User talk:Barnards.tar.gz

Welcome!

Hi Barnards.tar.gz! I noticed your contributions to Equestrian statue of William III, Bristol and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Sahaib (talk) 17:19, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Standard discretionary alerts for recent American politics and gender

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 12:23, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions for the Arab-Israeli dispute area

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 12:24, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You must follow these page-specific restrictions until you have 500 edits and have been here 30 days

For the purposes of editing restrictions in the ARBPIA topic area, the "area of conflict" shall be defined as encompassing

the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted ("primary articles"), and
edits relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict, to pages and discussions in all namespaces with the exception of userspace ("related content")

Also,

500/30 Rule: All IP editors, users with fewer than 500 edits, and users with less than 30 days' tenure are prohibited from editing content within the area of conflict. On primary articles, this prohibition is preferably to be enforced by use of extended confirmed protection (ECP) but this is not mandatory. On pages with related content, or on primary articles where ECP is not feasible, the 500/30 Rule may be enforced by other methods, including page protection, reverts, blocks, the use of pending changes, and appropriate edit filters. Reverts made solely to enforce the 500/30 Rule are not considered edit warring.

The sole exceptions to this prohibition are:

1. Editors who are not eligible to be extended-confirmed may use the Talk: namespace to post constructive comments and make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive. Talk pages where disruption occurs may be managed by any of the methods noted in paragraph b). This exception does not apply to other internal project discussions such as AfDs, WikiProjects, RfCs, noticeboard discussions, etc.

2. Editors who are not eligible to be extended-confirmed may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by editors who do not meet the criteria is permitted but not required.

3. One Revert Restriction (1RR): Each editor is limited to one revert per page per 24 hours on any edits made to content within the area of conflict. Reverts made to enforce the 500/30 Rule are exempt from the provisions of this motion. Also, the normal exemptions apply. Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator.

Note that this means your edits on such pages (which you aren't yet eligible to make) may be reverted by anyone at any time. These restrictions are stricter than those in most other areas because of the problems that we've had in this area. Doug Weller talk 12:24, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some falafel for you!

Thank-you for your essay, it made me very happy on a wet Saturday afternoon in Melbourne, Australia. I needed it to balance out all the WMF stuff,

So, as it is Saturday, and felafel day for me, I share some with you virtually -it is very well made and has lots of Sriracha sauce (Huy Fong Foods)! BTW is the Barnard a reference ot Barnard's Star which I just found out is quite close :-)

Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 05:14, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I love falafel :) And yes - it’s even closer with compression! Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 10:45, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Community toilet scheme moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Community toilet scheme, 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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:18, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Community toilet scheme has been accepted

Community toilet scheme, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

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

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

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!

Carolina2k22 • (talk) • (edits) 07:17, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Metallica Band (19:33, 25 April 2023)

HI. I am new and have been working on a page for an artist. I have a draft and all the coding seems accurate with no errors. I just don't quite know how to publish it and from where. I think I was in the sandbox practicing? I have more questions, but I haven't used this Ask Your Mentor feature before so I'll just start with one. THANKS!!!! --Metallica Band (talk) 19:33, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Metallica Band, welcome. I can’t see which page you’ve been editing from your contribution history. Are you sure it has been saved? Could you provide a link? Feel free to drop any further questions here. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 21:04, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm not sure how to start writing a wiki and save it without publishing it. I've just been accessing a sandbox and copy/pasting the code in a word doc to save my work that way. How exactly do I start writing a wiki and save it without publishing it? I'm pretty much done with it for now, but have plans on future additions especially when more interviews have been done do I can cite from those as well. Metallica Band (talk) 08:35, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best starting point for you would be this page: Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation, which guides you through the process of creating a new article (including assessing whether the article should be created). Have you seen Help:Contents? That's a portal to all kinds of help and guidance for new editors. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 10:23, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

Hi Barnards.tar.gz, When you create a redirect, please ensure that the term is actually used on the target page. If it is not, please add it, complete with appropriate reference, so that the reader understands why the redirect exists, Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 10:28, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Pbsouthwood. Is usage of a redirected term always an improvement? I'm not sure... this is an uncommon synonym which I could find used in only one academic source [1], but a synonym nonetheless. I felt this qualified for a redirect but not for any usage in the article itself. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 11:03, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In that case you could say something like "also occasionally term B^[1]", so that a person redirected to that page knows it is legitimate, otherwise they have to check for themselves. Mainly, it protects the redirect from being proposed for deletion. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 11:18, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that’s done. Thanks. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 15:37, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ whatever

Per your revert

Hello. You removed the category of uxoricide from Death on the Nile (2022) as not defining - but the entire movie is about solving the mystery of a woman's murder by her husband.That's the very definition of "defining". Deiadameian (talk) 09:30, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Deiadameian, the definition of defining I'm going by is the one on WP:DEFINING: A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently refer to in describing the topic. Featuring uxoricide isn't enough. Sources don't call it "a uxoricide film" or "a film about a man who kills his wife". Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 12:19, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is because such thing would be a spoiler, and the majority of sources you'll look for will avoid spoilers. It is thus skipped not due to its insignificance but rather as a service to the audience and the filmmakers. Spoiler articles on the other hand (which won't be as many, and they won't be the prioritized ones due to their nature) would mention it. The article for the book does contain the category (and it was not me who added it) and the same thing applies to the book as well. I believe the category should be restored for the the reasons I gave above: it is the most defining element (it is in fact the subject of the very title), the book's article has it, and its omission in spoiler-free sources is not due to non-notability but rather marketing.

Edit: Besides, the film itself counts as a source on itself, and it definitely mentions the uxoricide. Deiadameian (talk) 13:16, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any examples of non-spoiler-free sources describing the film in this way? Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 13:30, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Like this? Deiadameian (talk) 13:46, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, mentioning that plot element isn’t the same as it being a defining characteristic of the film. Some other examples: “Terminator is a sci-fi film about a robot that travels back in time” (defining categories would be sci-fi movies, time-travel movies, robot movies); “Clue is a murder mystery film based on a board game” (defining categories would be murder mystery movies, movies based on board games). These are defining characteristics that are commonly and consistently used to describe the subject. Inappropriate categories would be “movies featuring sharp metal objects” and “movies with characters dressed as French maids” respectively. Both would be true and verifiable, but not defining.

I don’t believe sources would ever say “Death on the Nile is a film about a man who murders his wife”, even if they paid no heed to spoilers. They would say something like “Death on the Nile is a Poirot film about a murder on a cruise ship in the 1930s”. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 14:28, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Listen, I am talking about facts, not hypothetical scenarios. I gave you an example and you dismissed it without reason and then ignored my other points because you stick too much to one rule's specific wording, saying that the sources (the ones that you are willing to accept, because you dismiss the ones that don't fit) do not contain spoilers. I am not going to argue any further because there is no merit. But if you think that the very central theme of a work is not a defining characteristic because spoiler-avoiding brief descriptions would not mention it, then I just disagree. Will you also remove the part from the summary where it says Simon killed his wife because most articles won't mention it? Deiadameian (talk) 18:48, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, because the policy on overcategorization applies to categories not to the main body of the article. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 19:12, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Mystery Fires

With great respect, I've reverted your deletions on this page. Sources you deleted included mainstream press, completely reliable. Please discuss on the article's talk page if you believe you have reasons to delete other editors contributions. Thanks. Thelisteninghand (talk) 20:51, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Suriname on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Arvind Kejriwal on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:George Maharis on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Chrisbyams (10:17, 30 May 2023)

Hello, Am I allowed to edit articles that have already been published on Wikipedia? --Chrisbyams (talk) 10:17, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, welcome to Wikipedia. Yes, you may edit any article as long as it’s not subject to protection (indicated by a padlock icon). Have you found the help pages that explain how to make edits and what kind of edits are constructive? Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 10:54, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from VariaSuitGirl (14:00, 3 June 2023)

Greetings user,

I was assigned to you under your mentorship, and I wanted to introduce myself, and ask if there were any easily digestible resources you could point me at to fully understand the pitfalls and endeavors of early Wikipedia editing. At the moment, I'm scouring Youtube for any information that may be useful to know, but if there are any specifics you could suggest, I would be much appreciative. --VariaSuitGirl (talk) 14:00, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @VariaSuitGirl, have you found Wikipedia:A_primer_for_newcomers? Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 18:15, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Metallica Band (11:48, 4 June 2023)

Hi again. I forgot you were here to help me if I had a question. So I tried to submit an article and it was deemed too promotional. I need different wording. Seems like something I can fix easily enough. Seems like if I reword it then it would pass. Could you give me an example of what kind of wording I would need to use? --Metallica Band (talk) 11:48, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I looked at your article Draft:Lo La. Artists and their friends, family and agents will sometimes come to Wikipedia and create an article whose main purpose is to aggrandize, promote or sell their subject. Wikipedia editors are quite sensitive to this, especially for minor, lesser-known and upcoming artists, even if self-promotion was not the intention of the article's contributors.

For the avoidance of doubt, could you confirm whether you are affiliated with the subject? Even if you are, that doesn't mean you can't write this article, it just means you would need to disclose a conflict of interest, then go above and beyond to make your article fastidiously neutral.

If we take a look at the Lo La article as it currently stands:

known for her unique blend. I couldn't see this phrase supported by a source, so it comes across as promotional. Known by who?
passion for music was evident from a young age. The source doesn't say this explicitly, so it comes across as your opinion rather than factual.
topped the charts in Indonesia. Charts plural? The source only mentions one chart (singular), and it's not the Billboard Indonesia Top 100, so this comes across as misleading.
She has been an advocate for mental health awareness. I couldn't find anything in this paragraph's source to support this. Even if it's true, it still has to be significant (being an advocate could mean almost anything).
known for her creative and artistic persona. This is not evident from the source and comes across as your opinion. See also MOS:PUFFERY and "weasel words".

In general, the sources seem borderline in terms of their reliability (many are blogs), and it's unclear to me whether the subject is notable. Have a look at WP:ARTIST and see if any of the notability criteria apply. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 14:06, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

+rollback

Hi Barnards.tar.gz,

After reviewing your request, I have added your account to the rollback group. Keep in mind these things when using rollback:

Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
Users should be informed (or warned) after their edits have been reverted. If warnings repeatedly don't help, WP:ANI is the default place to go. In cases of very clear ongoing intentional damage to the encyclopedia, WP:AIV can be used.
Reverting someone's edits may confuse or upset them. Whenever other users message you on your talk page, please take the time to respond to their concerns; accountability is important. For most users who message you, the tone and quality of your answer will permanently influence their opinion about Wikipedia in general.
Because the plain default rollback link does not provide any explanatory edit summary, it must not be used to revert good faith contributions, even if these contributions are disruptive. Take the time to write a proper summary whenever you're dealing with a lack of neutrality or verifiability; a short explanation like "[[WP:NPOV|not neutral]]" or "[[WP:INTREF|Please provide a citation]]" is helpful.
Rollback may never be used to edit war, which you'll notice to be surprisingly tempting in genuine content disputes. Please especially keep the three-revert rule in mind. If you see others edit warring, please file a report at WP:ANEW. The most helpful essay I've ever seen is WP:DISCFAIL; it is especially important for those who review content regularly.
If you encounter private information or threats of physical harm during your patrols, please quickly use Special:EmailUser/Oversight or Special:EmailUser/Emergency; ideally bookmark these pages now. See WP:OS and WP:EMERGENCY for details. If you're regularly patrolling recent changes, you will need both contacts sooner or later, and you'll be happy about the bookmarks.
Use common sense.

To try rollback for the first time, you may like to make an edit to WP:Sandbox, and another one, and another one, and then revert the row with one click. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about rollback. Thank you for your time and work in cleaning up Wikipedia. Happy editing!

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:18, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Wikibrains1 (17:29, 10 July 2023)

Hi mentor! So What’s up with captcha? I am doing everything it says but it won’t stop. I can not publish my edit due to this issue. --Wikibrains1 (talk) 17:29, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] whatever

[1]