This 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.
Sorry to see you go, it's been good to work with you over the last year on Arbcom. Article editing is addictive, so I have every confidence you'll be back to that at least. But if not, good luck wherever you end up. -- Euryalus (talk) 21:30, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
I hope you come back in time Yunshui, I've always held you in the highest esteem and thought you were really one hell of a good person. I understand burn out, real life and all that, and when I saw you were running, it was with mixed emotion, as I know the place can chew you up and spit you out. You've never been afraid to be bold, but you are such a kind hearted guy that I knew it would bring challenges. Whatever you do, I wish you godspeed and the best from life. You leaving does leave a void here, and I hope you find something more meaningful to fill the void on your side. Dennis Brown - 2¢23:54, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
I am not even going to say goodbye because I'd seriously like to believe that you are coming back. Well, I don't know what to say but you have been my greatest influence here and I'd have probably never edited here again if it weren't for you. And that means a hell lot to me. I respect your decision and wish you all the very best. It has been a privilege working with you and I hope to see you again. Please do come back. Take care, Yash!06:58, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry to see you retiring, Yunshui, but I understand that real life comes first. I can't thank you enough for all of your support and we are all grateful for your contributions to the project. I hope there will be a time when you feel like dropping back and doing a little editing, unencumbered by arbitration or administrative responsibilities. May you then rediscover what brought you to Wikipedia in the first place! All the best, LizRead!Talk!10:43, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Sorry to see you go Yunshui, This place can be a complete hell hole at times but it can also be a great place to be too :), Anyway thank you for your contributions and I wish you all the best for the future, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk13:07, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm very sorry to see you go, Yunshui! Hats-off for your long service for the encyclopedia, I really hope to see you again, soon! Meanwhile, all the best for the future! JimCarter13:53, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
I wish you the best and hope that you come back. You have been an asset to the project and all of your good work is very appreciated. I hope that your real life is blessed. — Berean Hunter(talk)17:21, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Yunshui, I too am sorry to see you go, and hope that you might consider rejoining the project in the future. I see that you joined Wikipedia just a few weeks before me. Thank you for your many contributions over the past several years, and especially for your service on the Arbcom. I hope that your time away from Wikipedia is joyful. All the best. - MrX23:43, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Yunshui, you were one of the first administrators to welcome me to Wikipedia—three years ago almost to the day, actually! I don't edit much anymore, but back when I did, it was always a pleasure to see you around the wiki. I recall that you stopped by my talk page several times to see how I was doing or compliment me on what I'd been up to, which made me feel welcome on this oft-unwelcoming site. I was happy to see you'd been elected to ArbCom, and I'm sorry to hear it's taken a toll on you. Hope to see you back around some time in the future. Personally, even though I'm not too involved in the daily affairs now, I still find myself needing to correct an article from time to time. And in a way, I find that much more rewarding than a lot of the stuff I used to do. Anyways, good luck with everything in your real life, and in your wiki-life as well, should you ever choose to return! — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler)02:39, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
I am saddened as well by your departure. Our only interaction, I believe, was when you fixed up a move that I botched several years ago. Yet as an observer, I've always seen you as incredibly level-headed and reasonable in the face of our worst conflicts. Yes, I agree, the Wikipedia community can be a depressing bunch, but the principles for which it stands (or for which it is supposed to stand)—that is, to build a free-access, free-content encyclopedia that connects the world with knowledge in an atmosphere of camaraderie and mutual respect—are what inspire me to come back. This is the side of the project I wanted readers (and potential new editors) to see with the Wikipedia:Five million articles message, and this is the side of the project we should all strive for. There will be disagreements, sometimes heated and bitter, and sometimes understandably so! But in the end, the most important thing is that maybe, just maybe, we've improved the world by sharing our knowledge. And with that, a deep thank you for all of your contributions to this project. See you around, Yunshui. Mz7 (talk) 05:02, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for everything you have done. I didn't see this coming but I certainly respect your decision. You've been an outstanding role model and I've appreciated your interest and guidance over the years. Hopefully you find some time to come back as a writer or even an administrator. Mkdwtalk21:42, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm the last one to hear news as usual, but on a personal note I'd like to thank you for persuading me that being an admin was a good idea, writing a good co-nomination statement, and then deflecting the very few opposes with a "move along, nothing to see", and I'm extremely grateful for that and everything else you have done here. Don't be a stranger. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)21:11, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Eventhough I don't know you well, but your wishes touched my heart a lot. Thanks and wish you good luck and hoping you'll return with editing on interested areas. ;) Vincent60030
Thanks for answering me. But I thought you retired! Have a nice retirement :) User:DelugeRPG
Holy macaroni! I never thought I'd see this from you man! Just... Gone! I'm kinda speechless! What can I say that others haven't? You made this place a pile better! You were patient, a great observer, even better at acting where needed, and you took me on to make me better. People say I'm smart, nah nah, not compared to you I'm not! You, are the smart one my friend. My friend... Yun, you're always welcome to drop me an E-Mail if you want to, becuase I'm prepared to be a friend to you if that's what you wanted.
The lateness of this really does show my frequency huh? Yunshui. Wherever you go, and whatever you do. know that the Wikipedia community will welcome you back. I'm sure the messages above make that clear. "Take it easy now."
Yes, come back! I unsubscribed you from the Signpost so it doesn't clutter your talk page unless you're secretly reading them in retirement. You can send me a private message if you want it back. 21:35, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
Three years ago ...
harmonious acting
... you were recipient no. 501ofPrecious, a prize of QAI!
Hello, Yunshui. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.
Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.
In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:
Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you. This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins
Hello,
Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
A new user right for New Page Patrollers
Hi Yunshui.
A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.
It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.
The Challenge Series is a current drive on English Wikipedia to encourage article improvements and creations globally through a series of 50,000/10,000/1000 Challenges for different regions, countries and topics. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are invited to participate.
Hello, Yunshui. 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.
Well, sort of back. I spotted we were missing an article (Jörg Mager) and then had some free time and thought I'd take a look and see how things had been going in my absence. Still not sure whether this marks an actual return or just a sporadic burst of editing followed by a retreat back to hermit-hood... watch this space. Yunshui雲水15:24, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Well you missed all sorts of fun. I had noticed you were missing when I went searching for some help with a particular egregious SPI investigation which did not end well. As an aside I opened a aikido club in Woolich - so based on previous discussions if you so inclined.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:29, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
It's like slipping on a pair of well-worn, comfortable underpants that have been stuck down the back of the wardrobe for a few years... Best of luck with the new club, and thank you for the invite - next time I visit the Big Smoke for any prolonged period I'll be sure to pack a gi! Yunshui雲水15:32, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Pratyya(Hello!) — is wishing you a HappyNewYear! Welcome the 2016. Wishing you a happy and fruitful 2016 with good health and your wishes come true! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! May the 2016 go well for you.
I see from the messages above that you've been busy with that article, making it all German and stuff. Thank you for that! Yunshui雲水16:40, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
That's what I do when I miss a user, instead of lamenting: translate an article by the user to German. Did the craziest things, like a woman (now a man) cycling from England to Australia, or the Dreadstar character. The bell rang on the German page for two days, 31 Dec (pictured) and 1 Jan (without pic). The bell tolled also for Dreadstar, sadly. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:07, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
The Christmas Tree of 'You Do Well' award!
YUN! :D It's great to see you around again! Here, have a tree in the spirit of giving, Christmas, and for the amazing efforts you made in the past and continue to make! Happy holidays dude! MM('"HURRRR?)(Hmmmmm.)14:04, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks - good to see you're still here. I'm not really back as such, just dipping in from time to time... but I daresay I'll see you around in 2017. Have a good Christmas. Yunshui雲水14:08, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
Editor of the Week seeking nominations (and a new facilitator)
The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.
The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?
In addition, the WikiProject is seeking a new facilitator/coordinator to handle the logistics of the award. Please contact L235 if you are interested in helping with the logistics of running the award in any capacity. Remove your name from here to unsubscribe from further EotW-related messages. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235·t·c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:19, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks; both now blocked. Can't immediately find any other potential accounts for this person (I no longer have the magic checkuser pyjamas, though). Yunshui雲水12:42, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
I think you wrongly blocked user Milton42069. It took me a while to work out what "voa" stood for, but "vandalism only account"? They seemed to be fixing a problem caused by another editor. (That said, the username suggests a possible conflict of interest, but that's another matter.) Thanks. --Money money tickle parsnip (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
They'd been creating nonsense articles (which I've now deleted), the content of which was enough to convince me they weren't here for any positive purpose. (It's conjecture, but it also seems likely that the IP who added the vandalism they fixed may well have been them, given the content and the fact that their account was created only a couple of minutes later). Yunshui雲水14:41, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
hI Yunshui, you recently deleted the above mentioned pages. Obviously these Pages should not be in WP-namespace. User:Bettina Wurche (meertext) is a new unexpierence user. I'm in contact with her, but currently it's not clear to me what she intended to do and what was the contents of these articles. I assume that Wikipedia:Telespazio VEGA Deutschland was the Redirect created after moving the Page. Could you ples restore the one of the 2 pages having some contents in the Namespace of Bettine and give me and her a notice. Regards --Varina (talk) 11:52, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, as I said Bettina has no experience at all. I'm active in the German WP, so I'm not very familiar with regulations in en-WP. Bettina seems to belive that somebody has to sort of activate a new article, I assume that's why she moved it to WP namespace. In de-WP we have a feature of gesichtete Version, where somebody with autoreview-rights has first to confirm that an article is free of obvious vandalism, before it's visible to everybody. Is there a similar feature in en-WP? --Varina (talk) 12:12, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
@Varina: en-wp has a sort-of-similar thing, in the form of New Page Patrol, which provides an element of review for new page creations - there's also the Articles for creation process, which allows drafts to be reviewed and checked before being moved to mainspace. In this case, though, the article had already been in mainspace for a while, and had been checked by other editors in the past, so I figured there was no harm in just putting it back there with Bettina's amendments.
One thing that we are much stricter on here is paid editing and conflicts of interest (from what I hear, de-wp is more lenient in this regard). I've left Bettina a message pointing her at the relevant pages, but you might want to encourage her to take a look, as well. Yunshui雲水12:44, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
A cup of tea for you!
Welcome back! I am really glad to see you active again. Whether you remain here or not, I hope this new year brings a lot of joy to your life! *secretly prays for the former* You have been missed by all. Regards, Yash!11:44, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Yash. I was sorry to see that your recent RFA didn't work out; better luck on the next run. Hope your studies are going well. It's good to be back! Yunshui雲水09:41, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Increasing an IP block of yours
Hi, Yunshui. 69.117.250.187, that you just blocked for 31 hours for vandalism, had been blocked by me on 31 December for 48 hours for BLP violations — claiming falsely that Jamie Hyneman had died, had been paid by the Russians, and had been murdered by his co-host Adam Savage.[1] (Other IPs had stated the same at Adam Savage, so I protected both those BLPs.) I see the vandalism you blocked for included another BLP vio. I think it's the same vandal, and I don't think 31 hours is enough, so I changed it to 72 hours. The IP seems to be at least somewhat stable. Hope you don't mind. Bishonen | talk21:04, 10 January 2017 (UTC).
Saw your help me request response here. Not sure why the user removed my response here though. Perhaps they're still genuinely confused regarding how to use talk pages. --JustBerry (talk) 15:58, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
@JustBerry: Not sure whether that was accidental or not - although I usually wouldn't recommend this, it might be an idea to re-post your message with a note to check that they'd seen it (they can always remove it again if they had and the deletion was intentional). Yunshui雲水16:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi, please do not reformat valid datestamps to an invalid form, as you did here. Bots and scripts expect the timestamp to be in the same format as is produced by four or five tildes: leading zero for hours earlier than 10, no am/pm indicator, no day of the week, no elapsed time, timezone (if present) should be "(UTC)" alone, without offset. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:22, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Redrose64 Based on the history, I think that error may have been introduced by AnomieBOT; it was introduced by my copying the decline code from that provided by the template (see the "Administrator use only" section in this diff). I see Primefac has already explained what caused the error. Yunshui雲水21:55, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
These are AnomieBOT's recent edits: 14:25, 12 January 2017; 22:07, 12 January 2017; 01:28, 13 January 2017; 11:00, 13 January 2017. Although they all add dates, none of them introduce an invalid date - either as new text or as a reformatting of an existing date. What you did was to alter "16:12, 5 November 2011 (UTC)" (which was present previously) to "4:12 pm, 5 November 2011, Saturday (5 years, 2 months, 11 days ago) (UTC+0)" (which is not in any previous version). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:53, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
The incorrect date format was part of the decline template which was copied and pasted directly from the existing template. Do you honestly think I have nothing better to do with my time than fuck about with datestamps? If you take a moment to actually look at the diff I provided above, you would be able to clearly see that the incorrect format is already present in the template to be copied. I've no idea why it happened, and I appreciate that it's a bit of an inconvenience, but your tone here - implying that I deliberately modified the datestamp in order to fuck up the page - is decidedly unappreciated. I've just been having an email conversation with another admin who recently decided to quit the project because he was fed up with the constant sniping and bitching from other members of the community, and frankly, I'm now thinking he had a point. Perhaps I shouldn't have bothered coming back; clearly the atmosphere here is just as toxic as it ever was. Yunshui雲水23:16, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Ah, now I finally see the problem. I had Wikipedia:Comments in Local Time enabled in my Preferences. Had you simply pointed out that this could cause such an error, I would have happily disabled it. I have now done so. My dastardly plot to break datestamps across Wikipedia is thus thwarted. Yunshui雲水23:31, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
I couldn't point it out, since I have no way of knowing that you have it enabled. Nor do I know what it does, never having used it. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:36, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi
I have written to the editor and he has agreed to my edit. I have been following S.Aishwarya s website and fb official page. Thanks ! SS 04:48, 14 January 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suswaralakshmi (talk • contribs)
@Suswaralakshmi: Where did this discussion and agreement take place, exactly? There is no discussion on the article talkpage, your pageorUser:GSS-1987's talkpage in which consensus to include your material is visible. Until there is consensus among other editors to include the (completely unreferenced) list of awards you keep adding, it should not be included on the page. Yunshui雲水09:39, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
When someone tells you you can't uses the sources you propose and asks you to stop posting unsourced material, that's very much not the same thing as someone saying, "Please continue posting unsourced material, my good sir, that will make the article massively better!". Perhaps, as GSS says, you should re-read his comment. He is, in fact, emphatically disagreeing with your edit. Yunshui雲水10:34, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Was pleasantly surprised to see your name on ANI just now. A sight for sore eyes if ever there was one. Good to see you again! :D Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 10:33, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Well, I don't have your talk page (orAkita (dog) for that matter) on my watchlist. I don't have ANI on my watchlist either, but I've been following it for the last few days because of reasons (that's a fascinating problem, mind you; cross-wiki block-evasion sockpuppetry with no apparent policy violations on en.wiki except for a failure to acknowledge the existence of an older, currently not blocked, account).
You also missed some very interesting goings-on around October/November. It seemed like every other day there was a literal fascist was showing up on ANI. No earthly idea why. :P
In lieu of a proper barnstar, I award you this banstartiod painting by that disruptive C19 painter Gustave Courbet, depicting three people - including the artist himself - removing articles of clothing to reveal a part of the male human body that is pink, hard, and hairy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shirt58 (talk • contribs)
I wanted to know why you blocked JamesBWatson because "the article" The day god took you home "apparently" they wrote and i need to know if they wrote the same article that i did its really important to me. I would appreciate it if you would respond back to me thank you and have a nice day.
Saying Goodbye Forever (talk) 15:30, 17 January 2017 (UTC)Sincerly Yours, Kimberly
Ps:Dont mind me when i write Sincerly yours i always write that.(LOL)
Well, it vaguely looks as though the editor may be trying to ask why I deleted The day god took you home &/or The Day God Took You Home, but it really isn't clear what he or she is asking, and even if that is the intended meaning, it would help to tell me what further explanation is needed beyond that given in the deletion log ("Very short article lacking sufficient context to identify subject of article") and on a talk page ("Wikipedia is not a medium for publishing poems or any other sort of creative writing"). Nor is it clear why anyone would post a message for me on this page. @Saying Goodbye Forever: If you can make it clearer what you are asking, I may be able to answer. IF the message is intended for me, it would make more sense to post to User talk:JamesBWatson/Open.
Well, Betty My Love 101216 has now created an article very similar to the one previously created by AustenSmith16, so it's probably safe to identify all three of these accounts. It is evidently someone who thinks that Wikipedia is the place to publish original "poetry". The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 17:17, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Nothing productive coming out of this suite of accounts, and based on the comments from Betty My Love 101216 I can't see that changing any time soon, so I've blocked the lot. Yunshui雲水10:24, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Paid Employer contents: Infoempresa
Many thanks Yunshui. I have done in coherence with your recommendation and I have uploaded on my user page
This user, in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, discloses that he has been paid by Infoempresa for his contributions to Wikipedia.
. In this sense, I have drafted a shorter, neutral and promotional free content on my sandbox through rough solid impartial references, not promoted by Infoempresa. Please, I would be really grateful if you could give me advice on how to improve/adapt this content for it to match your criteria, since I have received a new speedy deletion warning and I do not really understand how to go on from here. I really want to stick with Wikipedia´s criteria. Many thanks. Clara (Clara de las Heras (talk) (09:40, 18 January 2017 (UTC))
HiClara de las Heras. I'll start by saying that I personally have very little interest in articles about companies, and since there appear to be no reliable sources in English that discuss Infoempresa I'm not in a position to assess it's notability. However, as general rules of thumb for writing about a company, you need to provide neutral information that has been reported in independent, reliable sources. That means you should only add content about the company if a source which is not connected with the company has reported it. For example, you can't use the company's own website as a source for information about its product offerings, nor can you use press releases (even if they are reprinted in a reliable medium) to support statements in the article.
You should avoid lists of products or services, unless the products or services have been reported on in independent sources. You should also avoid any language that reads as though it could have come from the company's own marketing team. To take a small example from your draft:
History: Launched by Telecoming on October, 2014, Infoempresa.com addresses the need of information mechanisms within the Spanish company sector. The service operates through an automatic information tool aimed at providing financial information access. It’s targeted for business engagements, through directories, reports and financial data on both directors and firms. On June, 2015, Infoempresa.com launched its Map of Directors, a service which explores the connections links amongst executives and companies. Spanish media recognized it as the “Business Google Maps”. The tool applies cartographic representations in order to portray the influence amongst the Spanish business ecosystem.
This is mostly information designed to make the company look good, rather than to report its history. If we strip out the promotional text, we are left with two statements that actually reflect the company's history. The entire paragraph can be rewritten as:
History: The website Infoempresa.com was launched by Telecoming in October 2014. In June 2015, the site produced a Map of Directors, which uses cartographic representation to show influence within Spanish businesses.
To be honest, there's a school of thought which says that a specific feature launch doesn't really qualify as part of the company history, so in fact the paragraph could be trimmed back to:
History: The website Infoempresa.com was launched by Telecoming in October 2014.
Awards should be left out, unless the award itself is notable (i.e. has its own Wikipedia page). The same goes for membership of professional bodies; if Wikipedia doesn't have an article about the group the company belongs to, it's safe to say you don't need to mention it in the article.
It is also worth noting that, under Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy, you should not be trying to create this article at all. If you believe Infoempresa is a suitable topic for Wikipedia, the correct course of action would be to list it at Requested Articles, so that a user who does not have a conflict of interest can create it. If/when that happens, you are also advised not to edit the article directly, but to use the Edit Request process to request any changes you deem necessary. Directly editing an article with which you have a conflict of interest, particularly if you are being paid to do so, is very strongly discouraged, and is unlikely to end up working out well for you, your client, or Wikipedia. Yunshui雲水10:07, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Many thanks, for all your input, I will most certainly stick to your extremely valuable advice. It has been really useful. In this regard, since you or other editors do not have any conflict of interest with Infoempresa it would be extremely useful then that someone else could edit the page through their impartial view point, because I understand that since I have followed teh instructions and disclosed to be a paid employee, there is no real chance for me to be able to upload this page.
Is this allowed? Can I proceed in this direction? I really feel stuck and I am not that familiar with how this operates. (Clara de las Heras (talk) (10:31, 18 January 2017 (UTC))
(Clara de las Heras (talk)
Paid editing is generally frowned upon on the English Wikipedia, and article creation with a conflict of interest even more so. You can continue working on the page in your sandbox and potentially submit it via Articles for Creation when it is ready, but I am afraid you are likely to face an uphill struggle - standards for sourcing, notability and language are enforced extremely strictly for paid editors. Yunshui雲水10:57, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Teahouse
Hello, I'm writing to let you know that I hope you're not upset that I contradicted you at the WP:THQ, I just happened to know about the topic being discussed and I wanted to save the guys at WP:RFD some work. You are a much more experienced editor than me so I hope I did not cause any offense. Have a great rest of your day! Psiĥedelisto (talk) 18:12, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
No offence taken; as you say, you know the topic, and it's not as though RFD needs any more additions! Thank you for stepping in. Yunshui雲水10:28, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Dear Yunshui,
Is it possible to have just one person stay in touch in connection to one issue? You are the third person relating. We have a proverb in my country: with two birth delivery doctors, the child is born dead...
So please listen to the problem.
1. Somebody at wiki saw my text and was mistaken to believe it was copied from a stranger source. This is entirely not the case, as I have explicitly informed the two previous gentlemen, one after the other and now I'm doing it the third time!
2.The reason given for the deletion was that of Violation.
3. I am the author of that text. No violation!
4. Since there was and is not any Violation, there is no justification for the hasty Violation verdict and the page should justly and honestly be undeleted.
5. Furthermore, the text involved takes only a small part of the entire page. In this case, the person who misunderstood the text as violation would have acted better, and with consideration, by approaching me first with request for clarification. This could have saved us precious time and no damage to the health of my 82 yrs old most challenged heart.
Please undelete the page so I could continue to polish it and take good care of my health.
Please note someone else talk has been erased by mistake. I apologize indeed. too tired!
HiCorinna. Both my kids had multiple obstetricians at their births, and they seem to be doing okay. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, meaning that any user can weigh in on any topic. We do however, have policies and guidelines to adhere to, which have been pointed out on your user talkpage.
With regards to the specific issue, the problem is that Wikipedia can only publish text that is freely available under a CC-BY-SA licence. Since there is no evidence that the author of that text (who may or may not be you; we have no means of verifying your identity on the site) has released it under these terms, we cannot use it. The page in its entirety also failed to meet Wikipedia's notability requirements, which, in a nutshell, say that we will only accept articles about subjects who have been extensively written about elsewhere. A lack of notability also means that a page will be removed.
As I explained on your talkpage, there is a specific process you need to go through in order to release text for use on Wikipedia - and simply claiming that you wrote it is not that process. I realise that the process may appear frustrating, but it is a legal requirement in order to publish copyrighted text on Wikipedia.
It may also bear mentioning that, having done my own research, you do not appear to meet the notability requirements for Wikipedia in any case, and so we are unlikely to host an article about you. This is no reflection on you or your work, it simply means that you have not been written about sufficiently widely for a Wikipedia article yet. Yunshui雲水16:53, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
On25 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Wei Liaoweng, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a Chinese acting troupe was flogged for slander in the 13th century after they portrayed the scholar Wei Liaoweng as a drunkard? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wei Liaoweng. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Wei Liaoweng), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:38, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Done here. --JustBerry (talk) 16:06, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Psiĥedelisto (talk) 18:12, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
