User talk:Michael D. Turnbull/Archives/2023

Question from KamleshArora on Help:User contributions (05:57, 5 January 2023)

Hi,

I have published a page on Wikipedia and it's still under review. Please provide your guidance so that the page can be approved.

Regards Kamlesh --KamleshArora (talk) 05:57, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

@KamleshArora Is this about Draft:Junglee Games? That was declined on 21 December and again on 24 December. I am not a reviewer of new articles but I know what reviewers are looking for. That is evidence that the company is notable in the specific meaning of that word used by Wikipedia. Evidence is needed in the form of citations which are all three of: from reliable sources, independent of the company and with significant coverage, not just a mention. That rules out anything mostly based on an interview (current refs #1, #2) or a press release (#5): I didn't check the other refs. Your draft says "recognized as one of India's great mid-size workplaces 2022 by Great Place to Work". That sounds very promising, since I assume that Great Place to Work is some sort of organisation independent of Junglee games. However, you don't cite your source for that statement, so readers can't verify it, a core principle here on Wikipedia. You need much more on what third-parties are saying about Junglee Games (for good or bad) and much less about what they are saying about themselves. The world is full of people and companies going about routine business. Wikipedia only wants articles on those clearly making an impact that others are writing about. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:36, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Question from Vipul.sushiljain (17:51, 6 January 2023)

Hi I have started writing blogs, on Jainism, All the knowledge which I have to the best I am articulating it and writing it so people know and read about it. This is by blog URL - https://jainidologythirth.blogspot.com Kindly visit it, and help me in adding a backlink of my blog to wikipedia so people visit and read. Thank you. --Vipul.sushiljain (talk) 17:51, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

@Vipul.sushiljain No! Wikipedia must not be used for promotion of any sort and spam links to external websites will be deleted on sight, as one you added already has been. In addition, blogs are not considered reliable sources (see WP:BLOGS) and have very limited use within Wikipedia. Please restrict your contributions to material that will improve the encyclopaedia. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:59, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

I am not using wikipedia, for promotion, the content which I have written is logical and valid, which will help people to know more on thirthankar god. Vipul.sushiljain (talk) 06:21, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

@Vipul.sushiljain Adding links to your blogs is promotion, irrespective of how accurate the material is. If you have published in a peer-reviewed journal then you could cite the information. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:24, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Question from Void if removed (11:14, 5 February 2023)

Hi, you've been assigned as my experienced mentor and I have a question about sources, verifiability and original research.

I've found myself mostly trying to engage constructively in a highly contentious topic area so I'm trying to approach edits with caution and build consensus, and work towards a neutral POV as much as possible.

When it comes to preferring secondary sources over primary ones, what should we do when there is clear disagreement? A primary source says x, a supposedly reliable source says y, yet anyone can read the primary source and verify that it is indeed x - should we still defer to the secondary source? That is, does a reliable secondary source override a primary one, or does verifiable disagreement put the reliability of the secondary source in question?

Thank you for your time! --Void if removed (talk) 11:14, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

@Void if removed That's a tough question! I mainly edit in areas of science, so there tend to be multiple sources for most facts and a decent primary source will usually have been peer-reviewed, which gives it extra weight. I gather that your "highly contentious" topic area is for example the LGB Alliance. For these sorts of topics, much of the heat is generated because people express their strong opinions surrounding a limited number of objective facts and get into tangles over definitions. The role of a Wikipedia editor, I think, is to disregard all that and recast the information in a strictly WP:NPOV way for our readers. So it is quite reasonable that an article here should point out that primary source x and secondary source y differ and that yet another source z exists. Maybe we shouldn't comment at all until the dust settles: how will tertiary sources in 10 years' time view the issue?

I could perhaps give a better answer for a specific case but meanwhile my advice is that you WP:AGF with those who disagree with you. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:23, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I tried to be vague because I don't want to bother you with specifics, especially as it is so contentious and I'm well aware I'm in the minority here, but perhaps vagueness isn't terribly helpful!

If you really want to go down the rabbit hole (though I very much advise you don't), I think this discussion about "founders" is probably the area where I first really ran off the rails trying to pick apart how to reconcile primary and secondary sources. I'm in the minority in caring about it so I don't expect to make any headway with it and have dropped the whole issue - I only picked it in the first place because I thought it would be simple!

Here is a problem where an organisation says one straightforwardly factual thing about themselves, very clearly, in multiple primary sources, something backed up by *some* secondary sources and *some other* secondary sources disagree, *some of which* have been corrected or disputed directly by the individuals in question (on eg. Twitter). It isn't a subject that's easily deferred to "some people say x, others say y", nor is it a subject where summing together all possible options produces a useful result either.

It may seem a minor point, but from digging through the page history I believe that a specific list of names has been synthesised from multiple sources and then subsequently started to appear in secondary sources, which then has been used as citations to reinforce that original list, in a circular fashion. Obviously I can't prove that someone copy+pasted the list from wikipedia (or google) into an article, but I'm personally convinced that's happened.

So yes, anyway, I guess I'm a bit lost as to where the maxim of preferring secondary sources turns into a disregard for when they contradict primary ones, and how to navigate policy in this area. Void if removed (talk) 15:01, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

@Void if removed If I had been engaged in that discussion (and I'm glad I wasn't) I would simply have quoted this webpage as being fully in compliance with a Wikipedia policy, namely WP:ABOUTSELF. Other editors might have been able to find earlier versions of that page on the Wayback machine that said something different but by WP:ONUS (another policy) it is for those who wish to include potentially controversial material to come to a WP:CONSENSUS to do so. All that said, I think you were right to WP:DROPTHESTICK. Life is too short to fight these sorts of debate. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:51, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your guidance, it is appreciated. Hopefully I'll manage to branch out into less heated areas before I ask another question! Void if removed (talk) 16:05, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Question from CinemaScholar on Docufiction (15:16, 7 February 2023)

I need help adding a citation to an entry. --CinemaScholar (talk) 15:16, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

@CinemaScholar I'm guessing here but I think you need something like this:

The neologism docufiction was introduced by Rhodes and Singer.

References

The page number can be specified using the {{rp}} template (I've checked on Google books and that's the correct page). You could include the Google books URL but that's unnecessary. If I've got the wrong end of the stick, please give more details.... and incidentally that article displays examples of WP:OVERCITE. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:32, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Question from CinemaScholar (22:15, 7 February 2023)

Thanks very much. I made the change exactly as you suggested, with the wording and ISBN number. Someone called Mr.Ollie not only deleted the change, but keeps posting rude stuff about me. Why is this happening? Why would Wikipedia do this to a volunteer attempting to help, someone who reached out for help (to you) and then followed the suggestion precisely? --CinemaScholar (talk) 22:15, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

This change is blatantly incorrect, and badly sourced. See Talk:Docufiction#First_use_of_the_term. -MrOllie (talk) 22:33, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Question from CinemaScholar (22:44, 7 February 2023)

I've now added a secondary source, peer-reviewed, and this person is still "warring" against me. Is there anything that can be done? --CinemaScholar (talk) 22:44, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

@CinemaScholar Having discussions in multiple places makes it difficult for editors to follow them. Please now restrict comments about the article content to Talk:Docufiction and behavioural conduct to WP:ANI, if you decide to go down that route, which I note you have not yet done and I would not recommend. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:09, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Barnstar from Clovermoss

Teahouse Barnstar

Hi Michael! I don't think we've ever directly interacted before but I just wanted to say that your efforts to help newcomers don't go unnoticed and are appreciated. I've had the Teahouse on my watchlist for quite some time and while I don't pitch in there as much as maybe I want to, I do notice the great work that you and other editors do on a regular basis. So here's a barnstar to show that. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 00:06, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Awarded for your exceptionally helpful response for my inquiry at the Teahouse. Thank you! The ⬡ Bestagon T/C 14:28, 11 February 2023 (UTC) And for your kind advice on my talk page regarding that matter too! The ⬡ Bestagon T/C 14:49, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Question from User:Johnsagent

I queried the Wikipedia Help Desk about a Deprecated Sources notice I got when I tried to submit an article on my sandbox because on my edit page, none of the deprecated references were marked. You were nice enough to locate two of them for me which I removed. However, I just tried to resubmit and got the same notice though I have no red marks on my draft. Could you help again?Johnsagent (talk) 08:19, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

@Johnsagent I still see a deprecated source at #1233, which is the website nndb.com. Ideally, your draft could do with a lot of other tidying-up of sources. For example (using this one as its easy to locate in the text): you have #1787 That's got a direct link to a URL that's the top level of a website, which should really be the |website= parameter of a {{cite web}} AND a URL for the actual material you are citing. The whole thing would be much better if transformed to this. There may be additional parameters to add, such as the author information but I can't actually reach the website from my European location, so I can't check.

Some of your bare URL's can probably be improved just by running the "Expand citations" menu option at the side of the sandbox page but I'm hesitant to let that bot loose on such a huge number of citations in one go as it will be near-impossible to compare the before and after versions! Nevertheless I would encourage you to try these sort of fixes as you have clearly already put immense amounts of time into the draft and it would be a pity not to finish the job. Let me know if I can help with parts of what needs to be done.

I've been working hard. So, do you see any other deprecated sources that need attention? Any way to get them all?Johnsagent (talk) 18:21, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

@Johnsagent I don't see any more deprecated sources now. Why not install the gadget at User:Headbomb/unreliable into your own account and then you'll be able to see them yourself in future? That gadget also highlights less reliable (but usable) sources, so you might look for alternatives for marginal sources or remove them if you have multiple sources already. I noticed a couple of places where you have DAB-page links rather than links to the correct article. These appear in orange and are Robert Bentley, Shawn Harrison, William Scarborough, Nelson Castro, Sandra Williams, Peter Beck (politician), Dan Kirby, Harold Mitchell and Chittenden County. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:59, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

References

Hessische Staatskanzlei

Dear Michael D. Turnbull, the whole thing started when i came across the English article on the Staatskanzlei, which had only one sentence in it and an info above on the site that one should add additional info by translating the German article and that is, what i have done. I added the external link to the Duties of the Staatskanzlei as i myself thought it was a bit thin on this. I guess, the info on the former Hotel Rose has been given to show its huge history - i could leave out the stuff about JÜrgen Schneider - then it would perhaps be clearer? Or do you think one should erase the history of the Hotel completely? Kind regards, Naomi Hennig (talk) 21:35, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

@Naomi Hennig I think that the building itself is interesting and that its history as the hotel is relevant. There should be enough sources to expand the current English article based on what you have already added in your sandbox. My assumption is that the role of State Chancellery for each German state will be somewhat similar across them all, although I'm not familiar with where there are articles for these (or a summary article) in English. My suggestion would be that you move material from your sandbox, leaving out most of the "Tasks" and all of the "Head of..." section but keeping the bit on Schneider as that's certainly relevant to the history of the building. Meanwhile, I'll add an infobox for the building. Then we can review where we've got to and think about where to put the material on the Hesse Chancellery as a political institution. Is that OK? Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:56, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

I just found a German wikipedia-article on the subject of "Staatskanzlei" in general:

• In most of the German states, the State Chancellery (also known as the Senate Chancellery or State Ministry) is the official residence of the Minister President. The officials and employees of the State Chancellery assist the Prime Minister in the performance of his official duties. The State Chancellery has the status of a supreme state authority.[1][2] The Head of Office of the State Chancellery is usually called the Chief of the State Chancellery (CdS). Central tasks are the comprehensive information, the preparation of problems, the preparation of decisions for the respective head of government, the enforcement of the guideline competence of the head of government as well as planning, coordination, management and control of the government work. The authority's responsibilities also include preparing decisions on the awarding of decorations and state prizes, organizing protocol matters, and press and public relations work.

Perhaps we could use this to fill up the article on the "Hessische Staatskanzlei" and put all the text on the former hotel Rose in an extra article, like a stub? Kind regards, --Naomi Hennig (talk) 11:14, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

@Naomi Hennig Wouldn't it make more sense to do it the other way round? The existing Hessische Staatskanzlei is about the building: I've just added it to Wiesbaden-Mitte as a building of interest. It is very relevant that the wikidata item for the article calls it a national heritage site, nothing to do with government as such. "State Chancellery" is Wikidata Q1415691 and it would probably be as State Chancellery that you would create a new article on the more general topic, with text including what you have translated above. Then the historic list of heads of the individual states would be sub-sections of that article and of course there would be a wikilink to the Hesse building as an example. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

This sounds very reasonable... now we would call the article ²Former Hotel Rose"? And then this article would only be on the building... and the other thing with the state chancellery would have some time for me to collect info? Kind regards and thank you very much that you help me on this subject, i really appreaciate this! Kind regards, Naomi Hennig (talk) 14:34, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

@Naomi Hennig I don't think that there is any need to alter the name of the article, as that corresponds to the current name of the building and Wikipedia typically renames articles to their current form or the WP:COMMONNAME. Obviously, the enhanced article should include material already in your sandbox about the former hotel. I've already added the infobox.

As to the wider issue, I'm on a steep learning curve! Just looking at en:Wikipedia, we have States of Germany and Composition of the German state parliaments, which cover the whole country. Then for each Landtag there are articles like Landtag of Hesse and List of presidents of the Landtag of Hesse, with another article explaining what a Minister president (Germany) is. As far as I can tell so far, there is no article on State Chancellery or any List of State Chancellors but if there were to be such articles, I'd expect them to cover all the German states, with tables as at States of Germany. Whether there should then be individual article for each state (e.g. State Chancellery of Hess etc) I'm not sure: is there such a thing comprehensively on the German Wikipedia? We do have German Chancellery for the federal level. So, the main issue for you is how much new writing you want to do and at what level: the whole in one article and/or each Chancellery at State level. You could be very busy for a long time but WP:NOHURRY! What do you think? Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:37, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

First of all, this is a learning curve for me too... I never knew our political system is so complicated. When i started with the translation i really had to look up the tasks they are performing at the Hessische Staatskanzlei... :-) - i would never pass an immigration-test for Germany, i fear. As i'm pretty busy at the moment preparing a weekend in Hesse (haha, yes, my sister lives there and our whole family is spread over Hesse), i would prefer to leave this tangled wool of all the Chancelleries to someone more enthusiastic about this than me... do you go accord? :-) - Kind regards and thank you so much for your insight and help. It means a lot to not be left completely alone with such complicated matters, --Naomi Hennig (talk) 16:52, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

@Naomi Hennig That's absolutely fine. No-one here has to do anything they don't want to do. You have already completed most of the difficult bits that will help expand Hessische Staatskanzlei and I hope you'll complete that by moving the relevant parts to the live article, as we have discussed. Enjoy your time in Hesse! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:59, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Dear Michael, would you be so kind to have a look on what i added to the site? I also added the template "translated page" and the info-box looks great. Gives the whole article more power, i find! --Naomi Hennig (talk) 17:08, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

@Naomi Hennig OK, I'll do a light bit of copy-editing later this evening. For example, the way you did used {{ill}} wasn't quite right. Incidentally, you have expanded the text more than fivefold, so in its current state the article would be a candidate for a WP:DYK on the Mainpage. That would be another milestone in your life as a WP editor: let me know if you need help in making a nomination (see the link for the basics). Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:47, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Wow, Michael, you did a lot of editing, finding this wonderful old picture of the building and finding good reference-links for the text. The article really looks great now! I never did nominate an English article on the Did you know, for the German "Schon gewusst" i already had 7 articles there. But do you believe that really many people are interested to know more about the Hessische Staatskanzlei? Kind regards, --Naomi Hennig (talk) 11:06, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination an article for DYK?

Hi, yesterday you mentioned I could nominate the article for a DYK? I would like to do so, but I'm not sure I can phrase it perfectly on my own. Personally I was thinking something along the lines of "Did you know Thrasybulus of Miletus tricked the Lydian king Alyattes into believing his city was thriving with a party, and so ended the siege of Miletus and a twelve year war?" Alternatively, a less detailed version: "Did you know tyrant Thrasybulus ended the twelve-year Lydian-Milesian War with a fake party?" My phrasing isn't fantastic, but I believe this anecdote is the most interesting from the article. How can I improve the DYK? Many thanks GeneralCraft65 (talk) 09:01, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

@GeneralCraft65 Your second, shorter, version is the sort of "hook" that's perfect for DYK, as it is likely to make readers want to know more. There is a nomination wizard at Template:DYK nomination header#Instructions for nominators. Read the instructions on that page and try it out. Post back into this thread if you need any assistance. The text for the hook will be (with links) ...that tyrant Thrasybulus ended the twelve-year Lydian-Milesian War with a fake party? You can copy/paste that bit out of here in the source editor. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:09, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Hessische Staatskanzlei

On 6 April 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hessische Staatskanzlei, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that in 1945 the US Army confiscated the Hotel Rose in Wiesbaden, which is now the Hessian State Chancellery? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hessische Staatskanzlei. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Hessische Staatskanzlei), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:02, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Precious

organic chemistry and its people

Thank you for quality articles around organic chemistry, based on scietific expertise, beginning in 2018 with expanding and referencing Ralph Raphael, then Alan R. Battersby and Fluazifop, for gnomish cleanup of IMDb, for nominating the work of others, for offering help at the Teahouse and help desk, - Mike, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2840 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:46, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Your change on Societat Civil Catalana

You removed a sentence in agreement with Crystallizedcarbon on this page. I think that, por exactly the same reasons as explained by the latter in the Talk page, and because the same wrong source is quoted, the following sentence appearing at the end of the chapter 'Activism' should also be deleted: 'This belief is aligned with the rhetoric used by Spanish nationalism'. Thanks for your attention Mariano211 (talk) 17:09, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

@Mariano211 For the sake of openness and to keep all discussion in one place, please make your comments on Talk:Societat Civil Catalana rather than here. It would be sensible to start a new section for each edit request, even though your current suggestion will be similar to the one already actioned. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:20, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

I have got this message again. Do you suggest that I start a new section with my proposal? In order to avoid another lengthy discussion, perhaps it would be sensible to just delete the sentence I point at, because consistent with your previous deletion of 24 March. I wait for your comments before going ahead. Mariano211 (talk) 19:33, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

@Mariano211 The discussion on the article seems to have calmed down, with the latest comment on the Talk Page being yours of March 31. Now might be the time to proceed cautiously to make a small change to the article itself and see what comment that gets. If you are reverted, don't edit war but immediately engage in a discussion in a new section. Remember WP:ONUS says that people adding article content have to justify doing so and gain consensus, whereas removing content is less controversial. If you do delete the sentence, consider leaving the citation if it is relevant elsewhere: I'm thinking of the Alia Wong article, which is in English and makes some reasonable points. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:34, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your sensible advice, I will proceed as suggested Mariano211 (talk) 16:19, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Following 95.17.250.138's reaction I created i new section under 'Talk'. Thanks for your attention Mariano211 (talk) 14:51, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Dear Mike, To a newbie stumbling through a maze, to adhere to Wikipedia protocols, you have been a tremendous guide, helper in copy-editing on Lee Youn Chin, article. Your time, efforts, patience and editorial help is very much appreciated! You and other editors like you are the best! Setwikirec0 (talk) 14:38, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Lee Youn Chin - translation to Chinese draft done

Dear Mike,I

Hope you are doing great! Its good here too.

If I may trouble you again, the article of Lee Youn Chin, was successfully translated to Chinese. I submitted it, and I can see that it is now a draft in Chinese, as confirmed by Wiki-Chinese message to me. However, when I go to my translation-> it displays Lee's draft in Chinese under Published. When I click on the draft, I now cannot see my translation any more. ?? Instead, it says "Wikipedia does not have a draft: Lee Youn Chin.  ???

This msg comes up-

• 开始编辑Draft“Draft:李雲珍 Lee Youn Chin”。

But the below link I saved does display it in Chinese.

Sorry, I'm all muddy again and not sure as to why - Now I see, Now I don't syndrome! :((

Please help and advice me to whom should I contact. The Chinese wiki translation group, I did open a talk page when I moved it to publish. But I'm not sure of things. Maybe, its a phrase to wait till the wiki patrol, wiki editors and others see and approved and move it?

https://en.wiki%E9%9B%B2%E7%8F%8D_Lee_Youn_Chin&oldid=1151097826pedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Draft:%E6%9D%8E

Thank you very much, Mike!

Setwikirec0 (talk) 00:04, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

@Setwikirec0 As far as I can tell, the problem is that you drafted the Chinese version of the article here on the English Wikipedia, so its URL currently is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:%E6%9D%8E%E9%9B%B2%E7%8F%8D_Lee_Youn_Chin. Note the "//en." at the beginning. Each language on Wikipedia has its own rules and submission procedures. No-one here within the English Project can accept an article into Chinese Wikipedia. Instead, you need to find out what their submission process is and follow it. You can copy/paste out your Chinese draft as wikitext into that language's equivalent of the articles for creation page, which I think is at this URL and read any instructions there for submitting it. Later, you can get an administrator here on English Wikipedia to delete the redundant draft by adding the template {{db-author}} to the very top: that is how to request what we call "speedy deletion", leaving no trace here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:29, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Just one more thing. For copyright reasons, you need to say where you got the original (English) version of the article you translated when you copy/paste it into the Chinese area. Do that by an edit summary. There is more information at WP:TRANSLATEUS. Incidentally, you can see your global contributions at this URL, which currently has no relevant Chinese entries. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:35, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Always so thankful for your promptness! You are very helpful and the best, Mike! Setwikirec0 (talk) 16:52, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Question from Definitelynotlane (03:21, 26 April 2023)

How can I start a new historical page about a person of the American society that's unheard of --Definitelynotlane (talk) 03:21, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

That's a tough question, @Definitelynotlane! If you mean that there is no reliably-published information about the person, then the answer is simple: you can't, because wikipedia only covers topics that are notable in a specific sense. If you mean that there is information about them that exists only in obscure historical records and books that few people have access to but you do have access, then it might be possible but I warn that it is tricky for new editors like yourself to draft an article (we prefer that word to "page", since we are not social media). You have a steep learning curve and should start by reading this basic overview of what we need. The process of creating a draft for review by experienced editors is explained here. Good luck.... if you have addiitional questions, just add them here in this section of my Userpage and I'll try to assist. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:55, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Question from Diana Agron00 (15:12, 14 May 2023)

Hi... How do I verify my account in Wikipedia. --Diana Agron00 (talk) 15:12, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Diana Agron00. I don't really understand your question. Accounts here are not required to use real-life names and most editors use a pseudonym. I happen to use my full name but have never "verified" it to anyone on Wikipedia. It is actually against policy to impersonate some well-known living person by using their name as your account name (see WP:UN). Are you claiming to be Dianna Agron? It is also against policy to reveal the real-life identity of anyone using a pseudonym (see WP:OUTING).

By the way, I note from your Userpage that you work at IMDb. Please note that Wikipedia does not consider that it is a reliable source and you will get into trouble if you add information based only on IMDb citations. See WP:IMDB for the details. It is, however, standard practice to link to that website in the external links sections of articles on films, TV shows and actors and there are templates to do just that at {{IMDb name}} and {{IMDb title}}. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:42, 14 May 2023 (UTC)