User talk:331dot/Archive 5

November 2017

Closed.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on The Pentecostal Mission. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. see WP:BURDEN. Like the other editor, you don't appear to have made any effort to participate in discussion on the talk page of the article. MPS1992 (talk) 02:26, 26 November 2017 (UTC) @MPS1992: WP:DTR. I am aware that there seems to be a desire to remove unflattering information from the article. That is not sufficient cause. 331dot (talk) 02:31, 26 November 2017 (UTC) If you wish to be considered a regular, act like one. See WP:PG. MPS1992 (talk) 02:33, 26 November 2017 (UTC) Thanks for the tip. I've been told I might merit having admin powers so I must know something of policies. If you want to discuss this, go ahead and I'll see you there. 331dot (talk) 02:39, 26 November 2017 (UTC) Let's hope that won't be necessary. I'm sure you might well merit having admin powers, but only if you keep a cool head. MPS1992 (talk) 02:42, 26 November 2017 (UTC) I'm referring to the article, not me. 331dot (talk) 02:43, 26 November 2017 (UTC) Indeed. Thank you for finally dragging yourself to the article talk page instead of continuing to edit-war. Wouldn't it have been easier to go down that route to begin with? MPS1992 (talk) 02:46, 26 November 2017 (UTC) I didn't drag myself anywhere and frankly I resent the characterization you have given my involvement. As I indicated, the burden is on those seeking the change. I've never indicated a refusal to discuss anything. When others appear merely to be editing to sanitize an article for the sake of doing so, I will act. 331dot (talk) 02:51, 26 November 2017 (UTC) ... which would explain your first revert. It doesn't explain your second revert, it doesn't explain your apparent unwillingness to read WP:BURDEN, and it doesn't explain your failure to appear at the article talk page until we'd been through multiple rounds of this foolish discussion, as well as multiple reports to RPP. If you don't want to receive a templated warning for edit-warring, then do not edit war. I'm not sure I can explain it any simpler. MPS1992 (talk) 03:01, 26 November 2017 (UTC) @MPS1992: Mind explaining this revert? --NeilN talk to me 03:10, 26 November 2017 (UTC) (ec)That is, of course, your opinion which differs from mine. You are not in my mind and do not know what I am or am not willing to do, nor do you know what I have and have not done. I'm not the only one who has reverted the information in dispute. [1] [2] [3] 331dot (talk) 03:12, 26 November 2017 (UTC) No kidding, and one of them just popped up right here on your talk page! Nice. How many of them do you see edit-warring over this content, as you have done? MPS1992 (talk) 03:15, 26 November 2017 (UTC) We can keep talking about me or we can talk about the article content. I await your participation in the discussion there. I will have no further comment here on this matter. 331dot (talk) 03:31, 26 November 2017 (UTC) Yes, I came here to talk about your editing. I was rather surprised by the reaction. Before I came here to talk about your editing, I had already gone to the article's talk page to talk about the article. As I said, I'm glad to see that after several rounds of this, and posts elsewhere, you also finally found your way to the article talk page. Will that be a step forward? I hope so. MPS1992 (talk) 03:53, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank You For the communication. Yes, I do understand some people get confused by the moniker SEO. at the end of my name, I am a professional SEO for almost 30 Years and I use it as an attorney or doctor use Esq. or Ph.D. No one employs me, however, I do own several businesses as a now hands-off investor and have been a part of the digital revolution since 1984 as one of the first FIDOnet hubs in the state of Florida moving electronic mail for AT&T and the Government. That's 10 Years pre-internet then becoming one of the first internet providers in the state of Florida providing Internet to the Broward Sheriffs Office, Boca Raton Police Dept. and Deerfield Beach City Hall and of course the residential areas of south Florida. I find editing and correcting flaws in WikipediA a way of unwinding and still being productive at the same time.

Cheers Robert DiSalvo SEO (talk) 18:22, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

@Robert DiSalvo SEO: In that case, I apologize for disturbing you and wish you well. 331dot (talk) 18:53, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Business Profile

I recently added an article but was flagged because I had added the services offered by the business. However, I was referring to Safaricom Kenya wikipedia page and found to contain the same things that I had been told not to add (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safaricom). Now how do I go about this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abbaschild2017 (talk • contribs) 12:48, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

@Abbaschild2017: Beware in citing other pages to justify the existence of the one you created. Please see WP:OSE. As Wikipedia is a volunteer project, people do what they can when they can do it, and as such not every page is checked before being posted. There are likely tens of thousands of pages on Wikipedia that should not be here if examined closely. An inappropriate page existing doesn't mean the one you created gets to as well. I don't know if the page you cite is appropriate or not, but each page is judged on its own merits and not based on that of others.

"Flagged because I had added the services offered by the business" is not exactly what I said. I said that the entire piece reads as a business profile and not an encyclopedic article. The page you created has no independent reliable sources, sources written by third parties unaffiliated with the business, in it. You did post one promotional press release by the business, but that does not establish notability. I again urge you to read the guidelines at WP:ORG to learn what merits a business an article here. Not every business merits a page here like on social media. Please also take the advice already given you to on your user talk page.

I again ask if you work for this business or are otherwise associated with it. This is important to know in order to be able to tell you which Wikipedia polices may apply to you. 331dot (talk) 12:54, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

ANI Experiences survey

Beginning on November 28, 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) will be conducting a survey to en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

• https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

• Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi 331dot! Thanks for signing up to to take the AN/I survey. As you don't have email enabled, I am unable to send you the survey link. You can enable email in your preferences, or email me at pearleywikimedia.org and I can send it on to the address you use. Regards, Patrick Earley (WMF) (talk) 17:13, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

@PEarley (WMF): Oops, I guess I thought I had it enabled for some reason. I believe that I have enabled it now. Thanks 331dot (talk) 17:26, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Great, thanks. Link has been mailed to you! Patrick Earley (WMF) (talk) 17:36, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

THANK YOU from GALECA!!!!

I and all of GALECA appreciate your generosity and time in helping our little org. :)))) Blurbadeeblurb (talk) 11:14, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

@Blurbadeeblurb: I am glad to help out Wikipedia wherever I can. I don't mean to harp on it but you will need to review the policies I mentioned at the Teahouse(it also appears that someone added information about them to your user talk page) as these are very important policies. Thanks 331dot (talk) 11:19, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi, 331dot. I believe I addressed the COI concerns in my communication with the other user you mentioned, CordlessLarry. I filled out the form and understand the policies and will adhere to them and aim to be as transparent as possible in my contributions to the Dorian Awards page. I deleted our group's main logo to remove any appearance of promotion, and also deleted information I recently added that is not easily verified for now. I hope that does the trick in alleviating any current problems with the page. THANKS again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blurbadeeblurb (talk • contribs) 12:06, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

@Blurbadeeblurb: Thanks for your efforts on this. I was not trying to suggest any improper actions on your part, merely trying to help you avoid any potential issues in the future; as Cordless Larry indicated, we'd rather have people looking at articles than not. Thanks again and best wishes to you 331dot (talk) 12:08, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I totally get it - thank you for helping protect GALECA from possibly looking cheesy. Checks and balances are important now more than ever it seems. ! :) Blurbadeeblurb (talk) 12:12, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Don't Delete Rajballavpur High School

Rajballavpur High School is a Govt. sponsored high school, so it's page is surely not for promotion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ripan Mondal (talk • contribs)

@Ripan Mondal: Hello. Being a public high school doesn't mean that it is not possible to promote it. The page you created talk about the "aim" of the school(which is totally unencyclopedic), describes some features, and links to its contact information for interested persons to use. That's promotional. The article must indicate with independent reliable sources(sources from third parties unaffiliated with the school) how the school is notable. If you wish to properly contest the deletion, click the "Contest this deletion" button in the deletion tag(though as the page creator you are not permitted to remove the tag yourself) and explain your reasonsing and/or offer any sources you have. 331dot (talk) 17:14, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Firebird Tours

Hi,

thanks again for a review of Firebird Tours page.

I wondered if you could help me improve it. The first two points of the review are fair points, however, what does one do in an instance where there aren't many third/credible party sources linking to the company?

Also, you've noticed that the page contained advertorial type of material. How could I improve on this point?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jklfnp89 (talk • contribs)

@Jklfnp89: I've replied on the article talk page; I will make a further reply there. 331dot (talk) 11:43, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Alleged conflict of interest

Hi, I am wondering why you think the Julian Schwinger Foundation of Physics Research is not deserving of a wikipedia entry. It is a charitable nonprofit organization that supports scientific research by awarding grants. You diagnose a lack of "notability" and I would like to understand how you arrive at this assessment.

Further, I am accused of a conflict of interest, supposedly for the minor edits I made to the draft page. Must I conclude that I am not allowed to edit any page that mentions my name? If so, I shall leave the many factual errors in the page about me uncorrected. For the record, I note that that wikipedia entry was put up by someone unknown to me, without my knowledge and certainly without anybody asking for my consent and my verification of the stated facts.

Thank you, BG Englert — Preceding unsigned comment added by BGEnglert (talk • contribs) 12:09, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

I've replied on your page, please make further replies there. Thanks 331dot (talk) 12:29, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Conflict of interest re University of Notre Dame entry?

Hello!

You have suggested that I might be employed by or closely affiliated with the U. of Notre Dame. I am an attorney, but I am retired, and I never did any work for the University of Notre Dame. I live in Dallas, Texas, not South Bend, Indiana.

I have been making contributions to Wikipedia for 30 years. This is the first time I have signed in before making a contribution. Had I known my signing in would have aroused suspicion, I would not have bothered.Atty Frederick Wagner (talk) 14:37, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

@Atty Frederick Wagner: I apologize for the confusion, but in identifying yourself as an attorney and editing about the University of Notre Dame, it appeared that you might be an attorney working on behalf of the University to edit Wikipedia. Since you state that is not the case, there is no issue. I apologize for the confusion. I would add, however, that Wikipedia has not been in existence for 30 years. 331dot (talk) 14:41, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, 331dot. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Notability of Info-metrics

Hello, I have left some additional references on the talk page of the Info-metrics article to establish notability. Would appreciate if you could comment on these? Arnob (talk) 23:26, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

I still have some concerns about the article,(it still reads like a research paper to me) however my lack of knowledge about the subject itself may be interfering with how I view the article. I might suggest that you visit the Mathematics WikiProject and request assistance on its talk page(there are posts on it dated yesterday so it seems to be monitored). If it is not mathematics so much I may be able to find a more relevant Project that you could inquire at. 331dot (talk) 12:24, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Cursing

Sorry for cursing in the edit history, I continued on the fandom meme the user used for that edit and I should have just not done that, thanks for calling me out on that Milliondoses (talk) 19:59, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

You got mail

I don't do spamming of talk pages with blue boxes, but you got some mail. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:48, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

I wished to acknowledge receiving your message. Unless you would prefer me doing so some other way, I will email you a reply; it may be later today or tomorrow(from my POV). 331dot (talk) 21:44, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

I have (rather belatedly) followed this up now. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: Acknowledging your message and letting you know I've replied. 331dot (talk) 19:00, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 331dot, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
• Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

• If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

• A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
• Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

• ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
• The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks

Why, you're very welcome 331, let's hope this gets this situation off both of our chests. MitchG74 00:55, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing Ucmate Downloader, 331dot.

Unfortunately Kudpung has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

Absolutely not suitable for inclusion.

To reply, leave a comment on Kudpung's talk page.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:30, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Happy Holidays

From Stave one of Dickens A Christmas Carol Old Marley was as dead as a door-nail. Mind! I don’t mean to say that I know, of my own knowledge, what there is particularly dead about a door-nail. I might have been inclined, myself, to regard a coffin-nail as the deadest piece of ironmongery in the trade. But the wisdom of our ancestors is in the simile; and my unhallowed hands shall not disturb it, or the Country’s done for. You will therefore permit me to repeat, emphatically, that Marley was as dead as a door-nail. So you see even Charles was looking for a reliable source :-) Thank you for your contributions to the 'pedia. ~ MarnetteD|Talk 23:25, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

original research

So how is material already in an article and sourced from 3 authors and 4 books original research? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.174.134.240 (talk) 13:01, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

I have no opinion and am not even aware of any dispute you have with Tgeorgescu. I only noticed your crude language and personal attacks in their messages. That needs to stop. 331dot (talk) 13:03, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Name...

Hello 331dot. I hope that its everything OK with you, and I wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. That was not my intention to make you think that I am not honest. First, the reason that iI removed many of the talks is becase im starting to improve my skills on wikipeda and many of 'my talks' where rooky mistakes. Yes i read the message but not seem relevant at the time. I never been in Kentucky, never even heard about WKPD is a TV station, since i live in europe. Its funny because W.K.P.D. are my real name initials....but the fantastic thing is that in the other side of the planet it's a radio...I HAVE A Radio and never knew it(lol). Sorry for the inconvinient 331dot.

You can even check my activity if i have even made the smalest edition on WKPD is a TV station page to see that is true the things that I am saying to you. Never heard about such station!

But thank you for the tips and kind support!

WKPDeditor (talk) 16:03, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

No problem at all. I appreciate your reply and I apologize for the disturbance. Best wishes to you 331dot (talk) 16:07, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Danica Roem

I do not believe a website supposedly completely unbiased should be using female pronouns when speaking of a transgender person. This shows bias and I will not stand for it. VV101RAM (talk) 16:11, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

@VV101RAM: It is not biased to identify this person as they identify themselves. If you have a Wikipedia policy to point to which supports your view, please offer it. I welcome further discussion on the article talk page. Please note that edit warring is not permitted. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 16:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

It seems that someone has pointed out policy in this area to you on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 16:15, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes it is biased, because I do not believe Danica Roem is a woman, as do millions of other people. You are clearly picking sides and your bias shows in your edits. It is a shame to see that even Wikipedia has lost its mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VV101RAM (talk • contribs) 16:20, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

@VV101RAM: You are certainly entitled to your beliefs, and I do not wish to debate them with you, although all humans deserve dignity and respect. However, Wikipedia policy supports the article as written, as another editor has shown you. You are welcome to work to change Wikipedia policy, but until it changes, the article is correct. Please stop edit warring and discuss this matter. 331dot (talk) 16:23, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice on working to change Wikipedia’s gender pronoun and identity policy. However, I believe the way you have phrased your responses both here and on my talk page are biased.

May I ask how to influence Wikipedia’s gender pronoun and identity policy? Any links would be useful. VV101RAM (talk) 16:36, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

I don't wish to debate transgenderism with you. If you want to attempt to change Wikipedia policy, you should visit the talk page for the Manual of Style at WT:MOS. I frankly don't think you will be successful, but you are free to try. 331dot (talk) 16:38, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	For the kind support and to be open do dialogue to new users! Even when information looks like against the newcomers, 331 dot, help with a gracious etiquette. WKPDeditor (talk) 16:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

New Years new page backlog drive

Hello 331dot, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1^st and run until January 29^th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

• The total number of reviews completed for the month.
• The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Matt Patricia

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/nfl/lions/2018/01/01/detroit-lions-coaching-search-7-candidates-replace-jim-caldwell/980500001/

They and the Giants have asked permission to speak to him.

Danthemandtm (talk) 16:03, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

@Danthemandtm: Okay, but you claimed that he is already the head coach of the Lions. 331dot (talk) 16:04, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

OK, my apologies, but I think it might be wise to include his attractiveness to teams and how he's under consideration Danthemandtm (talk) 16:16, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Primary Source for Urinary Incontinence History

Hi there!

I recognize that the source is a "blog" on a website; however, the article is actually an interview with a high-level research and development scientist and Pd.D. in the field of incontinence technology. I am using Dr. Chimelewski as the source. The information he provided is accurate and provides a great history of incontinence inventions, which are useful for historians like me when writing thesis papers. While this article is on a website rather than a research paper, the article is on the website of a major company, which is in the industry of providing incontinence management supplies. The scientist interviewed works for the company.

I am a historian and an author; I'm familiar with the methods of careful research and primary sources. The article is on the website of a major company, and I would consider an interview with a research and development scientist a primary source. I very much feel like this information should be included in the article -- that it's helpful and provides insight into the history of incontinence management inventions. I happen to know Dr. Chimelewski, who is a fascinating, quirky, and knowledgeable man. Do you have any suggestions on how I can get his interview and information approved to be on Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.57.195.90 (talk) 20:20, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Please read WP:BLOGS, the policy in this area. The only chance you would have from what I see in getting the blog accepted as a source would be if the expert has had other work in their field published in independent reliable sources. If that is true, you should make your case on the article talk page first. 331dot (talk) 20:38, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Save Goa Front

Hello 331dot. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Save Goa Front, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Indian National Congress is a valid merge/redirect target per WP:ATD. Thank you. SoWhy 10:58, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Wanna Bet?

was closed by the nominator after brief discussion so withdrawn is more accurate. Unlikely to be renominated.
It appears that you underestimated Shhhhwwww!!.

You may need to review your !vote in light of the re-opening of the nomination. Stormy clouds (talk) 16:39, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Can i ask...

How was that a personal attack? I was merely stating that Medeis was up in arms about calling BLP's defamatory names, in that case Trump. How is pointing out the hypocricy of then calling members of congress "parasites" a few weeks later a personal attack? I just don't get it. I don't care much now that you removed it but could you please explain how that is a personal attack anyway? 91.49.81.181 (talk) 12:00, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

After looking at it further, I concede (and apologize for my initial viewpoint) that your comment was not an out and out personal attack and as such I reverted my removal. However, I think it is disruptive to the discussion so I condensed it. I would suggest that you move on from that line of discussion. 331dot (talk) 12:10, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Sorry but i am not happy with that. How about as a compromise you hat Medeis comment, in which they call BLP's parasites, as well as mine. Now it still looks like i did something offensive or the like. On top of that, how is a sarcastic comment calling for monarchy and calling people in congress "parasites" not disruptive to the discussion? And i would have moved on a long time ago if it wouldn't have been removed for a bogus reason by Medeis themselves. But anyway, do what you will. As is this is wholly unfair to me like this. My comment gets 'marked' as disruptive while the at least just as disruptive comment by Medeis gets to stand. Sorry to complain about that anyway, but it just is not fair to only hide my comment which was in response to a disruptive comment. Hide both or hide none. Anyway, really sorry to bother with this, haha. Have a good day anyway 91.49.81.181 (talk) 12:26, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Deleting my links

Hi, I am Colin Stetson's assistant. I need to add links to his personal websites, but am not being allowed to do so. Thanks.

Colinstetson (talk) 17:15, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

@Colinstetson: First, if you yourself are not Colin Stetson, you need to change your username as soon as possible to something without his name in it. You can do this by going to this page and filling out the form. Using his name as a username, when you are not him, is a violation of the username policy as a misleading username.

You should also read and comply with WP:COI, the conflict of interest policy, as well as the paid editing policy at WP:PAID, before editing further. Complying with the paid editing policy is required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use if you have a paid editing relationship(which you do if you work for him).

There are certain policies about external links, which you can review at WP:EXT- but in short they are not normally placed within the main body of articles. Further, since you are associated with him, you shouldn't be adding links to his website without discussion among editors on the article talk page first. 331dot (talk) 18:25, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Drive Appreciation

		Thank You
		Thank you for reviewing articles during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog Drive. Always more to do, but thanks for participating. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 05:09, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

CBNMKJUH's appreciation

Thank you for helping me with the citation problem. Hopefully the draft I'm writing will get published. If it does, I owe it to you.CBNMKJUH (talk) 1:17 PM, 6 February 2018 —Preceding undated comment added 19:17, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello 331dot, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

The NPP backlog at the end of the drive with the number of unreviewed articles by creation date. Red is older than 90 days, orange is between 90 and 30 days old, and green is younger than 30 days.

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
• We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

New Year Backlog Drive results:

• We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update:

• ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
• Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Could I invite some feedback from you?

Hello - you've given some extremely clear and very helpful advice to many a newcomer at the Teahouse recently, so I wonder if you might have a moment to cast a critical eye over something for me? You may already have seen this post of mine yesterday. I'm developing an end-of-the day handout for newcomers who've participated in Editathons. I'm conscious how we help them intensively on the day, then send them off on their own, possibly unsure what to do next. Handout link: here

I would really welcome any constructively critical feedback you'd care to offer me so as to make it as effective as it possibly can be. I just want to make sure we give the best support in the best way possible, and I thought your "Teahouse perspective" on assisting newcomers could be quite valuable. If you haven't got time, just ignore this post - I'll quite understand. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:13, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

I've reviewed it and it seems pretty nice to me. I can't think of any specific criticism to give on it. 331dot (talk) 18:30, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you - that's much appreciated. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:09, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks again

I was away for several days and didn’t know what was happening. Good to know there are good Wikipedians out there willing to cut that nonsense out quickly. Thanks again for the help man, much appreciated. Hope you have a nice weekend. —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 17:02, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you, 331dot, for being so helpful!

ConnallES (talk) 13:45, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Jeff Collins page

Thank you for your feedback. I have submitted a draft page for review. I believe that all of the criteria for publishing the page are met (reliable outside source).

Please let me know if you have any other questions.

The Conflict of Interest is that I am Jeff Collins's wife. I have intentionally made the article very bare bones and only added specific facts.

Thank you 15:48, 18 February 2018 (UTC)15:48, 18 February 2018 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lisamontanus (talk • contribs)

@Lisamontanus: I'm not going to formally review your draft, but I think in its current format it is unlikely to be accepted at this time. The opening line there is certainly written correctly, but the article will need to contain much more information. As I indicated before, merely seeking public office does not by itself usually merit someone an article, so to be accepted it will need to indicate how else Mr. Collins is notable. If he wins his election, he would then merit an article as a member of a state legislature. Has he been written about in independent sources about his career or anything not having to do with him seeking public office? If all the independent reliable sources that discuss him are related to his seeking public office, it will be difficult to have an article here about him at this time. 331dot (talk) 16:05, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

NRA

My post is 100% neutral. I am simply describing the NRA's success in using well placed funding to reframe the interpretation of the 2nd amendment which has been very successful. I quote Warren Burger, a conservative justice, to avoid any accusations of lack of neutrality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheTruthWillBeTold (talk • contribs) 02:21, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

@TheTruthWillBeTold: Your suggestion is not neutral at all, and your username makes it clear that you have an agenda other than building this encyclopedia. There may be ways to add the general point you are making, but not written like that. Please review WP:NPOV. 331dot (talk) 02:28, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Dorothy Morrison

I am referenced as a DJ in Vince Aletti's The Disco Files 1973-78. The song and year as I described are referenced several times on Discogs. I am a DJ, did play the song in 1972, still spin it today. The mere mention of this song where it was not mentioned before requires detailed referencing? Please re-add, and feel free to reference the sentence, as I could not access either source above. I am a fan and would appreciate your adding this nod to "Rain" back to her Wiki page. Thank you, David Wolf Cleveland OH (a/k/a DAVEDJ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.56.176.10 (talk) 11:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

You made a claim, "remains a dance floor staple", that needs to be cited. While I believe what you say, we need more than just your word as all information must be verifiable. The information must be in an independent reliable source. 331dot (talk) 11:38, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of PF Chang 2018 Winter Olympics

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as PF Chang 2018 Winter Olympics, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

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. Smartyllama (talk) 21:24, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

I don't think you templated the right user with this; this appears to be in response to 331dot reverting some page move vandalism. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:57, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

2018 Winter Olympics article

Thanks for saving the article after blatant vandalism by Ragedoptic. Just noticed that the page security has been switched off - was that deliberate? Previously all the edits were either being automatically accepted or being held in a pending list until they could be checked by an official reviewer. Rodney Baggins (talk) 23:58, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

It looks like the protection expired today, including the Pending Changes. 331dot (talk) 00:10, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm, is it just a coincidence that someone was able to launch an attack on the page just as the protection expired? Rodney Baggins (talk) 07:36, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Hard to say one way or the other. 331dot (talk) 09:07, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Swastika_Dutta

Please sir there was similar pages with similar quality they work together in the same industry and they hold similar respect in this industry.. I refer some name who have their biography page in Wikipedia please check this such as Koushani Mukherjee , Bony Sengupta, Raj Chakraborty please check their pages they work together.. If they have their pages on Wikipedia why not Swastika Dutta get her respect from Wikipedia.. Please sir I respect your thought but am requesting once again to check my article and remove this deletion log.. Rakhi (talk) 12:20, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

@Rahki Das: Please read WP:OSE, other similar articles existing doesn't automatically mean yours can be permitted too. As a deletion discussion is underway, it cannot simply be removed. You are free to contribute to it. 331dot (talk) 13:02, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Tea House comment

I saw your response to an editor asked to create an article by their employer. I run across that situation often and, if it is OK with you, I would like to use your explanation as the basis for some of my boilerplate. I got tired of composing responses to the same situations, typing the same things over and over so I gave in and started using a keyboard snippet manager to keep text around for editing and/or reuse. Anyway. I liked what you said and how you said it but I do not want to 'lift' it without permission. Cheers. Jbh ^Talk 17:34, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

@Jbhunley: Go right ahead. Anything to help. 331dot (talk) 20:13, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Jbh ^Talk 20:53, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

EUREKA organisation comment

Hello, I'm 331dot. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 09:48, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Eureka (organisation). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted. Hi, I am failing to understand how updating the logo of the organisation or adding the correct number of members is promotional? The Wiki page is explaining what EUREKA is but is missing a part of what EUREKA does ie funding companies. How is adding the information promotional? ESEEUREKA (talk) 10:43, 15 March 2018 (UTC) Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by ESEEUREKA (talk • contribs) 10:35, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

@ESEEUREKA: Hello. My post did not specifically refer to your edit to the logo, but to your more substantive additions describing what this organization does and seems like it could have been pulled from its website(if it was, it would be a copyright violation). Wikipedia is not interested in what an organization or any article subject states about itself, but is interested in what third parties write about article subjects. Y

Your username seems to indicate that you are associated with this organization in some way, which is what Wikipedia calls a conflict of interest. As such, you should really avoid editing the article directly, instead first suggesting changes on the article talk page(click "Talk" at the top of the article to access that page). I have posted information about this on your user talk page, please review that and make the appropriate declarations of any COI or paid editing relationship that you have. 331dot (talk) 10:46, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ESEEUREKA (talk • contribs) 10:49, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Verizon Connect

Can you please explain to me what is required to add a new business to wikipedia? It had independent citations. The copy was neutral. What does it need to stop other editors removing it? Jasonleedodd (talk) 03:10, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

@Jasonleedodd: In order to have its own article, the division of Verizon you are writing about must be written about with in depth coverage in independent reliable sources that show how it meets the notability guidelines for organizations at WP:ORG. Please review the guidelines. Currently, you offer just a press release as a source; in prior iterations of the page you offer only basic announcements of routine business transactions(the acquisition of the business) and a press release, neither of which are acceptable for establishing notability. Not every business or division of a business merits its own article on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 08:48, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

@Jasonleedodd:This is why I and another user have turned the page into a redirect; it seems that this division of Verizon does not merit its own article. You may want to start off mentioning it in an appropriate location of the more general Verizon article. 331dot (talk) 08:50, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and AfD'd it since it's clear that the SPA has no intention of actually discussing it. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:01, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

File:Moose Point informational sign, June 2015.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Moose Point informational sign, June 2015.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 22:41, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

RFA

Nice to see you at RFA. I had assumed that you were already an admin, and given how swimmingly the process is going so far, it appears that you soon will take up the mop. I struggle to think of a better candidate for adminship, so thanks are in order. Stormy clouds (talk) 14:39, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@Stormy clouds, top or mop? --Malerooster (talk) 02:50, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thanks for answering my question! TheRealWeatherMan (talk) 23:34, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

James Michalopoulos

Hello I am a new editor and was told to come here to tell you I am not associated with the subject in any way. Michael is, unfortunately, a very popular name all over the world - I'm a Finn/American and only share an interest in New Orleans with the subject - I don't know how else to verify that -- Thank you

Mikkopresents (talk) 18:02, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

@Mikkopresents: Your statement is sufficient, thank you. You may want to make a similar statement to the person who initially claimed that you had a COI. 331dot (talk) 20:02, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

A beer for you!

With 16 hours left, barring anything monumental, you will be an admin in no time (well.....16 hours to be exact ). Either way, enjoy this pint on me! Congratulations! I'm sure admins & 'crats will be around shortly to give you your bucket & congratulate you as well. All the best, TheSandDoctor Talk 05:35, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Getting the party started

File:Basil Hayden Kentucky Bourbon Whiskey, Artfully Aged - Circa 2015.png

I will be offline when your RfA closes but I thought I'd drop off the party favors now. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:20, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

I love Peperami. In all seriousness, well done, you do deserve it. Just don't wreck it like some recent admin promotees, and go steady. But you already knew that. Congratulations again. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:23, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Indeed, congrats! Now go protect a page or something, dammit! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:25, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Chiming in to offer my congrats. We will need to air the room out after all that cigar smoke but it is well worth it. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Closure is pending, but congrats on the mop. L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 21:56, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Honestly, when I was a 'crat, the one thing you'd look forward to was promoting a clear-cut admin. Well done again, sorry for the lack of 'crat input to do the deed. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:59, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

BTW for everyone else I no longer take AmEx. 23:13, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations on your successful RfA!

With 186 supporters, 331dot's request for adminship is the second to succeed in 2018 (image courtesy of Linguist111).

Congratulations on your successful RFA! Your bits have been twiddled. I strongly encourage and recommend that you read and become very familiar with Wikipedia:Administrators, the tools page, the blocking and banning policies, and the protection policy. Refer to them often, especially if you have questions. Please also don't hesitate to ask questions if you have them. There are plenty of people around, including myself, who are very willing to help you out should you need it. Again, congratulations! Someone should be along with your shirt and the key to the cabal restroom. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 22:57, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

• Congratulations 331dot!! Well deserved :-). -- Dane ^talk 23:10, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
• Very well done indeed, 331dot! Best of luck! Linguist^unEins^uno 23:14, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Ignore the stains.

• I found the shirt. It was in a box in the back shed, so it may smell funny. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:21, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
• Congratulations for adminship !! CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:40, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
• Congratulations and good luck! Donner60 (talk) 00:54, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
• Congratulations! Here's to hoping that we see many more sucessful RfAs soon. --Joshualouie711^talk 02:39, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

• Congratulations! Keep going. Happy editing! - Siddiqsazzad001 (TALK) 04:38, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

• Congratulations and well played sir. The answers you gave at the RfA were top-notch, particularly 9&10 ;-) Now, care to join me at CAT:CSD? In all seriousness, Category:Candidates for uncontroversial speedy deletion is a good place to start; this is mostly page moves that require a redirect to be delete first. They're usually straight forward, and they're one of the few admin actions you might get thanked for! Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:08, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

• Congratulations on your RFA 331dot :), Happy blocking ... err I mean editing :) –Davey2010^Talk 14:59, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

• Well Done. Have a view at Wikipedia:What you won't learn in new admin school - it can be so true at times. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:46, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

I would like to formally complain about the wiki mods, they blocked me again and again LOOK i think they should have their administratorish priviligigies removed and banninated from wiki!!!!1111one — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.0.2.16 (talk • contribs)

If you end up with this on your talk page, or at an ANI thread entitled "administrator abuse by 331dot" - welcome to the club.... Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:54, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Your RFA

Welcome to the admin corps.CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:35, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Congrats on being handed the mop!

Came across your page and realized that you are now an admin. So I wanted to say congratulations on the new tools. If I had known of your RFA any earlier you would have received a Support vote from me for sure. I'll never forget when you went out of your way to resolve the dispute between the IP user and myself despite the hostility he was showing, and yet you took things calmly and let the higher ups handle things accordingly. I have great faith that you will use the new tools with good faith and nothing less. Congratilations once again! —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 02:29, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

I'll just add my congratulations here, too. Am thinking of starting an ORFA myself, sometime soon. Gulp! See you at the Teahouse. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:07, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: The one stumbling block you have is a recent run of declined A7 speedy tags. See User:Ritchie333/Plain and simple guide to A7 and User:SoWhy/Common A7 mistakes, and remember that the barrier to A7 is very low. Once you’be nailed that, you are ready. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:04, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Ritchie333. I will obviously need to be more careful now that the post-ACTRIAL floodgates have opened, and had already identified that my CSD experience was still quite limited. Thank you very much for the steer - those look like helpful extra guidance pages. I will read and inwardly digest, as they say. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:15, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

New Page Review Newsletter No.10

Hello 331dot, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:

• ACTRIAL's six month experiment restricting new page creation to (auto)confirmed users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the feed again, and the backlog has since increased already by ~30%. Please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day.

Paid editing

• Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

• The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
• Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies. A further discussion is currently taking place at: Can a subject specific guideline invalidate the General Notability Guideline?

Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled

• While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the 'Autopatrolled' user right HERE.

News

• The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.

---

To opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Might wanna update your userpage...

...now that your RFA succeeded. Currently your userpage sticks out like a sore thumb since it has no mop topicon and is not in the Wikipedia admins category (while almost every other admin's userpage I've ever seen has one or the other). Every morning (there's a halo...) 03:55, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Request

Hello. Help improve the article Maureen Wroblewitz. Thanks you very much.27.68.20.150 (talk) 09:35, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello. I'm not sure why you have approached me about this, but my knowledge of the subject is almost nonexistent and I would not be the best person to do so. 331dot (talk) 09:38, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

This is a recurring sock. Please ignore. Alex Shih (talk) 23:38, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Yo!

Roll it! Lourdes 17:15, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

That poster was designed by Gary Grimshaw. I wrote most of his biography. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:57, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

That's amazing Cullen328. Lourdes 13:52, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Urgent notice about allegations of serious misconduct on your part

That headline is the best April Fools' Day joke I could think of. Did it work? Or is it too late in the day?

Congratulations on your adminship! You are deserving of the mop and will handle it well. To pay it forward, in case anyone else hasn't yet, is my advice to a new admin (with all 94 days of my experience at it). Read Wikipedia:Advice for new administrators, ask any of us other admins for help if you have a dilemma, and take it slow with some of the stuff that you'll learn.

– Muboshgu (talk) 01:59, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

ITN

Hi 331dot -- good to see you working on ITN! When you update the template, could you make sure you put the name of the article you are adding wikilinked into the edit summary, and whether it's an RD or a blurb. That way everyone can quickly check rather than having to use diffs. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 22:18, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Indeed it's good to see you active as an admin. Contrary to the above, I'd prefer it if you simply actioned the rapid needs of ITNC rather than worry too much about your edit summary and its formatting. We frequently have items that are ready to go for 24 hours or more, so if you could check and react to those, it'd be way better than troubling yourself with edit summary format. If you could do both, brilliant, but actioning the queue is far, far, far more important than your edit summaries. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:23, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Dislike of my username

Sorry that you felt that my username violated the rules. There was no intent to do so. The name I chose was simply a reflection of my personal interests. You will see by my new name that I have now avoided this. Sorry again. Admonished-22 (talk) 02:41, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

@Admonished-22: I don't know which name you had, but no apology is necessary. We all do things like that. Best wishes to you 331dot (talk) 07:39, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Bus crash

We conflicted there - I updated ITN/C and then went to update the template, but you'd already done it :) Black Kite (talk) 23:28, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

I was doing the reverse, I posted it and was then going to update ITNC. Funny that it happened at the same time. :) 331dot (talk) 23:35, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Minsimen

You beat me to it.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 07:56, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

My apologies. If you wish to change it to what you were trying to do, I have no objection. 331dot (talk) 07:58, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

No problem.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 07:59, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Truma

Hi 331dot, Thank you for your message! Yes, I'm an employee of Truma and were asked to keep the company page updated. I'm not paid to edit here. Please let me know what I did wrong - is it because I didn't mention a source for the change? Sorry, but I don't understand where and what to declare? I already sent an email to verify that I'm writing as Truma and got the information that the account was verified on Di 24.10.2017 17:38. I would really appreciate your help as I'm a little bit lost and don't want to be blocked! Thank you! Truma Andrea (talk) 10:06, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

@Truma Andrea: Hello and thank you for your reply. If you work for Truma and someone else at your company has asked you to edit Wikipedia, you are a paid editor and must declare it and your conflict of interest. You can simply make a statement on your user page(click your username at the top of the screen, or in your post above, to get there) to the effect of "Per Wikipedia's Terms of Use and conflict of interest policy, I declare that I am employed by Truma and am editing Wikipedia at their request." It would be a good idea for you to explain this on Talk:Truma (company) as well.

If you haven't already, you should review the conflict of interest policy. It will tell you that you should avoid directly editing in the area of your conflict of interest, instead suggesting changes on the article talk page(which I linked to above). You may need to get the attention of other editors to carry out the request, which you can do using the instructions at this page. I hope this helps you. If you have further questions, you may ask me; you can also ask at the Teahouse, an area for new users to ask questions. 331dot (talk) 10:18, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

help

hello, 331dot Please I am an editor in Arabic wiki for 4 years ... I am contacting you today about an article that must be deleted ... I start the process on Arabic wiki but also on other wikis.

the article Oussama Belhcen is an article written only for propaganda ... I am Moroccan and I never knew this pretender singer .... neither me nor other Moroccan editors ... since I do not know not the procedure used to delete it so I turn to you to do the necessary. Aelita14 16:07, 9 April 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aelita14 (talk • contribs)

I don't entirely understand what you are asking. Are you saying that the person does not exist? Are you saying that the article was written for publicity purposes? Looking at the page I don't see much reason to delete it. In fairness, I will point you to Articles for Deletion where you can start a discussion about deleting the article, but based only on what I see now, I don't think you would succeed. 331dot (talk) 16:14, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

the article talks about a Moroccan rapper while I am Moroccan in this field and I contribute in the political and artistic articles and I never heard about this person in national or international television ... neither me nor other publishers on Arabic or French wiki ... in addition one and the same person wrote these articles to show that it is known whereas it is not true .... all the sources are in Arabic via unreliable sources and there is no Notability. and yes I am sure the article was written for publicity purposes, or that the person who wrote it was paid for it. Aelita14

You not having heard of someone does not mean that they don't exist or are not musicians. Are you familiar with all 33 million people who live in Morocco? If you have evidence that editors of the article are undeclared paid editors, please offer it at WP:COIN. If you wish to assert that the sources are not reliable and as such the article should be deleted, please use Articles for Deletion as I stated above. Thank you 331dot (talk) 16:44, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

in order not to exhaust your time quota ... I am not against it on the contrary that would have made me happy and proud of the count among the Moroccan stars or 3rd generation stars ...

Morocco is a small country where stars and new born stars are counted considering the orientation of the Arab world in general towards the artistic diversity more than anything else (the Moroccans are laureates in this category) so yes I know the stars in the middle Moroccan and that is not in this list .....it's not the first time someone pays to write an article on wiki to promote someone ... it's already happened that someone admits it on our Arabic wiki group on facebook .... anyway thank you for everything I will see with the Arab administrators. thank you Aelita14 —Preceding undated comment added 17:10, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

I would like to thank you for creating the article Strat;is Haviaras! I am excited! I would like to ask you, for I am new, how can I crate a wikidata frame to add a photo and info? Thank you so much again for helping me! It is exciting to contribute here :) MatinaG (talk) 20:34, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm afraid I am not confident enough in my wikicode ability to give a good answer, I would suggest asking at the Teahouse. 331dot (talk) 20:40, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

NPR Bronze Award

		The New Page Reviewer's Bronze Award
		For over 1000 new page reviews in the last year, thank you very much for your help at New Pages Patrol! — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 00:00, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Sam Chui

it is not realted to it's promotion . In wikipedia we found many of the big film actors amd singers or big personality have their article. So we couldn't say like that we are promoting that actors . So in that case we say like we are providing information about that Actor so like that same way samChui also has a big place in aviation sector he is a common man but he is in great place of aviation. So through this article all who wants to know more about him can get a knowledge about him. So thereby i am strongly opposing the deletion of this page. For information this page is not related to any of his promotion it is related about his information to the people, do you find anything in this whole article which is describing to follow him on social media? because this article was created for information not for promotion, Regards Vnk414 (talk) 01:59, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

@Vnk414: Creating an article for "information" is considered promotion on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not just a place to post information, it is an encyclopedia, where article subjects must be shown with independent reliable sources to be notable. I posted a brief explanation of this on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 07:20, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

There are so many of you tube channel person who has article about him in Wikipedia, but no one takes objection against them as so it's providing information about them, Sam has developed and important place in Aviation most of the Aviation personality knows him very well but such personality's article I created in Wikipedia so that everyone could get information through him because there are no source of getting information about someone greater than Wikipedia, so I kindly request you to please retrieve that page, as I've also mentioned the page is at it's initial stage so the references and citation will also be provided soon but it's my kind request to retrieve the page , Regards Vnk414 (talk) 07:49, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

@Vnk414: Yes, there are likely many inappropriate pages on Wikipedia. As this is a volunteer effort, often inappropriate pages get through. Sometimes they exist for years before they are detected. That doesn't mean an inappropriate page you create can be permitted as well. See WP:OSE. Wikipedia is not just a place to distribute information, as I note above. I would be willing to recreate the page as a draft so you can submit it for review by another editor before it is posted, as long as you have independent reliable sources that have in depth coverage of Sam Chui. 331dot (talk) 07:56, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Removal of content from Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

No I did not remove it by mistake. It was a false report. I am going to delete it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.209.138.94 (talk) 08:55, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

I didn't say it was a mistake, and removing it is not what is done with incorrect reports(not that I believe it is incorrect). 331dot (talk) 08:56, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Retrieving of page Sam Chui which was speedy Deleted by you

It is not related to it's promotion . In Wikipedia we found many of the big film actors and singers or big personality have their article. So we couldn't say like that we are promoting that actors . So in that case we say like we are providing information about that Actor so like that same way Sam Chui also has a big place in aviation sector he is a common man but he is in great place of aviation. So through this article all who wants to know more about him can get a knowledge about him, and Wikipedia though also give information about various great personalities. So thereby i am strongly opposing the deletion of this page. For information this page is not related to any of his promotion it is related about his information to the people, do you find anything in this whole article which is describing to follow him on social media? because this article was created for information not for promotion,I kindly request you to retrieve that article back to Wikipedia,as the speedy deletion process was started by you so you can only retrieve the page, and I once again wanted to say you that the page is at it's initial state so more citation and references will be added to that pages as soon as possible, but I kindly request you to retrieve the page, kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vnk414 (talk • contribs) 14:15, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

@Vnk414: As I state above, I would be willing to recreate the page as a draft if you have independent reliable sources with in depth coverage of this person indicating how they are notable. You can then submit the draft for review before it is posted. I do not want to simply recreate the page, as looking at your user talk page tells me that you have had issues with providing appropriate sources. If you have learned from those issues, I look forward to your agreement with my proposal. In fairness, if you find that unsatisfactory you can request it be undeleted at WP:REFUND, but that will also probably only result in the page being made into a draft. 331dot (talk) 19:26, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

See the article Justin Ross Lee he is also a traveller like Sam Chui and he too has his own Wikipedia article about him, in that way Sam is also an traveller and I mentioned it lots of time that the citation and references to the page will be soon added as this page is at it's initial stage. All the information which I've entered here is verified by Sam Chui so these all information isn't fake so I kindly request you to please retrieve the page as it is ,kind regards Vnk414 (talk) 01:56, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

@Vnk414: You need to see Other Stuff Exists. I've already stated how I would be willing to recreate the page as a draft, which is also what you've been told at WP:REFUND. I have no other comment unless you are willing to accept the page being made into a draft that you can submit for review. 331dot (talk) 07:59, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

The Pack A.D. pages

Hi there. Just wanted to let you know that I am an extremely casual Wikipedia user and don't think my pages should be deleted. It was not my intention to create pages that are lacking in sources. I'm just not sure how to/too lazy to reference/cite a lot of my sources properly since they come directly from album sleeves. Is there any guidance you could give me for that? I've tried referencing Discogs a few times as well.

Goatsandmonkeys (talk) 09:02, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

@Goatsandmonkeys: Hello. It is not enough to cite an album sleeve for an article, you must cite independent reliable sources that indicate how the album meets at least one of the notability guidelines at WP:NALBUM. Not every album merits an article here. It appears that someone turned one of the articles you made into a redirect, as the album did not seem notable. If it did meet at least one of the criteria for notability, please offer an independent source to support it. For more information on citing sources, you can read WP:CITE. 331dot (talk) 09:06, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Sam Chui

You can recreate and as I also told you that the citation and references to the article will be added as Soon as possible as I've mentioned the page is at it's initial stage and all the information I've entered isn't fake because this all information is verified from Sam Chui itself. I would also like to say in Wikipedia we couldn't add any references of blog, so that's why I'm currently not adding citation there. More references and citation will be soon added , I once again request you to add that page, because if I once again create a new page then there will be further moderation , and then once again same situation so I kindly request you to retrieve the page as the page can be retrieve by you. I once again say you that the references and citation will added as soon as possible, kind regards Vnk414 (talk) 12:56, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

@Vnk414: The article is now at Draft:Sam Chui. Once you have completed your work, you can submit it for review. Please do not move it into the main encyclopedia yourself. 331dot (talk) 19:52, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, 331dot. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 09:12, 17 April 2018 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

—SerialNumber54129 ^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 09:12, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Draft;Sam Chui

I've done some changes and added some references to the article. The draft is also verified by Sam Chui himself so I wanted you to have a look at Draft:Sam Chui wether any changes are needed and is the article ready for publication, Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vnk414 (talk • contribs) 10:17, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

@Vnk414: I would prefer if you submitted the page for review; click the "Submit this page for review: button at the top of the draft. 331dot (talk) 10:19, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Requesting undeletion of my user page (Tieran)

Hello, I have been working on a draft article (Tieran) that I see has been deleted by you because of promotional reasons. Could you please explain further and perhaps help me make the article not promotional? I have been trying to be objective and linking third party sources, so I’d like to know what I did wrong and have the article restored so I can fix it. Thanks! Shftin2gear (talk) 16:35, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

@Shftin2gear: Hello. I noticed the draft after seeing another user, ReincarnatedRecordings, edit the subpage of your user page, which is unusual. As it seemed to be Tieran's record label, they were blocked by me for having a group username and promotion. I then examined your draft and found the sourcing to be inadequate and (frankly) the page seemed designed to publicize, if not promote, this person's music. The vast majority of sources seem to simply be links to Tieran's music or very brief mentions which do not establish how he meets the notability guidelines for musicians at WP:BAND. If I am in error, I welcome being corrected.

Given that someone else who edited the draft was, I would ask you if you represent Tieran or his record label, if so, certain policies would apply to you. Thank you 331dot (talk) 16:46, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

@331dot:

I do not represent Tieran or his record label. I had reached out to them to see if I could use any photos they had for the article as I did not have any of my own. I was simply trying to avoid copywrite issues but didn’t realize they were going to get involved directly and post the photos. I’d like to fix this article, including removing any direct links to music or promotional material and reviewing notability requirements. Could you please restore it for me?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shftin2gear (talk • contribs)

@Shftin2gear: Thank you for your answer. Given your explanation, I am inclined to restore it to allow you to do as you ask since you also state you will review the notability criteria; I would just ask you if you would be willing to submit the draft for review before it is made part of the encyclopedia, which will allow you to get feedback on it before it is part of the encyclopedia instead of afterwards. Thanks 331dot (talk) 17:30, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

@331dot:

I appreciate it. And of course, I was planning to do so anyways because I’m still relatively new to the article creation process. Thanks again!

It's done. Good luck 331dot (talk) 21:18, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Sam Chui

I've Submitted the draft for review how much time will it take to complete that? If it takes much time then can I create same draft as Article with same refernces and citation and information,Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vnk414 (talk • contribs) 05:40, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

It is difficult to predict how long it will take, but as of now there are about 1600 drafts in total waiting for review, so it will likely take a few weeks. I would ask you to not create an article with the same text, as that would defeat the purpose of creating a draft first. 331dot (talk) 08:02, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Michael Schulson

Hi 331dot, thank you for restoring my account. The page on Michael Schulson was also deleted on the premise of "Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban", but this was never the case. Could you please restore the page? If there's something wrong with it I can work on it further or it can be voted off for deletion, but as it stands the page was deleted unfairly without any feedback process. Sincerelyjohn (talk) 07:12, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

@Sincerelyjohn: All set now. 331dot (talk) 07:15, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

@331dot: Thank you for restoring my faith on Wikipedia. Sincerelyjohn (talk) 07:19, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Please protect Asaram

Hello! I see you're up doing admin tasks and was wondering if I could get a quick semi-protection or pending changes on Asaram. He was recently convicted of raping a minor and IPs are vandalizing the page. I suggest pending changes since at least one IP is editing in good faith and we are discussing it on the talk page at the moment. No one seems to be watching the page protection page so I though I'd come here. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 07:27, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

@HickoryOughtShirt?4: I've done PC for a week, we'll see what happens. 331dot (talk) 07:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Phew! Thanks a lot! HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 07:30, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

User talk:UDTS official

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 08:16, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Sheth Marketing

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 09:08, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Does this mean I'm in?

• Hi. Just wondering if this means that I am in the ITN/Cabal. Cause, like, I never got a formal invitation, and I want to know where I stand vis-á-vis the evil cohort of editors who ruthlessly manipulate the main page. Just wondering if I should order my robe yet... Stormy clouds (talk) 20:48, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

I think the invitation is in the mail. For the robe we just need your dues check. ;) Now don't tell anyone, we don't want anyone else to be on to us! 331dot (talk) 20:54, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Please Advise - College of Charleston

/* Managing a conflict of interest */ Hey there. You asked about why the "also known as" information for College of Charleston was inaccurate. It is inaccurate because the College of Charleston is not also known as Charleston. We are just trying to make it accurate. I also am not sure why I was reprimanded for adding two commas. Pretty minor stuff. There are a few updates that need to be made (info has changed, added/gotten rid of programs, etc.) how do you suggest i fix these inaccuracies? LutzAtCofC (talk) 13:15, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@LutzAtCofC: Hello. My comment was not intended as a reprimand, nor do I object to you fixing punctuation. However, I did not see where you have complied with the conflict of interest policy or the paid editing policy. You will need to do this before you edit further. If you intend to do anything more substantive than fix punctuation or revert vandalism, you will need to make an edit request on the article talk page due to your conflict of interest.

Are you certain that no one anywhere refers to the college as "Charleston"? Many people do this with their respective colleges (I do). I assume someone put it there for a reason. That's one reason that you should discuss on the talk page, especially with a COI. 331dot (talk) 14:41, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	I want to give you this barnstar because for your civility and honesty. thanks Wiki841 (talk) 15:28, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

How's it going?

Hey 331dot, just wanted to post a quick note to say that I have been impressed by your actions following your adminship. As far as I can tell, you haven't put a foot wrong, and the reasons why we all voted for you are still very much evident. It may seem odd coming from me (or even unhelpful I suppose), but I'm really glad you got the mop and that you're doing the right things with it. Don't let it get you down, but keep up the great work. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:21, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

I appreciate your comments. I find them helpful from everyone. I expect that I will make a mistake at some point but I am glad I haven't yet(as far as I am aware at least). 331dot (talk) 20:45, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Please unblock my student

User:SungMinSeung is a student in my course. I can assure you she is here to "contribute to encyclopedia". And she is using reliable sources. In her edit [4] which somehow got her blocked she is using the perfectly reliable Doosan Encyclopedia. The fact that "doopedia" sounds perhaps silly in English doesn't make it unreliable. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:48, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

I prefer to keep the discussion confined to that user's talk page. I will be away from my computer shortly; if another admin wants to unblock the student after more fully seeing the situation, I have no problem with that, though the blocking administrator should be consulted more than me, as I just reviewed the block. 331dot (talk) 09:54, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

(watching:) She was blocked, citing an edit with a reference for a plot that doesn't even need one? What face do we show to that good-faith editor, and those watching? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:57, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

I think a lot of this situation arose from the slight language barrier there seems to be here; though five different editors found the edits problematic, aside from the blocking administrator. I really have to go now, will be back later. 331dot (talk) 10:00, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: A pretty ugly one, I am afraid. She was quite depressed in class (more so when we found out that her block's IP range is disrupting the class, preventing me and others from editing - which I reported, but which clearly doesn't seem important to the reviewing admin). It's a clear case of WP:BITE. She is citing good sources (Korean encyclopedia), some people mistakenly thought she is citing Korean search engine, she gets a bunch of warnings, nobody apologizes, tired admins make quick decisions based on accumulated warnings ("that many warning messages must mean a clear vandal! Block hammer time! Job well done"). Some days I wonder why I bother teaching students about Wikipedia. That's one student I doubt she will ever come back here after the class is finished, given the treatment she got :( --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:05, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

I sometimes wonder where AGF went. If there's a language barrier, clarify, I'd say. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:11, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

The users involved seem to be Korean, and the website "doopedia" is Korean. I would prefer that further discussion of this take place in the ANI thread or on the user's talk page. Thanks, really have to leave. Will return. 331dot (talk) 10:27, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

“official” usernames

There wasn’t a lot of particpation, but the last time this was discussed "Official"_accounts_representing_individuals_as_opposed_to_groups it seemed like the general feeling was that “official” accounts of non-notable individuals are not a big deal and do not need to change their names. In almost every case they make a very small number of edits and are never heard from again. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:05, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Beeblebrox thank you for the advice. I will keep that in mind going forward. I assume that if an "official" account is obviously and clearly not the named person, it should be addressed? 331dot (talk) 17:26, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Yep. If they are claiming to be a notable person that’s different and is blockable per WP:IMPERSONATE. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:29, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Okay, thanks again. 331dot (talk) 17:31, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2018).

Administrator changes

None

Chochopk • Coffee • Gryffindor • Jimp • Knowledge Seeker • Lankiveil • Peridon • Rjd0060

Guideline and policy news

• The ability to create articles directly in mainspace is now indefinitely restricted to autoconfirmed users.
• A proposal is being discussed which would create a new "event coordinator" right that would allow users to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit.

Technical news

• AbuseFilter has received numerous improvements, including an OOUI overhaul, syntax highlighting, ability to search existing filters, and a few new functions. In particular, the search feature can be used to ensure there aren't existing filters for what you need, and the new equals_to_any function can be used when checking multiple namespaces. One major upcoming change is the ability to see which filters are the slowest. This information is currently only available to those with access to Logstash.
• When blocking anonymous users, a cookie will be applied that reloads the block if the user changes their IP. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. This currently only occurs when hard-blocking accounts.
• The block notice shown on mobile will soon be more informative and point users to a help page on how to request an unblock, just as it currently does on desktop.
• There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee is seeking additional clerks to help with the arbitration process.

Obituaries

• Lankiveil (Craig Franklin) passed away in mid-April. Lankiveil joined Wikipedia on 12 August 2004 and became an administrator on 31 August 2008. During his time with the Wikimedia community, Lankiveil served as an oversighter for the English Wikipedia and as president of Wikimedia Australia.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:05, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Elementary and Technical Skill Council of India

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 07:36, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Remove protection LipaPay Article as we won't create again until we launch several large PR to large local media.

Hi, Dot,

Thanks for your contribution on WIKI, we are planing launch several PR to local large medias, Before that we won't create this article again. Kindly help remove the LipaPay protection. Kilimall and LipaPay are brother companies that's why I thought I could use Kilimall's past PR reference. Sorry about that.

Many thanks Regards Victor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qinyihuan (talk • contribs) 17:27, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

If you aren't going to create the article, then the protection does not need to be removed. 331dot (talk) 17:34, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

@Qinyihuan: you described yourself as "We" in your comment above. Could you clarify what you mean by this?--SamHolt6 (talk) 17:57, 4 May 2018 (UTC)