Contents

User talk:FeralOink

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Please leave messages for me in a new section, at the end of this page.
I will usually respond here, unless asked to do otherwise. Thank you.

Johnuniq (talk) 05:19, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Probably needs auto-confirmed page protection from apparent COI pop-up accounts. SPECIFICO talk 12:30, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked at the history of two articles in relation to "as I keep finding Chinese IP addresses vandalizing the Stokes article, and Incomplete Bessel Functions article, and complain but no one wants to do a check user because China." and suppose that it was metaphoric satire. In any case, the argument is far fetched and if this can be helpful, CU is never run on IP addresses (no matter the provenance), but can be used with suspected accounts to compare technical information in recent enough logs, including IP address(es) they used in that period. If you suspect sockpuppetry, WP:SPI will usually be attended by independent clerks and admins who should have little to no involvement with the topic. If a page receives vandalism from multiple accounts or IP addresses, temporary semi-protection can be requested at WP:RFPP. —PaleoNeonate – 23:34, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello PaleoNeonate! Thank you for taking me seriously and visiting my talk page. I was referring to this in particular, which I initiated. We sort of know who the Chinese editor is who is vandalizing AND self-promoting.--FeralOink (talk) 13:47, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, ok this does not look like vandalism, but is indication of WP:COI editing and indeed a problem. DMacks appears to have done the necessary when discovering accounts and the 155.69.0.0/16 IP range appears to be Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. There's still some extant stuff like this paper also added by the same IP range in 2017 (found using: insource:"Jian-Jun" "Shu")... —PaleoNeonate – 16:24, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I rebuilt this article, and responded to a few of your comments. I just noticed the material you added near the top of the talk page -- this stuff is good and I will try to incorporate more of it when I get a chance. Cheers. ---- CharlesGillingham (talk) 23:52, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Charles Gillingham. You did indeed rebuild the article. Neats and scruffies, and the history of AI are not my forte; I am merely a mathematical statistician and applied probability professional (not academic) so I will bow out of further involvement at this point. I left a few additional thoughts on the article talk page. Thank you for stopping by and updating me on the page status. That was courteous of you.--FeralOink (talk) 07:02, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello FeralOink, I saw that you commented on Reza Goodary's article some time ago. It's WP:NasWP:NKICK (Fighting for WBC and WMC world title). Also sources full covered WP:NWSRC. Please review again. Thank you. AriaTess (talk) 07:39, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.

• AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
• The template {{db-afc-move}} has been created - this template is similar to {{db-move}} when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a little confused considering this article is aguably a better article than most of the others. Rolling stock is usually would warrant either a section of the system's page or a separate article entirely. The other LA metro rolling stock articles have even less info about their origins and designs than this one about a car that has yet to enter service. Most of the other articles have just a few PDFs or only first party sources. Arguably this is probably better than the majority of wikipedia articles. QuarioQuario54321 (talk) 19:04, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw your messages on the talk page for Sectarianism article and I come to you with a question. Since in the leading section it states that sectarianism can be labelled as "political" or "religious" but the reality is more complex than that, shouldn't it be better if the corpus doesn't show that distinction? There are some cases, as the Lebanese one on which I am working, that are difficult to label as either religious or political. At the moment the article looks a bit confusing overall due to this distinction. Thanks for your answer! Ziribilla (talk) 15:06, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:06, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:01, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I am writing to you as you are an experienced member of Wikipedia and in particular the WP:FINANCE project for advice. Please see the article about Mikhail Lomtadze. What advice can you give for improvement? Now there is an active discussion about the keeping or deleting. Deviloper (talk) 06:14, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deviloper, I regret that I did not see your message sooner. By the time I looked into it, the page had already been deleted. That is not to say I thought that BLP was worthy of inclusion, but I didn't even have a chance to review it.

If I can help you in the future with any other submissions or related matters, please do not hesitate to ask. I will be more prompt next time, I promise!--FeralOink (talk) 17:13, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am contacting you because you are a member of the Business Wikiproject. I submitted proposals for updating the wiki article on LRN (company) whose main focus is advisory on business ethics, regulation, and corporate culture. Talk:LRN (company)#Request Edits November 2022.. As someone who works for the company, I have a conflict of interest and cannot make the changes myself. I have followed all WP policies to the best of my abilities. Your review of the request would be very much appreciated. Thanks. DiegoPlace6561 (talk) 17:32, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DiegoPlace6561. Thank you for your message. I will go have a look at your article!--FeralOink (talk) 13:59, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited LRN (company), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fortune.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your civilized criticism on my talk page. I've replied there.Rich (talk) 10:53, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I noticed that you approved a series of edits by an IPv6 IP which were reverted by an IPv4 IP who I reverted and explained on their talk page that they couldn't find any sign of the "Password Live" thing ever existing. I looked into it myself and am not seeing anything mentioning a "Password Live". May I ask why you decided to approve these edits since I'm unable to verify them and you approved them. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:48, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Blaze Wolf. Yes, I approved the addition of the Password show stage in the Universal Studios, Lower Lot article. I approved it because Password is filmed at Universal Alternative Television Studios, at Universal City in Hollywood, and the Studio Tour often includes visits to shows in production. I now realize Password is not on the Lower Lot. I was wrong. Note the criteria for reviewing pending changes (emphasis mine):

The purpose of reviewing is to catch and filter out obvious inappropriate edits and vandalism on articles under pending changes protection... Reviewers do not take responsibility for the correctness of edits they accept. Reviewers are not expected to be subject experts, and their review is not a guarantee in any way of an error-free article. They are expected to have a reasonable editing history, distinguish what is and what is not vandalism... If no source is provided, you may search for one and if none is straightforward but there are no reasonable reasons to believe the new edit is vandalism, it is acceptable. It is not necessary for you to ensure compliance with the content policies on neutral point of view, verifiability and original research before accepting.

I'm sorry for the inconvenience that my review caused you.--FeralOink (talk) 05:35, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blaze Wolf, I edited the article. Have a look and see if it looks correct. Thank you.--FeralOink (talk) 05:40, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

THank you. I just figured I"d check with you first. I was not aware that the Studio Tour often includes visits to shows in production but saw you approved the edit. I myself would say that if a reviewer excepts an edit that is unsourced then they found a way to verify it, but if they couldn't verify it and accept it anyway that is the fault of the person who added (As long as it seems reasonable that it would exist). But that's my opinion and not in the rules. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:34, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, BlazeWolf for your courteous demeanor. I find it challenging to do Pending Change Reviews (per The Rules) due to my inclination to plunge down the rabbit hole and research everything.--FeralOink (talk) 09:57, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you’re a participant in the WikiProject for Finance and Investment and are currently active on Wikipedia. There are some corrections and important updates needed in the article about Digital Currency Group, one of the major players in cryptocurrency. I’ve started a discussion here. I have a COI, as fully disclosed on the page. Given the nature of the topic I thought this might be of interest to you as a participant in the Finance and Investment WikiProject. Thanks very much for your time. CertifiedTurtle (talk) 23:11, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CertifiedTurtle. Thank you for letting me know about this. I will go have a look at the discussion today or tomorrow.--FeralOink (talk) 05:50, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

still hoping to see you at Draft talk:Carla Vernón.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:49, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Carla-Vernon-Portrait.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 14:42, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Carla-Vernon-Portrait.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. Onthe file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:36, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't tag this file for speedy deletion. It was tagged as such by a Wikipedia administrator named JJMC89. I've only added the above notification template for reference purposes. However, as I posted at Draft talk:Carla Vernón#Image deletion, non-free images of living persons are pretty much never allowed. So, if you want to upload and use an image of Vernon on Wikipedia, it will need to be one that is either considered to be within the public domain or one that has been released by its copyright holder under one of the free licenses accepted by the Wikimedia Foundation. Your best chance and obtaining such an image is probably going to be contacting the subject herself or someone connected to her, and see if they're willing to provide a free image. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:42, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining, Marchjuly. I apologize for suggesting it was you, although you would have been correct to do so. I understand why the administrator tagged it the way did now.--FeralOink (talk) 19:29, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

HiFeralOink, sorry to bother you on your Talk page but I’ve been trying to reach you about the proposal you weighed in on. Since the discussion about the proposal appears to have concluded, I was wondering if you would be able to implement the changes I suggested? Please let me know if I can be of any help, within the parameters of my COI. CertifiedTurtle (talk) 16:45, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure that the photo on your page is not a Javelina? 2601:681:C00:CCF0:8080:C1DB:55E5:C42D (talk) 18:48, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! It ISaJavelina! Wow, you knew. Thank you so much for your comment! Given that you're an IP user with no talk page, I do hope you have an opportunity to read this reply.

I love pigs and javelinas. The latter might not quite be pigs, taxonomically; however, they are known as "New World Pigs". That's close enough, I think. Javelinas go feral-ing around near where I live, without causing harm or fuss. Bigger feral pigs, more boar-like ones, have a worse reputation. The boars live a few states to my east.--FeralOink (talk) 19:36, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

A tag has been placed on Devon Archer requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Devon Archer. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nominationbyvisiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Notrealname1234 (talk) 16:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Hunter Biden into Devon Archer. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 21:53, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Diannaa. I haven't copied from one Wikipedia article to another before. Thank you for explaining the procedure for citing within-Wikipedia content copied from Hunter's BLP to Archer's BLP. I will take care of that now.--FeralOink (talk) 22:18, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Sorry about the template; there's a lot to do today — Diannaa (talk) 22:54, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here's our problem with this article: at FAC the reviewers thought that it relies too heavily on one biography, and wanted more general statements about the Air Force or NASA programs, and especially about distinctions/firsts... augmented by other sources. (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Eileen Collins/archive1#Source review) Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:02, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hawkeye7, yes, I noticed the dependence on a single source. Thank you for taking the time to explain the background re FAC to me, here, rather than reverting me a second time! Now I understand your motivation. I concur. BTW, I added another source and am about to add a second one now, along with some content about what she did after her retirement. When possible, I will try to rely on other sources instead of that biography!--FeralOink (talk) 23:25, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't going to revert you a second time... if you can dig up some more sources for the "Astronaut" section, we can co-nominate the article for Featured. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:24, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Carla Vernón, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

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

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

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

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

Thanks again, and happy editing!

A while ago, you edited Sixteenth Air Force to replace "inactivate" with "deactivate." Inactivate is the proper term for organizational actions for USAF units. See the glossary of terms in Maurer, Maurer, ed. (1982) [1969]. Combat Squadrons of the Air Force, World War II (PDF) (reprint ed.). Washington, DC: Office of Air Force History. ISBN 0-405-12194-6. LCCN 70605402. OCLC 72556. Retrieved December 17, 2016.orRavenstein, Charles A. (1984). Air Force Combat Wings, Lineage & Honors Histories 1947-1977 (PDF). Washington, DC: Office of Air Force History. ISBN 0-912799-12-9. Retrieved December 17, 2016. Lineagegeek (talk) 12:15, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]