Judkessler
A belated welcome!
edit
Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Judkessler! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! Schazjmd (talk) 15:58, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
November 2023
edit
Hello, I'm Chaotic Enby. I noticed that you recently removed content from Arsenic without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ChaotıċEnby(talk) 16:00, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
External links on Featured articles
editHi, Judkessler; you've been changing the External links on Featured articles like Chagas disease and Buruli ulcer, when those links were carefully curated to comply with WP:WIAFA; I'm seeking to understand the rationale behind the replacements ? Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:34, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- I thought their number where too high (on some not 'featured' articles). So it becomes useful to remove the ones which are too specific. See Wikipedia:External links. Of course, you may put one back if you wish!
- Judkessler (talk) 16:37, 11 November 2023 (UTC).
- OK, so WP:FAs have been curated to meet the standards of our best work, per WP:WIAFA. You have been removing links that were recently deemed useful, and replacing them with others. What you refer to as "more specific" others are not warranted at those FAs, as meaningful content is already included in the Featured article; the ones chosen contain content that for some reason, in accordance with WP:EL, is not included. Could you please take greater care to notice the big editnotice like this one, that pops up when you edit an FA, and not change those? Also, as you may not yet fully understand the application of WP:EL, might you slow down on this activity? That will save a lot of time for other editors, and would be most appreciated. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:45, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the insights. I will pay more attention to the pages with special warnings.
- And, of course, feel free to correct what you see as mistakes.
- Judkessler (talk) 16:49, 11 November 2023 (UTC).
- You're welcome, but I don't really want to go around checking every one of your edits :) Regardless of whether the article is an FA now or not (and has the edit notice), the criteria for adding or changing an EL should relate back to "would that EL be needed or included or add useful information if the article were at the Featured article level of comprehensiveness". That is, ELs should be only supplements to what a complete article would have. Please have a more careful read of WP:EL to be sure you're clear on this. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:52, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- In fact, looking beyond those that have hit my watchlist, to your contribs in general, I see you're proceeding alphabetically to change ELs on every medical FA. Since you are using the wrong criteria, I'd ask you to please stop doing that. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:53, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- Isn't the WHO fact sheet a key external link? As opposed to a specific paper or website from a specific time or country?
- Judkessler (talk) 16:55, 11 November 2023 (UTC).
- No, it isn't in all cases. In an already well-written article, it wouldn't be there (although it may be cited-- have you been checking if WHO is already cited in an article-- it usually is), and you're removing some that might meet the guideline. Please read them. And please stop doing this now, as your edits are creating extra work for others, who will have to review each one. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:58, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- There were several articles where the external links were archived version of the fact sheets. Is this not a situation where it make sense to update it? A reference may need an old version, an external link should not, as far as I understand.
- Judkessler (talk) 17:04, 11 November 2023 (UTC).
- Yes, updating an old link may be appropriate in some cases, but that's not all you're doing. They each need to be checked individually to conform with the guideline. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:08, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- No, it isn't in all cases. In an already well-written article, it wouldn't be there (although it may be cited-- have you been checking if WHO is already cited in an article-- it usually is), and you're removing some that might meet the guideline. Please read them. And please stop doing this now, as your edits are creating extra work for others, who will have to review each one. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:58, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- In fact, looking beyond those that have hit my watchlist, to your contribs in general, I see you're proceeding alphabetically to change ELs on every medical FA. Since you are using the wrong criteria, I'd ask you to please stop doing that. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:53, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- You're welcome, but I don't really want to go around checking every one of your edits :) Regardless of whether the article is an FA now or not (and has the edit notice), the criteria for adding or changing an EL should relate back to "would that EL be needed or included or add useful information if the article were at the Featured article level of comprehensiveness". That is, ELs should be only supplements to what a complete article would have. Please have a more careful read of WP:EL to be sure you're clear on this. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:52, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- OK, so WP:FAs have been curated to meet the standards of our best work, per WP:WIAFA. You have been removing links that were recently deemed useful, and replacing them with others. What you refer to as "more specific" others are not warranted at those FAs, as meaningful content is already included in the Featured article; the ones chosen contain content that for some reason, in accordance with WP:EL, is not included. Could you please take greater care to notice the big editnotice like this one, that pops up when you edit an FA, and not change those? Also, as you may not yet fully understand the application of WP:EL, might you slow down on this activity? That will save a lot of time for other editors, and would be most appreciated. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:45, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Follow-up
edit
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:10, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the information. I stop making new changes. I will only review the changes made.
- Judkessler (talk) 17:15, 11 November 2023 (UTC).
- To clarify, my intention was to add WHO fact sheets on relevant pages (e.g. [1], [2], [3], [4] and [5]).
- Here is a list of the changes from the 17 pages where external links where deleted:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Antimicrobial_resistance&diff=prev&oldid=1184620323
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Arsenic&diff=prev&oldid=1184621231
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Arsenic&diff=prev&oldid=1184620728
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Asbestos&diff=prev&oldid=1184620955
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Botulism&diff=prev&oldid=1184621704
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Campylobacter&diff=prev&oldid=1184622737
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cardiovascular_disease&diff=prev&oldid=1184596682
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cardiovascular_disease&diff=prev&oldid=1184596682
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chagas_disease&diff=prev&oldid=1184623008 (featured article; reverted by SandyGeorgia)
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chikungunya&diff=prev&oldid=1184623188
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Child_abuse&diff=prev&oldid=1184623286
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dementia&diff=prev&oldid=1184625950 (reverted by SandyGeorgia)
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diabetes&diff=prev&oldid=1184596634
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dracunculiasis&diff=prev&oldid=1184626600 (reverted by SandyGeorgia)
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Escherichia_coli&diff=prev&oldid=1184627211
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Escherichia_coli&diff=prev&oldid=1184627188
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Food_additive&diff=prev&oldid=1184627848
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hearing_loss&diff=prev&oldid=1184625800
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pesticide_residue&diff=prev&oldid=1184628302
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teenage_pregnancy&diff=prev&oldid=1184619952
- Judkessler (talk) 17:56, 11 November 2023 (UTC).
- What is the best thing to do now? Should we only add the WHO fact sheets as references in the text of those articles?
- Also, what is the right procedure when an article has many external links (e.g. 5 to 10)? Discussion on talk page?
- Thanks in advance, Judkessler (talk) 20:24, 11 November 2023 (UTC).
- There is no maximum number of ==External links==, though it is unusual for more than about a dozen links to actually be wanted.
- Generally, if you're "weeding the link farm", I'd focus on removing broken links/dead websites, things that aren't really useful to understand the subject (maybe a link is more about who does research, rather than what the disease is?), and on links that say basically the same thing as each other (here's the WHO fact sheet, the CDC fact sheet, the UK fact sheet, the UNICEF fact sheet...). WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:38, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
The article BMJ Public Health has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Randykitty (talk) 15:13, 12 November 2024 (UTC)