User talk:WindTempos/Archives/2021/August

Check now

Pablo Ángeles y David check this article's Revision history. CoinR (talk) 10:02, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Not really sure what you want me to do here. After looking through the article, I've tagged it as a possible copyvio (you can see this on the talk page) but I'm not really qualified to make any further changes. Zudo ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:17, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

ok thsnks CoinR (talk) 10:19, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry Thanks CoinR (talk) 10:20, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Need Help

Hello Zudo, thank you for adding the pic.

Apparently, this is wrong: "She was re-elected to the Assembly in 2003,[6] but lost her seat in the 2007 elections.[7]" She didn't lose, so can you please remove "but lost her seat in the 2007 elections." Thank you GONvsKillua (talk) 18:34, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Lujaina Mohsin Darwish

Do you have a source for this? This article appears to confirm that she did in fact lose her seat.

In future, could you write an edit request on the article's talk page, following the instructions at WP:COIREQ? It'll be more likely to get done quickly this way. Zudo ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)\

new

i just read over the copyright page i had no idea i could not put articles on here and cite them, my apologies i fixed it Panda Parker (talk) 15:14, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

You are now a pending changes reviewer!

Hi Zudo! I've been running into you while patrolling logs and recent changes, and I happened to notice that you don't have the pending changes reviewer rights. I hope you don't mind, but I went through your contributions and I noticed that you're quite active in recent changes patrolling and that you consistently view and undo vandalism and bad faith disruption. I believe that the pending changes reviewer rights would be useful for you to have and that you'd make good use of the tools. Instead of having you formally request the rights at WP:PERM, I went ahead and just gave it to you. This user right allows you to review edits that are pending approval on pages currently under pending changes protection and either accept the edits to make them viewable by the general public, or decline and revert them.

Please keep these things in mind regarding the tool or when you're reviewing any pending changes:

• A list of articles with pending edits awaiting review can be viewed at Special:PendingChanges.
• A list of the articles currently under pending changes protection can be viewed at Special:StablePages.
• Being granted and having these rights does not grant you any additional "status" on Wikipedia, nor does it change how Wikipedia policies apply to you (obviously).
• You'll generally want to accept any pending changes that appear to be legitimate edits and are not blatant vandalism or disruption, and reject edits that are problematic or that you wouldn't accept yourself.
• Never accept any pending changes that contain obvious and clear vandalism, blatant neutral point of view issues, copyright violations, or BLP violations.

Useful guidelines and pages for you to read:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline and tutorial on using the rights and reviewing pending changes.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, a summary of pending changes protection, the pending changes user right, and how it applies.
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy section on pending changes protection and its appropriate application and use by administrators.

I'm sure you'll do fine with the reviewer rights - it's a pretty straight-forward tool and it doesn't drastically change the interface that you're used to already. Nonetheless, please don't hesitate to leave me a message on my user talk page if you run into any questions, get stuck anywhere, or if you're not sure if you should accept or revert pending changes to a page - I'll be more than be happy to help you. If you no longer want the pending changes reviewer rights, let me know and I'll be happy to remove it for you. Thank you for helping to patrol recent changes and keep Wikipedia free of disruption and vandalism - it's a very thankless job to perform and I want you to know that it doesn't go unnoticed and that I appreciate it very much. Happy editing! :-D ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:38, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll be sure to make good use of the rights! Zudo ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:42, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you!!!

Thanks for keeping the Bauer page clean. Anyways, we need to find a way to stop annoying Padres fans from vandalising the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GBAlph4 (talk • contribs)

@GBAlph4: no worries, it might be worth asking at WP:RFPP if the vandalism starts getting out of hand. Zudo ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:22, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

RedWarn unnecessary acronym

On https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=PayPal&diff=prev&oldid=1040221992

you reverted my edit from 'initial public offering' to 'IPO' on the grounds of RW 16.1.

What is RW 16.1?, so that I can understand the decision.

Thanks

Darcourse (talk) 09:23, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

RedWarn is a tool that's designed for quickly reverting edits (16.1 being the current version). It's mostly used for reverting disruptive edits, but has options to undo well intentioned edits too. In this case, I used it to undo your change which (despite having good intentions) goes against the manual of style regarding acronyms.

In most cases, acronyms should be written out in full when they're first used in an article. If someone didn't know what IPO stood for, they'd have to click on the link to find out. Wikipedia isn't constrained by space, so there's no technical reason to abbreviate terms when they only appear once.

Hope this clears things up. Zudo ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:49, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay, but the MoS link also states:

Another exception is when something is most commonly known by its acronym (i.e., its article here is at the acronym title)

and uses the 'CIA' as an example. Personally, I would put IPO in this category, what do you think?

Darcourse (talk) 11:44, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hmm, it's true that the MoS isn't exactly clear cut here. I'd argue that it's better for readability to keep the full text as "Initial public offering" rather than forcing someone to mouse over (or click) on the link to figure out what it refers to. I'm not too fussed either way though, so feel free to change it as you see fit. Zudo ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:35, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

I've re-instated it. Thanks for your help.

Darcourse (talk) 13:16, 23 August 2021 (UTC)