Jump to content

User talk:Ingenuity/Archive 4

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ClueBot III (talk | contribs) at 03:38, 5 November 2022 (Archiving 2 discussions from User talk:Ingenuity. (BOT)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6→Archive 10

New message from Uricdivine

Hello, Ingenuity. You have new messages at Uricdivine's talk page.
Message added 19:40, 15 August 2022 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

UricdivineTalkToMe 19:40, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
More than 26,000 edits in 16 months?! That's crazy! I thought having 14,055 in 2017 (my first year) was nuts...that's insane! I had less than 21,000 when I became an admin in 2018. Here, take my barnstar! You deserve it. Good work, seriously! TheSandDoctor Talk 23:33, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
(I checked your stats as part of the procedure for granting page mover in the above section. I don't normally stalk peoples' stats heh.) TheSandDoctor Talk 23:34, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
You deserve all the barnstars you get. I have made less than half of the edits you have made, yet I have more barnstars. You deserve more recognition. Keep up the good work!

47.227.95.73 (talk) 23:33, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

AfC issue with novice editor doing reviews

As you noted on the Talk page for User:Gorutna August 17, 2022, this editor is brand new and jumped right to AfC reviews User talk:Gorutna. They’ve made only 10 edits outside drafts. And, in fact, they have been declining most articles in AfC. An article I drafted has been caught up in this user’s inexperience in reviewing and rejecting almost all AfC drafts. Draft:Brown Skin Brunchin' While I am also a new user and with a declared conflict of interest on Talk for the draft, I spent weeks doing research on Wikipedia notability policy, looking at Good Articles as models, and learning the reliable sources and notability policies. If you’ll take a look, you’ll see that the analysis from User:Gorutna is wrong on its face and suggests they might not have even read the sources. User:Gorutna declined the article based on notability, saying the source “do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions)...” In fact, every single one of the six sources is an in-depth profile of the organization. I also believe at least four of the six sources are top tier publications, and the other two are medium tier but still reliable sources – independent editorial publications with a reputation for editorial accuracy. User:Gorutna could not have even read the sources if they think these in-depth profiles were passing mentions in unreliable sources. Perhaps they just did not like the subject. I don’t know. I know I could just click “Resubmit” but you are supposed to address problems brought up by the reviewer and the problems mentioned by this reviewer don’t exist. If a more experienced AfC reviewer believes there are notability issues, I am of course willing to do more work and follow advice. I’d expect the reason given would correspond to the draft, though. 

It doesn’t seem fair for this draft to have been labeled as having been declined once given the reviewer is a novice and seems to have not even read the sources. I wonder if you have the authority to just remove their review and place the draft back in the queue for review so it does not look like it was declined and/or to do your own independent review.

Thank you.Mediaguru29 (talk) Mediaguru29 (talk) 19:55, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Hey @Mediaguru29, I've reverted their review so the draft is back in the queue. >>> Ingenuity.talk(); 20:48, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP message

Hi Ingenuity,

Invitation

For those who may have missed it in our last newsletter, here's a quick reminder to see the letter we have drafted, and if you support it, do please go ahead and sign it. If you already signed, thanks. Also, if you haven't noticed, the backlog has been trending up lately; all reviews are greatly appreciated.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:10, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Louise McKinney

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Louise McKinney 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 Legobot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 (talk) 19:21, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Louise McKinney

The article Louise McKinney you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Louise McKinney for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 (talk) 20:40, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Untitled

Hello ingenuity,Plz help he put on the first biography what changes will be needed,As I am directly not connected but indirectly connected as I am resident of that area , 

 Plz help 🙏🙏 me regarding what I have to add to start on  — Preceding unsigned comment added by All Around India (talk • contribs) 17:18, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
@All Around India: as I stated when I declined your draft, you need to add inline citations to the draft. If you do not know how to do that, see referencing for beginners. Many of the references are interviews, which are not independent, do not show significant coverage, or are local news, which does not demonstrate that the subject meets the notability guideline for politicians. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 18:56, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Ryan Scott Blinston

I already used the talk page but nobody seems to notice it and anyway my edits are right and Dev1357 is wrong because Ryan Scott Blinston is not a serial killer he is a spree killer as a serial killer murders three or more persons, usually in service of abnormal psychological gratification, with the murders taking place over more than a month and including a significant period of time between them yet Blinstons murders took place only less than a month of each other which is the definition of a spree killer, As a matter of fact User:Lightiggy and User talk:FMSky both know that I'm right. Shktriib1 (talk) 19:37, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Shktriib1: it doesn't matter if you're right or not -- it's still edit warring. You haven't discussed it on the talk page, and you have reverted nine times, well over the four reverts that might get you blocked. See WP:3RR. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 20:21, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello.

Please explain to me what happened. 2A02:8070:6280:6700:BCF8:6939:A852:D2F4 (talk) 23:46, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

You vandalized and were blocked. Don't do that again. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 23:52, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Talking about Mohd Talib page

Give me proper reason why I am not eligible tell me Mohdtalib1 (talk) 16:09, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mohdtalib1: first, you are writing about yourself, so you have a conflict of interest and must submit articles through articles for creation. Second, you have not shown any references that demonstrate notability. IMDB is not a reliable source, and neither is a google knowledge panel. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 16:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

The BFG (Original Motion Picture Soundtrack)

Could you also review Draft:The BFG (Original Motion Picture Soundtrack) 122.174.226.72 (talk) 16:24, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Yep, I was actually already doing that! Great work on these soundtrack albums. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 16:27, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion under G11

Hello Ingenuity, I had my "Draft: Hathor Network" deleted based on the "G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion criteria".


Last time I posted this draft it was deleted because it had two paragraphs of copyrighted material and it never mentioned anything about promotional content or language. So I rewrote those 2 paragraphs with my own words. I also double checked that the language was neutral and improved several parts since the first draft.


I used Twitter, Medium, and Youtube because those are generally the only sources for new technologies that haven't been mentioned in media outlets yet. Could you mention which specific parts were considered as advertisement or promotional material? Is there any chance that you can review this draft again? Pxx05 (talk) 16:48, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pxx05 the draft has been deleted and I don't recall what its contents were. Twitter, Medium, and Youtube are not reliable sources; if something has not been covered by the media, it is almost certainly not notable. Writing articles about companies is very difficult, even for experienced editors—and more so for companies about blockchains and cryptocurrencies. I suggest gaining more experience in other areas of Wikipedia for a while before trying to write articles. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 17:14, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
I'm checking other crypto articles on Wikipedia and most of them cite the project's own docs and blogs since it's really hard to find technical details on regular media articles. But I'll try again, thanks for the advice! Pxx05 (talk) 21:55, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 August 2022

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:59, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Bruxton. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed or created, Greggs (disambiguation), and have marked it as unreviewed. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Bruxton (talk) 01:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hey @Bruxton, why did you unreview this? It looks like a fine disambiguation page to me. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 02:05, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
Oh rats, My apologies. It certainly is. we may have clicked at the same time, or I may have clicked wrong. Bruxton (talk) 02:19, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Maureen Steele

Hi, you put tags on the Maureen Steele article for containing close paraphrasing of one or more non-free copyrighted sources... But I've done quite a few edits to it since, and I'm hoping that it's okay now?

Best, Joe Vitale 5 (talk) 22:09, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@Joe Vitale 5 it looks good now, so I've removed the tag. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 22:24, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Request for AntiVandal whitelist inclusion

I had used AntiVandal sometimes in the past, but realised that you've now made it available only for those with rollback rights or are in the whitelist. Since I do not have rollback, I'd like to be included in the whitelist to use the tool. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 11:40, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

@CX Zoom  Done, sorry for the delay. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 20:41, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 05:34, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Jbuff2006 COIN

Hey, so I cam across the Jeremy Bloom article last night on Huggle, noticed the puffery, did a little digging, and wound up having the same COI concern you did on the user's talk the other day. After noticing that the headshot used as the article's picture was uploaded by Jbuff2006 as "own work", I took it to COIN, since I'm fairly certain that is Jeremy Bloom. Since you have recently expressed the same concern based off of the same material being added, figured I'd let you know in case there was something you wanted to add. FrederalBacon (talk) 15:20, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

@FrederalBacon Sorry for the late response. I do think that that user is the subject of the article, given it's the only page they've edited. I'll keep an eye on their contributions and if they continue adding promotional material I'll report them to AIV. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 17:24, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Sita Ramam (soundtrack)

Could you also review the Draft:Sita Ramam (soundtrack) 122.164.193.254 (talk) 18:23, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Looks good, accepted. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 20:02, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Some bubble tea for you!

You're a good editor, thank you for calling out poor edits quickly and revoking them. Kylerschin (talk) 22:52, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Request

I have been noticing your recent works of anti-vandalism and I really appreciate it!. Am aware you have a script for reverting vandalism and up until now I thought I would need rollback to user it but it says I can request in you talk that's why am here. I would be glad if you consider giving me the script so that I can too revert vandalism easier. Thanks and happy editing. — UricdivineTalkToMe 12:41, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

@Uricdivine any user can use it as long as they have 250 edits / 7 days since registration. I only have to approve users who don't have that, so you should be able to use it. Cheers! — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 12:43, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Oh okay. I must have read the requirements wrong. Is it compatible for Mobile? UricdivineTalkToMe 12:46, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
I think it is -- you won't be able to use the keybinds (such as "q" or "r" to revert), but you can select warnings from the "warn" menu. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 12:47, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
okay for mobile it doesnt revert? just like twinkle? — UricdivineTalkToMe 12:50, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
When you click on a warning from the "warn" menu, it automatically reverts the user's edit and leaves the selected warning on their talk page. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 12:52, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

I have a screenshot I would send you hope you don't mind UricdivineTalkToMe 12:56, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Louise McKinney

On 12 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Louise McKinney, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Louise McKinney (pictured) was the first woman in the British Empire to be sworn in as an elected legislator? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Louise McKinney. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Louise McKinney), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Hook update
Your hook reached 5,692 views (474.3 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of September 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 03:46, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Robert H. Floyd

I was also looking at AfC submissions and saw you accepted R. J. Floyd, making this redirect in the process, but I assume FloridaArmy made a typo and this redirect should be Robert J. Floyd instead (as the full name; the sources don't give a middle initial of H). I was going to start a RfD but realized asking you to G7 it or something would be a lot easier. eviolite (talk) 01:30, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

@Eviolite Thanks for spotting that. I've G7'd it and created the proper redirect. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 01:34, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Great work! Mr.weedle (talk) 23:53, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

why do you need speedy delation for the Draft:Massénat James ?

The copyright link you mention it's not on the Draft:Massénat James MJ.edit (talk) 02:39, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

The draft was copied almost entirely from this source. If you would like to rewrite the draft, please use your own words instead of copying from another source. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 10:46, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Louise McKinney

The article Louise McKinney you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Louise McKinney for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vacant0 -- Vacant0 (talk) 10:22, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft:T+pazolite

I see we reviewed this at the same time. I have no concerns if you wish to replace my review with yours. This type of thing happens often enough to be interesting, but it is not possible to lock the page to prevent it. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:06, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

@Timtrent: doesn't really matter, we declined for basically the same reason anyway. I'll make a bug fix for AFCH to avoid edit conflicts eventually... — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 21:11, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion for centre for ageing better

Hi there, you moved my article on the centre for ageing better into the draft space last month. Thanks for your comments about this article- happy to remove the link to the Ageing Better website. I was wondering if you could clarify about the additional sources required- I believe that all of the article's references mention the organisation, unless, like the "House of Lords report on ageing: response 1 year on". GOV.UK. Retrieved 2022-08-23, the source is relevant to the history of the organisation. In terms of references having 'significant coverage' do you mean linking to news articles from BBC news/ guardian rather than smaller publications like 'Inside Housing' — Preceding unsigned comment added by DoraBuckle1234 (talk • contribs)

@DoraBuckle1234: by significant coverage, I mean news articles that are almost entirely about this organization—not just mentions of it. For example, this BBC article is a reliable source, but it doesn't even mention the Centre. The first Guardian source is decent, but it's also an interview, so not really independent. The second Guardian source only mentions it once. Most of the rest of the sources aren't significant or independent (for example, the org's website isn't independent). It's extremely hard to write articles about organizations on Wikipedia, because they must have sources that are independent, significant, reliable, and non-routine (not just announcements). — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 11:03, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Alejandro Clavijo

Hello Ingenuity, could you review the Draft:Alejandro Clavijo. Thank you very much for your support Archivar88 (talk) 14:15, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

@Archivar88 it isn't submitted, but I don't think the draft is ready to be accepted. As far as I can see, there's only one independent source (the review). All of the remaining references are not independent or reliable. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 14:32, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, I did not add more information as I thought it was enough. I have already completed the references. Please, could you review now?. Always, thank you very for your advice Archivar88 (talk) 15:11, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
@Archivar88 the number of reliable sources on the draft is still not enough—Discogs and iTunes are not reliable sources. Please don't ask me to review this again; you can submit it through AfC and it will be put into the queue for another reviewer to look at. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 17:47, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Request on 20:28:02, 23 September 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Cammiy


Article Camcardii meets all requirements please publish

Cammiy (talk) 20:28, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

@Cammiy no, it doesn't, it's still very promotional, the sources are not reliable, and it doesn't have inline citations. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 20:30, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive

New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive
  • On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive.
  • Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles.
  • Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive.
  • Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 21:16, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Women in Green October 2022 Good Article Editathon

Hello Ingenuity:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Editathon event in October 2022!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2022, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) editathon event – Wildcard Edition! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to any and all women and women's works during the event period. Want to improve an article about a Bollywood actress? Go for it. A pioneering female scientist? Absolutely. An award-winning autobiography by a woman? Yes! GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to receive a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Alanna the Brave (talk) & Goldsztajn (talk) 23 September 2022

You are receiving this message as a member of the WikiProject Women in Green. You can remove yourself from receiving notifications here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

User:Iugodigital/sandbox

This is full copyright violation. Thank you for your CSD. Even so it is always worth checking for copyvios. We all miss them,. though 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 17:54, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

@Timtrent thanks for spotting that. I usually check for copyvios but must have missed it here. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 20:57, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
There are always others that will catch them for us when we miss them 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:05, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 September 2022

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Not sure if actionable with Revdel

Hello, Ingenuity. I hope you're having a good day, or night so far. Trying the nice approach to the block-evading IP you reported to WP:AVI got me this response[1], and I need a second opinion on if that's something I should report for removal. Thank you! BlueNoise (talk) 13:19, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

@BlueNoise: I don't think that meets the criteria for revision deletion. Under RD2 it says not "ordinary" incivility, personal attacks or conduct accusations, and calling someone "idiot" would fall under the "ordinary personal attacks" category. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 13:25, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Ok, I thought so. I admittedly never got around to reading the guidelines for it, since I so rarely have to use it. Thanks for the help. BlueNoise (talk) 13:28, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nellie McClung

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Nellie McClung 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 Legobot, on behalf of Grnrchst -- Grnrchst (talk) 09:20, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

AFCH merging pull requests

Hello friend. I'm looking at the recent commits to AFCH. Just a tip: I think it'd be better if you used "squash and merge" when approving pull requests. I think it would make the commit history look nicer, and would match the style @Enterprisey uses. Hope that helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:08, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae: sounds good, I'll do that in the future. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 11:08, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Democratism page

I noticed on my Watchlist that you dealt the Democratism page a while back, which led to its deletion. Not sure what the problem was last time but wanted to let you know that the same user has recreated the page with the same content. Yeeno (talk) 23:53, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ingenuity/Archive_4&oldid=1120095157"