User talk:Davidwr

From Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


This page last updated at 2021-01-25 07:48:16 PM UTC.

People are more important than Wikipedia.

davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) January 22, 2014

Topics are (or are not) notable. Articles adequately demonstrate a topic's notability, or they do not. A topic's notability does not depend on Wikipedia article content.

davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) February 11, 2014

(regarding oft-repeated arguments) That horse may not be dead yet, but it needs to be put out of its misery.

davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 13:41, 2 August 2015 (UTC) (off-wiki)

Dashboard

Todo list:

  • Look at Talk:Cross-docking
  • Create a "dummy" template to put on user talk pages that puts the page in a list of "IP or non-autoconfirmed editor who may need urgent editing help based on recent edits" The template would "expire" after 1 hour. Behavior during first hour: Add user talk page to a maintenance category that editors can watch. Behavior after 1 hour: Add to a different maintenance category that basically tells a not-yet-written bot to remove it as expired. Basically, this is a not-in-your-face combination of "this editor may need training, OR this editor may need blocking, but either way attention is needed immediately."
  • Check up on Talk:FTWZ#"List of Free Trade Zones" proposed new requirements[needs update]
  • Turn this into a user-space essay on WP:IAR, its application, and the heavy responsibility that comes with doing things out of process. tl;dnr: When you do it, do it with humility, only do it if you are 110% sure you are right to invoke it, go back back later to make sure you were right, and fix it if you were wrong.
  • Propose this formally - DISPLAYTITLE edit filter.
  • Work on this.
  • WT:WPAFC / CAT:PEND - 3,974 pending submissions
  • Wikipedia citation tool for Google Books
  • Commons talk, Commons watch list


To leave me a message, click on the + tab at the top of the page. Be sure to add ~~~~ to your message so I know who you are.




Currency adjustments[edit]

I noticed you advised Trigenibinion (talk · contribs) on MV Queen of New Westminster about the correct use of currency templates. I am looking at his other edits creating a currency conversion and I am wondering if you can look at them? Specifically I am concerned that the templates he has used on for example Costa Luminosa result in an erroneous conversion, the Euro amount is in 2006 euros but I think the conversion is in current US$ which makes no allowance for how the exchange rate has changed between then and now Lyndaship (talk) 15:03, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Lyndaship You might be right. I'm not an expert in those templates. The thing that caught my eye about the MVQoNW page was that the templates were too deeply nested, resulting in some not being "called." In other words, but for the technical limitations of Wikipedia's software everything would have been fine. See Category:Pages where expansion depth is exceeded and the pages that are linked in the discussion at the top of that page for more details. Your best bet is to bring this to Trigenibinion's attention and let him fix it. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 🎄 15:38, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for response. I've looked at the documentation for these templates and find them a tad too technical for me so I was hoping you were an expert. Obviously I will bring it to trigenibinions attention but I fear hes not an expert either! Lyndaship (talk) 15:43, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Well, he got some pretty complicated ones right - or they would have been right but for Wikipedia's technical limits - on the MVQoNW page. If that doesn't pan out, ask for help on the talk page of WikiProject related to the article, such as Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 🎄 15:47, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello. There were only two pages with nested adjustments. On one I noticed the result was incorrect, so I worked around it. In the other one the result seemed correct, but the page was somehow hitting the limit and someone brought it to my attention (and worked around it). Trigenibinion (talk) 23:23, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello. The conversion data is not complete. I have used the the proper year when possible. Some conversions would have to be updated in the future, as they are now providing a rough idea. Trigenibinion (talk) 23:28, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Capturegraphics[edit]

A tag has been placed on your user page, User:Capturegraphics, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be advertising which only promotes or publicises someone or something. Promotional editing of any kind is not permitted, whether it be promotion of a person, company, product, group, service, belief, or anything else. This is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages — user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources or advertising space. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:17, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

A beer for you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png As a German it's obviously a beer for you! Thanks for reviewing my articles and leaving valuable feedback. I am new to creating articles on Wiki, so this really helps. Appreciate your work and dedication! All the best, MSBER Marcos Silva BER (talk) 00:35, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

A beer for you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png Thanks for the great understanding, and for taking the initiative to actually do something with it by leaving a message. Very much appreciated! BartVanLierde (talk) 23:33, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year![edit]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.

Beta test[edit]

As I've mentioned before, I'm have a tool that ranks articles by the likelihood that they contain promotional content. I'm planning to roll it out into beta testing soon. Would you be interested in being a beta tester? Sam at Megaputer (talk) 05:06, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Interested, yes, have the time to meaningfully test it, no. Thank you for the invitation though. If the tool will be making or recommending edits to Wikipedia, please become familiar with the rules for "bots" as they also cover semi-automated editing tools in certain circumstances. If it's a "read-only" tool to identify/flag pages and log the results off-wiki then the "bot" rules don't apply. In most cases if the tool only "writes to" your "user space" using your own login there are no requirements other than perhaps some "paperwork" things like being public about what you are doing. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 🎄 17:33, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
It's a read-only tool. So far, all it does is apply a sentiment analysis to rank articles on companies based on the amount of positive and negative sentiment they contain. The articles at the top (the biggest outliers) are pretty much all promotional garbage. I'm planning on adding a bunch more features to this tool later on, such as the ability to identify likely perpetrators and to recommend a good state to roll back to. I also want to expand the scope of the tool to include other articles that may be the subject of promotion, such as BLPs, but right now I'm a bit short on server resources. There are nearly a million articles on living people, which is more than ten times the number or articles I'm working with now. Do you happen to know if the WMF might let me use their servers? With over 6 million articles to comb through, what we can find is limited mostly by computational resources. Sam at Megaputer (talk) 17:59, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
The WMF probably doesn't have spare resources other than those where some other external tools, but if your tool is resource-intensive they may throttle you. If you want to get a lot of "bang for the buck" focus on pages that are created in or newly moved to the main encyclopedia, and pages with fresh large edits by non-established editors or non-logged-in editors that are in a "company" or "biography" WikiProject or "living people" or "companies"-related category. Another "highly valuable" use would be run it against all "featured articles," all "class A" articles (this class is used only by a few WikiProjects, so it might not be relevant), and all "good articles" focusing on the differences between the time it was most recently promoted to or reviewed (re-confirmed) as an FA, class-A, or GA and the current version.
Long-term, I can see this tool as being one that Wikipedia might want to run against every edit to all "featured articles," "good articles," and "class-A" articles that are in certain categories, particularly people-, product-, and organization-related categories.
If you plan on running it against the entire Wikipedia, you might consider creating your own mirror or running it against an archived copy. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 🎄 18:09, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the tips! You might be interested to know that they tool can only detect promotional articles, not promotional edits. This is because it measures sentiment (Company X is good, or Company X is bad), which is often OK. Only when we have articles that are grossly imbalanced in one direction is this an indicator that there might be a problem. I'm going to try looking for promotion added since a FA/GA/A was confirmed. That idea sound promising to me. When the tool is ready, I'll get my beta testers from the village pump. Be sure to tell me if you change your mind! Sam at Megaputer (talk) 18:50, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Draft: Corey Allen Jr[edit]

After all the changes, what else do you see that’s not suitable to be notable ? Gameovername (talk) 21:17, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Uncle Jimbo wants YOU to improve Wikipedia's coverage of basketball and related topics
@Gameovername: The problem is the lack of anything that does show that this player meets either WP:NBASKETBALL, WP:Notability (people), WP:Notability, or any other relevant notability guideline. To put it another way: Please go through those three notability guidelines, find a way he meets ONE of those three criteria, then provide evidence, in the form of links, to support your claim. "Routine coverage" does not count. "Mere mentions" do not count. Biographical blurbs that were likely created by him or his manager or team don't count. A mere list of statistics doesn't count. Re-prints of any of the above don't count. Also, sources that are not considered "reliable, third-party sources" don't count. Sources that are otherwise considered "reliable, third-party sources" that are merely re-printing or slightly "massaging" information provided by this person, his agent, or his past or present team or league don't count as they are not considered "third-party."
For what it's worth, this does count as non-trivial coverage, but because it's local and because the event is not one that would be expected to be covered nationally in a general-interest publication, it's considered "routine" coverage. Had it been a national-level "best Basketball player in the NCAA for the season" award, that would carry a lot more weight even if it was in the same publication and had the same number of words. Why? Because I and other readers would expect that if he won such an award, there would be a lot more coverage from reliable, independent sources one internet-search away and that at least SOME of them would be "written independently" of the original, not just re-hashes of the same wire story. This is similarly "local, routine" coverage even though it is more than "a mere mention." The other coverage of his loss of eligibility does begin to "add up" but "losing your eligibility for breaking NCAA rules" typically is what Wikipedia calls WP:ONEEVENT.
I went to every web site you added in the past few days[1] except one or two I recognized as being "merely statistical." Other than what I mentioned earlier in this message, there was nothing that came even close to showing that this person meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines.
If this article were to be cleaned up and written the best way possible, meeting all of Wikipedia's standards except the topic being non-notable, it would still be nominated for deletion at WP:Articles for deletion and deleted as "not notable."
In short, it's not you, it's him. He's simply not notable. Unless you can convince an NBA team to put them on their regular, non-G-league squad, or you can convince him to try his hand at something else that will get him enough "significant coverage, from reliable, independent sources" like running for and winning a major-party nomination for governor or something, there is nothing you can do but wait. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 🎄 21:47, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Gameovername Following up - Wikipedia:WikiProject College Basketball has some ideas of how you can put your interest in college basketball players to use, as does Wikipedia:WikiProject Basketball, Wikipedia:WikiProject National Basketball Association, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian basketball. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 🎄 21:57, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Courtesy link for talk page stalkers (and honestly, for myself): Draft:Corey Allen Jr. (should be blue for the next 6 months at least) and Corey Allen Jr. (should be red until he is notable). davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 🎄 22:00, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail Re: Swancomm13 User Name and Subject Notability[edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Davidwr. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.SwanComm13 (talk) 07:50, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

I sent you an email, but I would like to continue this on your talk page, or my talk page, but I am not sure if I did it right.

Thanks for your detailed response, that is making me feel like I can get this page published still. I really appreciate it. And wish to take the necessary steps to get this moving again. However, If I take the necessary roads of protocol which of course I will do, I first have main question; how do I ascertain, that this subject is Notable? Because without that, it is not worth it for me to take all the other necessary protocols. Second, The Press on this subject, is around long before my disclosed company was writing about this subject...years before...so it is not re-written press, from the subject or my company. It is independent Press, save a few. I am willing to go back through the Press with a Fine tooth comb, to only keep the strong ones.. However, on a chat earlier tonight with Wiki Helpers, I was crucified for things like, no cited sources on subject's University Degree, his artwork locations and his described, medium (Bronze overlays) on one of his artworks. How does someone have an online citation for things like that, other than it be reported in the Press, as I have seen exampled by other Wike Pages of Notable subjects, on Date of Birth and University Degrees, cited only by Press mentioning these things. It seems inconsistent with many, many pages that I followed to get to this point. SwanComm13186.96.210.100 (talk) 07:11, 5 January 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SwanComm13 (talkcontribs) 07:50, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Note to self: This was copied from the user's talk page by the user but the user was not logged in at the time. It is substantially similar to the email the user sent me. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 🎄 15:44, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Databarracks - user space draft[edit]

Hi Davidwr,

Thank you for your message and help, I really appreciate it.

I do have an affiliation and have added the COI disclosure on my userpage [[2]]

Before creating the draft I did check the requirements, particularly around notability and quality of sources. I have tried to write as objectively as possible but as you say, I'm not able judge that fairly.

I've created the user space draft as you suggested User:Jsebback/sandbox/Databarracks

Would you mind proof reading it?

Jsebback (talk) 11:43, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

@Jsebback: Please treat yourself as a paid contributor with respect to that topic and edit accordingly. I recommend reading WP:Paid-contribution disclosure if you haven't already. I also recommend using {{paid}} on your user page and {{connected contributor (paid)}} on the talk pages of drafts which you edit and on the talk pages of articles which request to be edited using {{requested edit}}.
I don't have time to review it today and might not this week. For drafts, I recommend using the WP:Articles for creation process to ask for a review. This will put it in a queue. While there is a 2-3 month nominal backlog, the reality is that most get either a "quick pass" or a "quick fail" within a week. It's the borderline cases and the re-submissions that improve "enough to avoid a second quick-fail" but not enough to "be quickly accepted" that tend to take several weeks. I can speak only for myself, but I prefer to review things where I can make a decision quickly, not ones where I have to spend hours pouring over references to assess notability or hours cleaning the page up to meet even minimum editorial standards. I tend to quick-fail anything that's either 1) obviously very unlikely to be notable and which doesn't have any good reason to think it might be notable and 2) anything in the "not obviously notable but not obviously non-notable, but obviously written for promotional purposes." I tend to "quick-pass" anything that is 1) obviously notable and obviously not written in a promotional tone and which doesn't require a lot of work to get to a minimum acceptable article editorially, or 2) where the notability isn't obvious from the title but I can find it in the references within 5-10 minutes, and it's very well written editorially and has no promotional overtones that need to be edited out. Anything else I skip unless I have a lot of spare time on my hands. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 🎄 14:05, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

@Davidwr: Thanks for the direction here. I made the changes to the COI declarations as straight away. I didn't immediately submit the draft but have done so now. I suspect your quick pass/fail review process and judgement probably is similar for others so hopefully this is sufficient. There's quite a steep learning curve editing here so thanks again, this has really helped. Jsebback (talk) 09:20, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@Jsebback: Writing an article suitable for Wikipedia is not easy, even with a "notable" topic. Almost all of the "easy" things that aren't brand-new - like brand-new Nobel Prize winners and other "not WP:Notable yesterday, but WP:Notable today" topics - have already been done. On top of that, most people, including myself, find it harder to write objectively about things they are "close to" emotionally, financially, or otherwise, than about things that we are dispassionate about. That's one of the reasons, if not the main reason, that WP:Conflict of interest exists. For what it's worth, I've probably been the originating author of less than a 14 articles in my 14 years if you don't count "stubs," "redirects," articles spun off from existing articles, pages I made in the "old way" (mid- to late-2000s) of the Articles for creation process in which the AFC reviewer, not the actual author, was "credited" with the creation, and other cases where I may be credited with "the first edit" but the "creative content" was provided by someone else or where there was very little if any "creative content" to start with (stubs and redirects). davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 13:55, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Humor, comedic tastes, and anonymous pirates[edit]

Your comments on my user page are quite hilarious, but, how exactly do you notice when I change my user page? Is my user page like the only thing on your watchlist or something? JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 18:48, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Addizionatrice Dalton.jpg
Blinkenlights-original.png
@JJPMaster: Your user page is on my watchlist, but it's one of *get out ye olde mechanical calculator* *kerchunka kerchunka* *smoke comes from gears* um I don't know how many pages on my watchlist but it's a lot. If you want me to stop watching, or just watch silently, ask. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:07, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
Davidwr, I don't care if my user page is on your watchlist, in fact, please keep it on there, your comments are amazing. Feel free to watch as loudly as possible. JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 19:08, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Asharq news[edit]

Hello David, regarding your last message, the problem is that Asharq news was created less than two months ago, so there are not many sources for me to choose from — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fahadharbi (talkcontribs) 00:24, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

@Fahadharbi: Then wait. Many topics that are notable by Wikipedia standards were not notable when they first existed. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:13, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-02[edit]

15:41, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Cross dock[edit]

David

I have revised the article on cross-dock and the process of cross docking based on multiple comments. Charles has been a great help, but it is time to approve this and use it. It is far better than the existing one?

Johnjvogt (talk) 00:09, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-03[edit]

16:09, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Alicia313Records (talk) 00:06, 21 January 2021 (UTC) Copyrights Permissions questions[edit]

Hello Davidwr,

I saw your notifications about the copyrights permissions for these 2 files https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lawson_J_Maria_Cover.png#%7B%7Bint%3Afiledesc%7D%7D ( Lawson J Maria Cover.png ) and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:LAWSON_J_AHI_AYE_COVER.png#%7B%7Bint%3Afiledesc%7D%7D ( LAWSON J AHI AYE COVER.png )

, thank you so much for letting me know.

I sent an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS and changed the tag with {{OTRS pending|day=21|month=January|year=2021}} on files descriptions pages. I'm not really sure if I've added it in the right place though. Could you please let me know if I added it in the right place?

Do I have some more steps to do to avoid my pictures to be deleted please?

Thanks so much for your time.

Best regards.

Alicia313Records. Alicia313Records (talk) 00:06, 21 January 2021 (UTC) Edited. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:07, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

@Alicia313Records: Emailing OTRS was the most important step. Within a few days they should update the files and remove the deletion templates. Even if they take more than 7 days and the files are deleted, they will restore them when they process the email. They will let you know by email if they need any further information.
On another topic, your username suggests you may have a connection to a person or company in the recording industry. Be sure you have read and follow the instructions in the English Wikipedia's policies and guidelines related to paid editing and editing about topics that are "close" to you - WP:Paid-contribution disclosure and WP:Conflict of interest. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:12, 21 January 2021 (UTC)


@Davidwr: Hello davidwr,

I really hope this is where I'm supposed to reply.

Thanks so much for those important informations. Thanks to you, I've read the instructions. I'm volunteer so there is no paid editing but if I understand correctly I still have to disclose I'm a "COI" The thing is, I don't really know where to disclose it.

Could I disclose it as mentioned in one of the link you've sent me? "2. You can also make a statement in the edit summary of any COI contribution." I go in the article I'm trying to publish, I edit and add it in the "edit summary" by adding this:

{{Connected contributor|User1=Your username |U1-declared=yes| U1-otherlinks=(Optional) Insert relevant affiliations, disclosures, article drafts or diffs showing COI contributions.}} filled with the information needed?

In my case it would be: {{Connected contributor|User1=Alicia313Records |U1-declared=yes| U1-otherlinks=(Optional) volunteer manager, Alicia313Records/sandbox/'''Lawson j'''.}}

And also change the COI on my user page as written on the point 3:

"3. If you want to note the COI on your user page, you can use the {{UserboxCOI}} template:" "{{UserboxCOI|1=Wikipedia article name}}, then click "save". For me it would me: "{{UserboxCOI|1=Alicia313Records/sandbox/'''Lawson j'''}}" And of course just "Lawson J" if the page gets published?

Please let me know if I'm right so I can change it as soon as possible.

Also, I just noticed that you added a note to reviewers on my Sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alicia313Records/sandbox/Lawson_j "Comment: Note to reviewers: The Wikipedia contributor who uploaded File:Lawson j.png in 2016 also created a paged named Lawson j. That page was deleted a few days after the picture was uploaded. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:04, 20 January 2021 (UTC)"

Is this information affecting the new page I'm trying to create?

Once again, thanks so much for your time!

Best regards, Alicia313Records (talk) 12:22, 21 January 2021 (UTC) (edited to put templates inside <nowiki> and <nowiki>) davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 14:56, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

@Alicia313Records: I modified your comment to "de-activate" the templates. This is because one or more of the templates you used put my talk page in the category Category:Articles with connected contributors. See this edit to see the changes I made. Note that there are several ways to "de-activate" a template, I chose the simplest one - surrounding the template with <nowiki;> and </nowiki>. A more common, clearer way to do it is to surround it with <code><nowiki>{{the template goes here|the parameters go here}}</nowiki></code>. This renders as {{the template goes here|the parameters go here}}, which makes it both de-activated and easy to see because of the grey background. There are other ways to "de-activate" a template and make it "stand out" from the surrounding text, but I figure I'd start you off with just the bare essentials. When using a template "as an example" please check to make sure it doesn't put the page it is being used on in any categories. If it does, either de-activate the categories if the template supports doing so (check the documentation that is on the page for the template itself), or find some way to "de-activate" it. If you aren't sure, it's safer to just "de-activate" it. I find it helpful to set my Special:Preferences to show hidden categories, so I know if I've inadvertently put something in a "hidden" category when using a template. See Help:Preferences#Advanced options for instructions.
I will answer your questions later today. Leave me a note here if I don't answer by 6AM UTC Friday. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:10, 21 January 2021 (UTC)


@Davidwr: Hello davidwr,

Oh... I'm really sorry... Thank you for the editing, and for those new informations. No problem, I'm waiting for your reply.

Thank you so much and have a nice day!

Best regards, Alicia313Records (talk) 16:00, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

I won't be getting to this until Friday or Saturday, sorry. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:43, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
@Davidwr: Hello davidwr,

No problem, have a nice weekend!

Best regards,

Alicia313Records (talk) 10:56, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

UNFCU[edit]

Thank you very much for your these useful information. I am new to Wikipedia and trying to learn as fast as I can. I disclosed my COI and paid contribution status. Thanks again for adding the edit request to UNFCU page. Do I still need to submit the requested changes as you advise me earlier. I greatly appreciate your help! Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kerlouche83 (talkcontribs) 18:35, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

question[edit]

Hi, I'm sorry, I had a question.You mentioned my name here I can know your reason, I transferred the photo from Persian to Wikimedia from here.Was there anything wrong with my work that you considered me a saboteur?؟--بولس245 (talk) 14:23, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

@بولس245: You may have just been "in the wrong place at the wrong time" - your account was new and your edits, possibly by sheer coincidence, were consistent with the pattern of edits that a particular long-term bad actor would be expected to make. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:28, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
My friend is wrong. I just uploaded a photo that we can use in the article in all projects, and I copied it from Persian.--بولس245 (talk) 15:31, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
I even mentioned in the history that I copied from Persian.--بولس245 (talk) 15:34, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Return Ticket (2021)[edit]

Why not accept my draft. i follw all your notibility wp:nfilm this is upcoming bollywood movie and is also entry in the international film database(imdb) you can check ref in (return ticket)imdb also this movie is star cast is in also in wikipidia plz contect me in [redacted] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rk2515 (talkcontribs) 17:21, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

@Rk2515: I don't think you understand what "notability" means as used in Wikipedia. MOST films that are not in wide release and many that are simply are not eligible for an article because they are not "notable" as Wikipedia defines the term: That is, they have not (yet) received in-depth coverage from reliable sources where both the source and the coverage are independent of the subject you are writing about. See WP:Notability and WP:NFILM as well as WP:Reliable sources and WP:Independent sources. Also read WP:What Wikipedia is not particularly WP:NOTPROMO. It would also help to read WP:Your first article.
Also, please read WP:Signatures. A "bot" signed your message above for you, but it's better if you "sign" your messages yourself. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:34, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Re: Another block[edit]

Hi! Thanks for letting me know. LuchoCR (talk) 22:12, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

S.A. Quinox article[edit]

Hi, I wanted to let you know I optimised the article on S.A. Quinox, based on the feedback, could you check it please? WikiSerena (talk) 12:39, 25 January 2021 (UTC)WikiSerena

Box Critters reason[edit]

Before you send me a notice telling me to give a reason here is my reason and evidence. First of all this is based on a semi new MMO from the Creator of Club Penguin and if that game got a article then why not this one. Also ik the sources arn't that good but I am determand to keep growing it and hopefully more people will see this article and add more info that I couldn't find. However if you incest that this isn't ready then I will take it down and I will keep trying again and again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LittleMAHER1 (talkcontribs) 17:56, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Another editor has nominated the page for deletion. Discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Box Critters. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:47, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-04[edit]

18:30, 25 January 2021 (UTC)