This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
KylieTastic, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. –Davey2010Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 11:58, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! You are very fast! Fconaway (talk) 11:53, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Updating Shel Israel page
Shel Israel was very frustrated that he could not update his Wikipedia page to include his more recent books. Having edited other pages I made the changes to reflect the more recent books; most of them have remained in place.
However, he also wants to change his picture to one that shows him at a typewriter (and that you can find on his own blog at ShelIsrael.com.) He owns the copyright to the picture; it was taken as one submitted to Profile, publisher of Twitterville but not used. The picture was taken at his home by Brian Solis in 2009.
How do we get this sorted out so that he can use a picture to which he owns the copyright? Trying to figure out the copyright tags is simply a nightmare; he has no problem with doing any appropriate attributions and credits.
HiJimCanuck the fact that you say "Shel Israel was very frustrated that he could not update his Wikipedia page" shows that you are probably unaware of a couple of Wikipedia policies. There is a strict Conflict of interest policy, and also as part of What Wikipedia is not a section covering that Wikipedia is not for promotion. I'm sure it was a figure of speech but to be clear it is not his Wikipedia page, but a page on Wikipedia about him - this is a distinction that is taken seriously here.
Also its not factually correct saying "could not update his Wikipedia page to include his more recent books" as even though I guessed you had a Conflict of interest I left most of the edits you made (see your remaining changes) including the updated info on "his more recent books". I just removed, this, the purely promotional statement about Amazon availability - Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia not a promotional platform.
Hopefully I can help explain the issue with the images, but I agree the whole copyright issue is a nightmare. Wikipedia has a policy of all content including images being licensed under a suitably free copyright license or be copyright free. He may own the copyright (but often subjects don't realise that unless formerly transferred the copyright is normally with the photographer even if they have asked for it to be taken) but even so it would have to be released under a suitably free copyright license. I'm no copyright expert but I'll advise you as best I can. As the image has been previously published you probably want to see Granting us permission to copy material already online. Basically the image on the blog would have to have a licensing comment added for a licence like CC-BY-SA. Alternatively if they do not want donate that image under a 'free' licence then they/you have two choices: leave Wikipedia to use what images other editors can find with a suitable license, or take and upload a new unpublished image and mark as released under a suitable licence.
Sobre Crianças, Quadris, Pesadelos e Lições de Casa... cover
Hello,
Thank you for fixing a bad image file on Sobre Crianças, Quadris, Pesadelos e Lições de Casa..., I just saw the image file was broken. However it's up and working over at the Portuguese version of the page, with the same file name. What went wrong when I put it on the English version? // Psemmler (talk) 19:27, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
HiPsemmler the image did not work as images only work on the language they are uploaded too or if on Commons. Most images like this can not be uploaded to commons due to only accepting 'free' images. So you would need to upload this image locally as a non free image (Non-free content criteria). Upload starting with the File Upload Wizard and under the 'fair use' category there is an option for "This is the official cover art of a work.". I hope that helps, all the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you so much. // Psemmler (talk) 19:34, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
HiRicky81682 sorted! Yup should have noticed that one - been on the reverse of that myself fixing up bad submits. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 00:20, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Jac motors
Hi
If you can please upload jac s5 new(2015)on the page of jac motors.
Thanks Srezahf (talk) 10:59, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
HiSrezahf the trouble is finding one that is copyright free, or licensed with a suitable 'free' sue licence. If you can find one, or better still take one yourself, then you can upload on Wikimedia Commons using the Upload Wizard. A search in commons for "jac s5 2015" turned up File:JAC Refine S5 facelift China 2015-04-06.jpg but it looks the same as the older image on JAC Motors so I guess its not the correct one. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 12:16, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Fail
Thank you for repairing my momentary-lapse-of-reason in Tortoiseshell cat in the image. Of course, factually I know this can't be done...Sorry for the need to come behind me. Happy you did; the cats seem neglected sometimes. Happy editing, Fylbecatuloustalk 22:30, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Hey Fylbecatulous no worries - happens now and then to all of us :) Happy editing KylieTastic (talk) 23:02, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Earlymanbc Edit question
Hi there
I have just created an account on wikipedia and made some edits under cuckold and hotwife , the day before yesterday. They were taken down because I did not include the correct referencing format. I read up on how to include the proper citation and then made the edits again yesterday and included the book reference using what I believe is the correct citation system following the one already in exsistence on the entry. You have removed my edits, can I ask why ?, as I do not want to get into one of these edit wars. If I am doing something incorrectly I would rather know why. Hope to hear from you so we can resolve this.
HiEarlymanbc I did not remove your edits, I just reviewed your sandbox (this User:Earlymanbc/sandbox) and added feedback for your issue on the declien notice as you submitted it as a new article. The comment I left on that page was:
The correct place to talk about an issue is on the article talk page - in this case Talk:Cuckold or on the talk page of someone who revert you (you can see the names and talk links on here. Or ask for help at The Wikipedia:Teahouse
I'm at work at the moment so havnt got time to add much, but what you did the first time it was reverted was correct - you tried to fix the issue and posted a message on the reverting editors page here. When reverted a second time unless there is a specific issue pointed out that you can fix, you should discuss with the editor on their talkpage. The second revert didnt give a reason so asking why would have been the best thing to do, or ask for help/advise at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. The next revert gave a reason "erotica author, not a reliable source" (see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources for what is classed as a reliable source. The next editor reverted for the same reason with "Rv paragraph sourced to non-RS" then with 3RR and posted the waring notice on your talk page. The reason for this is a policy we have see WP:3RR. If you want more information either talk to the reverting editors or ask at the Wikipedia:Teahouse where lots of experienced editor try to help new users. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 12:35, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for that KylieTastic, very helpful. I have followed your advice and looked for concensus on the talk pages of both 'cuckold' and 'hotwife' so hopefully some progress will occur. One last question, i know I will have to wait to see how this pans out but I what point can I go back and make my edit assuming nobody has a problem with it and is there some timeframe I need to be aware of after being blocked from making the edits to these articles.
HiEarlymanbc, you can sometimes speed things up by Pinging other users - i.e. they see the mention notification in the top right hopefully like you did for this message. To do this you basically either link the persons name like I did yours ([[User:Earlymanbc|]]) or use the template {{@|Earlymanbc}} but you must sign your post with ~~~~ for this to work. Or you can leave messages on the other editors talk pages that reverted you and let them know about the discussion.
Another point would be I see you added to existing sections on the talk pages, which is ok but can get new posts missed. Unless your replying to a current thread the best thing to do is start a new section - the easiest way is use the 'New Section' tab top right the page. I see on Talk:Cuckold and Talk:Swinging (sexual practice) someone moved your messages to there own sections and commented.
As for time-frames, the most important thing to consider is if any counter points raised have been addressed - the point the other editors have made is the source appears to be the opinion of a novelist rather than a reliable source - Remember Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia not just a collection of opinions. The best way to resolve such issues is to see it you can find other sources to back up the claim. However to also give you a more direct answer the main policy on timeframes would be the WP:3RR "An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period."
The best advise is usually try to follow WP:BRD ("BOLD, revert, discuss cycle") - continue to be bold, but if reverted, discuss rather than revert. If a discussion is not going anywhere ask at the Wikipedia:Teahouse or if that does not help try the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard. Hope that helps KylieTastic (talk) 14:22, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
17:59:27, 22 January 2016 review of submission by 88.243.58.86
Sorry about the substitution of guns with thermonuclear warheads. It was caused by the use of the XKCD browser extension which automatically substitutes certain words with other words.I was originally switching out siege howitzers with the more specific 28 cm Howitzer L/10 which was the type used in the conflict.173.21.185.76 (talk) 21:50, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi 173.21.185.76, I was surprised as your other edits looked cool - come across browser extensions causing bad edits before, just be careful. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 23:04, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you Kylie
I appreciate the welcome, but I have been on WP for years, but I could not log into my old ID, and so I am in the process of making a new one. I declare to you that I am tylas and associated WP user IDs. You are the sweetest Administrator that I have come across in all my years of editing. I mistakenly sent you a blank sandbox page to look at as an article, but in the future I do have some articles I would like to introduce and they are mostly related to genetic, viral and infectious disease of world-wide concern. Again, thank you for the welcome. ~Iza Savant
Hi and Thanks, but for the record in-case anyone else strolls by I'm not an Admin here. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 18:33, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
one request
Hii, My name ia sohel from ahmedabad. One of the biggest fan of allu arjun. This is my request that can you please notify me about the dubbind version release dates. I would be thank full.
Hi! I'm sorry I have no idea of any release dates for Allu ArjunKylieTastic (talk) 19:32, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Byron Bay article
HiKylieTastic! The Byron article is pretty bad. I see you've done some good work on it yourself and I'm hoping that you know more about the way Wikipedia works than me. What I'm getting at is this. Byron being Byron, everyone wants to contribute to the article and so there have been heaps of edits by non-registered editors, hence the mess. Would it be possible do you reckon for it to be elevated to semi-protected status? I don't know how to go about getting that considered. If it were to be, there'd still be work to be done to clean it up, but at least that way we'd know it won't get worse in a hurry. All the best to you! Boscaswell (talk) 20:56, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
HiBoscaswell, unfortunately due to the protection policy is unlikely to get protection. They are very hot on the "anyone can edit it" policy - even though the vandals keep us very busy. Normally a page has to be under active vandalism and Byron Bay, New South Wales shows very little activity. Also you can see that many vandals are reverted very quickly, so if you improve the article it should generally stay that way. For future information the page your looking for is Requests for page protectionorWP:RPP for short. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 21:16, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
you know what, KylieTastic, you are KylieTastic! Thank you very much for your complete and well-considered reply. I understand totally. It's funny, I came across a proposal in the Village Pump area in which someone was decrying Wikipedia and what it does, saying "How many more articles do we need about this or that highway?". That particular editor wanted Wiki to add something else entirely. But it's obvious to anyone who cares to look around that there is heaps and heaps (and heaps) of work to be done on articles everywhere. Thanks again! Boscaswell (talk) 09:03, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Regarding Abaco System's submision
Hi Kylie! Thanks for reviewing the article. I've added more references and some external links. Being a rather new company it is hard to get more sources (there are lots of press releases regarding the company that talk about Veritas Capital's acquisition or Abaco winning this or that contract, but I don't think those add a lot to Wikipedia, take [this] as an example).
Just as an example I've found another Veritas Capital portfolio company (Truven Health Analytics) which is in similar conditions and has been approved.
HiEstebanglas the basic trouble with as you say "a rather new company" is that its often impossible to find enough sources as they don't exist yet. Even established companies like the one I work for that has supplied custom solutions to many of the biggest companies in the country, still has no article and probably never will do as no sources exist. All you can do is try to find as many sources as possible, and re-submit and get feedback. If enough don't exist for now then maybe it's just too soon for a Wikiepedia article. As for Truven Health Analytics is was created in June 2007 so before we had so many polices to stop Wikipedia being used for promotional purposes. Also the 'other stuff exists' argument more often results in the other articles being removed than a reason to accept another. However a quick google shows more sources do exist for instance this and this - as the last one says『Start-up with 30 years’ experience, ~700 employees』sounds like more than your average start-up. Hope that helps KylieTastic (talk) 19:39, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks KylieTastic There is plenty of sources out there, but they many refer to the same event (the acquisition), I thought it was sort of overkill to cite 8 sources for the same piece of information, but I'll do if it helps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Estebanglas (talk • contribs) 20:02, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
HiEstebanglas your right that there is no point having too many that basically cover that same, but adding a few more especially if any add anything extra in the coverage would be a good idea. Also look for the best sources, for instance Yahoo Finance News is probably considered a pretty good source, although I only just noticed in this case it was just a 'reprint' of the businesswire ref. Another option would be to see if there is any relevant info on the entities that were acquired - some info and references on its pre history may help. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:15, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
KylieTastic that is actually a great suggestion! I added various sources to previous acquisitions. Thanks! Estebanglas (talk) 20:50, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
uploading images
How do i go about uploadimg images, it says my account is not confirmed and it removed a picture.
HiManniebentley yes you have to be autoconfirmed to be able to upload images. This happens after your account is four days old and has made at least 10 edits (in most cases). So you'll need to just wait a few more days or you could look at Wikipedia:Files for upload. If the image is copyright free, or released under a suitable 'free' licence you can upload on Wikimedia Commons (as I don't think that has a time restriction). All the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:32, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
uploading images
Thanks kyle, since i am new to this could you help me with 4the page? (Manniebentley (talk) 19:43, 5 February 2016 (UTC))
HiManniebentley I've got a lot of 'real-life' work I need to concentrate on at the moment (must stop getting distracted by Wikipedia) - so I can't really help now. I would recommend asking at the Wikipedia:Teahouse where you'll find lots of experienced editors to answer any questions you have. It's a good place to ask whenever you have questions, but especially when starting out. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:54, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
thank you kyle i totally understand (Manniebentley (talk) 20:08, 5 February 2016 (UTC))
Sventovid thanks
You are right, this IP edit put lots of nonsense there and broke the images. Zezen (talk) 22:18, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
HiZezen I've been mulling over if I should revert since they did it as it appeared to be a POV edit pushing Poland. I re-reviewed after your fix and decided it wasn't really constructive. We'll see if they come back. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 22:22, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
An acid-test: his『Światowid』is not etymological, so again, you were right. Zezen (talk) 22:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure why you removed my protection template. A mistake? Edit conflict? I had protected the article (on your request). (Ah, no, I see you didn't make the request. Anyway, I protected it.) See history. Bishonen | talk 21:01, 10 February 2016 (UTC).
HiBishonen sorry yes just a mistake I was just reverting the rest of the vandalism after you protected it and missed the tag. Sorry about that - fixed it. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 21:15, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Cool, no problem. Yes, it all happened practically simultaneously. Bishonen | talk 21:21, 10 February 2016 (UTC).
Chicago sit ins photo
Hello,
There appears to be some confusion over the controversial image currently displayed in the Chicago sit ins article, but the photographer (Danny Lyon) did claim it was Bernie Sanders, and the University of Chicago library link in question was changed in January after a TIME article was published, which didn't interview the photographer. See information below. I don't think my edit was vandalism in any sense.
The current version of the Sit in article on Wikipedia only identifies it as a student, which is fine, but I think it's pretty clear that the person in question is indeed Bernie Sanders after doing a comparison of the photos linked above.
Hey Kyle, Thanks for reviewing my draft for Beer and Pizza Day. This is a new unofficial holiday starting this year. Since it is beginning this year, there are not many sources to cite yet. I will be building out this holiday page throughout the year, adding content and more source articles as they become available. I was wondering if the article could be approved based on this. This will not just be a forgotten page, this is something I am passionate about and am working hard to promote. It will really help to have the Wikipedia page up and running so that if someone searches for more information about this holiday, they will find this article and be able to add more information about their country's celebration. I would appreciate your reconsidering this page after knowing this.
HiNickSaul. I'm glad to hear you are passionate for this idea and I wish you good luck with it, however Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia of things that exist and are "WP:Notable" (see the Wikipedia:Golden rule). It's not a place for promotion as that would allow not just the good new ideas but also every sort of crazy. Set up your own website, and use social media - if it then takes off it will naturally become notable and then will qualify for its own Wikipedia page. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 21:52, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Moshe Dayan
Sorry, should learn to preview even for minor edits, I've fixed it now. Thanks, GiantSnowman 22:01, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
HiGiant no worries we all make mistakes - as long as we get there in the end that's all that matters :) KylieTastic (talk) 22:03, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
05:50:38, 18 February 2016 review of submission by PSHQ
Could you please review the new changes made? Citations were added but I am not sure if the references were listed properly. Thanks!
HiPSHQ glad to hear you've added references - but unfortunatley I'm currently not very well so wont have time to do a proper review. I'd suggest either just submitting for review or if you'd like to get some feedback first ask at the Wikipedia:Teahouse where lots of experienced editors help out. Sorry I can't be more help at this time KylieTastic (talk) 12:13, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
page creation
I need a wikipedia page, but I have no online reference. Can it be created? Henry Ogar (talk) 00:58, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Please please publish my templates on Wikipedia you take my photograph also from my posted links. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Syed Baqar Imam Rizvi (talk • contribs) 13:43, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Syed Baqar Imam Rizvi its not 'your' template Wikipedia does not work like that, Wikipeida artciles and templates do not belong to anyone. Also it was not suitable for a template as it was just static text of an article segment. It was moved to Draft:Syed Baqar Imam Rizvi but as the original template was used on User:Syed Baqar Imam Rizvi/sandbox I have copied the text directly into that, and will flag the remnant for deletion. However note that all have your edits so far have been self promotion - I suggest you read What Wikipedia Is and What Wikipedia is not - and the Wikipedia:Golden rule. KylieTastic (talk) 14:44, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Submission of article Rhino equipment
Hello, my article was declined due to references, what do I need to do in order to complete my article? I ahve added some references but do not know if they are enough.
HiRhinotechnician firstly your doing the right thing adding new references as the problem was that you only had references to rhinoeq.com and as per the Golden rule "Articles generally require significant coverage, in reliable sources, that are independent of the topic.". I don't have time at the moment to look in detail, but it looks like the new references are still promotional and probably use text direct from the company, so not really independent. The policy that would apply here is Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) and from a quick look I doubt the current coverage would be enough. If you'd like to get some feedback from others I'd recommend asking at the Wikipedia:Teahouse where lots of experienced editors help out, and you can get opinions from several people rather than one. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 20:24, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
00:25:00, 24 February 2016 review of submission by 1234567andr
Please join us at the California College of the Arts' Simpson LibraryonSaturday March 5, 2016, for an event aimed at collaboratively expanding Wikipedia articles covering Art and Feminism, and the biographies of women artists!
Hello, I tried to submit an article you recently declined due to a lack of sources but when i tried to add all the references wiki said they were not allowed due to links and copyright?
Hi 90.200.36.197, sorry for the late reply - real life stuff - I just looked and you did add the references (although not in a very usable way for readers). So I'm not sure what error you saw but you can see here that you did add them. I changed them to a list but they really should be linked inline so people can trace which info comes from which sources. Please see Help:Referencing for beginners for help. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 21:04, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
15:13:09, 26 February 2016 review of submission by Tarquino1975
Hello,
Thank you for reviewing my post so promptly. I am writing as I would like to know what changes would need to be made in order for the post to be published. Do you think you could provide some tips on what to change?
thank you, and looking forward to hearing from you.
HiTarquino1975 we have two policies that matter here - The first is articles need to show Notability which is just Wikipedia way of determining which subjects are suitable for an article. In this case Wikipedia:Notability (people) is the more specific version for people. Note that Wikipedia:Notability is not the same as colloquial notability or the same as importance - i.e. many people, companies etc are important in some way but just haven't been written about and thus fail Notability. We also have the Golden rule that states "Articles generally require significant coverage, in reliable sources, that are independent of the topic.". So to answer your question you need to find more independentreliable sources and add them to the article (see Help:Referencing for beginners for help). Also if you want more advise from other editors I recommend asking at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 11:11, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Wipipedia
Wipipedia
please don't change the wikipedia page because it is for a practice from my school Gisela1999 (talk) 17:12, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
HiGisela1999, Wikipedias main article pages are not to be used for school practice. Changes are visible to the world in the main area, so all edits need to be serious and follow policies. However you could make such practice pages/edits within your own User pages. For instance you could create User:Gisela1999/List of buildings, sites, and monuments in New York City. Note also I was only the first to revert your change, the subsequent were made by R'n'B — Regards KylieTastic (talk) 17:34, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Delete Wikipedia Account
Dear KylieTastic,
I have received a message telling me that my page was rejected apparently because i can't create a page under my own name dedicated to the professional musicians whom perform in so many recordings thru the history and around the world as a sideman and not as a band leaders.
I have sent a prior message explaining my intentions to create that page but it was not responded.
I would like to delete my account and I request to be informed / guided to the process to do that.
Thanks for your assistance
Sincerely,
Hector Pineda — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thickstrings (talk • contribs) 15:24, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
HiThickstrings I can't see any such message telling you that! The draft for Hector Pineda was declined because all Wikipedia articles need to show Notability and in this case more specifically Notability. Note that Wikiepedias Notability standard is not the same as importance. Unfortunately you are correct that it is much easier to find reliable sources| for "band leaders" than the many hard working people professional musicians not in the spotlight. However there are articles on some people like this who have been written about. If you can find reliable sources| then the article could still be accepted. As for deleting accounts its not actually possible (see Wikipedia:Username_policy#Deleting and merging accounts. If you wish not to contribute any-more then just don't edit, if you wish to make sure you get no notifications by email you can change your preferences here. All the best. KylieTastic (talk) 18:00, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for your recent reverttoRed Star F.C.. Recently I have been noticing a large number of IP edits to edits to a pages such as (1) football clubs in the UK and France (2) stadia associated with those clubs and (3) radio stations in France. These edits are similar in that they (a) are from IP editors (b) Never use an edit summary (c) Frequently change only the years (d) never include references to reliable sources. Your edit caught my attention because I have watchlisted this page ever since I reverted one of the IP editors. You edit was probably cleaning up a change from such an editor. Thank you! YBG (talk) 17:21, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Highway shields
FYI, we made a change to Louisiana highway shields today (we've been waiting to create 1500 or so shields for some time!) There may be a few missing so don't be surprised if you find some in the missing files category. –Fredddie™ 02:46, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
You reach a point in life when you realize that you're reaching out in vain—as all your appeals and legitimate requests of explanations just go unheard—but you still try helplessly, hoping for a turn of events.
This will be the tenth or eleventh time I talk about this issue, but it will be definitely the last time, for I no longer care about about my first—and definitely last—Wikipedia article. Last year I created Huzama Habayeb article upon the request of the writer herself, who is actually my sister. The images have been removed repeatedly by some editors due to copyright issue. I then tried to communicate with different people to resolve this matter, but it seems that this problem is just too complicated.
I have an authorization letter from the original copyright holder; and I have already sent it to Wikipedia by email, but apparently it wasn't enough. I was given a promise from them that the images will be restored, but that didn't happen.
I am not even going to bother upload the authorization letter again; it can be viewed in the inbox of permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. I sent it on February 20, 2016.
I know it seemed "pointless" to you, but the attempt to restore the pictures seemed reasonable to me.
Thanks for everything; and I apologize for my frustration.
HiAngevilish sorry about your frustration, but your not the first or last to be confused and frustrated with the way Wikipedia and Commons work together. WikiMedia Commons is a seperate project that Wikipedia uses automatically. Thus it was only "pointless" just to undelete the images here on English Wikipedia, but the comment was supposed to direct you over to commons to see what the issue was. I am not invloved much over on commons and not a member of OTRS so I can not see the relevant information. However as Fredddie has kindly pointed out apparently the OTRS ticket was approved on February 27 - I'm not sure where thsi information comes from? Is this a permission you have Fredddie or another page I've not yet found? I must admit I would also have expected the acceptance of this ticket to have got the images automaticaly undeleted and tagged and some information added to your talk page on commons but neither has happened. Also I would have hoped that your email would have been responded to so you knew what had happened. As I have not used OTRS myself yet I'm unsure of the procedures - maybe Fredddie knows if this is still something you just have to wait to happen or if you need to request the undeletion now? Hope that helps. — KylieTastic (talk) 13:04, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Jameslwoodward, I'm not her sister; I'm her brother and she's my sister. If you read the entire article—which is something that has been already done, I assume—you will see that not a single proportion isn't cited with official references from Arabic media outlet, especially the quoted parts in which her works are commended or highly praised. I actually did this article as a birthday present to her. She's going to have her own website very soon. If you guys are going to delete the article, please let me know so I could at least save a copy of it and use it for the website since it took me more than forty days to write it. I'm new to Wiki Codes; it was incredibly challenging to use them. I didn't know it wasn't allowed for family members to make articles for each other. I apologize. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angevilish (talk • contribs) 14:29, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
HiAngevilish no need to apologize, you made your edits in good faith and no one blames people for not knowing every policy. Also note that although editing with a Conflict of interest is strongly discouraged it is not full out banned. I've not read the artcile in detail but I see no reason it would be deleted, that should only happen if she was deamed not notable which does not appear to be the case. The worst case I would think would be someone taging the article with {{COI}} if they believed it did have bias that needed addressing. Also even if it was deleted, again not that I see any reason for that, you could aways get an admin to get you a copy - things are not deleted for ever. Finally the end product shows that you put time and effort in, so although you've had some issues with the polices (and many of us did at first) you should be proud, and I hope you consider continuing editing as we always need good editors. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 18:22, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello! My I ask why did you remove my image from my page (José Luis Turina)? If you prefer, you can answer me writing to my mail (jluis.turina@gmail.com).Jluis.turina (talk) 14:04, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
HiJluis.turina I didn't remove the image just the link left over to the deleted image that as my edit summary said was deleted on the 8th Feb 2016. As you can see from the image page on commons here. You had warning noteices added to you talk page on commons (commons:User_talk:Jluis.turina) but you may not have noticed as I think the default notification is not to email when new messages are added - you can ([[:commons:Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo|view and change here). Also note that yoour name suggests a Conflict of interest so please read that policy beofer editing that artcile any more. If you want to upload images again, just make sure you fill in the correct licence infomation. Also note that for commons images must have a sutable 'free' licence (see Commons:Licensing) - All the best KylieTastic (talk) 14:44, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Letter Box UK: poorly sourced, reads like an advert
Hi KylieTastic
If the contribution from the UK is poorly sourced and reads like an advert in your view could you help to present the facts so they do not read as an advert? ≈≈≈≈ — Preceding unsigned comment added by AA999 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
HiAA999, that is the issue, its about presenting "facts" or in terms of Wikipedia having reliable sources for statements. The orginal and new lead statements are unsourced. Do any of the actaul insurace companies, or govenment agencies have any such opinions of letter boxes being a meaningfull risk? The next statement appears to completely made up - as I have just had new windows and a door I know there are many regulations that applied this time that didnt last time, so it would appear that the standards bodies and agencies do not agree. The whole section reads like the sort of marketing designed to look official and fact based to sell such products. Wikipedia is not for WP:PROMOTION. It appears that you have had a history of adding such content and being reverted by multiple editors. Please do not add content back unless you can find reliable sources for the claims main made such as the saftey concerns or not meeting regulations. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 15:56, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi KylieTastic
Thank you, this helps. ≈≈≈≈ — Preceding unsigned comment added by AA999 (talk • contribs) 12:59, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Timeline of medicine and medical technology
Thank you so much for fixing those images. I apologize for that. I should have been more careful when I replaced all the hyphens (I was using wikiEd to speed it up) – I forgot to look at the images as well as the text for mistakes when I previewed. Hope it wasn't too much trouble. Have a nice day! Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 03:28, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
HiMe, Myself & I (☮) no worries your not the only one by far, its a far too common problem and unlike you some appear not to care and I've been correcting regularly for months. The trouble is there is also no consensus on hyphens so I keep seing people changing between the different types of hyphen caracters (– — − aka 0x96, x97 and x2D) and — also others adding or remove them from before hyphens. Several of the tools/scripts that 'fix' hyphens are very indescrimiate and thus rely on the users paying attention. I keep hoping the Wiki software will be changed to give people a list of errors that they have introduced with an edit as most are accidental so they would go oops and fix. Anyway all the best, KylieTastic (talk) 18:59, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for the reply! I promise, I will be more careful in the future. The many dash styles confuse me far too much already. That error reporting feature sounds very nice indeed... Well, I must be off. Once again, have a lovely day! Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 04:08, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Bognor Regis
Hi there. My edit was no mistake. Bognor Regis is a disgusting and rundown coastal town and my contribution is the truth. --BubBog (talk) 20:19, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
I await your reply. --BubBog (talk) 20:21, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
I received a message that an edit I had made to the Page, err... Greenville Texas? wasn't constructive. I didn't make any edits and have never made an edit to Wikipedia. Not sure what is up, but rest assured I never plan on making any in the future either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.173.184.132 (talk) 15:30, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi, yes don't worry about it was over a month ago and IP addresses often get reasigned at least for some internet providers. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 16:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
vandalizing by 161.113.20.135
Thank you fro reverting the Douglas R. Docker article. Trying to improve the article has been a nightmare lately due to this IPs relentless campaign to disrupt and vandalize systematically, often under the guise of related IPs who only post on this article. I have already issued 2 warnings to no avail, and I can see from his talk page that he has been warned by at least 3 other editors/admins for the same reasons about other articles. Can anything be done? It's becoming impossible to work properly in the current situation... Thanks for any tips that might help!80.116.134.204 (talk) 22:14, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi80.116.134.204 yes these things are annoying but luckily they have a way of working out in the end - Wikipedias current existence shows that more people want to do good than bad. Unfortunately IP editors are difficult to deal with if they are problematic, I've been dealing with one persistent vandal for 6 months who's evaded dozens of blocks even on ranges of a 1000 ip addresses. In this case you did the correct thing in escalating warnings, then depending on a users actions you can report to WP:AIVorWP:ANIorWP:AN/3RR etc. Also I would recommend that if you run into a problem user you could ask for help/advise at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. However in this case the situation has been deal with and they have a 1 month ban. I would recommend if you want to continue to help out and edit although you can continue as an IP editor there are benefits to having an account (see Why create an account?) - one main one its easier to communicate with others and be notified if others 'mention' you. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 23:24, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you so much for the useful tips. Ok, will open an account, I guess I've just been lazy! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.116.134.204 (talk) 08:17, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Opened an account! Thank you Kylie for your kindness and explanations.Rudra555 (talk) 18:59, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
HiRudra555 glad to have helped and thanks to you for your contributions. Wikipedia is only what it is because of the work of all the positive contributions made by people like you. I hope you find it fun and rewarding, and if you do run into the minority of editors that cause problems - don't let it stress you and remember there are lots of places to ask for help, but for new editors the Wikipedia:Teahouse is always a good place to start. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:05, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Responding to your message on my talk page (JoySLeigh)
Greetings KylieTastic,
You left me the following message on my user talk page and I just want to say thank you for your support. I chose to use the placement *Help me* on my user talk page - and hope I did so accurately. Just an FYI to inform you I received your message and acted on your recommendations.
'Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place *Help me* on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking
Button sig.png
or
Insert-signature.png
or by typing four tildes (JoySLeigh (talk) 20:34, 24 March 2016 (UTC)); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! KylieTastic (talk) 14:25, 13 February 2016 (UTC).'
HiJoySLeigh, I see from your 'help' message on your talk page that you are feeling a bit overwhelmed by all the policies etc of Wikipeida. Don't worry this is normal, at first most people probably do, and those that don't may just be a bit overconfident. I've been doing this a few years with 80,000+ edits and I still learn of new polices etc most weeks. You don't need to know much to positively help out. We have a policy Assume good faith that means that, especially for new editors, mistakes (if they happen) are not a big deal if the edit was not obvious vandalism etc. Yes if you make a change that breaks a policy the edit may be reverted - but that is how many people learn. We also have the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle policy that covers this principle. My advise is do not try to read all the policies just be aware of the core principles (see the Wikipedia:Five pillars) - and then start with small edits to existing articles; try the tutorial Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure; and if you want to write new articles use the Articles for creation procedure where you create articles in a draft area. If you want helpful advise I suggest try the Wikipedia:Teahouse which is "A friendly place to help new editors become accustomed to Wikipedia culture, ask questions, and develop community relationships". All the best KylieTastic (talk) 13:50, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
03:58:23, 27 March 2016 review of submission by J78ww
HiJ78ww "Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic" (see WP:42). You have no references and this is about something not yet out. Wikipedia is not for promotion of new ideas, but an encyclopaedia of things that are notable Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:59, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Pia de Jong
Thanks so much for your guidance re the article I submitted re Pia de Jong. I followed your advice, added many more independent and verifiable sources, and resubmitted it. Hope it passes muster now.
Best wishes,
Boomer1946 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boomer1946 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
You tagged a single-sentence article as "Lead too long". Please take more care when tagging. Thanks. PamD 21:22, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
HiPamD thanks for catching that - must have had a random brain-freeze for that one. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 23:31, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
These things happen! (Then there are the trigger-happy NP patrollers who'll merrily stick "Needs sections" onto a single sentence, and "Unref" and "Refimprove" together, and similar rubbish!) PamD 10:05, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Is it CocoAnut or Coconut Grove Fire? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tlegenovag (talk • contribs) 15:28, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
HiTlegenovag the correct spelling appears to be Cocoanut - you can sort of see it on the frontage on the image File:Cocoanut Grove Night Club Fire.jpg and can easily read it on the plaque File:Cocoanut Grove Memorial.jpg. Also spelling clear from cocoanutgrovefire.org. Cocoanut is just an old spelling of Coconut - maybe they thought it made the club sound cool? You'd be surprised how many things/people etc are spelt oddly, so I end up fixing good faith 'corrections' most weeks if not most days. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:20, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Oh damn, you are right. I should have looked at the pictures first. I was so engrossed in fixing "obvious" mistakes that I did not think it was the actual way it was written. Thank you, sir! --Tlegenovag (talk) 04:25, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Rhino Linings
Thanks for reviewing the draft. Rhino Linings is the creator of sprayed-on truck bedliners, which is a large truck and Jeep aftermarket. There are two articles about this - truck bedliner and spray-lining. Furthermore, "Rhino lining," "Rhino liner," "Rhino line," and "Rhino lined" are common terms frequently used to refer to spray-lining in general, whether it is using Rhino Linings product or even a different brand. Is that generally not sufficient for a company article in terms of notability? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.151.40.194 (talk) 21:22, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi67.151.40.194 the general rule of thumb to start with (although it depends on subject for the detail) is "Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic" (see WP:42). Draft:Rhino Linings only has references from itself. If the terms you mentioned are "frequently used to refer to spray-lining in general" then you should be able to find references to at least show that. Also for a brand to become the general name for something I would assume that their would be many other references to them as well. The general advise would be to find as many independentreliable sources you can and if you can find some then re-submit. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 21:34, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Short Biography of José Gros-Camisó not published
Thanks; I'm not sure of the exact reason, as besides my inital statement, that any search engine will provide information, I provided several references, most from Communist sources, I repeat references again:
I must remark that, as far as I know, Jose Gros-Camiso is not a member of my family. He was awarded, during his stage in the USSR, the following medals, as stated in the references listed above:
-Soviet Union Medal for Valor/ Bravery (1941)
-First Grade Partisan Medal
-Red Flag Order
-Moscow Defense Medal
-Victory Medal
Including or not including the short biography is up to you, as it was from the beginning, I can't provide more information, but having been head of the communist party organization in Madrid, Spain, for close to 20 years may have an interest for some. Thanks, best regards, + Salut--Caula (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
HiCaula I think there may have been some confusion. Firstly I'm not sure why you have title this with "deleted" as your draft has not been deleted it's still at Draft:Jose Gros-Camiso. Also although I was the one that first declined your article as it had no reference, I see that you then added some references and resubmitted. It was actaully Onel5969 that declined it the second time for the reason of not adequately showing notablity as defined by Wikipedia:Notability (people). I will reply to your comment at the bottom of the references: Firstly its not nesesarily the number of refernces but the quality, however although English refences are prefered if available having the refernces in Spanish, French, Catalan is not a problem. I don't have the time at the moment to review the actaul refenerces so I would suggest either asking Onel5969 for more feedback on their descision, or to ask help/advise from a wider group of editors by asking at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 16:11, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Typo?
"He was a quick student in mechanical and electrical technology, repairing the troublesome generator, and upon finding a burned out electric motor among some items discarded by the previous tenants, proceeding to rewind the armature and convert his mother's hand-powered washing machine into an electric-powered one."
Did Farnsworth "rewind" or did he re-wire the armature of his mother's washing machine?
Elaine Higgins
Hi Elaine, I see your asking about Philo Farnsworth the source given is "The Boy Who Invented Television" and you can view that book at google books - on page 10 it says he "rewound the armature" link here. It's easy to see why you may have thought this was a typo as most people would we familiar with electirical things being re-wired, but so so familiar with motors being wound. Alll the best KylieTastic (talk) 12:19, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
tell us why do you reject it?
hi
We provide links to sources why did you reject it? which kind of source do you need?
Hi 46.225.76.65, you didn't say which artcile this is in reference to? KylieTastic (talk) 13:35, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
WIKYj Question
Hello - A photo file was deleted from the Billy Bibby & The Wry Smiles page. I have tried to put it back as copyright holder has given permission but it's not working, I get an error message saying:
There was another file already on the site with the same content, but it was deleted.
How to I put the photo back? Thank you.
HiWIKYj the file File:BBTWS comp.png was deleted on commons for "Missing permission as of 27 March 2016" I'm not sure why you get that error! As far as I know there is no block on re-uploading that image. Both locally on English Wikipedia and over on commons I get "No file by this name exists, but you can upload it." Sorry but I'm not sure why your getting an error! If your getting the error on English Wikipedia try asking at the Wikipedia:Teahouse if your trying to upload on commons maybe try asking at the Commons:Help desk - Sorry I cant be of more help KylieTastic (talk) 22:52, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Don't know where this goes...
Hello, I was looking for history on a particular Chapstick product called "Body Balm" but I keep coming up empty. You were the last person to edit the Chapstick page and I wonder if you've ever heard of this particular product. Years ago I remember my grandfather had a tube of Chapstick Body Balm and I wonder when it was manufactured/discontinued. It looked like an original black & white tube of lip balm except it was much larger and said "Body Balm" instead of lip balm. Like I mentioned, I can't find a picture of it or any details about it. Do you know what I'm talking about? SatStar1 (talk) 14:08, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
HiSatStar1 I only edited Chapstick last because I was reverting vandalism, not because of any knowledge on the subject. I cannot see any obvious involved editor to ask in the history so I'd suggest maybe posting a question to the article talk page (Talk:ChapStick) - but looking at editor involvement it's probably a long shot. Otherwise I would suggest emailing, tweeting etc the company direct - I've had a more than 50% success rate on getting helpful responses from companies on random enquires just because you ask. It help if you phrase it in a way that's really positive to the company/product. Hope you find what your looking for, all the best KylieTastic (talk) 18:58, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Original Barnstar
Hello Kylie
Please help me edit the article i am currently creating. My English is not good. I have a lot i want to contribute to Wikipedia especially about articles in Hausa and Nigeria.
They have been rejecting my article and this is the 4th time. In my last bit to make a contribution, am resorting for your help before i can finally give up.
I'm confused by your edits, Kylie. Miguel Ali is the director of a movie (Confessions of a Womanizer) that is listed on Wikipedia. As the director of the film, shouldn't he be listed on Wikipedia. Your rejection of the article was on the grounds that his work as a director wasn't verified; however, he is already credited on the page for Confessions of a Womanizer. So basically, what you're saying is that Wikipedia doesn't serve as a proper footnote? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.251.61.129 (talk) 12:48, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi96.251.61.129 I see your talking about Draft:Miguel Ali. The decline notice and comment did not say "his work as a director wasn't verified" but that Wikipedias Notability standards had not yet been met. As per the comment the Wikipedia:Golden rule states "Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic", and IMDB is not considered a reliable source as anyone can edit with much less rules and checks that we have on Wikipedia. Also Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source for references, so you are correct "Wikipedia doesn't serve as a proper footnote". Confessions of a Womanizer also is borderline notable as it only has one independent reference, and the IMDB link only has 59 ratings making it fairly non-notable. If Miguel Ali is notable at all then you should be able to find some reliable sources that are independent that talk about him, in which case just add them and resubmit. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:41, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Mount Wedgieproof
You gotta admit, a lot of bullied middle-schoolers would like to believe in such a place... Anmccaff (talk) 00:13, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Proof of Binomial Theorem Utilizing Taylor's Series
What information has to be verified? I have referenced the binomial theorem and taylor's series.(2601:204:CA01:DC33:C557:F65B:941E:9270 (talk) 20:44, 17 April 2016 (UTC))
Hi2601:204:CA01:DC33:C557:F65B:941E:9270 links to other Wikipedia articles is not a valid reference. If the information is covered by those articles then no need for a new one, if not then the information must have a source. Also as the previous reviewer commented the article has no context. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:52, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Our sockpuppet friend(s)… Comment
Hello. I noticed that you have reverted a lot of vandalism from someone using various IP addresses to make irritating edits to transit-related articles and templates. Today I reported several of these as sockpuppets based on this IP: 2.24.126.221. I am not that familiar with ARV or the Sockpuppet reporting/follow-up process, but I thought I would let you know. If you do spot additional cases, perhaps you could link them with this case. Cheers. giso6150 (talk) 13:26, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Please ignore this. I thought I was helping the issue by combining these but the "investigation" just yielded a quick shrug of the shoulders, citing "good faith" edits by the vandal. My time feels wasted, and so I am sorry for wasting yours. I will just keep reverting these weird changes as I see them. giso6150 (talk) 18:18, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Higiso6150 unfortunately I'm not surprised you got that disappointing response from a sock report, they don't appear to work well against anons (IPs), and to the casual observer that does not scratch below the surface it may not look like vandalism on some IPs contributions, however when they change the key numbers from the title rather than the sub lines on a dozen articles its rather obvious vandalism. This particular 'challenged' editor has been doing this from October 2015 I think almost every week since. They use 2.24.*, 2.27.* and sometimes 95.14* - and I've had them blocked on maybe a hundred individual IP's over the first few months, and a couple of week long blocks on large ranges of IPs (see Orange IPs and transport articles). WP:AIV in the short term and WP:ANI in the long term are probably a better place than WP:SI as socks really work best for people using accounts to POV push. I've taken this to WP:ANI before 2.27.x.x / 2.24.x.x (Orange Home UK) persistent transport system vandalism and I've been tempted to go back but the options are either to block the ranges long term or semi-protect a large number of articles - neither Admins would do lightly. Possibly the edit filter supports such but I'm not that familiar with its limits and abilities and small number changes would be a challenge. For now I just dump a one and only warning template on them and they usually go away for a day or two. I have links to a couple of dozen accounts for evidence but gave up record keeping. No worries for the message, your not wasting my time and I'm sorry I couldn't respond sooner (11 hour work day and other stuff) - I'm glad to have someone else helping. If you do take it further say with WP:ANI or if you have other challenges to treating these as the pure persistent vandalism they are then don't hesitate to msg me and point to my ANI report as evidence of long term abuse. On a final note I've actual gone from being pissed at this person to feeling sorry for them... for this to be continuing for this many months points to bigger issues in their life. For now I'll keep checking, and I'm grateful for the help as I get less time for Wikipedia these days. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 20:51, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
19:31:51, 18 April 2016 review of submission by Mnlkrz
Dear KylieTastic,
Thank you very much for the review and your comments. I edited the article and added references. I have a problem with file upload but I hope that these references are verifiable from your point of view. Please let me know what else I can do to avoid that this source will be deleted. Any help will be appreciated. Thanks Mnlkrz (talk) 19:31, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
HiMnlkrz glad to see you've added more references and removing "notable" from the lead to make it more Neutral and Encyclopedic. I'm just back from a long stressful 11 hour work day and have lots still to do so I wont have time to re-review myself. Also I believe its good to get input from more than one editor so its not submitted vs. reviewer and you get a more rounded opinion which leads to a better article. So if you've added all the references you can find then I would suggest either resubmit (blue button on the decline notice) or to get more input and advise up front try asking at the Wikipedia:Teahouse where lots of experienced editors and admins help out. All the best and good luck KylieTastic (talk) 21:12, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm editing a Wikipedia page as a part of a class assignment ("The Black Power Mixtape 1967-1975) and I tried adding the movie poster but did not have permission to. I saw that you deleted the red link so I was wondering if you could add the correct photo?
HiNoah.C.Cole yes your correct that you can't upload untill you've had an account for a few days and 10+ edits, which as a coincidence you've just reached with this edit. However you have to wait up to 24-hours for the bot to assign the user right. Also for uploads like this new users can ask at Wikipedia:Files for upload. However in this case I have done it for you, and linked in the article. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 21:03, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
X Factor Uk
I attempted to add the new logo to the X Factor UK's page, but was unsuccessful. Would someone be able to do this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matty5521.1 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
HiMatty5521.1, if you want to use an image it must be uploaded first. As its a logo it can only be uploaded locally (not to commons) as Non-free content. You can either upload yourself starting with Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard (accessed via the "Upload file" in the left-hand menu); or you can ask someone else to upload at Wikipedia:Files for upload; or you could just post your request to the article talk page for someone to update it. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 21:25,
Hello can u bring back the powderpuff girls z on Boomerang please the other one was boring and if u of owner on Bommerang channel bring back the anime shows on Bommerang thank u from Donnieo7357! Donnieo7357 (talk) 17:40, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
16:25:36, 1 May 2016 review of submission by Atlor
Unfortunately there is an inherent lack of information about our society online - as mentioned, we keep a high degree of secrecy for the protection of our members. We do not have an online presence. However the board has decided that we wish for a wikipedia article to be created so as to have at the very least a slight mention of our existence going forward, to help drive up interest. That being said, this wikipedia site would serve as a source itself. Furthermore I've added a third party notification at the top to make it clear there is a lack of 'reliable' sources. I'm honestly not sure what else can be done to have the page be approved.
Many thanks!
HiAtlor unfortunately the desire of a group, organisation, person, etc to have a Wikipedia page is not how it works. We have a set of Notability policies including Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) which covers organizations that you need to meet. Also the general rule "Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic" (see WP:42). Also all information should generally be verifiable as how else can someone tell a made up group from a real one - and people submit made up things all the time. So if their are no sources then their can be no article. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 16:50, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
MRSA Page Changes Reverted
Hello,
I made a change to the 'Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus' page on 15:32, 27 April 2016. I changed the spelling of MRSA from Methicillin to Meticillin, in accordance with the International Pharmacopoeia guidelines. I stated my reasoning for this change, as being due to the fact that the "the spelling Meticillin is the International nonproprietary name spelling, rather than the US and Australia's national spellings.". The British government, for instance, now refer to MRSA with the spelling change I added, as well as international bodies. So it would make sense to make thee changes.
Though if you disagree, I am willing to concede that it is ultimately a rather pedantic edit.
HiAsigkem if the accepted name has changed 'officially' then yes the change can and should be made, if the correct term in now Meticillin then its not pedantic to change it. However, saying that there are a few issues to address:
You didn't leave an Edit summary stating the reason for the edit - so people can only guess. The bigger the change the more important it is to explain. Don't worry this is one of the things most new editors don't know about at first.
As with all things on Wikipedia it needs to be sourced - the bigger or more fundamental a change the more important. So if key bodies have changed this you need to add the link. I found the "International Pharmacopoeia" but could not find this guideline.
Lastly and why I noticed was you need to be careful of context and not just search replace. You changed the words in a lot of reference titles that should not have been changed - if the title of a paper/book etc has a certain name it should not be changed. Also note you have to be careful with changes in filenames, wiki-links, urls, templates and category names etc.
So if you can find the relevant links to show the name change then please do change it, adding the reference(s) and being careful of the context. If you need help or advice with editing then I recommend the Wikipedia:Teahouse where lots of experienced editor help out. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 16:03, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Rufus Isaacs
Dear Kylie,
Many thanks for your note and many apologies for blundering into making changes with limited knowledge...!
I would be most grateful for any assistance that you can provide in changing the error on several pages in relation to the family name of the 4th Marquess of Reading, Simon RUFUS ISAACS. This is a change that he has asked for as it is now causing problems with Journalists who are using Wikipedia to check their stories.
Although his daughter's maiden names appear correctly on his page (Lady Natasha Finch née Rufus Isaacs) his appears inaccurately in the title and in other references to his father and his grandfather.
The source to verify this correction is Debrett's Peerage and Baronetage.
Many thanks for any assistance that you can provide in correcting these errors.
What did I do wrong for creepy gnome ?
86.3.91.224 (talk) 19:45, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi86.3.91.224, if your not joking, and thus now trolling, then you need to look at what an Encyclopedia is. Also note that "Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic" (see WP:42) KylieTastic (talk) 19:48, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
my Teahouse questionare: are there two uncoordinated new page review mechanisms?
Kylie, Thanks for responding to my TeaHouse question about new page review. Made me feel better to know someone else thinks something isn't quite right. Gab4gab (talk) 00:31, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
HiGab4gab I take it you got no other replies - I guess maybe a better place may be the Village pump if this is signs of a bug. Cheers 19:49, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Screen Image for HP Integral PC
Hi KylieTastic,
most of the time I am using and writing for the german Wikipedia. I have uploaded an image of the Screen of the HP_Integral_PC to the German Wikipedia.
But I did not now how to include this image into the english one. It would be nice if you are able to include the picture.
Thanks
--Denalos (talk) 07:44, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
HiDenalos, I see the image you mean de:Datei:HP Integral PC Display.jpg. Unfortunately you can only use images from either the language Wikipedia your on or from Commmons so a German image cannot be used on English Wikipedia. I'm not sure if such an image would be alowd on Commmons or not, I would think it was ok as long as you took the image. It unclear from the German copyright if you took the image or were it came from. If you did take the image you could move it to commons (See: Wikipedia:Moving files to Commons) or upload as a new image either on commons or here on English Wikipedia. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 08:33, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
HiKylieTastic, I have moved the picture to commons. Not it's possible to use the picture within the en-wikipedia. Please be so kind and include the picture like in the german article. Thanks --Denalos (talk) 09:15, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
HiKylieTastic, I have added several information to the integral PC entry based on my knowledge. I own two of these systems running until today. If you like you may reread my english and additionally you may remove the request for additional information. Best regards --Denalos (talk) 09:50, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Trolling Bronco's fan
Just wanted you to be aware that there is a Denver Bronco's fan (or several) that is editing the Ty Law Wiki page to show that he's wearing a Bronco's shirt instead of a Patriots shirt.
It's obviously petty and he's completely just trolling.
This is not a huge deal or anything, but it's annoying nonetheless.
Am happy to incorporate corrections and modifications. Please give specific areas to be changed and where I can go on this site for assistance. I used a couple of similar existing bios on Wikipedia as a format. Please advise. Thank you so much.
I have seen a page related to automobile industry. I would like to ask whether you have any suggestion on the spelling correctness of the article "List of automobile manufacturers," as we know that those "manufactures" manufacture many automobiles in general.
I am really not sure which of these two should be the correctly spelled article heading
(1)List of automobile manufacturers (present spelling), or
(2)List of automobiles manufacturers ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automobile_manufacturers
Thank you for any of your suggestion.
Cherdchai Iamwongsrikul
HiCherdchai Iamwongsrikul although they manufacture, as you correctly say, automobiles (not just an automobile) no one pluralises the object of any manufacturer. Be that automobile manufacturers ,or car makers as we would say in the UK, or any such example: for instance house builders or book sellers. So the current spelling is correct, and although English is a language full of contradictions I can't think of any case in this form that the object of a manufacturer is pluralised. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 19:44, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
09:55:10, 23 May 2016 review of submission by 80.0.11.162
My IMDB page is also a legitimate 3rd party reference, as you cannot make your own IMDB page. A strict set of guidelines that need to be followed, and then several 3rd parties have to officiate it.
Hi, i understand why you have deleted my page, and i will work on.
At the moment, I'm not sure how to keep editing for up to a week's worth of work without actually submitting it, because it seems that every time I press save page, it goes for submission without me wanting it to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KaydoOfficial (talk • contribs) 10:11, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
HiKaydoOfficial your page has not been deleted, just declined, it is still at Draft:Kaydo (where it was moved to from Kaydo as per the note on your talk page from another editor). Also I'm not sure what you mean about submitting on every save as I only see it submitted once in the page history, and it was not submitted by yourself but 82.37.171.143 so if that is not you then you may wish to ask them why? Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:54, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
My Dear Sir
I am new on Wikipedia,and I ensure you that none of my editing is false,I am editing it according to the Pakistani Military History book,which is open infront of me lap,as I have written,I have merely removed Indian Propaganda,which is full of false sources,I do not yet know how to quote sources,If you may guide me,you will find that I will be able to quote sources to prove myself right,kindly forgive me for any inconvenience and help me as an elder brother — Preceding unsigned comment added by RommelTurk (talk • contribs) 18:45, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
HiRommelTurk all information on Wikipedia should be sourced from Identifying reliable sources the information you have been changing and removing has sources. There is obviously much historical disagreement between India and Pakistan and thus all information must be sourced. Stating that you have a book on your lap is not a reliable reference and there is propaganda on both sides. The data changes are frankly unbelievable, such as your edit here where you changed it so the 'winning' side had more losses than the loosing side. Also as you said you clearly do not understand not only quoting sources or other wiki markup - I suggest looking at Help:Referencing for beginners. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 19:04, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi again RommelTurk, as I do not know this area and you may be correct that multiple articles have "Indian Propaganda" or you may be wrong and using dubious sources (or should I say written from a particular perspective) I have raised this with WikiProject Military historyhere - I woudl encourage you to post your books details and any other information there - if other agree with you they would then assist you. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 19:21, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Constructive comments about Reigne
Hi,
I just wanted to address my concern that the singer you refer to is Mrs. Regine Velasquez, she is now married and now used Alcasid. However, my deepest concern is her name is not correct. Her name is "Regine" not Reigne. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regine_Velasquez that is her right?
I am also a Filipino so I know for a fact that you misspelled it.
Hi Kylie, I believe that I have re-written the article to better reflect the correct Wikipedia style; referencing the statements and also the people mentioned in the article. Please let me know if it is now correct. Thank you! Best regards JohnHagie (talk) 06:29, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
HiJohnHagie sorry for the late response - busy life at the mo. Good to see you've added references, and I see someone else has already assisted with a tidy of the format of them so they link directly. You've re-submitted so either myself or more likely one of the other reviews will get around to it, but we have just crept up to over 700 waiting so please be patient. In the mean time if you can find any more references and content then you can continue to add/improve. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 15:10, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Ziggurat
Thanks. That's someone who not content with threatening me at Talk:Dogon is now stalking and reverting me. From what he's said at Talk:Dogon he seems to have searched for me on the web and I guess he knows I'm American. Doug Wellertalk 07:28, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
People like this really drive me close to leaving Wikipedia - Asserting a single point of view, attacking users, ignoring policies all while they just can jump anon addresses to avoid any long term issues. Although I agree with the general desire to let anyone edit, I'm now with the conclusion that especially with IP6 it just allows the idiots to do to much damage and takes up too much time. At least most just give up after a few days. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 11:28, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
I hate IP6, but I see Bishonen managed to block an IP6 range which I didn't know we could do. Doug Wellertalk 08:31, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
I recently added our retail Floor plan company to Wikipedia. This is not for promotional purposes but more for informational. Please let me know what you will need from me to add FlexPlus back to the Retail Floor Plan section. My apologies for any inconvenience...
Hi64.132.244.10, no apology needed you where just continuing what had already been started. Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia not a directory (See WP:NOTDIRECTORY), without independentreliable sources a list of links is just random and not based on criteria readers of an Encyclopedia expect. Also such inline External links are against Wikipedia policy. Now with them all removed all companies have the equal chance of being found by google etc. So to answer your question, the link should no go back at all and the compnay not mentioned unless in context with an independentreliable sourced piece of information related to the topic. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 18:09, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
16:18:03, 4 June 2016 review of submission by JohnHagie
I am requesting a re-review after having "cleaned up my act" by better referencing the article. I believe that I did it correctly...
Thank you -
John
HiJohnHagie did you see my answer to your last question here? I don't believe it's particularly fair to priorities one article over the others submitted - if you look at Category:AfC pending submissions by age we have over 700 pending and quite a few have been waiting weeks. Unfortunately either less people have been reviewing recently or we've just been getting more submissions (I think both), and I've had a lot of real lie issues.
However saying that I did have a quick look and frankly I'm not sure if they pass the relevant notability standard (see: Wikipedia:Notability (music)). I tend to be an Inclusionist but I would not want to accept it just to have someone (aDeletionist) flag it for deletion. If you can find any information with source that shows one of the points on Wikipedia:Notability (music) it would be easier - but I couldn't find any indication of chart success; or awards; or that the albums were released on a major record label or more important indie label; etc. So as such I would not be happy to decline per se, but I'm also not convinced enough to accept - I either would like to see something to pass Wikipedia:Notability (music) more clearly or wait for another reviewers opinion. So I suggest trying to add more, and be patient, and if you want more advise from other more experienced editors try asking at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:57, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Why my article is declined
Hi Kylie
will you please tell me my article is declined — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vaibhav Alpha (talk • contribs) 15:42, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
HiVaibhav Alpha as per my comment "Wikipedia is not social media or a blog" its an Encyclopedia. Your submission is more suitable for your own user page which you already have it on. To have a page on Wikipedia articles needs to meet our Wikipedia:Notability policy or one of the more specific ones such as in this case Notability. If your interested in photography I recommend checking out our sister project Wikimedia Commons where they have completions that may interest you, or look at Category:Wikipedia requested photographs for images others are requesting. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:06, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
• Thanks for guiding me kylie you made me clear about it all thanks once again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vaibhav Alpha (talk • contribs) 15:24, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
My article "Skywhale (band)"
Hi KylieTastic,
I am sorry that my newly created article about the Bristol band Skywhale was not found to be acceptable for the Wikipedia guidelines. I only started to today do it is only a very bare-bones draft. I was hoping to add more information with reliable citations which would make the information more noteworthy.
Can I re-submit the article when I have filled it out?
--Cjcooper (talk) 03:14, 8 June 2016 (UTC) CJ Cooper
HiCjcooper, no worries - and yes please do re-submit once you've filled the rest out. Note one of the main things to consider is meeting one of the criteria as given on Wikipedia:Notability (music). All the best KylieTastic (talk) 08:53, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Denied Wiki Page
You denied my Wikipedia page for "unverified sources". The source is an official government web page listed as a reference.
What exactly do you consider verified for sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djmc993150 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
HiDjmc993150 the decline was not "unverified sources" but reliable sources - we generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic" (see WP:42). Although a government site is not as biased as many corporate or personal sites they still have a bias. Also the information is hard to verify as it only has the single link and no Inline citations. So although as I'm sure you've noticed articles already exist is a similar style we generally apply higher standards to new articles. As long as the information is kept neutral and non-promotional then it could probably be accepted as long as you can at least add inline references to the sections to the page on the site they come from - See Help:Referencing for beginners for more information on this. I would help with an example edit or too but as you have noticed we are extremely backlogged at AFC at the moment. Hope that makes sense, all the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:58, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Follow up/
Kylie,
Your rejection of my page is based on your violating the very references you gave me, specifically:
"Access to sources[edit]
Policy shortcuts:
WP:PAYWALL
WP:SOURCEACCESS
See also: Wikipedia:Offline sources, Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request, and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Cost
Some reliable sources may not be easily accessible. For example, an online source may require payment, and a print source may be available only in university libraries or other offline places. Do not reject sources just because they are hard or costly to access. If you have trouble accessing a source, others may be able to do so on your behalf (see WikiProject Resource Exchange).
"
Just because YOU personally cant access the remainder of the government reference page, does not justify its denial.
Further, you seem to be asserting there is some bias or other reason for refusal. It is incumbent on you to prove the governments lying to make that claim. I am referencing official government sources for my information. You cannot arbitrarily declare them unreliable or biased because you don't like them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djmc993150 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
HiDjmc993150, I did not say I could not access I said the relevant pages were not linked. Also I did not say they were biased, it's taken that all most all sources are biased. There is criticism of probably most government departments in most governments in the world on independent sites, however this independent view point is hardly ever mentioned on any government website. As a thought experiment, how much would just trust an article on a North Korean, Russian, or Iranian department sourced only with a single link to there website? You can either take what I actually said and add some inline references to sections, and preferably some external independent sources, or you can just wait and see what the next reviewer says - the choice is yours. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:20, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
And if you did not say you couldn't access the relevant pages, that tells me you made zero effort to look at the cited page. Further, "As a thought experiment, how much would just trust an article on a North Korean, Russian, or Iranian department sourced only with a single link to there website? " You are comparing North Korea and Iran to the US Military? I no longer need nor care about your advice on how to properly cite anything when you make such comparisons. I will wait for someone who has more intellect and deal with them.
HiRaju Dubai I didn't do a full review as that takes time and at the moment I'm just going though the new submissions to do basic tidy ups and decline completely non-yet suitable submissions. We are very backlogged at the moment probably because several of the regular reviewers are away or busy (that's the trouble with volunteer systems). Please be patient and someone (possibly myself) will get around to the full review and wither accept or give you feedback. In the meantime feel free to further improve the article or look at other articles. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 21:07, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Raju Dubai (talk) 13:25, 21 June 2016 (UTC) May I request a review of the page I created TPConnects
20:42:37, 12 June 2016 review of submission by Ladyyvone
Hope you are fine. The article I think is not coming under promotion. If you think you can underline the phrase/ words thats showing any promotional matter.
Regards
Prasenjit — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.123.12.113 (talk) 09:49, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Prasenjit, jus a quick answer as I'm at work.... Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia and as such we have polices such as Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and articles much have reliable sources. The title of Draft:Microsoft Office 2016 – 4 Awesome New Features to Know is more sutable for a blog, and pharases like "There is no denying the fact that Microsoft Excel is an indispensable component of office work" is not neutral or sourced in anyway. Also although this may be a suitable standalone topic for a blog or tech news site there is no reason this would have its own Encyclopedic article. Microsoft Excel already exists with a section Excel 2016 (v16.0), also Microsoft Office 2016 also exists as an article. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 10:13, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Max Money
Hi Kylie,
Good Day to you.
I was recently referred to the AfC and I came up with an article about the company I represent. I was trying to give more insights about the company which may be useful. I have referenced it with the external links making it more relevant.
I was not trying to promote my brand, nor did I advertise any services.
Kindly help me in getting this thru.
HiSyed1809 sorry for the delay in getting back it's been a busy day. Firstly let me say I understand, and although we have polices against promotion and advertising most is understood to be unintentional and done in good faith. All articles on Wikipedia need to meet certain polices to be acceptable for inclusion: the main ones for new articles are the notability policies. In this case its the Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) polices that need to be met. Also in general "Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic" (see WP:42). Many companies just do not yet meet the requirements, others just need the independentreliable sources added to show that they do. Also note that Wikipedias notability standards are not related to how 'important' or 'good' a subject is. So have a look at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) and see if you think the company meets the acquirements. Also I recommend the Wikipedia:Teahouse if you have other editing questions as you'll find lots of experienced editors that will try to help advise, and you don't have to wait for an individual to be about. Hope that helps - all the best KylieTastic (talk) 20:40, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Draft:Odoo_Community_Association
KyleTastic - Thanks for your review and feedback, it is useful and I will seek some more reliable external sources for Draft:Odoo_Community_Association and re-submit later. - SJM — Preceding unsigned comment added by StuartJMackintosh (talk • contribs) 09:38, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
HiStuartJMackintosh glad to hear it - and welcome to Wikipedia. Note that creating new articles is one of the hardest things so don't be discouraged by 'declines' they are just to say 'not yet ok' and to point out why. Sometimes articles just need more editing and reliable sources, but sometime the subject has not yet met the WP:notability requirements. Note that this topic would come under Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) which hopefully will give you an idea of what would be required. Also I recommend the Wikipedia:Teahouse if you have questions as you'll find lots of experienced editors that will try to help. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 20:47, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
KyleTastic - I wonder if you can take another look at Draft:Odoo_Community_Association and let me know if the external references added will meet the guidelines. If so, I will clean up the article ready for publication. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StuartJMackintosh (talk • contribs) 14:44, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
HiStuartJMackintosh, well it is a big improvement as none of the original sources were independent - however some of the new ones are still just press releases so still not independent. With a very quick look I'm not sure, and I'm too busy (real life and on WP) to look deeply at the moment, and I much prefer to get a independent set of eyes on an article than make the review process a one-on-one. So as such I recommend that you do clean it up, add more if you can and re-submit; alternatively you could just submit to get an opinion on the references; or for more helpful input than I'm able to give at the moment I would recommend asking at the Wikipedia:Teahouse where lots of experienced editors will see your query and be able give give help. Sorry I couldn't be of more help - too many 12 hour days are killing me and I need to go find some food. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:28, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
User:KyleTastic, Thanks again for your helpful feedback, I will take your advice. Hope you catch up on some rest (and some food!). All the best, SJM. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StuartJMackintosh (talk • contribs) 07:23, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
07:53:33, 16 June 2016 review of submission by Amy Jaworska
thank you so much for reviewing my article.
I would like to ask for your guidance on improving the existing referencing please. For example, if I was to upload an image (print advert) of the two references that were rejected, would they be then accepted?
thanks you for your help,
Amy
HiAmy, you can only uupload the image if its not copyrighted or has a suitably 'free' licence (such as CC-BY) see Wikipedia:Uploading images for more information. In some cases 'non free' images can be uploaded to English Wikipedia and used see Wikipedia:Non-free content, but it's difficult to tell from a file name like "1980 - New machinery.jpg". If you talking about your 'ref' "Punch, or the London Charivari" - which was more like a claim than a reference as I assume you are saying it was in some issues of Punch, or the London Charivari. To be a reference you would need something that either backs up the claim that they advertised their or some reference to the issue numbers and pages (so that someone could verify the information). I must admit I'm no copyright expert so you may have to seek guidence somewhere else to find out if you can upload images of the print adverts, such as the Wikipedia:Teahouse or maybe Commons:Village pump/Copyright over on commons. For more referncing help see Help:Referencing for beginners. Note that the standard for inclusing of this type of artciles is Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) so have a look at that to so what reviewers will be lookiing for. Lastly if you have any other questions on editing I recommned the Wikipedia:Teahouse as lots of experienced editors answer questions asked there. Hope that helped, all the best KylieTastic (talk) 10:15, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Can't you take a australian joke, are you able to put it back for a couple days.
Can't you take a australian joke, are you able to put it back for a couple days. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitchcliff123 (talk • contribs) 12:21, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
A previous deleted image was reverted by me.
The contested file is for and by the subject author who is the historian of the article. The work should not have been removed and my undo yesterday June 15, 2016 should be restored. Regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Obltkg4 (talk • contribs) 18:46, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
HiObltkg4 as per my revert edit summary the image has been deleted not removed so adding back a link to the image without dealing with the underlying issue first serves no point but to introduce an error on the page. The CommonsDelinker bot was just cleaning up the invalid link not removing to the already deleted image. The image was delete over on commons as a "possible copyright violation" as per the notice on your talk page over there see here. Also you had an answer by User:Christian Ferrer to your post here. As the image is already deleted I cannot view it so the license claim made so I can't comment on the facts - however you appear to just be claiming the image is the authors so copyright is not an issue: firstly the subject of an image often does not own the copyright; and secondly even if they do own the copyright they would still have to release it under a suitable 'free' licence - hence the answer you got about Commons:OTRS. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:13, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Coronel
Thanks for unbungling my bungle. Keith-264 (talk) 18:23, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
HiKeith-264, no worries - it was clear it was an accident. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:53, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I can't believe it! I did it again!Keith-264 (talk) 19:20, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
17:00:43, 18 June 2016 review of submission by Anketil
Apart from replacing the first reference with "Collin's Roll, College of Arms, London UK" I cannot see any other way of doing this.
I am a member of the Guild of One-Name Studies and have a 6000+ database of Juby references together with family papers, Wills, etc throughout the centuries.
There is so much rubbish put forward as to the origin of the name that I was hoping to put the record straight!
HiAnketil some things like "Juby family papers" and "Family papers" are not reliable sources at all and would count as original research. Some things like "John Nichols's 'History and Antiquities of the County of Leicester'", " Plea Rolls, Inquisitions Post Mortem and State Papers", "Parish Registers and Central Record Office, UK" and "1 Collin's Roll, College of Arms, London, UK" maybe are but they are not defined in a way others could check. Are these on websites, if books etc we need more details - see Help:Referencing for beginners for more help. Also if you'd like to seek advise from a wider range of experienced editors I recommend the Wikipedia:Teahouse. Hope that helps, cheers KylieTastic (talk) 17:12, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
21:30:11, 18 June 2016 review of submission by Rjmendez2016
Hi, I would like to ask what would be the best course to take to have the page that I created to be published? I would absolutely appreciate your feedback and guidance on what needs to be done and not only to have it published but to make it better as well. :)
Hello, KylieTastic, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes!
We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Faizan (talk) 07:33, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Note: Having a username change after you start using STiki will reset your classification count. Please let us know about such changes on the talk page page to avoid confusion in issuing milestone awards. You can also request for your previous STiki contributions to be reassigned to your new account name.
09:03:51, 19 June 2016 review of submission by Hoggm2
Hi, Thank you for the feedback. I am still getting oriented to the workflow of Wikipedia. I have moved my page to userspace. I assume it doesn't need approval.
Please could you tell me how I remove the "Submission declined" statement from my page? There is a line with the text "" which links to the declined statement.
HiHoggm2, no worries and welcome to Wikipedia. Yes your user page needs no approval, in general all pages under you user name (your user page, talk page, sandbox and subpages) are yours to use within reason. See Wikipedia:User pages for more information for what you can and can't do on them.
To remove the "Submission declined" just edit the page and yes its the bit before the <!-- Do not remove this line! --> which was there only in context of being in the AFC draft area (as new users would submit articles then remove the {{AFC submission|...}} not knowing what it was. Things in double curly brackets { }} are templates. I've removed the templates for you see this. You'll probably have other questions as you start out, so I recommend the Wikipedia:Teahouse as lots of experienced editors try to assist people there. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 11:39, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Kylie, Thank you, much appreciated.
Kind Regards
Martin
Hoggm2 (talk) 11:46, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi in Relation to Dr Sanhory wiki Page
Hi,
I have added an official link from WIPO world intellectual property , the patent states the invention and has all the details
inside the patent , would that be accepted now?
thanks for reviewing the draft version for "BYK Additives & Instruments". We've been informed that this submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability.
Please let us know what you need so the article can be published.
HiDrive2012 just a quick reply as I'm at work.... the notice on your talk page is for last year (28 September 2015) you don't currently have a draft. However your statement that you "have been asked to create it" shows that you should read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Also other language Wikipedias tend to have much lower requirements for articles so being acceptable - here the standard that will be applied is Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 09:46, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
More sources about Dr Sanhory
Hi,
Thanks for the response here some more sources for the pharmaceutical drug Lieshmanol that was invented by Dr Sanhory
it treats lieshmania and Diabetic wounds
he is the founder of Sanhorial factory in Khartoum Sudan as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarigpidecimal (talk • contribs) 10:10, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
HiTarigpidecimal, unfortunately the bits of the articles I can read (the first is behind a subscription, the second I can access by https://web.archive.org/web/20030829045150/http://allafrica.com/stories/200006280099.html) do not mention Dr Sanhory. So although as the inventor he should have had credit on the articles he doesn't and so they don't help his individual notability. The links would so better for an article on Lieshmanol that mentioned Dr Sanhory than the other way around. Note that Wikipedia notability is different from doing something important - many people doing important work are not notable and many that do nothing are - it's just about people writing about someone or not. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:41, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Rejected Issue
I've already added the references to my new article. Yet it got rejected. Shall I get to know the reason?
Regards, Ishwar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenishwar (talk • contribs) 23:20, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
HiGreenishwar, it wasnt declined for having no refernces and the reason was in the decline notices both on the article and yourr talk page. The reason is Wikipedia has a set of Wikipedia:Notability polices to determine if articles should be included. In this case Wikipedia:Notability (music) would apply and the two references do not appear to show the Kandara meet any of the listed criteria. Please read the criteria and see if you think they do meet any of them and if so update the article and refnerces to show this. If you want more advise on this from a wider range of opinions I recommend the Wikipedia:Teahouse. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 09:59, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
HiFn2gf3431 I would be happy to help if it wasn't list on Articles for deletion - if the article passes please feel free to ask again or you can use the Wikipedia:Files for upload process. As it would be Non-free content it needs the article to exist so it would be best to work on finding any extra references and responding to points of the AfD first, we can add images and tidy up after. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:21, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Draft:Retro Run:Car Racing
Hi! I am Peterye2005. You recently declined my submission at Articles for Creation, Draft:Retro Run: Car Racing. The reason was: Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. Just to make sure I am understanding this correctly, is it that the source I found (Blackberry World) is not reliable or is that the source I found is not independent from the topic?
HiPeterye2005 I would think that the "Blackberry World" source is reliable is showing that it exists and the details, however its just a listing and I assume all games are listed there. A single source is neither "significant coverage" and its maybe not independent (I'm not familiar with there vetting process). In this case the policy/standard that applies is Wikipedia:Notability (video games) which should explain the things we look for regarding video games - Sorry I should have dug that more specific link out before but WP:AFC is inundated with submissions. Hope that helps explain things and you'll be able to work out if its not yet 'notable' or if it just needs more sources to show it passes Wikipedia:Notability (video games). All the best KylieTastic (talk) 19:05, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
18:26:49, 27 June 2016 review of submission by OB93
I just need to know how to get this out of my Sandbox. I submitted this here by mistake, and have used the information to add to the Polio Survivors List page. I can't seem to get a blank page to figure out how to add names and info the Polio Survivors page since it isn't a simple edit needing a block table to contain the new information. When I try to add a person, I can't seem to get it in a separate box. This is very frustrating for a new person, like me. Could someone help me?OB93 (talk) 18:26, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
HiOB93, just select 'Edit' at the top right of the page - select all the code (i.e from {{AFC submission to 18:17, 23 June 2016 (UTC)) then just delete. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 17:26, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
19:12:44, 27 June 2016 review of submission by 69.121.5.233
Hello! I added a lot of new information with citations to the page for Grace VanderWaal. Previously, there were no legitimate sources, but I have included them in the latest revision as well as rewording and reformatting.
My International bath day draft was declined stating that the sources refer to self submit sites.
I used these sites only because I thought they are the most serious and relevant sites.
Bath day is talked about on many websites and on social media - private people, lifestyle sites, spas, dog grooming businesses and many more.
Please see examples:
UK lifestyke site : http://www.femalefirst.co.uk/love/ (see calander when you scroll down)
I do not think that these mention are serious enough to be used as a cite on Wikipedia but it surely proves that this day real and commenced on June 14th.
So your help regarding the best reliable cites will be highly appreciated.
Thanks!Yoolaboot (talk) 10:53, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Draft being declined - The Hong Kong Institute of Surveyors
Dear Kylie,
My name is Sam and I am working in a PR firm in Hong Kong. Recently my colleague has drafted a organization profile on Wikipedia for our client, The Hong Kong Institute of Surveyors.
However, we find that the review process take so much time. It has been drafted about one month ago, but it has not been published.
We try to consult some users of wikipedia and they suggest us to disclose the paid contribution on the talk page. So we have done accordingly too. According to the notification, our draft was declined by you. So we would like to know what else we can do to make the organization profile publish and prevent violation of any regulation of wikipedia.
I see you asked at the Teahouse [1] in my absence - so I'll consider this answered. KylieTastic (talk) 12:35, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
Free Licence
Hi Kylie,
You commented on something re: copyright. I had an image deleted previously and wanted to know if you have any suggestions to have it released it under a suitable 'free' licence. A sort of quick and dirty how to have this uploaded without being deleted.
Does the owner of the work - in this case the publisher have to do or can I proxy with the appropriate permission.
HiObltkg4, copyright on Wikipedia is a difficult/complex subject - and it's even more strictly applied over on commons were the image was remove from. Firstly I'd recommend reading the notice on your commons talk page HERE where you'll find some links, and the editor who removed the image and could maybe help. Unfortunately their is no "quick and dirty" way for images that have been already published not under a 'free' licence. To publish on commons the copyright owner has to give permission because although you know that you have permission to anyone else your an unknown person just claiming that on the internet. It actually looks like they may have made it easier than the old method, if you look at Commons:OTRS in the Declaration of consent for all enquiries section there is a link to a Wikimedia OTRS release generator - I've not used but hopefully it is easy enough although if they don't want to upload the image with the release then they'll need to know the file name File:AugustEnigma.jpg. Otherwise people should release publicity images on there own websites with a CC-BY/CC-BY-SA etc licence clearly marked (see Commons:Licensing). Hope that helps. KylieTastic (talk) 20:44, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
The Nairobi Hospital article
Hi Kylie!
Thank you for undoing the modification I tried to The Nairobi Hospital. I could not add an image because I have not reached the minimum edits to be enabled to upload media! Would you please add the logo as I tried?
Yes, I agree, it is odd, but it is what it is... Not the only recent song title where the composer has overlaid a second title/message... Two years ago, the same corps did Andy Akiho's "to wALk Or ruN in wEst harlem" which a couple other corps did this year... Odd, but I guess it works for the composers... GWFrog (talk) 21:39, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Congratulations, KylieTastic! You're receiving this barnstar because you recently crossed the 1,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and Ugog Nizdast (talk) 16:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
New Zealand Scout Jamboree
Hey KylieTastic
Im just going to let you know that I Will Change Back the Edits For the NZ Scout Jamboree Page as I currently Work For them As Part of Their Media And marketing team
there is a plan in place to create 19th and 20th jamboree pages in conjunction with this main page to keep this information relevant to our event
HiCrazycart00n thanks for the heads-up, but I'm just one of many editors that would have picked up the same concern as I see Velella already has. As you state you work for them there are a number of polices that you must be aware of: Firstly is Wikipedia:Conflict of interest which strongly discourages these types of edit. Next would be to point out Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia and not a platform for promotion see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not especially WP:PROMOTION. Lastly yo can just remove information with intent to create new pages sometime later. If an editor wanted to do this they should either prepare all the pages in there own user area or in draft, or a more normal approach is just to add to a page and move out sections to there own pages if and when they get big enough to stand alone. In this case I don't see enough information for separate pages. I would suggest asking for assistance at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, or WikiProject New ZealandorWikiProject Scouting. I've done a quick tidy as well. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:50, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for the information and the tidy i had no intention on using it as promotion for our event even. At the time it did not show what nz jamboree was about i have just found it really hard to find information on nz jamborees even for editing this. i have asked nz jamboree officials to hopefully receive some more history on previous ones. It was misunderstood that wikipedia could be edited by others and i was asked to have look into this, We work on volunteer basis i did not understand that This could be Wikipedia:Conflict of interest how ever as im relatively new to editing on Wikipedia and seem to have missed Somethings so again thank you for pointing me in the right direction Crazycart00n (talk) 22:33, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
HiCrazycart00n, no problem at all - we don't expect people to know all the rules (I still don't know many and I've been doing this for years) and one important one is Wikipedia:Assume good faith. Also most cases of Conflict of interest are well meaning, and most 'promotional' content is done with the best of intentions, and it can often be a fine line between 'encyclopedic' and 'promotional'. So you didn't misunderstand that "wikipedia could be edited by others", that's correct in fact all content is just added by volunteers not by any paid staff. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 15:02, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
USS COLORADO (SSN 788) Ship's Crest (a.k.a badge)
Not sure where you came up with the ship's crest you posted around 15 June 2016 to subj page. It differs from the crest picked as the winner by ship's C.O. in announced contest. See ship's commissioning page on Facebook for further info and actual crest.
K. M. Harrison, Head of Temporary and Emergency Systems Division, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, US Navy2601:187:8100:B98E:6DBA:BDDC:7BEC:2C1E (talk) 23:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi, it wasn't me I was just fixing the image Ootervon3 attempted to add with this edit - and they uploaded the image to commons here but gave no information to were it came from. I was just assuming good faith that it was the correct one. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:07, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Roberta Colindrez
You revered my edit, I am assuming because the name of the TV Movie has the word "Dick" in it. Am I supposed to censor that word? It is also directly cited in one of the references on the page.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4295500— Preceding unsigned comment added by Susanev (talk • contribs) 16:04, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
HiSusanev, no we don't censor on Wikipedia - however with a reference or any edit summary it just looked like the sort of vandalism we get a lot of. We can't check every dubious looking entry (or the vandals would win due to volume) so its the responsibility of editors to add sources and explain actions via edit summaries. So apologies for the mistake, I've added back with a reference and please add edit summaries especially if the edit is non obvious or could look dubious to others. All the best and happy editing, KylieTastic (talk) 16:10, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Deleted image on Woods Hole Research Center page
Thanks for removing the link to the image that had already been deleted.
But I was wondering how people upload logos to Wikipedia. Logos are obviously copyrighted (which I assume is why mine was deleted) but I see plenty of logos on Wikipedia pages.
HiLeadvilleDave, you can upload logo under fair use locally to Wikipedia but not to Wikimedia Commons. Commons only hosts 'free' media but on English Wikipedia (and I believe similarly on other languages) allow some copyrighted images under fair use. Start here and use the options for "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use." and "This is a logo of an organization, company, brand, etc." make sure you five the source, the article it will be used on (fair use images can only be used in one place), and for why the use will be minimal something like "Only used in infobox to inform users on subject". Hope that helps KylieTastic (talk) 20:34, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Thank you Kylie
IceTwinsMom (talk) 15:53, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Deleted photo
Hello,
Could you please tell me how to reupload a deleted photo? It's absolutely ridiculous that it was deleted. HyeSK (talk) 12:24, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
HiHyeSK, I assume your talking about File:Hasmik Karapetyan.jpg. I don;t have permissions to see deleted images so I can only go by the discussion commons:Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Hasmik_Karapetyan.jpg which suggests you just took an image from the internet and claimed it was you own work. As per the answer to your question on commons here if you do own the image copyright you need to show that you do. Or you need to find an image with suitable licensing as per commons:Commons:Licensing. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:19, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
Image change
Hi I just wanted to change a wiki actress picture because her current one is extremely bad... Is there anyway to do so? Or what are the rules to changing their photo? Please and thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.89.140.18 (talk) 21:00, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi50.89.140.18 I agree it's not a good picture, but pictures on Wikipedia need to be copyright free or have a suitable 'free' licence (see Wikipedia:Uploading images for more info). I have had a quick look and could not find one. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 22:06, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Children's TV articles and removing red-linked images therein
Hi there! These articles are attracting several IP vandals, it would be more beneficial to simply undo the last edit or revert to the last good version. Thanks for contributing! –Skywatcher68 (talk) 19:35, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Please, it doesn't make sense to remove nonexistent image links when the article isn't even grammatically correct! You're seeing some of these disruptive edits before I do, would be nice if you'd revert them. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 19:37, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
HiSkywatcher68, again you don't say which article your talking about, making it difficult to comment. If I see a reason to full revert I do, if not I don't. Since the edit before you posted here was on Busytown Mysteries and I had previously edited that I assume this is the article in question, however I fail to see the huge "isn't even grammatically correct" part in what you reverted with this edit. Yes they fail to understand an/a usage but as they are from Puerto Rico, I would Assume good faith that English is not their first language. Since neither version had any direct reference for "opentheme", "country" or "last_aired" I'm in no position to claim either correct. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:58, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
It's not any one article or IP. Several IPs, all suspected to be socks of one blocked user, have been making mass unsourced changes to articles pertaining to children's TV, mainly replacing actual original channels and air dates with US-centric ones. The phenomenon has become so bad that SummerPhDv2.0 made a point of noting it on her user page. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 22:29, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
New images for ETS theory
Hi Kylie
you've deleted the links to images for the Geodakyan's evolutionary theory of sex - however those images were new, in comparison to the deleted previously due to copyright violation. I uploaded new images but Wiki did hang (twice) in this process. So I wonder what happened to my new uploads. In any case I am going to rename the images and rename the links, to avoid old references. So please treat them with attention, they are my product, not copyrighted. KaiStr (talk) 20:26, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
HiKaiStr I've never had an issue uploading images here or on commons but I have had others mention occasional problems. I have never tired to upload to a file name that has previously been deleted so maybe that causes an issue. I can see you have only edited here on English Wikipedia and you only have 1 file uploaded Special:ListFiles/KaiStr, so all I can suggest is try uploading again. As for the final comment, if you've created these yourself you'll and they have not been published elsewhere you should have no issues. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:44, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
I made a change that said "She is very interesting" on paula schers wiki page and it was removed. Please tell me why, and tell me what you think about wiki vandalism.
Yours Sincerely,
Euan Harrison — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.232.28.133 (talk) 16:59, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi92.232.28.133 it was removed because "She is very interesting" is not encyclopedic, but a personal comment. How do you think articles would be if it was considered ok to add such commnets? Wikipedia is not social media or the youtube comment section, such opinions are not even vaild on talk pages. I'nm sure you did it in good faith, but its just not what Wikipedia is for. Where such additions are not found right away you then tend to get someone postying the opposite - such is the way with opinions. If you do find her interesting then maybe once your block expires you can find other sourced information to add in a more encyclopedic format. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 17:08, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Naga people (Lanka)
Hi KylieTastic, The last article was based on falsify facts and misleading. I've read many articles and journals about this topic and therefore I know that the former article is a fabrication. The Yaksha people or the ancestors of Veddas are descendant of Polynesian. According to the prof, Balagalla who researched about the origin of the languages Sri Lanka, the Naga people were the Aryans who came to Sri Lanka at the same time Aryans reach to India. But most of the reference are written journals and therefore I'm in a bit difficulty to provide the links to them as the haven't converted in to e versions yet. And I'm willing to improve it further and cann't improve much right now since I'm in a bit busy schedule. However I think this article is better than a misleading article. Thanks for the talk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neelyadi (talk • contribs) 18:43, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
HiNeelyadi, I agree that Naga people (Lanka) needs to be improved as indicated by the maintenance tags at the top, however you can't just deleted everything including lots of sourced material. Your version also had errors, no categories, the lead sentence didn't make sense. I would suggest improving it by making smaller edits with edit summaries so others can see the reasons behind edits. Feel free to remove unsourced assertions, but don't just delete sourced material without good reason. If you only have one contradictory source then the correct action is not to replace content with your preferred version but to add yours to show the difference of opinions. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 18:55, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi and thanks I didn't how to make the reliable source bur now i know thanks for all I make the editing agan check out it is all right. You can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! AlexKMH (talk) 8:27p.m., 17 September 2016 (ET) —Preceding undated comment added 00:28, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
HiAlexKMH, yes that looks good much better, just a missing http:// that I've added. Although in theory every substantive statement should have a source on Wikipedia it's a policy applied more strictly when dealing with Biographies of living persons. I know it can be hard for decent people to understand because they would never do it, but some people do just make things up to push their own point of view. All the best and happy editing. KylieTastic (talk) 11:40, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
removed photo
Hello! I am new to Wikipedia, but I'm trying to update a photo for Sue Ellspermann that you just deleted. The photo is posted on the ivytech.edu website and can be used by anyone. I work for Ivy Tech and have been asked by Sue to update her page. Ivytech2016 (talk) 15:08, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Ivytech2016
HiIvytech2016, I didn't delete the image I just removed the link to the image that had already been deleted. It was deleted from c:commons as a copyright violation. I assume your talking about the image from this page which does have links to high res version of the photo and logo. Although it would appear from the links that the intent was for free use their is not actually any licence statement, and the page has a copyright statement. For others to be able to use a suitable licensing declaration would have to be given along with the download links. For Wikimedia Commons you need a suitable free license as per Commons:Licensing such as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:21, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Want to help test advanced new tools planned for Recent Changes?
Hi KylieTastic! I’m reaching out to you because our logs tell us you’re a very active Twinkle user (top 25, actually!). The WMF Collaboration team is working on new tools that we hope will be useful to people engaged in reviewing recent changes, fighting vandalism or supporting new users. We want to test them for usability with editors who are experienced with relevant wiki work. If you’re interested in helping to shape this new technology—we’d like to hear from you.
The testing should take about an hour, will be conducted online, and will take place during the next few weeks. To participate, please email dchen[at]wikimedia.org with the subject line Twinkle User. Include the following information:
Username
Email where we can reach you
Your city or time zone
Best time to talk to you
Your primary use of Twinkle or Recent Changes (e.g., reviewing recent changes, reviewing with a particular focus (specify), anti-vandalism, new-page review, welcoming new users, etc.)
HiKintetsubuffalo I don't actually see any red-links on Template:Scouting uniform/sandbox/test unless you mean the incomplete oraneg box arround it? I certianly don't see the same issue that existed on the previous one. I see this. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:51, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Wow, I've been looking at the redlinks for two weeks, now they'(re gone, weird! Why the partial box, though?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 14:54, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
HiKintetsubuffalo, it could have been the page had not been edited so the temaplete not updated (sometimes the auto update appears to fail, or take a while). Maybe someone else did a 'null edit' (edit, and save with no changes) to fix it. The partial box I did have a quick look at before but could'yt see the issue - should it be a full box or none at all? Let me know and I'll try to have a look tonight after work. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:59, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
None at all is fine, thanks so much!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 15:00, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Why do you delete images, that are improperly sourced, some times, by mistake and don't give me chance to redeem myself and fix the image source. Why are all edits, on my images, you delete, one time, final? I'm volunteering my time, many times large numbers of hours, to help make Wikipedia, a respected and legitimate, internet site? I'm doing my best to fix my mistakes? I don't think this is fair or consistant, with Wiki policies, especially from me. I've created numerous Infoboxes, to articles, that need them and add many images to them, also. I'm not attacking your work, but I don't understand what is going on?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Chitt66 (talk • contribs)
HiChitt66 I didn't delete any images because I am not an administrator. I assume you talking about on De Lancey's Brigade where I removed the red-link to the deleted image? Per your talk page noice (here) you were notified on the 5th Sept by Sfan00 IMG that File:De Lancey's Brigade II Lefferts.jpg did not have a valid non-use explanation. The image was delete on the 13th Sept by Explicit. You appear then to have twice tried to add the link back without re-uploading or asking for the image to be undleted by providing the correct details. So to answer your points:
"and don't give me chance to redeem myself" - you where notified and did have 7 days to fix
"Why are all edits, on my images, you delete, one time, final?" - Firstly I can't comment on deleted images I had no involvement with, but copyright is taken very seriously by Wikipedia/Wikimedia as it is a legal requirment. Your not alone in having images deleted and not understanding some of the reasons (I've had images deleted as have many editors) - copyright is complex! Secondly who said it was final? If there is a relevant license or Non-free use rationale you can re-upload, or ask the deleting admin to undelete if you give them the relevant details.
"I'm volunteering my time" - And thank you for that, it's great that people do or we would have no Wikipedia as we all volunteer. I have volunteered over 100,000 edits and Sfan00 IMG over 500,000.
"I'm doing my best to fix my mistakes?" - Great! We all make mistakes, and hopefully we all do our best to fix them. I get reverted for the odd mistake, and I've reverted mistakes by many experienced editors and admins. Please don't take it personally it's usually not.
All I can suggest is when you get a notice on your talk page about an image, try to fix it if its an obvious error, or otherwise conteact the notifying editor who can advise. Hope that helps explai things - Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 15:32, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Andrea Scotti
Hi,I have received your message and I have cancelled wrong image of Andrea Scotti because nobody have make an answer about my many messages in "discussion" when italian Wikpedia have already cancelled image of italian actor Gianni Macchia that somebody have confused with genuine image of Andrea Scotti. bye! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.62.135.212 (talk) 14:32, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Unfair Censorship of the Threat that Lizard People Pose to Mankind
Dear Sir or Madam,
I write to you with great concern. I earlier posted on another person's comment section. As I previously mentioned, I have incontrovertible proof that Gavrilo Princip was indeed a Lizard person, and that he had been embedded with the Black Hand to instigate a war which would kill mankind. Moreover, I also have proof that Michael Gordon, a journalist with the New York Times, is also a Lizard person. I know this as I met him, and his glove slipped off and I saw into his slitted, yellow reptilian eyes. Furthermore, I have heard from sources within the government and military that he was especially adept at dealing with the harsh desert landscape in Iraq. I want this change rectified as I believe this to be censorship of pressing material. Lastly, I also have evidence (I have studied the records of the former regime of Saddam Hussein, who is not a Lizard person), and I have evidence that can substantiate my claim that Iraq had in fact found the Stargate. The tubes in the desert which prompted the First Gulf War were nothing more than excavation materials. Iraq never had nor never desired a nuclear weapons program. Knowing that the possession of the Stargate would allow Iraqis to travel to other galaxies in the pursuit of superior technology, the U.S. was forced to act. I can prove this with internal documents from the regime.
Last, as an amateur biologist, I do not believe that the nomenclature is correct for so-called horses. Rather, I believe that "neigh" is the more appropriate substitute; the same is true for bears. We call them bears, when in fact they are not bears, they are "werebear-the-carebears," which I believe reflects the more appropriate combination of correct science and the respect for beliefs of native americans.
I believe both claims reflect censorship and animus towards truth and truth-telling. To appropriate the framework posited by Michel Foucault, you are a node of power, and a tyrannical one at that, and I believe that it is my duty to speak truth-to-power in order to rectify the previous two misunderstandings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.75.14 (talk) 20:46, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Well if you "have incontrovertible proof" you should go to the papers.... or back to reality.... Wikipedia is not for jokes, fantasies.... take it to the papers, or to social media, just keep unsourced stories off Wikipedia. KylieTastic (talk) 20:52, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
This is certainly no laughing matter. If I link it to my blog which has been cited by numerous other blogs, does this count as a valid source? I assure you, I only adhere to the most rigid academic standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.75.14 (talk) 20:55, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
HiAnarul Islam(Rony), maybe? Depends what you need help with? However in general I would recommend asking for help at the Wikipedia:Teahouse where you'll find lots of experienced editors to answer any questions you have. KylieTastic (talk) 09:52, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:1926 Sir Frederick Chance, Liberal.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:1926 Sir Frederick Chance, Liberal.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:24, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Don't delete my start up page
You are planning to delete my start up page. It will affect me a lot. It's not a personal waste page. Try to understand. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunanavati (talk • contribs) 15:19, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
HiDunanavati Wikipedia is not for Promotion - also it's clearly made up as you state "Nanavati International" is both "a not very famous start up from India" and "the company sore great heights and now comprises of a staff of about 2000 people all over the world". Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 15:17, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
It is not for a purpose of promotion. It's just that like other companies my start up too should have a Wikipedia page that's all I thought. 2000 all over the world is a very less amount and sore heights is just to mention growth. I completely respect your decision and I will compile with the decision you take.
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunanavati (talk • contribs) 15:27, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. I really appreciate your reply. - You can do as per your wish. I am new here and wanted to add excistence of my startup. Thanks a lot again and whatever you do with my page please do wisely.
Thanks for the catch. There was an auto-edit that happened unintentionally. However, the content was intentional, and I believed, constructive to take some of the Public Persona and put it into one section, instead of all over the place in the rest of the article. It was my intent to start a "seed" and see if other editors would follow. But no worries. algocu (talk) 19:56, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
New: Beth Crowley
Hi, Kylie,
As you can see Im new and Im trying to write and article of Beth Crowley but Im a little confused of what I have to do. Can you help me? Its my first article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TasMadness001 (talk • contribs) 16:09, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello! Could you please help me upload some pictures to some articles? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mutaito0321 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Could you please help me delete the pictures that I've uploaded? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mutaito0321 (talk • contribs) 23:25, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
HiMutaito0321 you haven't uploaded any images here - see your upload list here or over on commons none as well (see here). It looks like you have images on commons but they have been deleted as copyright violations. You can only upload copyrighted images (without permission/linence) locally under strict fair use rules - see Wikipedia:Non-free content. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 23:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Fokker
Sorry about that, I was using Open Office to remove Oxford commas. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 12:11, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
HiKeith-264, no worries we all make mistakes. I keep hoping that they'll implement a feature to warn users when they have created red-links post save as these types of things happen a lot by accident. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 12:21, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Request on 14:59:11, 27 October 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Henry1950
I am working on adding citations to the Steven R. Timmermans draft, but I am wondering how you define "notability." For example, why is a minor-league hockey player, e.g. Jared Staal, more notable than the head of a denomination and former college president, e.g. Steven Timmermans?
HiHenry1950 Wikipedia has a number of 'notability' standards in this case Wikipedia:Notability (people) is the one that counts also Wikipedia:Notability for the general rules. Note that Wikipedia 'notabily' is not the same as 'inportance' and often just comes down to being written about (i.e being noted) by others. So that can mean that a person or organisation that have done important things that have not been writen about is not 'notable' and people such as minor sports people or celebrities only famous for being famous can be notable. So if they have done 'notable' things then adding citations is the correct thing to do. I hope that helps explain things - All the best KylieTastic (talk) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Why have you reverted my change? I've talked about my reasons on the article's Talk page, and you have not responsed in any way... 80.108.76.31 (talk) 15:27, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi80.108.76.31, sorry I didn't see the discussion on the talk page, and I was remiss in not putting the reason in my edit summary. I reverted because it got flagged as an error as you broke three images with your version here. Without an edit summary saying to see the talk page it looked like just a random search/replace (that people often do breaking things). I have done a partial revert back to your version, but I have fixed the broken images. Luckily the wiki links tollerate the difference. Sorry about the confusion - All the best KylieTastic (talk) 16:30, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
In regards to my edition to sections in International Institute of Information Technology, Hyderabad page
Hellow,
I received a message from you stating certain sections of the page have been a violation of copyright material. This is to inform you that I am making the edits on behalf of the said institute and they have instructed me to use the material found on their pages and websites. I am therefore not infringing any rules and I hold the full permission to use the material in any way needed to enhance the page on International Institute of Information Technology, Hyderabad. The editions on the Director, Dean (R&D) and Dean (Academic) have been added (and deleted by you) on the request of the institute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nanavati.sneha (talk • contribs) 12:08, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
HiNanavati.sneha, I'm afraid you miss understand what Wikipedia is for - it is an Encyclopedia not a web site for organisations etc to promote themselves. Firstly you have a stated conflict of interest so you should read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest before editing again. Secondly an organisation can not give you permission to violate the copyright - the information is marked as copyrighted on their website and Wikipedia content is published under CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL - you should read the policy Wikipedia:Copyright violations for more information. Lastly another policy is Wikipedia:Neutral point of view which information taken from an organisations own page probably isn't. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 12:21, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Heliopolis
Thanks for the message. There was a new luxury ocean liner called Heliopolis launched in 1907. Also in that year, immigrants from Malaga crammed into a old ship called Heliopolis to emigrate to Hawaii. Someone has amended the page and assumed it is the same ship. It is not and I have also provided a link to the photo of the 2nd vessel. I am a writer on ships and have published the Compendium of the World's Passenger Ships. My website is at www.shiphistory.co.uk
Sorry about the many edits - I was trying to get to grips with the site. Don — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donships (talk • contribs) 22:30, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
HiDonships, the best way to start is with small edits - the wiki markup is not that complex but takes a few edits to get used to. However also not that we have a policy Wikipedia:No original research and information should be sourced (see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources). So yes if you think information is incorrect and it does not have a source then its ok to remove, if it does have a source then you need to provide a better (more reliable) one you cant just assert that you know. Many of us have expertise in areas, but without sources others can not tell the expert from the (numerous) trolls, or the just misinformed. If you do have questions or want advise I recommend the Wikipedia Teahouse where you'll find lots of experienced editors. All the best. KylieTastic (talk) 22:42, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
How is your Spanish?
I have created a new set of shields for Mexican federal highways that are ready to upload. However, the document from which I got the drawings is in Spanish (not my first language, but I can get by) and I can't find any mention that the document or the signs depicted therein are in the public domain. So, could you or do you know anybody who speaks Spanish natively who could look it over to find any licensing information? It's located here: http://www.sct.gob.mx/normatecaNew/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/SCT_NIS_0419.pdf Thanks. –Fredddie™ 05:15, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
Hey Fredddie, lo siento, no hablo Español. Spanish is not common at all in the UK, mostly just tourist level stuff, we don't have many native Spanish speakers here at all. You could try asking tucoxn who introduced me to WP:USRD/S/R as they have ES-2 (intermediate) userbox on their user page. I don't think I've come across any other Wikipedians that are fluent in Spanish apart from one that has been blocked on commons so I'm not sure I would trust there interpretation. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 12:45, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
HiFredddie, I didn't see any mention of the road shields being in the public domain in that publication, as well. It looks like the road shield you're interested in is on pages 19 and 429 of the PDF, correct? Keep in mind that works created by the Mexican government do not default to PD, unlike in the United States. In fact, works created by the Mexican government generally do not become public domain until 100 years after publication. You should refer to Wikipedia talk:Copyrights/Archive 5#Mexican copyrights, COMMONS:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Mexico#Government Works, and COMMONS:Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter#Road signs for additional info. It doesn't seem like this series of road signs is appropriate for posting on Commons, and it's probably a stretch to post them on EN.WP under the non-free content rules. However, I noticed File:Carretera federal XX.svg, which seems to have been on Commons for long enough to have passed adequate scrutiny. Although I think you will get a negative response, you should ask this question at the Commons village pump for a final authority. I'm also pinging Imzadi1979, who is very experienced and active on the subject of international roads. I'm sorry for the potentially bad news. - tucoxn\talk 14:08, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, that's just it. There is already a set of Mexican shields on Commons. I'll read the links shared. Thanks, Tucoxn and KylieTastic. –Fredddie™ 14:18, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
So what I'm getting is that they'd most likely be gratis in the US (because the threshold of originality is so high), but not in Mexico. We ran into that with Australia a few years ago. We ended up deleting everything from Commons and uploading shields to ENWP. See File:Australian_state_route_2.svg, for instance. –Fredddie™ 14:31, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
I think I would agree with that assessment Fredddie, if added to commons there is a reasonable risk of them being challenged and deleted. Unloading to ENWP and tagging {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} would seam a reasonable route to go. — KylieTastic (talk) 15:34, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
Minor query, but I'd really like to know. Recently you undid a change I made to the article for Operation Plowshare (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Plowshare) as, if I remember correctly, being 'unconstructive'.
The edit I made was to the following sentence:
"This became the first crater on Earth, definitely proven to be from an impact event."
I had removed the comma, as leaving it in would imply that the Sedan crater was in fact the first crater formed upon the planet. It's not comma splicing but I think it lies upon similar lines.
I understand that new users are encouraged to make edits in a sandbox, but this seems unnecessary when correcting a small yet obvious grammatical error. In this case I fail to see exactly how it is unconstructive.
Hi81.148.241.90, ok I will Assume good faith that you really didn't realise what you had done - please see the 'diff' of your edit adding "Channing Tatum and his friends" and "... friend friend friend friend..." etc. If you did not do this on purpose then I assume you have one of those 'fun' browser extensions that mucks with text? If so you would not be the first, but please do not edit while such a thing is enabled. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 21:59, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
New Page Review needs your help
Hi KylieTastic,
As an AfC reviewer you're probably aware that a new user right has been created for patrolling new pages (you might even have been granted the right already, and admins have it automatically).
Since July there has been a very serious backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed of over 14,000 pages, by far the worst since 2011, and we need an all out drive to get this back down to just a few hundred that can be easily maintained in the future. Unlike AfC, these pages are already in mainspace, and the thought of what might be there is quite scary. There are also many good faith article creators who need a simple, gentle push to the Tea House or their pages converted to Draft rather than being deleted.
Although New Page Reviewing can occasionally be somewhat more challenging than AfC, the criteria for obtaining the right are roughly the same. The Page Curation tool is even easier to use than the Helper Script, so it's likely that most AfC reviewers already have more than enough knowledge for the task of New Page Review.
It is hoped that AfC reviewers will apply for this right at WP:PERM and lend a hand. You'll need to have read the page at WP:NPR and the new tutorial.
Congratulations, KylieTastic! You're receiving this barnstar of merit because you recently crossed the 5,000 classification threshold using STiki.
We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool.
We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and Ugog Nizdast (talk) 05:38, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, KylieTastic. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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.
I as the author of his bio am associated with the companies he has worked for and the persons linked in the article can attest to the validity of the information. If further references are needed i can add those, plus his career is active and as such more content is to be added regularly. I understand what is required but i also see pages like the one for Ray Gonzalez Jr. who has a very short career and as such very little information, tey that one was approved.
HiHavocWWC the Other stuff exists reasoning is never a good one, it is almost always likely to get the 'other' targeted for not being up to standard rather than helping your own. The Ray González Jr. article does have 14 references even if they are all from the same source and not exactly a good one. I'm not going to suggest it's deleted as I'm generally an Inclusionist, just concentrate on adding as many sources to your article as you can find to show notability. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 23:13, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
HIKylieTastic, sorry is my attempted explanation came out with something like the Other stuff exists. I decided to do more research regarding the data i submitted and provided as many references as i could find. Hopefully it should meet the guidelines now. I tried to use different sources guessing it would be more reliable that way. If i need to add more references i will — Preceding unsigned comment added by HavocWWC (talk • contribs) 00:09, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
HiHavocWWC no worries, your doing everything fine, just learning as we all have the Wikipedia ways and policies. I see you've already added several other sources so a good positive move. I'm going off-line now but just wanted to reply and say your doing exactly what the Articles for creation system is designed for. It's an iterative process that hopefully ends up in a new article that your proud of creating and is good for our readers. All the best, and happy editing KylieTastic (talk) 00:42, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Request on 00:00:15, 23 November 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Ron Boat
Kylie, this article is being written by people in Ron Boat's office and industry. Information is accurate and verifiable if anyone takes the time to read reviews etc. A blog appearing on a third party was removed from the bio even though it should be considered verification that RB is a contributor and writer totally unrelated to the blog's owner other than being a contributor. His 45 year career is as note worthy as some others found on your site and we wanted to submit it as testimony to his work with major corporations, major medical groups and independent entities.
Someone mentioned that actors can't use IMDB as a reference but it's there for some. any suggestions?
HiRon Boat as you say that this account is "being written by people in Ron Boat's office and industry" then you should stop - see WP:NOSHARING, also you need to read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest before editing for "Ron Boat" under any account. The subject may or may not be WP:NOTABLE but to show this the article need to be properly referenced not just a link to a Google search - see Help:Referencing for beginners. As for the IMDB, yes it is not considered areliable sources that is independent of the topic as anyone can edit it. However it can be a secondary source hence you'll find on many articles. However as you've stated your in breach of our WP:NOSHARING policy you should no longer edit on this account as it also seam that the intent was to promote and thus see the policy WP:PROMOTION. To be clear I'm sure your intent was good, but this is not what Wikipedia is for (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not). All the best KylieTastic (talk) 00:37, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Sony Entertainment Television Logo 2016.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Sony Entertainment Television Logo 2016.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:52, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
I am the founder of the company and the chief designer of the HSR.
Links to our company webpage and to the Fb and Linkedin platforms have been added, as well as a reference to a book which, among others, also talks about our company.
I hope this will be enough to get the article published.
HiTyphon Antaeus, Wikipedia has a number of policies that you need to be aware of. Firstly "Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic" (see WP:42) so adding the company web page, FB and Linked-In fails to show Notability as they are neither reliable sourcesorindependent. Secondly Wikipedia is not for organisations or people to publish about themselves as Wikipedia is not a web host (WP:NOTWEBHOST) or for promotion (WP:NOTPROMOTION) - see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for for full list of what we are not. Finally as you state that you are the "founder of the company" then the policy Wikipedia:Conflict of interest applies... in summary, editing with a COI is strongly discouraged and highly scrutinised. Hope that explains things, Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:16, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Norwich Medical School
Hi, You keep on reverting the section of "Achievements" on Norwich Medical School. Could you stop or give a reasonable explanation?
HiDrjosh c1234, as per my edit summaries the information is promotional (see WP:PROMOTION) and has no independentreliable sources. All claims on Wikipedia should be sourced using reliable sources that are independent of the topic. This is especially true for certain information including anything promotional in nature. Claims such as "Medical school was rated 1st of all UK medical schools for preparing its junior doctors for work" needs independent sources not the institutions own website. Most organisations have websites saying they a great, some are honest some are not, that is why Wikipedia expects reliable sources that are independent of the topic. Also as you have only made edits to this topic and only very positive information I would guess you are also editing in conflict with our policy on Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. I hope that explains things more clearly. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 21:33, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
09:39:46, 24 November 2016 review of submission by Zsmithzdlgs2
I'm confused as to why this article was rejected. A less substantial, and less well-sourced, version of it already exists, and has been accepted, on the Italian Wikipedia. This article uses one of the same sources I used, which in my article was rejected as insufficiently authoritative. Nesbett, being an English composer, is more notable to English readers than he is to Italians, so if the Italian article was accepted then why was mine (which was more relevant and better-referenced) rejected? If someone can explain the difference in policy regarding the English and Italian Wikipedias' different standards for notability and different definitions of a valid source, that would be great, as I currently can't understand it. Zsmithzdlgs2 (talk) 09:46, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
HiZsmithzdlgs2, differnt langauge Wikipedias have different policies. I belive in general most other languages have lower standards, much as English Wikipedia did in the early days. Your article was not "rejected as insufficiently authoritative" but as it failed to show notability - to quote the notice "Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". English Wikipedia has two main relevant notabilty standards for this article Wikipedia:Notability (music) and Wikipedia:Notability (people). Your sources do show they existed but not that what they did was notable unless appearing in the Eton Choirbook is a higher acolaid than I understand (music is not my area of expertise). I would suggest looking for any aditional information and sources, or if you wish you could re-submit for a second opinion, or maybe ask for feedback at WikiProject Classical music. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:14, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Wow. That honestly surprises me about the different criteria, but OK. It produces a very counterintuitive result! Whether the Choirbook is a significant thing on its own is a matter of opinion; to people interested in early English music it's comparable to the Dead Sea Scrolls, but to the wider world it's completely unheard-of. It's not an *award* that would prove notability by itself (like a Nobel Prize or Oscar would, or being listed in one of Time's lists of influential people), but it was a collection of music put together when publishing was not quick, cheap or easy - so *at the time* Nesbett's stuff was clearly notable enough to be included for publication. I won't labour the point; I accept that in the grand scheme of things the whole field of early music is quite niche, so I'm at a disadvantage in terms of "notability" before I even start writing about it. I actually asked in the IRC channel as well and was advised to try and find something from JSTOR to give a more solid scholarly basis. I'll try that - and if I can't find anything, then I guess I'll have to accept that there isn't (yet) enough scholarship of Nesbett, which I suppose would answer the question of his notability. Thanks Zsmithzdlgs2 (talk) 10:41, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
HiZsmithzdlgs2, yes I was surprised that their wasn't more standaisation between languages when I started editing, but most polices are all locally evolved. I guess the language barrier would make it a hard to do. However I just wanted to say that it does not really matter if its a niche subject or else we would just be a site of popular media and celebrity pages (what a horrible thought). If the Choirbook is comparable to the Dead Sea Scrolls then yes his inclusion would be quite notable. I would certinaly say that if you can find any other sources it would definetly be worth re-submitting, he is certinaly of some note. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 11:03, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Regards,
Lyoko_x — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lyoko x (talk • contribs) 10:24, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
HiLyoko x, unfortunately I can not see deleted articles so I'm just going on memory - the article was deleted because it did not have enough references from reliable sources that are independent of the topic to show notability (relevant policy Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)). If other similar articles exist linked to Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur then they either have to meet the policy standards or can also be flagged for deletion. I have not got the time to review then but both Team KART and Entrepreneurship Cell, IIT Kharagpur have a number of references from a number of sources. I suggest if you want to try again use the Wikipedia:Articles for creation method and then you can work on getting the article up to our policy standards without risk of deletion. If you want to do this then you could ask the administrator (RHaworth) who actually deleted the page to restore a copy to the draft area for you to work on. Hope that helps explain things, Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:30, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
hi
I saw that you edited my edits on the page of Guru Gobind Singh Ji and on Guru Granth Sahib Ji. I am not a pro and that is the reason I deleted the pictures by mistake. I would want you to help me to add "Ji" after the name of the text which appears under the image as Ji is used to give respect in India. Next was the removal of death. Dear Sir may I request you to please consider that Guru Gobind Singh Ji is our Guru. We never use the word "died" for a Guru as a Guru never dies. He attains immortality. So please let this be there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paramdeeptung (talk • contribs) 16:55, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
HiParamdeeptung don't worry about not being a pro we all have to learn - but I suggest you just look at your edits after you have done them, the pages were covered with broken red-links. "Ji" appears to be a honorific title and we have a policy on not overusing them - see MOS:HONORIFIC. As for death vs attaining immortality this is an Encyclopaedia and as such it is a fact that people die (at least in this existence) but "attaining immortality" would appear to be a matter of opinion. To be encyclopaedic you could change it so that is says both, i.e. person _____ died (some date) but the followers of _____ believe that they have attained immortality. Lastly in your edit here you changed the parameters of the infobox from "death_date"/"death_place" to "immortality_date"/"immortality_place" - parameters of templates are 'code' not visible text to readers and all you did was effectively delete the information. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 20:24, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi Kylie..Thank you for your response on the page!...I think I know what to do to correct the problem. Should I be adding {{ }} before and after each reference source. All the best!
HiRunman826, sorry no it's not as simple as adding {{ }}. Firstly in-line citations are not added by just adding [x] but by the mark-up <ref> reference contents</ref>. The easiest basic way to add a reference is just to add the url in the ref tags like: <ref>http://your-url-to-your-source</ref>. Or you use the various citation templates to add more details such as <ref>{{cite web|title=My source Title|url=htttp://mysourceurl.com|accessdate=24 November 2016}}</ref> however the easiest way to add these more complex references is to use the refToolbar (see Help:Referencing for beginners where that section has a video if its not clear). Your reference in the reference section do not actually have the urls to the source otherwise I would sort one out as an example. Give it a try and if you run in to difficulty ask for help either here or as I'm only around some of the time ask at the Wikipedia Teahouse where lots of experienced editors help out new editors. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:52, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi KylieTastic. Thank you for your notes! I took your advice and watched the video on properly citing sources and made the correct changes. (Runman826 (talk) 20:58, 24 November 2016 (UTC))
HiRunman826, no worries. I've moved the refs into the place-holder positions you left (with this edit). The Wiki software then generates the [1 etc links to the references that are then listed in the reference section. It does this by having the template {{reflist}} in the references section. FYI anything in double curly brackets {{ }} is a template that does extra work for you just like the cite web ones you added. You can see the info on templates for instance for cite web in the Template area i.e. Template:Cite web. If your happy with the changes hit the RESUBMIT button on the article and it will be added to the review list again, I'm going offline as I've been working way to many hours and I need a break from computer screens. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 21:23, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Discourse
Discourse is a new generation of discussion with different features and capabilities that are rapidly changing, so the versions should be included within the wikipedia website as an abstract. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.129.96.217 (talk) 02:29, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
New Page Review - newsletter
Hello KylieTastic,
Breaking the back of the backlog
We now have 810 New Page Reviewers! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog. Now it's time for action. Mid July to 01 Oct 2016
If each reviewer does only 10 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
Let's get that over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.
Second set of eyes
Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work. Read about it at the new Monitoring the system section in the tutorial.
Getting the tools we need - 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey: Please vote
With some tweaks to their look, and some additional features, Page Curation and New Pages Feed could easily be the best tools for patrollers and reviewers. We've listed most of what what we need at the 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey. Voting starts on 28 November - please turn out to make our bid the Foundation's top priority. Please help also by improving or commenting on our Wishlist entry at the Community Wishlist Survey. Many other important user suggestions are listed at at Page Curation.
Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
.
Removal of Image: Lesser Slave River
Hi there,
I notice that my image of a gateway sign for the Municipal District of Lesser Slave River keeps getting deleted and replaced with a defaced version of the sign. I believe the contention is that the logo on the image is copyrighted. However, I am the legal owner of the copyright as I am the logo's creator. I thought I had provided all the fair use sign-offs when I uploaded the image to Wikipedia. Is there any way for me to upload the correct image in place of the defaced one?
My main concern with the defaced image being on the Municipal District of Lesser Slave River's Wikipedia page is that this image does not fairly or accurately represent the municipality's gateway signage.
I am a Wikipedia novice, so any assistance you could provide would be greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sean Mellis (talk • contribs) 15:37, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
HiSean Mellis I'm not surprised you are confused - many copyright issues are confusing and looking into this one I'm confused. Firstly note that WikiMedia Commons and English Wikipedia are sister project but not the same and have different rules. All material on Commons has to have a suitable free licence and as a copyright holder you can not just give limited access to use on Wikipedias. What I don't understand is why the current image c:File:Lesser slave river MD sign.jpg has been deemed OK your vandalism free version is not. I'm assuming that because the logo is vandalised it is deemed not the logo and thus not copyrighted. The problem is because of Freedom of panorama in Canada laws. So, if my understanding is correct (and you would have to confirm by talking to the commons people such as Revent who left you the last message on your commons talk page (User_talk:Sean_Mellis) you could choose to freely licence the image by using c::Email templates or possibly it may be ok to upload locally to English Wikipedia under 'faire use' i.e. Wikipedia:Non-free content but I'm not sure so I would suggest asking at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Hope that helps explain things. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 16:04, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
@Sean Mellis: The logo is already in the infobox, with the proper licenses, so I don't understand why you assert that the boundary sign has to be in the infobox. I don't even think that boundary signs should be in the infobox, they're not an accurate representation of the community. Since I assume you live in the MD of Lesser Slave River, you must know of a beautiful location that can represent the community, I'm thinking Athabasca River, or Lesser Slave Lake. I'll ask you again to take a picture of it, and upload that. But until then, all we have uploaded of the MD is the boundary sign that someone took. 117Avenue (talk) 19:30, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for PROD-ing it. I've had it on watch since it was first created to see if the creator would improve it before proposing deletion. I can see why they haven't. I looked myself and there is zero coverage apart from one or two passing mentions in local papers. If the PROD is removed, I'll take it to AfD. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:03, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
HiVoceditenore, I had a look as well and could not see any coverage - frankly it just looks like promotion. I agree if they don't add any refs and the PROD is removed just AfD it. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 16:09, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Raddatz
If I provide a link to the video showing her crying on national TV, would that be enough? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.100.131.106 (talk) 05:07, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I've just seen the clip and yes it's not what you expect of a professional, however the statement "Her lack of impartiality was further shown" would appear to be speculative. Impartiality should be judged on what people say and/or actions they take, not speculation on the reason someone is emotional. Also your edit said "after Trump won" which was not true, he just looked likely to win at 244 to 215 (on screen at the time). So a more accurate statement would be that she became clearly emotional during election coverage when Trump was close to winning the presidency. Oh and yes you should always have a source for such statements. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 12:49, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
So, any mentioning of her acting unprofessionally, even with the video, would be inappropriate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.100.131.106 (talk) 04:38, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I'm not sure - it was certainly an incident that was unusual so could be mentioned however the tone needs to be neutral. I would suggest maybe posting a suggested addition with a link on the artcile talk page to get feedback. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:03, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Including this sentence could make WP appear as unprofessional as is being alleged, no? YBG (talk) 16:46, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Letters To James Cameron
I wrote letters to James Cameron that will tell James Cameron to never make Avatar2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:7830:6B9:BC0A:889E:548D:7277 (talk) 16:24, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
It's not vandalism for James Cameron to never make Avatar2, because I wrote to James Cameron that will tell James Cameron to never make Avatar2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:7830:6B9:BC0A:889E:548D:7277 (talk) 16:30, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Hey Kylie - I saw the recommendations you made and tried to clean up the content and updated a bunch of sources (37 in total now, mostly news organizations and published books). Please let me know if there are any other changes I should make. This is my first crack at this!2601:196:4701:A60F:EC3C:B1CC:90BA:83F4 (talk) 03:23, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I agree that enough has been added that it no longer meets the criteria for a speedy A7 delete. However most of the references only mention in passing so it may still be challenged on Wikipedia:Notability (people). Regards KylieTastic (talk) 11:59, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected
New Page Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC))
BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected
AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey
Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!
This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:
Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.
Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.
Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Uploading Photos
Hello, you reverted my edit yesterday on Next Nova Scotia general election. I attempted to upload a photo of our leader Gary Burrill as the other two Nova Scotia parties had pictures of their leaders up. Mainstream media in Nova Scotia has a bias against the NDP because they are left leaning. For some reason, Wikipedia would not permit me to upload a photo even though I've confirmed my account through email. GlaceBayNDP (talk) 11:54, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
HiGlaceBayNDP, you have to be autoconfirmed before you can upload images to English Wikipedia - which normally means your account has to be 4 days old and have 10+ edits. This is applied to all people automatically, no political bias. Also note that to upload images to English Wikipedia they normally have to copyright free or released under a 'free' use licence, although English Wikipedia does allow some Wikipedia:Non-free content under 'fair use'. If you do have a copyright free, or compatible licensed image you can upload now over on Wikimedia Commons - but they do not accept fair use images. Wikimedia Commons images can be used on all language Wikipedias, and your account you created here will be valid their as well. Hope that explains things. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 12:08, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi again GlaceBayNDP, I just had a look and I could not find a copyright free, or free licensed image of him. This is a problem we have with a lot of people who complain about the lack of an image, they just don't make one available freely and want to control Wikipedia content. The easiest way for an individual to make an image available is to upload to their own website, or say Flickr and label with a CC-BYorCC-BY-SA licence. Also as you have indicated a link to them I need to point you to our policy Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, please read. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 12:17, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Draft:Jack Patrick Lewis
Hello KylieTastic,
Thank you for editing my page "Jack Patrick Lewis" to make the election results work! I really appreciate it!
Would you be able to move the photo I included to the infobox? I couldn't get it to look good - it was always off-center and wonky!
I would really appreciate it.
Best,
HB — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harry.breault (talk • contribs) 17:36, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing listMediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:54, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
.
Hi, well lesson learned and no harm done - but please don't play with test edits. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 17:36, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Ts 14:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC)14:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC)14:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC)14:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC)14:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC)Gioannania1821 (talk) responding User.
Joanne Mitchell
Hi. Do you know what happened to the pic from the Joanne Mitchell page. It's really weird. I think it was something to do with the fact there were TWO identical pictures. The first had a corrupted filename with a [..jpg] at the end, which was of course unusable. I then uploaded a replacement with just [.jpg] which I did use on the page, But this simple mistake - entirely mine! -seems to have led to real comedy of errors! Someone rightly suggested deleting the [..jpg] but they didn't mean the [.jpg] one too. I hope all this can be fixed.Picknick99 (talk) 00:26, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! Picknick99 (talk) 10:48, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Hugo programming language
Hello! We are attempting to improve the article at Hugo (programming language). If you could refrain from reverting it back to the redirect while we add sources, that would be greatly appreciated! Thank you. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lisatordis1981 (talk • contribs) 19:02, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
HiLisatordis1981 then I would sujest you work on it in a less public place such as copy it to User:Lisatordis1981/sandbox/Hugo (programming language). If you restore without any additional independant sources it is likely that other editors would revert. Working on the article in your own area means you can edit in your own time without worrying about other reverting,, flagging, tagging, etc... Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:09, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Will do, thank you for the advice! It is much appreciated!! Lisatordis1981 (talk) 19:30, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Kamahl Santamaria
Hi Kylie, I've just made a number of changes to the page 'Kamahl Santamaria'... including adding third-party sources, and uploading a new photo.
(by the way, I'm not sure why my previous image was deleted - it was taken with my own camera!!)
So yes, obviously I AM Kamahl Santamaria, and I understand the Wikipedia position on conflicts of interest. Is there a way to get around this? Do I really need someone else to make the edits for me?
Many thanks,
Kamahl. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiwimedia (talk • contribs) 08:17, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
HiKiwimedia, thanks for adding some 3rd patry sources. I cannot view deleted images or the file page so I can't see what was wrong with the image(s). If your talking about File:Kamahl Santamaria CTC.jpg it says it was deleted for "F9: Media file copyright violation without credible claim of fair use or permission)" - if you think this was in error you could ask the deleting admin Diannaa. However, copyright is an odd thing (that I'm no expert on) but I think that if someone else takes a picture of you on your phone then they as the photographer actual own the copyright not you as the camra owner or subject. The simplest way to allow images to be used on Wikipedia would be to have some or all of your images on your website labeled for 'free' use with say a CC-BYorCC-BY-SA licence.
As for WP:COI the basic answer is "you are strongly discouraged from editing affected articles directly" and getting "someone else to make the edits for me" still fails for the same reason - they would not be able to be neutral. See Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. If you want more advise, and maybe differnt opinions I would suggest asking at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:40, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
The photo was deleted because it was copied from Al Jazeera or elsewhere online and thus was a copyright violation. We can't accept such photos without express written permission and release under license by the copyright holder. — Diannaa🍁 (talk) 12:32, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Tigers Are Bad For Horses
Hi Kylie. I got your message regarding the edit made on the Tigers Are Bad For Horses page. Currently, MusicBrainz is listed as an authorized external site, and the website Weave is listed on Musicbrainz.org (http://musicbrainz.org/artist/cb18691e-315b-4f4d-8448-59060f5b7bb1/relationships). Weave doesn't have any adverts or promotional parts on its website. It is an information site which gives you everything you need about an artist. Compare the Weave of Beyonce: http://weave.me/app/weave.html?Beyoncé versus her Discogs page: https://www.discogs.com/artist/52835-Beyonc%C3%A9 . They both contain discography, official links and general information about Beyonce. What is the difference between listing Musicbrainz or Discogs and listing Weave? Thanks again for your message, I just would like more information as to why Weave shouldn't be considered a reliable resource and external link for TABFH. Thank you!
Kaufmanlm (talk) 20:52, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
HiKaufmanlm, although it is generally applied to articles rather than links Wikipedia:Other stuff exists is almost always a bad argument. I don't know if MusicBrainz is a reliable source, but as it looks like it's user driven content then probably not (the same for Wikipedia, IMDB, etc.). However MusicBrainz is a collection of set information where Weave appears to just scrape information from other sites, so the Beyoncé link you sent appears to just take the text from Wikipedia. It does not matter that Weave "doesn't have any adverts or promotional parts on its website" its a business that it appeared you were trying to promote by linking from one of the webs top sites. Instead of averts it appears the intent to be used as a way to promote brands (per this). Also they have dubious licensing claims as they take Wikipedia text shared under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike but Weave T&C claim a level of ownership. Your actions are covered by the policy WP:LINKSPAM, and as it just appears to gather info from other sources it's more like someone adding Google search links articles. If you would like to clarify this I suggest asking at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, or you could ask at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/NoticeboardorWikipedia:Help desk. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 21:33, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi KylieTastic, Thanks for the detailed response. I understand how you might think that Weave is “merely a collection of Google search links articles” but I did some research into the site and found the opposite to be true. As you would notice from the Beyoncé link there is a ton of content that isn’t scraped from anywhere on the Web. Apart from Getty Images photos, videos and reviews, many of the sections on the page have information you can’t find (or infer) from anywhere on the Web – such as all her album influencers, all her collaborators, events that she has featured in, etc. There is no Google search that can pull all this information together and a lot of the information isn’t even available on the open Web. Here is the guide on Pop music to take an example of curated information not just scraped from Google: Best of Pop Music. I guarantee you that a vast majority of the organized content isn’t freely or easily available on the Web. I hope you will reconsider your decision. I will also post on the forums you mentioned to make sure I understand what is acceptable going forward. Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaufmanlm (talk • contribs) 22:59, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
HiKaufmanlm the fundamental point is Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia and Weave is not, it's more of a portal page of links vaguely associated. The main text is direct from Wikipedia so no benefit for our readers. For Beyoncé you mentioned "album influencers" but there is no "album influencers" section, and the "Collaborators & Influencers" is just a list clicking on each gives no Beyoncé related info. In fact all the sections just look like lists with no explanation of how (or if) they relate to the subject. Many of the sections make no sense, as would be expected from a mash-up, such as: "Book References & Influences", the dictionary and book of Isaiah!; "Minor Film Appearances & References" "Pulp Fiction" from one year before she was born with no explanation why (I would guess because it has been rumoured that the name "Honey Bee" from the video "Telephone" relates to "Honey Bunny” in Pulp Fiction. Rumour is not encyclopaedic. As for your "Best of Pop Music 2016" again the text is just direct from Wikipedia Pop music (not 2016 related); the "More Info" is just the first two "See also" links from that article. A lot of the rest of the sections are just opinions and some frankly odd ones such as I noticed deadmau5 is the first "Artists With New Releases This Month" but it is hardly what most would classify as pop. In short I'm sorry I see no encyclopaedic value it's more of a general music related portal site, which I'm glad that you enjoy and find useful. So yes please feel free to get other input as decisions here are by Wikipedia:Consensus, but I think you'll find the agree it does not fit our policies. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 14:52, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
02:03:49, 19 December 2016 review of submission by Ffs.Andy
Caught in the Web is a real podcast available on iTunes and Soundcloud, and i was only following what the host of the podcast, Willie Muse, wanted on the wiki article dedicated to his podcast. Willie Muse is a writer for College Humor and doesn't have his own wiki article along with anyone else mentioned in the article
I don't understand the issue with your review of an article I wrote regarding "Johnny Mark". The criteria for notability in American/Canadian football is:
American football/Canadian football[edit source]
Shortcut:
WP:NGRIDIRON
American football/Canadian football players and head coaches are presumed notable if they
Have appeared in at least one regular season or post season game in any one of the following professional leagues: the Arena Football League, the Canadian Football League, the National Football League, the third American Football League, the All-America Football Conference or the United States Football League, or any other top-level professional league.
Note: Players who play in minor or semi-professional leagues (such as af2) are not presumed notable unless they meet another criterion, such as notability arising from their college football days.
Note: this does not apply to assistant coaches or coaching assistants.
For which he qualifies. As a player in at least one regular season game (which was noted in the references from cfl.ca), he is the Canadian Interuniversity Sport all time record holder in points and field goals. Given that I have submitted this article twice, would you be able to be SPECIFIC on what needs to be corrected, as "fixing the references" is more than a little vague on your part. Thanks, Merry Christmas.
HiC.r.nowicki Happy Christmas - Sorry about that, yes I missed that he had actually played finally after the first two signings. I would suggest updating the final sentence to make it clear - something along the lines of changing " played Week 7 " to " played his first regular season game in Week 7..." - I would do it myself but as I don't know much about CFL I will leave it to someone who knows the game better. Sorry about the mistake, we've been trying to reduce the huge backlog and it means not spending as much time as you would like on each article. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 11:04, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
11:08:54, 29 December 2016 review of submission by Steelgraham
I was initially asked to add additional references as when I initially submitted a draft, it only had two. It now has seven.
I (and others) are surprised that no-one until now has thought about creating a page for the subject matter until now, but I don't think the 'time delay' is grounds upon a reasonable reason to decline the acceptance of it.
HiSteelgraham, yes I declined the original submission because it only had two and both just the company website. You then added four more and SwisterTwister left a comment that they were "simply trivial announcements, listings and mentions". You then added another self published source, your second sentence appears to be addressing the comment from SwisterTwister not myself re 'time delay' but I'll comment on the rest. As for being "surprised that no-one until now has thought about creating a page" there are a huge number of companies let alone the multitude of other subjects, so a subject has to have done something to gain someone's interest to create an article. However yes their are many interesting and notable subjects that do not yet have articles, and many that do have articles but in my opinion are of little interst (but valid by our polices). In the end it comes down to can an article be written to meet our policies, and in this case the main one to consider is Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). 3/7 sources are from https://www.digital-science.com/ hence not independent; the bloomberg source is just a basic company listing; the thebookseller ref is non-specific but looking at the first two links they are just announcements of giving small awards to other companies; the fao.org ref is not only a blog, but reads just like a press release; so that leaves only researchinformation.info as a more reasonable piece. Look at the requirements as per Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) starting with the "This page in a nutshell" at the top and you'll see why this is not enough to show notability, you need significant coverage in reliable, independentsecondary sources. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 12:28, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Request on 14:48:53, 29 December 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Carackus
I must apologise for the first submission which was a blank page. I am still coming to terms with this whole editing process. I have invested a lot of time in preparing new content for the article but just want to check that I am on the correct lines and format. I still have a long way to go and I do not want to invest the time if I am not following your procedures. I realise you are busy bit could you run your editors eye over the new content and get back to me with some thoughts and advice. I am also struggling to upload a jpeg of the composers photo for which I own the copyright. The system keeps saying it cannot verify the copyright ownership of the material. My user name is Carackus. Thank you in anticipation of your help and complements of the season to you.
HiCarackus, no worries we all have to learn and at first it is a bit overwhelming with the number of policies. The main policy you need to consider when writing any new article are the Wikipedia:Notability ones which are the rules by which we determine if a subject can have an article. In this case Wikipedia:Notability (music)orWikipedia:Notability (people) would be the more specific versions. All of these notability polices require the conditions to be shown with reliable sources that are independent of the topic. Also note that a good place to ask for advice and feedback is the Wikipedia:Teahouse where you'll find lots of experienced editors and admins help out. See Help:Referencing for beginners for basics on adding references and also note can't use inline External links, Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 15:33, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
HiCarackus I've tweaked the obvious, but you will first need to look at Wikipedia:Notability (music) and references you can find and determine if you think he will meet the requirements. It can be a good idea to just find references first and list at the bottom, then work then into the text. Also I realised you asked about images, and that is always a complex issue. If you have a picture that has never been published and wish to donate it as a free image then Commons is the easiest just use the UploadWizard. If not then we can use images uploaded to English Wikipedia as 'Fair Use Non Free Content' then you can use Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard and just fill out the relevant sections. In general though most information including images on Wikipedia are provided under a free to use licence - we don't allow copyright holders to just allow for use on Wikipedia as this is a free Encyclopedia not a promotion platform. Hope that helps a bit KylieTastic (talk) 15:53, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Dear Kylie,
Many thanks for the helpful advice, as far as I can appertain the article does meet the criteria required by Wikipedia so I will continue with the detail and cross reference many of the links so to verify the sources. I will leave the image issue till I am ready for submission approval. Thank you again for your useful help. I will also visit the Teahouse to find experienced editors and admins. I will also reference other composers of similar stature to see how their articles compare. Thank you again Carackus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carackus (talk • contribs) 19:03, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
HiDesidynamite, thanks for the note. Articles are just re-submitted usually by hitting the resubmit on the last review note - but as you could not do that as it was removed I have resubmitted for you. Luckily we have the review list back down to more sensible levels again < 500 so hopefully I want be long. I'm busy but just wanted to make sure this was done as you had left a message. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 13:46, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Draft:Gregory Ouellette
Hi Kylie,
I have made revisions to the article that I would like to submit. I believe it is ready to be posted. I was hoping you could take a look at it when you get a chance. All the best. (Runman826 (talk) 22:30, 30 December 2016 (UTC))
HiRunman826, I assume all the adding and removing of the message was trying to get a section? The simplest way on a talk page is to use the "New Section" tab at the top-right of the page next to edit or to create a title use double equals both sides of a title. i.e. == Your Title ==. The problem is the external links section is usually just for links to say a website for a subject not articles about them as they are more like references. All you have to do is more them into the place that they relate to in the text and add ref tags around them i.e.<ref>your link</ref>. If they do not relate to the text as it is (i.e. they are more of a further reading list) then you should add a sentence or two and add the ref. I would help but my Italian is very bad, but it looks like that all refer to an incident at the ATP and remarks made by McEnroe and then by Ouellette. If this is the case just write a line or two about this in your own words and pick just a couple of the refs as 4 for the same info is a bit much. Do that, I'll tidy if needed and it should be good to be accepted. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 15:54, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Your edits to my page
Hi KylieTastic
I see you have made some edits to the "Les Penning" page that I am writing , thank you for that. This is the first Wiki page I have written so
I know there will be plenty of mistakes and I look forward to learning more.
I don't fully understand what you have done though. I think you have collapsed two references to a book into a single reference. That looks good
but I don't know how to do it.
There seem to have been some missing "names" but I don't know where to add them
and you have deleted my re-direct from the name "Leslie Penning"
How do I set it up to link both "Les Penning" and "Leslie Penning" to this page?
HiRusselljenkinsfearn don't worry about mistakes we all learn by them. As for the refs see Help:Referencing for beginners and in particular for this case the section Same reference used more than once. I have also fixed the red-links to authors that don't have articles. If the page is accepted then it would be moved to Les Penning, a redirect could be made from Leslie Penning to the same page, but that would normally only be done if they are also well know by that name as well. However first the page needs to be accepted which has been slower than normal recently as the list reached thousands, but we have now got down to <450. It will involve checking that the article meets the standard Wikipedia:Notability (music)orWikipedia:Notability (people) (as well as other general polices). Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 16:07, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Thank you for repairing my momentary-lapse-of-reason in Tortoiseshell cat in the image. Of course, factually I know this can't be done...Sorry for the need to come behind me. Happy you did; the cats seem neglected sometimes. Happy editing, Fylbecatulous talk 22:30, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Reported to AIV -NottNott|talk 17:03, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
