello, Xkalponik,

Thank you for creating Thelomma ocellatum.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Hi, Xkalponik please remove Copyvio content.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Dcotos}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Dcotos (talk) 14:51, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

sure give me 20 minutes. X (talk) 14:52, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
@Dcotos, The article is now substantially rewritten. My bad, I should have processed it in a word processor beforehand directly publishing in Wiki. I was intending to rewrite and expand in real time, hence put a "being created" tag on it.
But I understand there seemed to be some copyvio from a particular source. It's just when dealing with nomenclature items, there's not much room for "totally rephrasing", as facts tend to be the same in all the sources.
I'd be more careful from now and will process offline before putting directly into wiki.
If you feel a revision deletion is needed, please do so.
Thank you for your help in the article as well. X (talk) 15:13, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi,@Xkalponik you did nice work! but next time do't copy paste any content As a general rule, do not copy text from other sources. Doing so usually constitutes both a copyright violation and plagiarism as per WP:Copy-paste. Thank you Dcotos (talk) 15:19, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

March 2024

Information icon Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you may have added public domain content to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Thelomma ocellatum. You are welcome to import appropriate public domain content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Public-domain sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any public domain content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you. Dcotos (talk) 15:12, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Enchylium conglomeratum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sessile.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Enchylium conglomeratum

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Enchylium conglomeratum you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Wolverine XI -- Wolverine XI (talk) 09:02, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Enchylium conglomeratum

The article Enchylium conglomeratum you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Enchylium conglomeratum for comments about the article, and Talk:Enchylium conglomeratum/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Wolverine XI -- Wolverine XI (talk) 14:41, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Enchylium conglomeratum

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Enchylium conglomeratum you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Wolverine XI -- Wolverine XI (talk) 09:02, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Enchylium polycarpon

The article Enchylium polycarpon you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Enchylium polycarpon for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Snoteleks -- Snoteleks (talk) 19:22, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red April 2024

Women in Red | April 2024, Volume 10, Issue 4, Numbers 293, 294, 302, 303, 304


Online events:

Announcements

  • The second round of "One biography a week" begins in April as part of #1day1woman.

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk 19:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Women in Red

Hi there, Xkalponik, and welcome to Women in Red. I see you have already written several interesting biographies of women and look forward to many more. If you have not already done so, you might like to look at some of our Essays, perhaps starting with our Ten Simple Rules. Please let me know if you run into any difficulties or need assistance. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 06:42, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Xkalponik. Thank you for your work on Moye moye. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hello my friend! Good day to you. Thanks for creating the article, I have marked it as reviewed. Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 12:50, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Women's biographies

Hi there, Xkalponik, and thanks for creating several biographies of women over the past few days. If you intend to continue along these lines, you might like to join WikiProject Women on Red where we are trying to improve coverage of women. You can sign up under "New registrations" on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/New members. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 07:28, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ipigott, Hey! Thanks for the invite. Snap, I thought I was already officially registered. You left a message on my talk page previously 1 year ago. Since then I started creating articles from the Redlist. I've recently started to participate in #1day1woman and listed my articles there in daily section as well as the weekly section. I plan to continue this throughout the year. At least 1 bio per week. Btw I've now formally registered via the link you sent. And I'd also like to join the newsletters of the project. I'm open to any collaboration or anything I can help with. Also, feel free to share any of your suggestions or tips.
Thank you. Have a great day.
PS: (I admire your work a lot). X (talk) 07:50, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Sorry about the confusion. I had a feeling I had contacted you earlier. It looked to me you were not yet an official member as you had not added {{User WikiProject Women in Red}} to your user page. Thanks for registering under New members and welcome to the project. I've included you on the mailing list so you'll receive our monthly invitations. It's good to see you are participating in our contest. I see that your recent articles have been translations. While you have correctly attributed them in your first edit, it's also useful to include a translation template on the talk page. You may have noticed I've taken care of the last few. I hope to see many more of your biographies of historical women. If you feel like creating any from scratch, you might find it useful to look through our Primer. Please let me know if you run into any problems or need assistance. Happy editing.--Ipigott (talk) 08:09, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Enchylium limosum

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Enchylium limosum you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Qwexcxewq -- Qwexcxewq (talk) 04:23, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

@Qwexcxewq, If you're unwilling/unable to review this please state so. It's been more than 12 days since you marked this under review. Regards. X (talk) 19:57, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Hey when attempting to review this article I realized that I was a bit out of my depth and I don't think that I could provide a good review to Wikipedia's standards. Is there any way the article could be reviewed by someone else? Qwexcxewq (talk) 01:46, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
@Esculenta, As someone with vast GA experience, could you take a look at this situation and suggest something? Thanks. X (talk) 12:42, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
According to WP:GAN/I#N4a, since the reviewer has not yet made any substantive comments on the review page, the reviewer can request a Wikipedia:G6 speedy deletion, then the nomination should reappear in the nominations page. Esculenta (talk) 14:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
@Qwexcxewq, Please follow the procedure suggested by @Esculenta. Thanks. X (talk) 16:56, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
I put it in the category Candidates for technical speedy deletion. Qwexcxewq (talk) 23:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
@Qwexcxewq, Unfortunately, that's not the correct way to do it. Please edit the nomination page and insert this {{Db-g6|rationale=I do not want to review this page. Please see [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Xkalponik#DYK_nomination_of_Enchylium_limosum this discussion].}}. Copy and paste it. X (talk) 08:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
@Qwexcxewq, NVM, I've added the tag myself since I'm not sure if you're active right now. X (talk) 08:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Merciless Ones, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Deadline. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 05:54, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Here Comes Tomorrow (radio show), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NewsOne.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:57, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Xkalponik. Thank you for your work on 2023 Bangladesh Government website data breach. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 12:41, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Xkalponik. Thank you for your work on Hetty Pettigrew. Moriwen, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

What a cool lady! Thanks for the nifty article.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Moriwen}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

— Moriwen (talk) 17:35, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Enchylium conglomeratum

The article Enchylium conglomeratum you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Enchylium conglomeratum for comments about the article, and Talk:Enchylium conglomeratum/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Wolverine XI -- Wolverine XI (talk) 14:41, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Enchylium polycarpon

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Enchylium polycarpon you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Snoteleks -- Snoteleks (talk) 17:44, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Xoak/Archive_2&oldid=1258463092"