Jump to content

User talk:Galobtter/Archive 3

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 05:11, 28 December 2018 (Archiving 2 discussion(s) from User talk:Galobtter) (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 5→Archive 8

Similar problem

Hi, Galobbter. I appreciated your help with the problem related to Italians in Albania. Unfortunately I am facing something similar problem of possible "abuse" with another article: Lavori Pubblici (1947-1990). Can you help me with your precious advice? If you agree that cannot exist this article together with the one called Jeenyo United FC, I will accept what seems a "provocation" by User:Number 57, who first agrees in accepting the article, writing to me: "Number 57 moved page Lavori Publici (1947-1990) to Lavori Publici over redirect" (and that I have accepted with a friendly OK) and one hour later erased it all. Regards, --Esauster (talk) 19:56, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

If you could get Esauster to understand the basics of WP:BRD and WP:RM, that would be much appreciated. Cheers, Number 57 20:02, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
Update: It seems the message may have been understood.[1] Sorry to bother you. Cheers, Number 57 20:08, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
Sincerely I did not understand the "message" from this admin: to me it remembers a bit the word "ABUSE" with newcomers by a kind of boss....but anyway, thanks for your previous help.--Esauster (talk) 20:15, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

PS: A confirmation of his possible abuse can be seen in the fact that has merged the example I gave him (Deportivo Petare and Deportivo Italia (1948-2010)), but I have found in Wikipedia that there are many many many historical football teams that are NOT merged in the encyclopedia, like U.S. Internazionale Napoli -for example- and Napoli FC!....unbelievable, but true.--Esauster (talk) 20:43, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Esauster, Number 57 has given what seems to me a perfectly reasonable explanation at User talk:Esauster#Lavori_Publici/Jeenyo_United of why that is the case. I don't see any "abuse" but rather someone explaining that you shouldn't repeatedly revert other users per this policy; doing so hinders collaboration; what you instead should do is discuss on the talk page. I understand you're upset at the article being "erased" but what you can do instead is to merge the content of the page into Jeenyo United FC. Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:23, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Ok. I trust you. But I want to pinpoint that this admin has written in my talk page this "(my question: So, why exists the U.S. Internazionale Napoli and the Napoli FC, to name only one example of the many articles (about historical football teams NOT merged into actual football teams) that I have found in en.Wikipedia?--Esauster (talk) 20:50, 20 October 2018 (UTC))….Admin answer: Because that was a merger between two clubs to create a new one, not a single club being renamed. In those cases separate articles are justified. Number 57 21:32, 20 October 2018 (UTC)". So, if two clubs merge, separate articles are justified.....and in the case of Lavori Publici this is exactly what happened! After 22 years was created the team Jeenyo United FC with the union (as the word "united" clearly indicated) of the "Lavori Publici" closed in 1990 and the team (that had played in second division) "Geeska Afrika" (read data on this team here: http://www.rsssf.com/tabless/soma2-05.html). So, why Napoli FC & US Internazionale Napoli yes and Jeenyo & Lavori Publici no?...cheers, --Esauster (talk) 14:51, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
This is quite simple:
  1. If two clubs merge into one, there are three separate clubs – the two original clubs and the new club (for example Newcastle East End F.C. and Newcastle West End F.C. merged to form Newcastle United F.C..
  2. If a club is renamed, it is not a separate club, so there is no justification for a separate article; hence why Ardwick A.F.C. is a redirect to Manchester City F.C.
In the case of Lavori Publici/Jeenyo United, the club was just re-established under a different name (source). There was no merger with Geeksa Afrika, who have continued to exist separately to Jeenyo United (see here), so I don't know why you've mentioned them. Number 57 15:04, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Well, I see this admin "rules" everything...also the talk pages of others.....anyway I want to pinpoint that when LLPP was recreated, after 22 years of being OFFICIALLY closed, it was united (as the name UNITED indicated) by somalian managers with Geeksa that was in a third level, but soon they had problems (in actual Somalia all seems to be a "fighting") and the Geeksa team was returned to the lower level with his management. But the recreation was OFFICIALLY done between LLPP and Geeksa. Of course, all these changes can happen only in a country like it is now Somalia.... --Esauster (talk) 15:36, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Furthermore, I have to add that not all the information I get about LLPP is from the internet (like happens with most of people and also with you, I surmise), but also from a friend who is from Somalia. He is now searching about why there it is the word UNITED in the new name of the actual football team. He thinks that there are more than two former teams that have been united in order to create the actual "Jeenyo United FC". He is well informed: for example, he told me that the word Jeenyo is the translation of the Italian word Genio (and later I have found on the internet that he is right). So I think there it is a high probability that there were at least 3 old football teams "united". --Esauster (talk) 18:19, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Esauster, a note that original research is not allowed. Any information you put in an Wikipedia article should be sourced (the source can be in Somali or be offline, but has to be reliable). Presenting some sources that describe exactly happened between the clubs would be good. Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:28, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I know the rule about original research....it is going to be difficult in the case of Somalia (with all the related problems about "reliable", as we all know in such a devastated country), and my somalian friend has been informed about this rule.....at least I can say that I am doing all I can do to "save" from merger the LLPP article. Thanks again for your help/advice. --Esauster (talk) 18:39, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
Good! Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:40, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Freaking awesome script!!!

Just wanted to say that User:Galobtter/Shortdesc helper is AWESOME!!! Thanks a ton for making that. I've been using it a bunch. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:03, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Zackmann08, Thanks for the praise! Galobtter (pingó mió) 19:05, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Galobtter, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

Backlog

As of 21 October 2018, there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.

Community Wishlist Proposal
Project updates
  • ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
  • There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.
New scripts

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Draft:IOTA (technology)

I'm not seeing the overlap. Th earwig says zero, which is mistaken, but when I search this, I'm not seeing large overlap.S Philbrick(Talk) 17:41, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Sphilbrick, sorry, I linked the wrong url in my edit summary. See this url that I linked from the template - paragraph is wholesale copied from section II IV part A of that document. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:44, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
Galobtter, Looks like someone beat me to it. Thanks for an explanation I was scratching my head trying to figure out what was going on. And thanks in general for all the diligent work you are doing searching for an helping to remove copyright issues. S Philbrick(Talk) 18:25, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
Sphilbrick, Thanks. Well I have to thank you for all the work you do at copypatrol and in revdeling (much more than me :)) Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:28, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

On editing and adding

Dear friend, I hope that this is the proper way to communicate. Yes, it was my first addition to the English version of Wikipedia (but I have made more in the Greek version). Still, I am a novice in terms of adding stuff, but I long-time user and very much a supporter of what Wikipedia stands for. I had no problem with the initial rejection of my edit. I understand the reason. As a professional in communications, I consider posts on social media an on-the-record position, worth tracking. But I am not going to argue in my first post on the merits of a long-standing policy. I appreciate the hard work of the editors and the enormous responsibility. Needless to say that I appreciate the fact that ultimately my edit was accepted. I appreciate it very much taking time to deal with all this, which shows care and professionalism. Which, I guess, is a long-winded way to say thank you for all you are doing to keep Wikipedia relevant and a reliable and unbiased source of information. Thanks again. (PS> I really hope this is a message that is read by the person who edited my piece :-) ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by StratosAthens (talk • contribs)

StratosAthens Thanks. Sending a message here or on your talk page are both reasonable places to communicate. Usually here we don't add every post of social media as people make a lot of tweets; as however his tweets did get covered in sources it was a reasonable inclusion in the end. I hope you as a long-time user become a long-time editor :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:00, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Talk:InfoWars

Is there a FAQ? Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 19:52, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Jim1138, yes, in the editnotice I linked. Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:38, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

That close

The Barnstar of Recovery
was absolutely fantastic. Great stuff! Thanks very much...here, you dropped this. ——SerialNumber54129 10:33, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

A heads-up

I checked, you joined the project in 2013. So you joined when the footnote reference style had firmly been in place as the predominant reference style for over half a decade.

I started contributing here in 2004, when there were no reference sections.

I made thousands of edits in 2005 and early 2006, where I used the WP:Footnote3 reference style. And I converted articles from that style to the footnote style. I know these two reference styles absolutely cannot be mixed. I know this conversion is best done by someone with some familiarity with both styles.

I assure you, it is highly annoying to have people mistakenly apply the very wise warnings about recklessly mixing completely incompatible styles talo the use of the two completely compatible methods of using the footnote reference style.

Thanks for drawing my attention to Help_talk:List-defined_references. WRT to the order of precedence of wikidocuments, do guidelines take precedence over howtos? Policies and guidelines certainly take precedence over essays and user essays. WP:CITEVAR is a guideline. Help:List-defined references is a howto.

I strongly suspect that the passage you cited at Help:List-defined references was submitted by someone who, like you, has no experience converting an article from one style of references to another. I left a comment at Help talk:List-defined references#Misleading references to CITEVAR. Geo Swan (talk) 11:00, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Geo Swan, Whatever the history, currently list defined references are considered different from other styles - different enough for WP:CITEVAR to apply (using CS1 references and non-CS1 references are also technically compatible but still mixing different styles per CITEVAR - "removing citation templates from an article that uses them consistently") . I suppose a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Citing sources could clarify this if this is considered unclear though I note that so far everyone other than you seems to agree that list defined references are a different style from what is used in the article, and as I said CITEVAR says specifically to not switch from using references defined in prose and in reflist ("moving reference definitions in the reflist to the prose, or moving reference definitions from the prose into the reflist"). Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:09, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Shouldn't the term "style" be reserved for distinguishing between the genuinely incompatible reference styles, and not applied to alternate methods of using a single style?
  • You wrote "CITEVAR says specifically to not switch from using references defined in prose and in reflist." then you quote what CITEVAR actually says to avoid: "moving reference definitions in the reflist to the prose, or moving reference definitions from the prose into the reflist".

    So, CITEVAR says to avoid doing what you did. You moved references. Is adding brand new list-defined references "switching". I suggest adding brand new list-defined references is absolutely not barred by CITEVAR, when the other wikidocument says "some or all" of an article's references can be list-defined references.

  • Clarification please, did you mean to suggest I had lapsed by "removing citation templates from an article that uses them consistently". If so I dispute this assertion I removed any references.
  • WRT everyone else seems to agree... And, sorry, I continue to have doubts over how everyone seems to confuse references styles that can't be mixed, with the two compatible and compliant places a contributor can place their brand new references. Geo Swan (talk) 11:29, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Request on 23:06:22, 1 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by KT987


Hi there, I made a submission for Nventify, and not sure why it has been declined. Is there a way to get more clear help on the reasoning, or help with writing?

KT987 (talk) 23:06, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

The first thing you need to do is to find independent references with significant coverage about the company. See this guide for more information. Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:32, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Goodread templates.

Hello: I must disagree with your decision on the Goodreads templates. First, proper procedure was not followed because notice of the deletion discussion was not posted on the template talk pages. Next, the number of editors commenting did not constitute a quorum (IPs carry less weight than experienced, longtime editors). Third, the points I raised re rationales for deletion were not addressed (e.g., the 4 criteria and recommended solutions for improper use of the templates), Finally, the “spammy” argument for deletion is unsound — we have “spammy” linking templates for many user-accessible web-pages such as IMDb, Rotten Tomatoes, ESPN, Turner Classic Movies, and more — each of these is connected/owned by for-profit companies. (When there is a problem it is with the ‘’use’’ of the template, not the template itself. I urge you to go back and re-close the discussion as a “no-consenses”, which is your privilege to do so. Thank you. – S. Rich (talk) 08:15, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

First, proper procedure was not followed because notice of the deletion discussion was not posted on the template talk pages. There was a notice on the template page; that is all is required (and the notice also displays on the hundreds of pages where the template is transcluded on).
Next, the number of editors commenting did not constitute a quorum (IPs carry less weight than experienced, longtime editors). IPs are human, and their !votes carry the same weight as a experienced user with an account unless there is evidence of block evasion/socking. And apart from the IP there were ~6-7 editors either with an explicit bold "delete" !vote or arguing that the links have no value; well enough participation for a quorum.
Third, the points I raised re rationales for deletion were not addressed (e.g., the 4 criteria and recommended solutions for improper use of the templates) The editors argued that every use, or nearly every use, violated a guideline - WP:EL.
Regarding your last point, I note that people's arguments were more than that it was for-profit; they argued that the links had no value; you made your argument at the Tfd and almost everyone else at that Tfd disagreed.
I could be convinced to relist, but considering that there was already a previous discussion at WP:ELN where I read the consensus as against inclusion, further discussion seems unlikely to change the outcome unless you can bring up a new point. Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:46, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Awesome Wikipedians

Hello Galobtter.

Rebestalic here again. (We've seen each other a lot, haven't we?)

A userbox says that you became an Awesome Wkipedian on May 1. Does that mean that May 1 is a "day of recognition" in your name?

Thank you, Rebestalic[dubious—discuss] 19:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

No, that's just the day Gerda gave me the Precious prize. Galobtter (pingó mió) 19:35, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
I see.
Rebestalic[dubious—discuss] 19:56, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

You removed a parameter

In this edit [2] of Template:Portal-inline you removed |text=, which allowed for custom text. Would you mind adding it back by replacing {{#if:{{{short|}}}|{{{1|}}}|{{{1|}}} portal}} with {{{text|{{#if:{{{short|}}}|{{{1|}}}|{{{1|}}} portal}}}}} ? Thanks, – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 01:25, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

BrandonXLF,  Done Galobtter (pingó mió) 01:48, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Frayae

Hi Galobtter How are you? I think this is the first time we have spoke. The blocked sock, stated they reviewed 435 articles in one sitting. scope_creep (talk) 13:13, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Facepalm Facepalm Softlavender (talk) 13:25, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Galobtter,

Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW
  • Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.
If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.
We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.
With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 27, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, --Cameron11598 (Talk) 20:57, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Then please show me how to do it properly

If I simply remove the tags, I'm left with an empty section. That's why I put back in all the comments manually. Jason Harvestdancer | Talk to me 19:55, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Harvestdancer, Preview the whole page when removing the tags, and remove the section heading ==Gender==. And stop making personal attacks and aspersions of "pov-pushing editor with an agenda" or you're liable to get blocked. Galobtter (pingó mió) 19:58, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Galobtter. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 November 3#Template:Infobox Russian inhabited locality

Thank you for attempting to close this discussion. However, I would like to see some arguments in the close which go beyond the simple count of votes, since the oppose side presented pretty detailed motivation. Would you please either unclose or read write the extended motivation. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:54, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Whenever I close any discussion, I always read the whole rationales of everyone commenting. Per your request, I've added an explanation of the result; I hope that, though I know that you dislike the result, that you find the explanation reasonable for why the consensus was against you here. Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:32, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. Whereas I indeed do not like the result, I am not going to contest it at this point, as you have sufficiently substantiated your rationale. (I might join if someone else contests it, but this seems to be unlikely since nobody cares about this infobox, I am just left alone with all this shit to sort out).--Ymblanter (talk) 07:37, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
GOOD DeanBWFofficial (talk) 05:18, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

DEDON company profile

Hey Galobtter, why did you delete the page ? What is advertising or promotional meaning when i simply transform a companies page from one language to another ? Looks like many companies have a profile about their history, products and achievments. Happy to read your professional proposal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosenstock2612 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

First of all, I didn't delete the page; an admin reviewed my nomination of the page for deletion and deleted it. Anyways, I don't remember what the text of the page was; but that it was translated from another language does not mean that original version or the translation isn't promotional or promoting the company. Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:40, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) It was an article about a furniture company started by a professional footballer. I've recreated DEDON as a redirect to Robert Dekeyser; I think that article covers the company adequately and has numerous citations backing the facts up. FWIW I think Galobtter was right to tag the article as it looked far too much like advertising copy. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:00, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Oh you've jogged my memory; I remember it now. It had way too many buzzwords. Even the Robert Dekeyser has a bit of that but it is far better in covering DEDON. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:02, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Alert

Is there a reason for your ridiculous notification, or are you in the habit of adding random notices to peoples's talk pages? --Calton | Talk 15:51, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Template:B.l.o.w.

You need to put {{oldafd}} in Template talk:B.l.o.w. --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:39, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

 Done Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:17, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Page review

Hi - thanks for your review of a page I created. I'm assuming I did something incorrectly...the page is gone and it redirects back to the band page. Can you help me understand? I'm a novice at this, just trying to help with an occasional contribution. Thanks Galobtter. Nihil7 (talk) 23:17, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Nihil7, Hello. You haven't done anything incorrectly; however we have standards of notability for the creation of a standalone article, and the album appears to clearly fail that, and so I redirected the article to the article on the band. See also this quick run down of what a separate article requires: "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject"; and the guideline notability for albums. Maybe see if you can find some good reliable sources on Madder Mortem and expand the article on the band? Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:02, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Just checking

Hello G. I hope you are well. I wanted to check about the Template:Infobox Olympic Sailing that you added to the Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Holding cell#To orphan. Although the outcome is delete I think it needs to be either substitute or merge. The discussion mentions that it is redundant to Template:Infobox Olympic event. So when you get to an article where the IOS is used like Sailing at the 1984 Summer Olympics if you remove it there won't be an infobox in the article at all. As I look at it there are some fiddly bits that need to be done to make sure all the info from IOS transfers over to the IOe but I'm not sure what all needs to be done as the sandman is calling and I'm about to head to saw some logs - is that enough sleep metaphors for you :-) If I am missing something my apologies. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 08:04, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the note; I moved it to the "to review" section. Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:12, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
Well, I thought I was headed for my pillow but got side tracked. Thanks for checking on this and for the move. MarnetteD|Talk 08:18, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Transport accident infoboxes

Please review your close here. No-one is proposing to keep the name {{Infobox rail accident}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:40, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Pigsonthewing, close amended, template names aren't really decided at WP:TFD so I left choice in that (to be decided in the process of merging). Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:01, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Note

In this answer. You forgot to add an important negator, hence making your comment contradictory and self-indicting . –Ammarpad (talk) 11:32, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Ammarpad, Thanks! Oops. Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:36, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Just to take your mind off any other wiki-page which might be pre-occupying you for the next few days. Good luck.

Cabayi (talk) 18:36, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Cabayi, ha, I saw this new message popup while checking the RfA page :) Guess the kitty did distract me for a few minutes at-least.. Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:40, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

CHECK THE FIITJEE ARTICLE WHICH YOU JUST REVERTED

IN THE END OF FIRST LINE THERE ARE 2 CITATION INDICATING THAT THERE ARE MANY LEGAL CASES AGAINST FIITJEE, WHY ARE THEY PRESENT WITHOUT ANYTHING MENTIONING ABOUT IT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:3e80:1800:10::7a1 (talk) 13:59, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my edits at Sentinelese

I do not know what you did, but you rescued all the good edits that bot had thrown out along with the youtube link it took objection too. Your effort saves me time in redoing those. Thank you. 222.164.212.168 (talk) 17:00, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Revised Version with Suggested Changes

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).Ref at the URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Shyama_Raju Hi Frayae, New draft now up with more specific reference to notability guidelines, as suggested. As per the suggestions, the entire article has been rewrite. Try to keep the tone of the article neutral find the revised version. Thanks very much.

Thanks --Vmaske (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:31, 17 October 2018 (UTC) The article text is fine. I am not convinced on the number of references and would like to see more reliable secondary sources, sources like books, magazines, and news stories. They do not have to be in English or available on the internet. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 10:35, 17 October 2018 (UTC) Hi Frayae, please find more references, reliable secondary sources as follows:
1. https://www.deccanchronicle.com/150507/nation-current-affairs/article/karnataka-governor-state-govt-lock-horns-over-vtu-honorary
2. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/education/news/three-karnataka-colleges-make-it-to-top-in-swacchh-campus-ranking-2018/articleshow/66050534.cms
3. https://newsable.asianetnews.com/karnataka/62-selected-for-rajyotsava-awards-2017
4. http://digitallearning.eletsonline.com/2016/06/reva-university-transforming-students-into-excellent-citizens/
5. http://www.siliconcitynews.com/?p=11304
6. http://www.pics4news.com/daily_news_photo/112180/Guest_House_and_Health_Center_Inaugurated_at_Reva_University.html
7. https://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-features/tp-educationplus/pursuing-a-passion/article7649155.ece
8. https://www.deccanherald.com/content/75502/shining-stars-future.html
9. https://mediatech914.wordpress.com/2017/09/20/ramayana-revisited-by-23-renowned-scholars-from-across-the-globe-at-dsa-international-conference/
10. https://www.thehighereducationreview.com/magazine/reva-university-building-the-new-era-of-education--ASON752540036.html
11. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/education/news/three-karnataka-colleges-make-it-to-top-in-swacchh-campus-ranking-2018/articleshow/66050534.cms
12. http://docplayer.net/60358643-Bengaluru-india-knowledge-is-power-prospectus.html
13. https://www.deccanherald.com/content/476673/india-should-develop-own-model.html
14. http://digitallearning.eletsonline.com/2016/06/reva-university-transforming-students-into-excellent-citizens/
15. https://www.realtycompass.com/divyasree-developers-bvwq2657
16. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPSx-8qQqOs
17. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRr5egFqNB8
18. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHgNA_XQiIE
19. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PFgtSMF0zo
20. https://www.thehindu.com/features/education/college-and-university/pursuing-a-passion/article7645807.ece
21. http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Layout/Includes/TOINEW/ArtWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOIBG%2F2010%2F05%2F19&ViewMode=HTML&PageLabel=6&EntityId=Ar00604&AppName=1
22. https://www.asmaindia.in/asma-annual-convention-2018/indias-top-30-marketers-in-education-2018-awards/
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Vmaske (talk • contribs) 06:10, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Gilobtter, As per your suggestions please find more references, reliable secondary sources for the notability of the above mentioned topic:
1. https://www.thehindu.com/features/education/college-and-university/pursuing-a-passion/article7645807.ece
2. https://www.deccanherald.com/city/reva-varsity-students-educate-703386.html
3. http://www.ptinews.com/pressrelease/15729_press-subSkill-Development-Needs-to-be-Focus-of-Education--Says-Panel-at-2nd-BERG-Education-Awards--Indian-Educationists--Institutions-Feted
4. http://asiaone.co.in/asiaone-global-asian-of-the-year-2018/
5. https://www.deccanherald.com/city/reva-varsity-students-educate-703386.html
Requesting you to guide on the same. Vmaske (talk) 05:59, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Vmaske, I checked the references, and the sources that are not "trivial mentions" of him as described in WP:SIGCOV are a couple of interviews about the university he runs which is not coverage about him to make him notable per the general notability guideline. Like I said before, if you want you can resubmit with the best references to get another opinion; however my suggestion is you direct your efforts to an existing article or a notable subject since it doesn't look like Shyamu Raju is notable enough for an article. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:28, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations

on passing the 200 mark and making it:-) FWIW, I noticed your Hindi-babel-box for the first time and out of lame curiosity, do you know any other Indic language? ∯WBGconverse 20:46, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Winged Blades of Godric, not really - well I should know Tamil since it is my mother tongue; alas my skill only extends to kind of understanding my Grandma when she speaks :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:46, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Well, with WP:200 and an hour left, you've passed. Congratulations! ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 08:49, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Bellezzasolo, well, you know what they say about counting chickens before they hatch; but thanks! :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:55, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Now I'm feeling bad about getting you a kitten when all along you wanted a chicken. I'll see if I can find the receipt. Congratulations. Cabayi (talk) 09:17, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Question about User:Galobot/report/Articles by Lint Errors

I have a question about the SQL query that generates User:Galobot/report/Articles by Lint Errors. Is it possible to exclude the Lint error group called "Obsolete HTML tags"? I have no interest in replacing these low-priority tags, and there does not appear to be a firm consensus that they should be removed. Thanks for anything you can do. The report has been very useful to me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Jonesey95,  Done Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:36, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Fantastic. Thanks, and enjoy the mopping! – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:44, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Your signature

Now that I supported your RfA, you owe me an explanation! You said that the pingó mió in your sig means ping me. I can't think of a language where that would be so. Am I missing a language?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:48, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Bbb23, not in any particular language, its just faux Italian of "ping me".  :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 01:54, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Awhile back I got curious and asked Google Translate. Here's what it said. ―Mandruss ☎ 07:15, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Tempted to change my signature to Galobtter (He caught my) :P Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:31, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
The only thing is that the word for my in Spanish has an accent on the i not the o.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:09, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Apparently Google Translate doesn't support faux Italian. ―Mandruss ☎ 20:02, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
And apparently the actual "ping me" in Italian is "me il ping," according to Google Translate--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:52, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Welcome

Enjoy your new status as a punching bag for POV-pushers, spammers and other ne'er-do-wells :-) Guy (Help!) 18:07, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Cats and gorillas. Some people sure are excited. Well, congratulations to you, and let me offer my personal opinion that the arguments opposing you were very weak. Good luck! Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:14, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Request For Administration Nomination

Hello Galobtter, could you please nominate me to be an admin on Wikipedia as i have been seeing many vandalism and wish to ban these accounts which do so. So please do nominate me and i will coorporate as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theamazinnghelloworld (talk • contribs) 05:24, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Theamazinnghelloworld, Please see Wikipedia:Adminship is not for new users Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:39, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Request for article approval due to admin vandalism

Hello Galobtter. I have seen that you are an amazing administrator and contributor on Wikipedia so I feel that I can trst you on this. Earlier this week I created an article Draft:John Kavinraj Philip, and submitted it for review. It came back but i was expecting this. The admin that declined my article stated on my talk page saying I am a b**** by creating this article and having no help and useless towards wikipedia. I was very hurt and as an admin on Wikipedia that was not the attitude i was hoping. I have seen that you are great at your job so thats why I came seeking help from you. Could you please personally review my article as you are a great administrator to trust and i supose the best yet. My sources come from books, magazines, newspaper articles and booklets. Please do consider it so that I can continue my passion on contributing on Wiki. Thank you so much Galobtter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theamazinnghelloworld (talk • contribs) 09:10, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello Galobtter. I am sory but I think you were mistaken as I am not being paid to edit nor create this article but to be honest i spent 3 moths researching on this and recently got my Wiki account to have this article created. Please do advice is my reference not enough because i think it is good enough because I have books, magazines and newspaper articles to refer back as source. Please do consider my article and i will update and put in more sources if requested but my prayer is for it to be created and accepted to be an article. I dont want my work to go to waste because of that admin. So i want your help and please do help me Sir Galobtter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theamazinnghelloworld (talk • contribs) 09:37, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello Galobtter, its ok, cuase that guy that admin that said bad words to me deleted my article. He called me a f**ker this time. I was really pissed o him condemming my article. So Galobtter, while I am creating my article again (I copy pasted it incase of an emergency) so could you tell me if my sources were not up to standards or what. You name it I will fix it ad please do upon God I am begging you to help me because many admins have never helped me when I asked for advice in the live forums and talk pages none of them helped me but. Please do help me out.I will listen to you all the way and follow your instructions. Please do i am begging you to help me and approve my article. What am i lacking just name it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theamazinnghelloworld (talk • contribs) 10:06, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Theamazinnghelloworld, Stop lying about other people - nobody called you a f**ker - if you recreate the article and it is not substantially less promotional it will just get deleted again and you'd likely be blocked for continued promotional editing. Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:11, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

I am sorry Galobtter, thank you for reviewing Nas Daily Corporation page. That was not the page where the incident happenened. It happened on my first article John Kavinraj Philip. He is a great person and i researched him for 3 months and I was quite mad when the=at admin said that to me. Then later a guy named Deb deleted the draft so I dont have the history record. Thank yu for at least answering me and I am trully thankfull. Due to no admins answer me but your really and awsome Wikipedia. Is it ok if I recreate my old article that got deleted and you review it and give me your advice? I am willing for any type of advice from you as an admin.

TheamazinnghelloworldThis accusation didn't happen either, and I have checked every single edit related to the deleted article of John Kavinraj Philip. You've been asked to stop lying, and immediately return to doing so. How about taking some time off from article creation and read up on some of the information available on reliable sources and also promotional editing. If you continue disrupting Wikipedia by accusing others of wrong when they're not doing anything even close to resembling what you are saying you'll be blocked from editing to avoid wasting the time of administrators with false accusations. -- Longhair\talk 10:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Longhair, Slightly late, I already blocked them :). (the history of John Kavinraj Philip and wikiquote:John Kavinraj Philip is probably relevant) Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:39, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
You acted while I was checking their credibility. Job done :D -- Longhair\talk 10:43, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Another bit of admin abuse deal out :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:44, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Welcome to the mop cupboard btw. When somebody is grovelling and piling on praise, they want something (if they're new here anyway) :D -- Longhair\talk 10:48, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Personally, I wouldn't unblock. Your decision is well-justified, and I'm only offering a view in case well-meaning interference has made you feel that you have been too severe... Deb (talk) 13:06, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
I wouldn't either... -- Longhair\talk 13:07, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
And every time I assume good faith, I end up looking like an idiot. Can we change that AGF to ABF or something, you know, just for efficiency? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:14, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Still good to have someone thinking about AGF, though yeah, one bad thing about AGF is that it makes you look stupid if the editor does turn out to be bad/malicious :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:18, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
It's my fault. I missed the f**er content here. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:26, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
One can still assume good faith while keeping WP:Competence is required in mind :D -- Longhair\talk 13:27, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:28, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

The Admin's Barnstar
For being baptized by fire. :) Dear oh dear. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:14, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, Anna Frodesiak. Not the easiest start to admining, I suppose :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:19, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Probably more on me for not taking all that advice about "taking it slow" :D Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:21, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Your judgement and pace were just dandy. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:28, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations, you are now an administrator!

Galobtter looking confused as to what the d-batch button does....

Hello Galobtter. I am pleased to report that I have closed your RFA as successful. Good luck with the new tools, and feel free to stop by my talk page anytime if you have any questions. Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 12:39, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

With 208 supporters, Galobtter's RfA is the tenth to succeed in 2018 (image courtesy of Linguist111).
*cough* Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:31, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
And have a read of Wikipedia:What you won't learn in new admin school, you come to find it's oh so true at times... Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:53, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • I am slightly late to the party, but just wanted to drop by and congratulate you on the passing of your RfA. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop by. I am usually always around to lend a hand. --TheSandDoctor Talk 07:29, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Also, I love the image and caption you added Ritchie333, you seem to find fitting ones . --TheSandDoctor Talk 07:33, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Hmm, since when has being confused about something ever stopped me? User:Ritchie333/GA should be the perfect page to test what the d-batch button does Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:41, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
This cat roolz! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:03, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
But it is serius biznis

Category creation protection

Hey, now that you are an admin (congrats on that!) you might be able to help me. I am doing maintenance on Arrowverse characters and while trying to create Category:Arrowverse characters, I've noticed that it is protected. Looking at the deletion discussion linked there, it seems that either the rational was flawed at the time, or that the situation has changed which would now allow the category to be created.

As recent RM discussions have concluded, all character articles in the "Arrowverse" franchise which need disambiguation should be disambiguated with "(Arrowverse)" - Oliver Queen (Arrowverse), John Diggle (Arrowverse), Joe West (Arrowverse) and Barry Allen (Arrowverse), and I've recently created the corresponding redirect category Category:Arrowverse character redirects to lists. Also, looking at one of the rationals given in the category delete discussion about how the MCU does not have such a category - this too was created Category:Marvel Cinematic Universe specific characters. The category structure would benefit from having a category for characters, in the same way it benefits from having Category:Arrowverse episodes for the episodes. Hope you can help me out with this. --Gonnym (talk) 15:32, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Gonnym, TBH, I really don't deal with categories that much and wouldn't know if creating the category would be appropriate or not; and anyways, you'd want to ask the protecting admin (ping CactusWriter) first to see if they'd be willing to allow recreation. Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:37, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
No problem, I'll ask him (first time I ever needed to do this and the page itself doesn't really say who to contact other than "administrators"). --Gonnym (talk) 15:39, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

welcome to the mop corps

Congratulations on your successful RFA!
I'm a little late, but that won't stop me from torturing you passing on what the puppy told me after my RFA passed –
eleven long, sordid, hasn't-Katie-gone-away-yet years ago:
  1. Remember you will always protect the wrong version. (I got nothing here. It's inevitable. I'd be shocked if you haven't done it already.)
  2. Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. Without exception, you will pick the wrong one to do. (See #5.)
  3. Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll. (You'll attract many more of those now, because mop. They must like to drink the dirty water in the bucket.)
  4. Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block, because really, what else is there to live for?
  5. Remember that when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology.
    It will not be a personal attack because we are admins and, therefore, we are all rouge anyway.
  6. Finally, remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able.


Katietalk 02:00, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales, because if it did, it would be much, much better.
All rights released under GFDL.

Welcome...

...to the deep end of the pool. It only gets more fun. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:18, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Sounds like the old, supposed, Chinese curse: May you live in interesting times. But I’ll be more careful around Galob after gaining this new tool: [3]. O3000 (talk) 22:56, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
GLOB!!!!?? HOW DARE YOU DISRESPECT ME! That's a blocking. Galobtter (pingó mió) 04:31, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Short for global, indicating global knowledge and your interest in global warming. Did I get away with that? Are they smiling? O3000 (talk) 13:57, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
:D :D
You're spared .. for now. Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:20, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Usernames

If they need suppressed so they don’t show up in drop downs, it’s usually best to contact a steward directly or go to #wikimedia-stewards connect and request a steward to suppress it globally. Because of SUL, it’s really a global issue (and if it really shouldn’t show up in drop downs, be sure to request suppression and not lock-hide.) TonyBallioni (talk) 15:04, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

TonyBallioni, ah okay, thanks. Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:07, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

I know you're a new admin and everything...

...so I'll try to be gentle, but this AfD close [4] is completely off the mark. You said, "article meets WP:GNG based on the provided sources and so merits a stand-alone article", but that logic doesn't track. Usually at AfD the question is notability, but not this one. The question here is WP:NOPAGE which deals with the question of whether a subject, assumed to be notable, should nonetheless be covered jointly with other subjects on a shared page. The arguments presented on that question, not on notability, are what you should be evaluating. EEng 21:48, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Those arguing for keep argued there was enough information for a separate article and for the "presumption" of suitability for a stand-alone article that WP:GNG gives; those are reasonable arguments, and were made by the "predominant number of responsible Wikipedians".
Not only that, to present a WP:NOPAGE argument, those arguing for delete would need to at the very least point out what "shared page" the person would be covered in; no one arguing for delete did. Galobtter (pingó mió) 04:50, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Hmmm. Odd that you refer to "the predominant number of responsible Wikipedians", linking that phrase to WP:CLOSE, which explicitly warns "Consensus is not determined by counting heads". I guess we'll just have to renominate specifying a specific target page. EEng 16:55, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
I was referring to the bulk of it which talks about "If the discussion shows that some people think one policy is controlling, and some another, the closer is expected to close by judging which view has the predominant number of responsible Wikipedians supporting it, not personally select which is the better policy." Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:57, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
You're right, sorry my search for that phrase in CLOSE didn't find it somehow. Nonetheless I still think it's off the mark. It's not a question of which of GNG or NOPAGE controls, because they are two steps of a single decision process presented on the same page -- not uncoordinated, policies or guidelines found on disconnected pages directing conflicting things. Most participants in the discussion insisted on speaking only to the first part of the process -- GNG -- and ignoring the second part -- PAGEDECIDE aka NOPAGE. Anyway, thanks for your replies. EEng 17:06, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello

@Galobtter:, I have edited {{User MU}}, Now can I remove deletion tag. Afingba Mangang (talk) 13:50, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Afingba Mangang, just wait for Liz to see if she'd withdraw the nomination. Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:14, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Withdrawn! Thanks for taking care of that, Galobtter. Liz Read! Talk! 19:50, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
It looks like you've received a few of these recently so I thought I'd make the hat-trick. Thanks for your work at RFPP helping to clear the backlog. Best, Mifter (talk) 07:04, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Abusing talk page

You may want to revoke User:2600:387:8:5:0:0:0:78's talk page access. Thanks! EclipseDude (talk) 08:37, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Already on it :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:38, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

please go to talk page for all of the edits you just reverted

There is no rule that says I can not edit the page, it only says it is "strongly discouraged." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melizdean (talk • contribs) 05:33, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Melizdean, COI editing may only be "strongly discouraged", but promotional editing and adding copyright violations are 100% not allowed. Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:38, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Please be more specific on the talk page on what was promotional editing and copyright violations? I listed out on the talk page the edits I am proposing. Thank you. Melizdean (talk) 05:49, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Take part in a survey

Hi Galobtter

We're working to measure the value of Wikipedia in economic terms. We want to ask you some questions about how you value being able to edit Wikipedia.

Our survey should take about 10-15 minutes of your time. We hope that you will enjoy it and find the questions interesting. All answers will be kept strictly confidential and will be anonymized before the aggregate results are published. Regretfully, we can only accept responses from people who live in the US due to restrictions in our grant-based funding.

As a reward for your participation, we will randomly pick 1 out of every 5 participants and give them $25 worth of goods of their choice from the Wikipedia store (e.g. Wikipedia themed t-shirts). Note that we can only reward you if you are based in the US.

Click here to access the survey: https://mit.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_eXJcEhLKioNHuJv

Thanks

Avi

Researcher, MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy --Avi gan (talk) 06:08, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Redirect was not deleted

I nominated [5] Nobember at list of redirects for discussion a few days ago and the result of this was delete. However, I noticed that the redirect hasn't been deleted yet and is still there? I also don't understand why the discussion was closed so quickly, I thought that maybe it could be relisted due to a lack of consensus but that's just my humble opinion. CycloneYoris talk! 05:53, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

CycloneYoris, I have no idea why it didn't get deleted; I relisted it now. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:24, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! :) CycloneYoris talk! 06:31, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Migrating previous template protection to new template

Hey Galobtter, I've created Template:Infobox reality competition season per the result of the result of Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 December 5#Big Brother season templates and was asked if the previous template protection Template:Big Brother housemates and Template:Big Brother endgame had, could be enabled for this one as well. Thanks! --Gonnym (talk) 13:42, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

I've added the semi-protection those two templates had. Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:47, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you! --Gonnym (talk) 14:13, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018

Hello Galobtter,

Reviewer of the Year

This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to Onel5969. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554 reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285 edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.

Thanks are also extended for their work to JTtheOG (15,059 reviews), Boleyn (12,760 reviews), Cwmhiraeth (9,001 reviews), Semmendinger (8,440 reviews), PRehse (8,092 reviews), Arthistorian1977 (5,306 reviews), Abishe (4,153 reviews), Barkeep49 (4,016 reviews), and Elmidae (3,615 reviews).
Cwmhiraeth, Semmendinger, Barkeep49, and Elmidae have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only seven months, while Boleyn, with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.

See also the list of top 100 reviewers.

Less good news, and an appeal for some help

The backlog is now approaching 5,000, and still rising. There are around 640 holders of the NPR flag, most of whom appear to be inactive. The 10% of the reviewers who do 90% of the work could do with some support especially as some of them are now taking a well deserved break.


Really good news - NPR wins the Community Wishlist Survey 2019

At #1 position, the Community Wishlist poll closed on 3 December with a resounding success for NPP, reminding the WMF and the volunteer communities just how critical NPP is to maintaining a clean encyclopedia and the need for improved tools to do it. A big 'thank you' to everyone who supported the NPP proposals. See the results.


Training video

Due to a number of changes having been made to the feed since this three-minute video was created, we have been asked by the WMF for feedback on the video with a view to getting it brought up to date to reflect the new features of the system. Please leave your comments here, particularly mentioning how helpful you find it for new reviewers.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Leonid Afremov: New draft

Hello, I wish to create a new draft for "Leonid Afremov" in my own words, no copy/paste from other websites. Just one or two short paragraphs. Is the article now banned for creation? I'm reading the following: protected Leonid Afremov [Create=Require extended confirmed access] (indefinite)... Thank you for your answer. Scm5791 (talk) 20:55, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Shocked!

I went to look for some tasks earlier and came across 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami at an "articles that need copy edits" page. I took a crack at the first two paras. and realized none of it had inline cites. WHAT A DOG! And to think it was once an FA, now merely "B". It needs to get some citations for what we both know might be fact, but that's not good enough.

Shocked, I tells ya. Regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 05:19, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

See MOS:LEADCITE. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:59, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Hamster Sandwich, The sections particularly being requested to be copyedited are tagged, e.g at 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami#Sri Lanka Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:23, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Or, there's never a bad time for an old hamster to learn new tricks, such as finding and adding citations :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:30, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
It's not finding cites which is the difficulty now... It's finding cites that match the material as presented....Not a big deal, one or two suitable news sources covered that story. I'll stand by my editing so far there though, as far as prose. Those lede paras were a mess, stylistically. Quick question... Are "The Guardian" or "The Mail" suitable sources? They both seem kind of straddling a line between a blog and a news outlet. Regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 15:17, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
The Guardian is a major mainstream newspaper (so WP:NEWSORG applies); just make sure you're citing the news section and not opinion. If by The Mail you mean the Daily Mail, then no. I'd suggest looking in Google Books for sourcing and see if you can find higher quality sources than newspapers reporting on the day. Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:25, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

I cannot believe at this late date there is no article for Motorcycle assassin. Shocking. Hamster Sandwich (talk) 04:24, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Franz Klainsek page and Artlover06

Hi, Galobtter, as you seem to know your way around complicated copyright violation issues, I'm here to ask if you can help Artlover06 (talk), whose edits turned a low-key and fairly encyclopedic page written by someone else into a WP:CSD#G11 and WP:CSD#G12-worthy speedy deletion (spamvio? MER-C and I should write a page on that). One suggestion off the top of my head when Artlover06 posted on my talk page for rescue was that the previous non-copyvio revisions could be restored. I don't work in revision-deletion territory, though, and it seems that you do. – Athaenara ✉ 08:05, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Athaenara,  Done. Yeah, when there are previous non-copyvio versions it should be reverted to that version and revdelled instead of G12ed; in this case, Kdv06 added a bunch of copyright violations too so 🤷‍♂️.
Also, judging by their usernames, Kdv06 is clearly also Artlover06... Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:39, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
I nominated the article for Afd. Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:53, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Very nicely done indeed, thank you! – Athaenara ✉ 09:06, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your help in editing this article. I am going to go ahead and edit this article from here. As I said I am writing a research paper in school about this artist and will have much more credible and self written information on him. Not sure about the language you are using to describe additional issues- please be of help and advise me on how to resolve any outstanding issues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artlover06 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Artlover06, What you need to do here is find reliable sources on the subject. See also WP:42. Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:01, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. I will link all my research accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artlover06 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Notice

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GiantSnowman. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GiantSnowman/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 31, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GiantSnowman/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Bradv🍁 21:42, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Merry

Happy Christmas!
Hello Galobtter ,
Early in A Child's Christmas in Wales the young Dylan and his friend Jim Prothero witness smoke pouring from Jim's home. After the conflagration has been extinguished Dylan writes that

Nobody could have had a noisier Christmas Eve. And when the firemen turned off the hose and were standing in the wet, smoky room, Jim's Aunt, Miss. Prothero, came downstairs and peered in at them. Jim and I waited, very quietly, to hear what she would say to them. She said the right thing, always. She looked at the three tall firemen in their shining helmets, standing among the smoke and cinders and dissolving snowballs, and she said, "Would you like anything to read?"

My thanks to you for your efforts to keep the 'pedia readable in case the firemen chose one of our articles :-) Best wishes to you and yours and happy editing in 2019. MarnetteD|Talk 22:32, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Category creation protection, part 2

Hey, so CactusWriter (the admin which blocked the creation of the category) hasn't been online since the 5th. Where would be the correct venue to ask for a review of this block? --Gonnym (talk) 19:29, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Gonnym, The review would probably be at WP:DRV; however I can unprotect it; but a first question - it seems, from reviewing the discussions, that a a category Category:Arrowverse specific characters a la the MCU one you mentioned would supported for creation while Category:Arrowverse characters may just be re CfDed. Would creating the former category be acceptable to you? Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:46, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
That could work, but would be a sub-optimal title. The reason the MCU editors choose that title was, I'm assuming, since other editors were adding the comic character articles to that title and they wanted it made clear that it was for MCU-only articles. However, that happened because said editors were also blocking the creation of new articles on the basis that the comic book articles already exist. This has been recently challenged with 2 new MCU creations. This was also somewhat of an issue with the Arrowverse but there have been several new articles created recently. Also, per WP:CONSISTENCY with 99.9% other character categories out there, we never use "specific" in the title (except the MCU one), so for example, The Flash (2014 TV series), does not have a category named Category:The Flash (2014 TV series) specific characters, for which an argument can be made that other editors would mistakenly be adding comic book articles to it. Also, Category:Arrowverse character redirects to lists exists so that would need to be also changed, which would mean dozen of pointless edits. So to sum it up, it could work, but there is absolutely no reason not to use the standard title. --Gonnym (talk) 11:14, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Gonnym, Ok, I unprotected the category. Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:17, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Convictions

Just an FYI, you don't need to go to trial to be "convicted" of a crime. If you plead guilty and are sentenced then you've been convicted too. R2 (bleep) 08:42, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Digitalhealthalience

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 09:36, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

 Done Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:40, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Galobtter/Archive_3&oldid=875667160"