User talk:ApricotAvalanche037

Welcome!

Hello, ApricotAvalanche037, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! HiLo48 (talk) 23:33, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hello, thanks for the warm welcome to Wikipedia. I currently need help with publishing a translation for the article https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torquato_Nanni. I have made a public draft for it and added a new source with new information: Draft:Torquato Nanni. However, I was unable to publish it due to not being an "experienced user". Does this mean I need extended confirmation to publish translated articles? Additionally my draft does not link to the original Italian article, as it says on the draft "add languages" rather than "languages". When the draft I have made becomes a standard article page, will it still be connected to the original Italian article and how can we make sure of it? ApricotAvalanche037 (talk) 02:42, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I suggest using the Articles for creation process by having your draft reviewed before it becomes an article. I suggest you add more references to the draft (or reuse the existing references as needed). When you're ready, you can type {{subst:submit}} (just as you see it here, not how you see it in the wikicode of this reply) at the top of your draft. Once the draft becomes an article, you can go to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q63302087 to add a link to the English Wikipedia article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:13, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:American Communist Party (2024) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:American Communist Party (2024). Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 03:38, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: American Communist Party (2024) (May 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Garsh2 was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Per the previous comment, this subject has already been determined to be non-notable at AFD.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:American Communist Party (2024) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Garsh (talk) 21:33, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ApricotAvalanche037! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Garsh (talk) 21:33, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Torquato Nanni (May 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Vanderwaalforces were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Majority of the content is unsourced.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Torquato Nanni and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:41, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Jay8g [V•T•E] 06:41, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

June 2025

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Communist Party USA, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history, as well as helping prevent edit conflicts. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it.

The *Show preview* button is right next to the *Publish changes* button and below the edit summary field.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 02:26, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

COI question

Hi there,

I was wondering if you could please confirm whether you have any personal connection to Haz Al Din, the MAGA Communist movement or the ACP. Thanks. Simonm223 (talk) 11:20, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I am not a member of the American Communist Party, I am not in the Infrared community or any online political community for that matter, and I am not even from the United States or Canada. Is there any other questions you have? ApricotAvalanche037 (talk) 13:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. You should consider diversifying your editing beyond MAGA communism and paying greater attention to WP:NPOV as your edit history seems indicative of a COI as it stands. Simonm223 (talk) 15:19, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but it is much easier to quickly fix something on the page for Al-Din than it is to research highly specific things about the Eastern Front of WWII. This is why it appears that I am paying greater attention to the page for Al-Din. I put more effort into other stuff, but it is just slower. ApricotAvalanche037 (talk) 22:45, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can still pay greater attention to neutrality. Because it's clear your edits have tried to position this man as being a legitimate Marxist theorist and. Well. Let's just say he's no Althusser. Simonm223 (talk) 00:52, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think that Al-Din has contributed to Marxism as much as Althusser or something, but this doesn't make him not a Marxist. I don't think his commitment to Marxism should be disputed in the wikipedia article. Should the PSL be condemned in their wikipedia article because there are no secondary sources about them being Marxist-Leninist as well? I never once said in the article that Al-Din is some sort of genius that is now the sixth head of Marxism-Leninism. I just removed all of the vandalism and tried to increase the neutrality of the page. If I thought that Al-Din was a genius, then I would have added Marxist theorist or something to the first sentence, which I have not done. There is enough criticism of Al-Din in the political positions and ideology section and the controversies section, which I think is fair to have. I just do not think it is fair to have flak throughout the entire article and malign his character in a non-neutral way disputing his ideological commitment to Marxism. Removing communism from the ACP infobox is just petty. ApricotAvalanche037 (talk) 02:25, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]