User talk:Traumnovelle

Hello, Traumnovelle, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.

• Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
• Check out some of these pages:
  • Contributing to Wikipedia
  • Introduction to Wikipedia
  • How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
  • The five pillars of Wikipedia | Cheatsheet of WikiCode

• If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out the Teahouse, ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! Rasnaboy (talk) 04:37, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

==References==
{{Reflist}}

Hello, I'm HistoryTheorist. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Greg Foran, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 02:18, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page The Fellowship (Christian organization), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a

Hello, Traumnovelle. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Remsense留 01:08, 6 January 2024 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Hi Traumnovelle! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Not a big issue; just so you know. Schwede66 21:47, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I reused the reference you added to

I think I actually forgot to add a citation myself. But that was the source I was using. I linked to extremities because that's what the paper referred to which includes paws amongst other things. I left the disambiguation as multiple pages there were correct/relevant, although that may be confusing/not apparent. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:49, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes. We generally much prefer no link at all rather than a link to a disambiguation page except in

very unusual situations. Since "extremities" is a common English word, I think it's fine to leave it unlinked ... and have just put that word back again. Graham87 (talk) 09:59, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Kooikerhondje, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for your removal of the spam at Dog skin disorders. However, when you see a bad edit (or several), please revert/undo it wholesale before making any further edits, so the bad edit can be tagged as reverted in the page history I've done that for you in this case. If you see this spam link again, please let me know if you can. Graham87 (talk) 02:04, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't realise it was spam, I assumed it was a good faith addition of an unreliable source. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:25, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at

Draft:Immune-mediated thrombocytopaenia. Thanks! ‍ Relativity 02:19, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

The period would've been a mistake I just simply didn't notice, thanks. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:31, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit, [1], per

Thanks. Traumnovelle (talk) 18:47, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page JFS (school), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a

Hi there! I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted my fix to List of British Jewish entertainers.

If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both <ref name="foo">...</ref> and one or more <ref name="foo"/> referring to it. Someone then removed the <ref name="foo">...</ref> but left the <ref name="foo"/>, which results in a big red error in the article. I replaced one of the remaining <ref name="foo"/> with a copy of the <ref name="foo">...</ref>; I did not re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the remaining instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove all instances of the named reference so as to not leave any big red error.

If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 04:42, 1 March 2024 (UTC) If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{bots|optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}} to your talk page.[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at

Draft:Immune-mediated thrombocytopaenia. Thanks! Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

You reverted the edits I was making to the citations in the French bulldog article before I had finished. I'm now done, having over-written the reversion with the edits I was working on at the time; I think it's cumulative of everything I'd done. You may wish to again revert the edits, since it seems that you are so inclined.
107.122.85.58 (talk) 20:48, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw the broken reference so I reverted, it's fine to overwrite if you're working on an article and someone reverts an unfinished change once you're finished.

Your edit got reverted by someone else this time. I'd like to note on Wikipedia consensus supports using standardised breed names for capitalisation per

MOS:BREED. For example the French Bulldog and Labrador Retriever are capitalised as their breed standard has the name capitalised. Abyssinian cat doesn't have cat isn't included in the breed standard so it's not capitalised. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:57, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Immune-mediated thrombocytopaenia, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

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

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its

grading scheme

to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation

if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation

.

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

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Ingratis (talk) 10:49, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you check the La Presse reference at the end of that paragraph before you placed all the CN tags in this diff [2]? It seems strongly implied that all the information in that paragraph would have come from there. Geogene (talk) 01:01, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I can't speak French but Barry Pless isn't mentioned in the source. Traumnovelle (talk) 01:05, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. Please keep an eye on her, okay? Make sure she doesn't wander off. Feed her twice a day at 6am and 6pm, a half a cup of food. She likes cheese and turkey if you want to give her a treat here and there but make sure to keep an eye on her weight. Panini! • 🥪 20:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cushing's syndrome (veterinary), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

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

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its

grading scheme

to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation

if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation

.

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

Thanks again, and happy editing!

talk) 17:29, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

I broke the reply when editing my comment. Do you feel the inclusion of those three studies in Wikivoice with the figure range presented in the infobox to be fine? I can try and get consensus on the Wikiproject in regards to which sources should be used for life expectancy but I feel that'd be quite slow and have little engagement. Traumnovelle (talk) 09:54, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not aware of any meta-analysis/systemic review of life expectancy data for breeds unfortunately. This the largest study to my knowledge that includes breed data and most of the other sources used are outdated by at least two decades. I'm quite certain the breed encyclopaedias are based on anecdotal evidence given the only studies available at the time are mostly breed club surveys which have much lower figures. I do try and include other studies from other countries if they're recent and have good methodology and I believe I did try and search for one for the German Shepherd but only found a breed club survey with a significantly smaller sample size. I've looked again and gone through quite a few studies and found three of potential merit. This one is same country and smaller sample size but focuses solely on veterinary records whilst the aforementioned study uses several sources: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-10341-6/tables/3 I found an Italian study too: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167587724000412 both of these have merits for inclusion but in regards to an overall analysis, such does not exist to the best of my knowledge. This Swedish study is a bit old but represents a different country, unfortunately it appears the study may be in Swedish: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/1751-0147-46-121 Traumnovelle (talk) 20:00, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Traumnovelle. Thank you for your work on Hypersomatotropism (veterinary). Another editor, Klbrain, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for providing this interesting page on hypersomatotropism. The page seems to be framed around the relevant chapter from 'Canine and Feline Endocrinology', although there are many other sources to support the ideas from there. Regarding this citation, if you are citing from a book chapter, you should include the chapter title (for example, perhaps in this case it's "Disorders of Growth Hormone" by Reusch - unfortunately I can't see the 2014 edition you seem to be using). If you or other were looking to expand it, it would be great to look at this in other animals.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Klbrain}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Klbrain (talk) 18:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Klbrain: it does rely almost exclusively on one source but I don't believe that's an issue? Over time other sources will be added and I will come back as I encounter other sources. I cited the pages relevant to the condition which are part of a larger chapter. The chapter is about the pituitary gland with subheadings/subchapters for specific conditions.

The book is available here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9781455744565/canine-and-feline-endocrinology and the pages are included under section 1 Chapter 2. Traumnovelle (talk) 19:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vaginal cytology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Exfoliate.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed you reverted my edit on the pit bull death in NYC. And I see now that's because the NYPost is considered an unreliable source. Here's another source for the story in case you'd like to revert my reversion: https://abc7ny.com/police-officers-fatally-shot-a-pit-bull-mauling-his-owner-inside-bronx-apartment/14737414/. Cheers. Juliakamin (talk) 10:34, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I looked it up now that you mentioned it, but all the reports appear to be local. There's local consensus to only include incidents with non-local coverage, if you look at the other entries you will see they are either mentioned in a national publication or mentioned in a publication from another area. Traumnovelle (talk) 11:30, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And if you take a moment to google "pit bull nyc" you will see at least a dozen other sources. Cheers, Julia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juliakamin (talk • contribs) 10:36, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]