User talk:Cassiopeia/Archive 15

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.

I significantly improved and added several references on "Sree Parabat". Are there additional recommendations for this page to be published? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gosamb1 (talk • contribs) 00:34, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi

talk

) 00:57, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I will work on the suggestions. Gosamb1 (talk) 06:11, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi

talk

) 06:38, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Noted. Will do. Gosamb1 (talk) 07:01, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

As you suggested, 1) removed the IMDB references, 2) removed the double brackets of the red-ink text, 3) added ISBN information for several books, 4) removed most individual website references of noted actors, actresses and movie director.Gosamb1 (talk) 21:22, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi

talk

) 01:48, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. So, the current references contain 1) an obituary of Sree Parabat in the most widely circulated newspaper in Bengali language (Ananda Bazar Patrika) and includes a photo 2) an article on the writings of Sree Parabat. As another independent source, I will add a link to "Who's Who of Indian Writers" (https://books.google.com/books?id=QA1V7sICaIwC&pg=PA411&lpg=PA411&dq=sri+parabat,+whos+who&source=bl&ots=i0p994ZQDg&sig=Zw_w6nWY34ChzOd8yYLpeeevuUE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiQyITd78_fAhVR-lQKHeIoBh4Q6AEwCHoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=sri%20parabat%2C%20whos%20who&f=false) which also confirms his birthplace. Would that be adequate? By the way Sree Parabat is referred to here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ami_Sirajer_Begum. Please advice. Gosamb1 (talk) 19:56, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi

talk

) 04:30, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for continuing to advice me. You are correct, the font in the obituary seems to have been deprecated and does not show up properly (in Bengali font) anymore, though the author's photo is still there. I will see if there is any other official record of that obituary. I am not sure how I can determine the relative importance of the novels, and is it not proper to include a correct and exhaustive list anyway? One other question, one novel of the author, which has been converted to a TV serial, as mentioned in the wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ami_Sirajer_Begum) that is being currently telecast every weekday; does not that merit being an independent source? Gosamb1 (talk) 07:07, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi

talk

) 07:32, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. I understand. I will see what I can find. Gosamb1 (talk) 17:32, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Gosamb1, I will paste some of the above comment on the draft page, so you dont need to come back to search for this message in the future as it would be achieved. Cheers.09:26, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello Cassiopeia! I appreciate your assistance with the article for Gennaro Brooks-Church. I would like your guidance however about a recent edit made by Greyfell...He was very personal in calling our edits 'crap' and threatened me with a block due to 'disruptive edits' - of which I have no idea what he is referring to.

I have been working very hard wholeheartedly to abide by the policies and guidelines on WP but this has thrown be for a loop and I would rather not antagonize him any further as his comments seem to be more pointed at me rather that the article or subject. Is this something you can assist me with? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jay Bestille (talk • contribs) 04:56, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Jay Bestille Greetings to you and thank you for the questions. The edits made by in involved party, who is also a reviewer, got some points and rightfully so.

1. Promotional: They (in Wikipedia we use neutral gender unless the we know for sure the gender of the editor) were aim to reduce puffery and promotional tone/context of the article as Wikipedia content should be written in a
   WP:PROMO
   for more details. Secondly, information in the content needs to support by reliable source, example, if source doesnt not state his DoB, then it should not be there.
2. conflict of interest (COI with the associate page, and Wikipedia do not encourage editor with COI to edit on the associated pages for the very reason, COI, especially a paid editor, as at times, the paid editor would fail NPOV requirements and add a word or two or some subtle phrases to promote/market the subject (Gennaro Brooks-Church). A promotion page could be nominated to be deleted in Wikipedia. A promotional editor could be blocked from editing if repeatedly /or not adhere to warning(s) and they will might subject to be banned from Wikipedia and/or account creation. - see Page creation, illegitimate
3. reliable
   sources to strengthen the article with such sources from major newspaper. Also, make sure all the pages your have created is written in neutral point of view (plain and fact-based) and all content is supported by reliable sources and do not add (even a word) extra which is not support by source or the word would is a promotional word.

I believe you meant to do a level 4 warning here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:2600:1017:B81E:79A3:DDEB:E898:D6E5:9AF6 Perryprog (talk) 20:11, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Never mind, they were blocked anyway. Perryprog (talk) 20:12, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 20:15, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Most likely. Sorry about that! Perryprog (talk) 20:18, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 20:20, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

		Barnstar of Diligence
		Hi CASSIOPEIA, A barnstar for you for your tireless contributions. Happy New Year, Cheers! Ppt1973 (talk) 12:46, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ppt1973 To get this banstar from you means a lot to me, I must have done many little things right. Got to say, it is always a pleasure collaboration with you in content contribution in Wikipedia. Thank you.

By the way, I have left a message on your talk page and ask for your input/advice, kindly have a look and let me know what you think. Thank you and Have a wonderful new year!. Cheers.

talk

) 01:54, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

I saw you moved this to drafts. I have been around since 2005, but not terribly active on Wikipedia, I take care of the vegetables in my little garden. I have never heard of 'drafts' before, and have over the years (dozens of times) started articles with the little I knew hoping that the crowd sourcing magic would then take over, which often it does. Here is one example--

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mischa_Spoliansky

I assume this new 'draft' thing, means that no one will see the draft so the hive mind functionality will not take over. Instead, I am expected to only create new articles that are already above the stub level? I am only asking to understand the new way of doing things. I don't have much time to devote to wikipedia, and potentially in this new world I should just stop bothering. Thanks Tibetologist (talk) 22:43, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Tibetologist Greeting to you and thank you for the question above. First of all, let me thank you for your contribution and it is pleasant to know you are one of editors have been around for more than ten years in Wikipedia.

1. Article in main space requirments:I dont not know when the "draft" thing started but all articles created need to pass (i) notability guidelines (2) contain claimed in the article need to supported (i) [[WP:SIGCOV|significant coverage (at least 3) (ii)
   verification
   which (v) the sources talk about the subject in length and in dept and not merely passing mentioned.
2. Moved to draft space:I moved your page to draft page as NPP (new page - which is where you have created the page) has yet to shown the requirements needed like no sources provided, the article could be draftified by reviewer - see
   The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution
   .
3. Stub class - Article CAN be created in stub class level or any class level as long as point 1 (i-v) are met.
4. Mischa Spoliansky, the topic/subject you have created is notable but the content has not been supported by sources in most part. The point is, if I going to change some of the content or add some info into the article, such as change his background or works, without providing inline citations (sources), how would any readers able to verify such info? They cant.
5. Verification:In Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and verifiability means that other people reading the articles in Wikipedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source which ia stated in
   instructions on inline citation, and click the submit button on the grey box of the draft page. Here I find some sources might suitable to use - source 1, source 2, Here - stroll down the page and there are a lot of sources indicated which you might able to use
   .
6. Also, pls see below, and hope they could help.

1. Neolinguistics - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Neogrammarians - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. Matteo Bartoli - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thank you and happy new year.

talk

) 05:22, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

It has been decided for a while and the conclusion to the argument was that

Hello! I am trying to get my new page approved. I was originally denied, though I think it was because it was unfinished. I have since added quite a bit more information, links, sources, etc. I am hoping that this page will be approved now. Can you please review and let me know if the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:South_Pasadena_Tournament_of_Roses_Association page is approved?

Thank you! --Schmied15 (talk) 09:51, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi

talk

) 19:43, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Good day I want to start a page, "

Thankyou Cassiopeia for your detailed feedback. I presume this is where I respond once I have completed those changes but please let me know if I am not using this 'talk' section appropriately. I am working on the changes now Bethcarey (talk) 08:23, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 09:38, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

will do - I might have to finish it Monday but when done, I'll 'submit' and let you know. Thanks again.Bethcarey (talk) 09:41, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

another question, when I provide the sources for the competitions, is it best to cite/reference OR link to the article Bethcarey (talk) 09:53, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 09:58, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

thankyou Cassiopeia. I got help from Cyrulla Consultants with the edits and deletions. We have referenced the same source multiple times in the 'body' and then in the Exhibitions/Prizes & Comps - is that correct? Appreciate your help.Bethcarey (talk) 02:26, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 02:37, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

hi Cassiopeia - I have bought Cyrullas work, follow her exhibitions and am a friend. I asked for their help for fact checking of the detail to do the edits required, ie. of the most important exhibitions & prizes but I am not being paid for this in any way. Is that ok? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bethcarey (talk • contribs) 08:41, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Cassiopeia - I have completed your COI instructions, read the links regarding promo, puff and NPOV and reviewed the article again for objectivity. Please advise if it is ok, thankyou.Bethcarey (talk) 10:31, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 12:45, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Cassiopeia - I just 're-submitted' and pressed 'publish changes' as per your comments above, thankyou.Bethcarey (talk) 21:35, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Cassiopeia - I'll read the information on the grading and how to improve it. Thankyou for your quick turnarounds and detailed feedback. It's a big learning curve but your guidance was clear.Bethcarey (talk) 02:23, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 02:42, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure why the bills page has been moved to a drafts section and yet this page, List of acts of the 116th United States Congress, which has nothing, is live. I'm not sure if you didn't see it, so next time please look into more pages that have little to no actual content. Also the 116th Congress JUST STARTED, of course there wouldn't be more stuff added to it at this time. Tl97 (talk) 15:27, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 05:36, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

This is clearly not a article. It's a disambiguation page.

I'm very unsure of what should be sourced exactly. It's just a page to easily find lists of different types of cross-dressers.

talk

) 09:37, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 09:54, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

But it's not a stand alone list, it's a list of lists, with just links to navigate from. There are no people listed only links to list which have the people.

talk

) 09:57, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 10:05, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

18:29, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Hallo, you moved Draft:Docking theory of olfaction to mainspace despite the original creating edit summary of Help is kindly requested to redirect the current Wikipedia page "Shape theory of olfaction" to a renamed page "Docking theory of olfaction. Two recent reviews (references 1 and 2) as well multiple colleagues agree that the new title is more accurate. While I am an experienced Wikipedia editor I do not know how to replace the earlier page with a new one. Once the replacement has been made appropriate changes will then be made throughout the article for consistency with the new title.

The existing article

Please check more carefully when moving articles to mainspace: the creating editor here plainly didn;t understand how to move the existing article, or how to request a move, but that's what should have been done instead of creating a duplicate article in mainspace. Thanks. PamD 09:39, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 09:49, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

But the creator apparently didn't know that the way to retitle an existing article is just to move it to the new title. We now have her article in mainspace as a duplicate article, which is a mess. It would have been kinder to her and better for the encyclopedia to move the existing article to the new title for her, if she can't do it herself (or tell her how to do it), and then suggest that she edit that article. We don't want to lose 13 years of work by other editors. There is no need for her draft to have been moved to mainspace, and doing so has removed the possibility of a simple move to that new title. PamD 10:11, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 10:17, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Could you perhaps reverse your move to mainspace, and ask the editor to work on the existing article, adding content supporting the new term and then proposing a move? PamD 10:20, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 10:25, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I think that's probably what would work best. Thanks. It can be a struggle to get ones head round all the complexities, but I think the creating editor started off by causing confusion talking about "redirecting" when she meant "moving" (well, in ordinary language "renaming"!), and it went on from there! PamD 10:34, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 10:38, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 02:36, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

I have followed your suggestions and appropriately revised "Shape theory of olfaction". It is now ready to be renamed "Docking theory of olfaction". However my temporary page "Docking theory of olfaction" has already been deleted so I could not do what you suggested. Can you assist by renaming "Shape theory of olfaction" "Docking theory of olfaction", or is there something else I need to do first? Thanks so much for your useful suggestions. Dolly442 (talk) 20:39, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 02:29, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Please, you should rather use tags with warning, instead of moving wholly functional article to drafts. Mere few hours after creating, you have moved my article "Nikola Aćin" (my translation of ten years old article from French Wikipedia) to draftspace, commenting "It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources" and "Pls see referencing for beginners for info and instructions.". Please, keep in mind that such move is against rules and culture of Wikipedia. Verifiability is not matter of inline references (which I intended to put anyway as I always do)! You already have detailed author's bibliography and discography (including major French publishers like Casterman), dozens of easily verifiable public facts, as well as authority control which confirms almost all main data from the article: Virtual International Authority File, ISNI, Catalogue général du Bibliothèque nationale de France, IdRef (Identifiants et Référentiels pour l'Enseignement supérieur et la Recherche) etc! In that case it is already referenced from the highest authority, and you cannot remove quite completed article from the main space as a "draft". According the rules and our customs you may only tag it with a warning. Sincerely, --Stripar (talk) 18:11, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

reliable sources

such as professional published mainstream academic or journalists sources, where by the sources talk about the subject in detail and and in length but independent of the subject. Discography, listing, interview, press releases, IMBD, home page, user generate sites, source affiliate/associated/ are considered NOT independent and or reliable.

Do note, sister Wikipedia sites (different Wikipedia languages) operate independently from English (EN) Wikipedia and for such, each site has their own guidelines and policies. If France (FR) Wikipedia accepts a page into their main space, it does NOT mean it is acceptable in EN Wikipedia. Pls see -

talk

) 03:03, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello. I can mostly easily agree with you, but you should notice my main points which apply for EN WIkipedia too. 1) Procedure — Tagging with warning is the usual procedure in such cases, rather than moving the whole page. 2) Referencing — Authority control(s) are the highest level of sources with references, reliabilty and verifiability. Inline references serve for particular but dubious data only, ie. not covered by authority control. Sincerely. --Stripar (talk) 11:13, 8 January 2019 (UTC)--Stripar (talk) 11:13, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 13:23, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

I did as you reqested and I have added inline references (as I always do), but being long enough here I felt this particular action (moving to draft) as truly different to Wikipedia spirit and even editorial policies. "This tool /Move to Draft/ is to be used with discretion, it is not a catchall for not knowing what to do with a new page." in Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Or is it some new rule which applies to all new pages? In that case, my apologies for being persistive. --Stripar (talk) 14:26, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

talk

) 15:30, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

You closed this early but with no indication of an early close criterion. Could you specify which early close criterion is met please or reopen it until the full 7 days has run? Thanks. --Michig (talk) 11:32, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi

talk

) 11:39, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Whatever time zone you're in, the close is still 8 hours early. It needs to run for a 7 full days from the time it was opened. Thanks. --Michig (talk) 11:53, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi

talk

) 12:07, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Hey Ppt1973, good day. the source you provide of the above bout here [7] stating it is a rumous and not an official announce. Volkan has been booked for UFC Fight Night on ESPN+ 5 against Dominick Reyes on March 16, 2019 in London - [8]. UFC Fight Night on ESPN+ 7 is on April 20, 2019. It is unusual for a fighter to be booked 2 bouts at the same time, in advance, especially only one month as fighters might sustain long medical suspension and could not fight the next scheduled bout.

By the way, I have created all the redirects, if you want to link to UFC Fight Night xxx, it would work now. Thank you.

• Hi. The Saint Petersburg event is targeting a matchup between Alexander Volkov (not Volkan Oezdemir) and Overeem for the headliner. Cheers! Ppt1973 (talk) 15:54, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ppt1073, I am so so sorry. Volkov and Volkan, where my head was at??.. my mistake. I was a little confuse as the reason above, and thinking it can be that, but you always did very good edits, so I pop by and check with you and you are right again :). Thank you and cheers.

talk

) 16:01, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

This is a former Wikipedian HardSunBadMoon. The message is intended to inform you that a very important fact about conor is missing on the article of forementioned personality which is of very high importance. Notorious was an unemployed Irish plumber in his early life and the preceding statement was found missing by me when i was checking the article. It has also been confirmed and verified by many reliable websites like Joe.ie and BuisnessInsider. Thus, its an appeal to add the information and maintain the class of the article. Regards117.225.107.110 (talk) 16:57, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi

talk

) 05:20, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, but I'm still confused. I eventually figured out how to enable VisualEditor, but I don't see any field into which I can paste the URL of the source article (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oshkosh_Steam_Wagon) as you described. Thanks again. Jelliott4 (talk) 01:52, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi

talk

) 01:55, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi CASSIOPEIA, can you please take the Draft:2018–19 Women's World Squash Championship article and publish it. There are other articles linking to this page and the tournament is in its current season. The article is also of encyclopedia noteworthy because it is informing the reader as to when the tournament is taking place and that its format has changed regarding when it is being held. Finally as a World Championship it is of considerable significance. many thanksRacingmanager (talk) 11:55, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi

talk

) 00:37, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

17:54, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

To the portals project.

Thank you for joining!

The next issue of our newsletter will be coming out very soon.

You can get caught up with recent history of the portal system by reading our

The main introduction to portals is Wikipedia:Portal.

For a list of all portals, see Category:All portals.

To create a new portal, place the code {{subst:bpsp}}[[Category:Category:Portals needing placement of incoming links]] on a blank portal page, and click on Preview.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask.

Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   07:54, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

hello please assist me regarding the draft draft:meri pehli mohabbat. AR.Dmg (talk) 12:10, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi

talk

) 00:40, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello Cassiopeia, I'd like your help in creating a page for my company. You speedily deleted me before and I don't want it to be speedily deleted again so I'd like to come to you and ask for help (or tips at least). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colincabana (talk • contribs) 23:18, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Colincabana, Greetings and apologies for getting back to you late as I am in transit and places that off the grids at times. Good to know you are looking for help. What you could do is to read

1. WP:Your First Article
   to know how to read an article in Wikipedia
2. referencing for beginners
   to understand how to provide inline citations
3. pls provide at least 3 (i)
   reliable sources
   such as from major newspapers / academic journals (iii) which the sources talk about the subject in length and in dept and not only passing mentioned.
4. the content need to writ in a
   WP:PUFF
5. no violation of
   copyright infringement
   - write summaries the sources content in "your own words".
6. go to
   notability
   page and look at the right panel and click on the relevant topics and follow the links.
7. pls click on all the blue highlighted texts on this message and it will lead you to other pages for for info and/or instructions.

Cheers.

talk

) 00:52, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Well, here's the first issue of the new year. Enjoy...

New participants

A hearty welcome to new arrivals to the portals department:

• Emoteplump
• Pakieditor
• CASSIOPEIA
• Venomous Sniper
• DannyS712

Harvesting categories tool prototype

DannyS712 has created a user script prototype, User:DannyS712/Cat links, that can pull members from a category, a functionality we've been after since the project's revamp last Spring. Now, it's a matter of applying this technique to scripts that will place the items where needed, such as in a section starter script and/or portal builder script.

New portals since last issue

What else is going on

There have been some discussions at

DreamyJazz is working on a bot to place links to portals on root articles, category pages, and navigation footer templates.

Portal bugs are getting dealt with soon after they are reported.

Lots of wikignome activity (using Hotcat, etc.).

Keep up the good work.    — The Transhumanist   08:07, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

20:34, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

--PATH SLOPU ^(Talk) 14:08, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

February 2019, Volume 5, Issue 2, Numbers 107-111 Happy February from Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual editathons. February events: Social Workers Black Women February geofocus: Ancient World Continuing initiatives: Suffrage #1day1woman2019 Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage: Socialites Twitter - Forgotten African American Suffragists Women in Red image uploads to Commons Image attribution: Johntex (CC BY-SA 3.0) Subscription options: English language opt-in International opt-in Unsubscribe --Rosiestep (talk) 20:09, 26 January 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging