Jump to content

User talk:Ganesha811/Archive 13

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13

Question from Claraisnice9 (16:37, 4 June 2025)

Hello! I was wondering if Wiki could give me a list of five famous Afrikaans, but it just gave me Americans. Can you help me with this? --Claraisnice9 (talk) 16:37, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello, you can ask questions like this at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. —Ganesha811 (talk) 16:40, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Sarah Venâncio Costa (23:08, 4 June 2025)

how can I find articles to translate from english to portuguese and from portugese to english? --Sarah Venâncio Costa (talk) 23:08, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi! You can look in these two places:
More information can be found at WP:Translation. Thanks for contributing and welcome! —Ganesha811 (talk) 23:32, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Yunuoooy on List of black video game characters (05:25, 6 June 2025)

How do I add another box --Yunuoooy (talk) 05:25, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) You can check out the WP:MOSTABLE and H:TABLE links. Hope this answers your question. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:58, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2025).

Administrator changes

removed

Interface administrator changes

added 0xDeadbeef

CheckUser changes

readded L235

Oversight changes

readded L235

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open to determine whether the English Wikipedia community should adopt a position on AI development by the WMF and its affiliates.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • An arbitration case named Indian military history has been opened. Evidence submissions for this case close on 8 June.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:17, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Hypothetical question on creating a new discussion

I have a hypothetical question: if a discussion becomes an extensive wall of text and a stalemate, how would one go about it (i.e. adding a section break, creating a new discussion, etc.)? Just a thought I might have. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:47, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

A section break is probably fine. You could also try WP:3O or other forms of WP:dispute resolution. But often the simplest solution is simply to walk away. —Ganesha811 (talk) 22:50, 6 June 2025 (UTC)
I see. Over the years, I've often tried out other forms of dispute resolution when things don't work out the way they should (like resolving an edit war, etc.). Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:00, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Free Beacon

For question#1 7 editors !voted generally unreliable, 5 didn't, and I objected to both questions. I see vague-or-clear references to PAGs: WP:RSCONTEXT WP:UNDUE WP:USEBYOTHERS WP:NOTCENSORED. How did you decide that generally-unreliable was consensus? Peter Gulutzan (talk) 18:11, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Well, previous consensus had held that it was generally unreliable, so finding any new designation for the Free Beacon from 2012-18 would require a fairly clear consensus. The previous most recent discussion took place in 2020, wholly after 2012-2018, and found clear consensus for "generally unreliable", so that had to be taken into account as well.
In the recent discussion, none of the !votes were so off-base that they needed to be struck or disregarded, in my view. Only two editors clearly supported "generally reliable", and three more took a nuanced position which favored noting the organization's clear advocacy/partisanship. However, as you say, seven editors supported "generally unreliable". Clearly, the consensus was not for general reliability. The plausible options were "no consensus" and "generally unreliable." However, no consensus would not accurately reflect the discussion - the majority, backed by policy arguments, felt it was generally unreliable, and even 2/5 editors who took a different stance called it "marginally reliable" - plus there was that 2020 discussion. On the whole I felt both parts were good discussions carried out in good faith. —Ganesha811 (talk) 18:24, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
Sad that 7 (or 8 including you) editors can decide what readers won't be allowed to read in any article, but I don't see a hope for wp:closechallenge. Thanks for replying. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 13:09, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
As an experienced editor I'm sure you're familiar with how WP:RSN works. This system has been in place for years and (seeing as neither iteration of the Free Beacon is deprecated or blacklisted) doesn't constitute any form of ban or censorship of article content. It's just a baseline consensus for editors to refer to. —Ganesha811 (talk) 13:31, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:23, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you Gerda! —Ganesha811 (talk) 18:28, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Papst Leo XIV

Dear Ganesha811, I'm referring primarily to the depiction of the photo of the cathedral in Trujillo, Peru, which reflects a central theme of the work of Pope Leo XIV. Your approach would require further deletion of photos, which, in your reasoning, do not actually expand the impact of the text. Therefore, I once again welcome your assessment, in that you at least reinstate the photo of the cathedral, the ancestral seat of Pope Leo XIV's so beneficial work in Trujillo, Peru, in the Wikipedia entry. Juniperi (talk) 14:05, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

I restored the Trujillo image with a modified caption more focused on Prevost. Thanks for bringing up the matter. —Ganesha811 (talk) 14:31, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
Hello, thank you very much, dear Ganesha811, for your efforts and your attention to the topic in the spirit of Pope Leo XIV's work in Trujillo, Peru, in the form of the revised caption. It now fully reflects the changes you made in your previous criticism. However, your changes are not visible in the current version (due to a script?). Best regards, Juniperi! Juniperi (talk) 23:18, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

DYK for Kent Haruf

On 10 June 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kent Haruf, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Kent Haruf wrote his final novel in 45 days while dying of a lung condition? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kent Haruf. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Kent Haruf), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shahanuddin Choudhury

4d-3k and delete felt weak for the subject, but could I have a copy in userspace or draftspace for when the sigcov is uncovered, per your closing comment? Thanks, BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:19, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Sure, I've created it at User:Ganesha811/Shahanuddin. The raw count was actually 5d-3k - remember the nominator - but of course there are other factors as well. Hope you find something, always good to see an article get recreated for the right reasons. —Ganesha811 (talk) 22:25, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
@Ganesha811: If one were to potentially find significant coverage, would they have to pass through deletion review or AfC to get the article back into mainspace? Aviationwikiflight (talk) 01:19, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
No, that's not required. But if the recreated article is substantially similar to the deleted version (i.e. if new, high-quality sources have not been found and incorporated), then it would be eligible for speedy deletion under criteria 4. If there's a back-and-forth cycle of deletion and recreation without substantial improvement, the article title could eventually be salted. —Ganesha811 (talk) 01:23, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

2025 Minnesota lawmaker shootings

Can you please stop calling it terrorism without providing a reliable source? Bloxzge 025 (talk) 15:30, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

It is definitionally terrorism; politically motivated violence directed at politicians with a "manifesto". All that is confirmed by reliable sources. But you're right, I should wait for a reliable source. I won't edit war, and I may have been editing in a rush and letting my emotions get the better of me; not a great example. —Ganesha811 (talk) 15:32, 14 June 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for understanding. If it is called terrorism by a reliable source, you can add it to the article again. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 15:35, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Sootysimons on Bill Rogers (educationalist) (23:12, 16 June 2025)

Hello, I'd like to add a 'bibliography' section to this article. Is it possible? Regards --Sootysimons (talk) 23:12, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Yes, that's possible through normal editing. Wikipedia pages are open to anyone. Please bear in mind our conflict of interest rules. If you have a connection to Rogers in any way, you should instead make suggestions on the article's talk page. —Ganesha811 (talk) 23:28, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Adding

While you are adding new information which is an asset, you are also making some mistakes. That section is alright now.Aromatize (talk) 18:45, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure which mistakes you mean specifically, but no doubt I've made some in my time as an editor. Glad you're also helping to ensure the article is as good as it can be. —Ganesha811 (talk) 18:51, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
Please do not change that paragraph. I have told you about errors, that is one.Aromatize (talk) 19:48, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
I will continue to make edits to improve the article. If you have specific concerns, please mention them - I do not know what you are referring to when you say "that is one". What is the specific error? —Ganesha811 (talk) 19:54, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
You keep changing the sentence about belonging to a party, it's wrong. Desist.Aromatize (talk) 20:01, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
I changed that sentence once, after you modified it and after your second comment here. It is also in a different paragraph than the one you initially mentioned. Please communicate clearly. Finally, Wikipedia is built collaboratively. It's not a good idea to give orders to other editors like "desist" - rather, you should bring up specific issues on the talk page. —Ganesha811 (talk) 20:04, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
When you keep insisting, incorrectly, on something that is not being collaborative. Aromatize (talk) 20:15, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
What have I insisted on? And what was incorrect about it? Please share the diffs. I can't respond to such vague comments. —Ganesha811 (talk) 20:29, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
It's fine how it is now. You weren't reporting membership correctly. Aromatize (talk) 20:43, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
If you continue to edit on there to the same extent, I or other people will try to get the edit protection level increased. There's no reason for this amount of edits. Aromatize (talk) 21:52, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
I don't think you really get how Wikipedia works. I will keep on editing to make the article better where I am able. I'm also an admin and so edit protection would have no impact. Please read WP:5P, particularly the 3rd. Editing is how Wikipedia gets better. Again, if you have specific issues, please raise them on the talk page. I'm getting tired of your vague remarks. —Ganesha811 (talk) 21:59, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

I'll add something to the talk page for the article.Aromatize (talk) 02:02, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Note: user subsequently blocked as a sockpuppet. —Ganesha811 (talk) 03:46, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Mccoy Jonas (12:02, 19 June 2025)

Thank you for being my mentor and editor here. --Mccoy Jonas (talk) 12:02, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

No problem - welcome to Wikipedia! —Ganesha811 (talk) 17:51, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Mccoy Jonas (09:28, 20 June 2025)

I don't know why everything I have edited are going back to the former. I have edited that page more than five times with references but it keeps going back. What can I do? --Mccoy Jonas (talk) 09:28, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello! I'm not sure exactly which pages/section you mean, but some general recommendations; each edit should have a very clear edit summary saying what you changed and why, especially as a newer editor. That will help others understand what you are working on. Accordingly, also read the edit summaries that others add so you understand whhy they are making their changes. And don't be afraid to ask them on the talk page if they revert a change of yours - discussion and consensus is how Wikipedia moves forward. —Ganesha811 (talk) 11:42, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from EmmaChiaJenXi on User:EmmaChiaJenXi/sandbox (02:32, 22 June 2025)

Hello, thanks for helping me! I appreciate it. However, I just recently created a draft on Desmanthus depressus but I later realised that it is under the article Desmanthus virgatus so I wish to delete the draft. Do you have any idea how to do that? Thanks. --EmmaChiaJenXi (talk) 02:32, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Yep! This falls under the "Criteria for Speedy Deletion" - specifically, WP:G7, which says that a page can be deleted if it's only been worked on by one editor and they request deletion. Blanking the page, as you did, counts as a deletion request. So I'll go ahead and take care of that for you. Thanks for contributing. :) —Ganesha811 (talk) 02:45, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from EmmaChiaJenXi

Hello, thank you for helping me all the time! I have a new question though, how can I decline a speedy deletion? A user has tagged Sommera sabiceoides speedy deletion but that was because I was still editing it. Right now, there’s more information already, so can you tell me how? Thanks! It would be really bad if all my hard work was nothing and the article go deleted. EmmaChiaJenXi (talk) 07:28, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Technically, you shouldn't have removed the tag yourself, but in this case, I really don't mind, because the user shouldn't have tagged it at all. The relevant policy, WP:A1, states Do not tag under this criterion in the first few minutes after a new article is created but they tagged it precisely four minutes after creation. Not only that, but it did have sufficient context - the one-sentence stub clearly described a species. I've left them a message on their talk page saying as much. Thanks for creating a new article! —Ganesha811 (talk) 10:43, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
Thank you so much! EmmaChiaJenXi (talk) 08:32, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Blackmightydeath (12:06, 23 June 2025)

could you please tell me how to add site links from where i have taken data --Blackmightydeath (talk) 12:06, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello! Help:Referencing for beginners should be useful for that. —Ganesha811 (talk) 14:50, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Carmo-Lee (12:13, 23 June 2025)

Hello how do u create a Wikipedia page --Carmo-Lee (talk) 12:13, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) See Help:Your first article
Destinyokhiria 💬 13:45, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Question from Johnhook40 (15:16, 27 June 2025)

Hello,

I'm trying to publish an article about a non profit group I belong to called the Pipeline Simulation Interest Group or PSIG for short. Would you be able to help me publish my page? --Johnhook40 (talk) 15:16, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for disclosing your COI. Take a look at the guidance linked there about working on articles with which you have a conflict of interest. Please note that it will be difficult to publish a new article about a group you belong to that is neutral, well-sourced, and demonstrates notability. If your organization is truly notable, no doubt someone unconnected with it will create an article eventually. In general, I recommend going through the WP:AfC process. —Ganesha811 (talk) 15:58, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kent Haruf

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kent Haruf you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of AirshipJungleman29 -- AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:11, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from Minister Randolph (01:26, 2 July 2025)

Greetings. Why did you say the name Rhonayra is not notable and can not be added? There are certainly credible sources to support the name and its meaning. --Minister Randolph (talk) 01:26, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Can you please link me to sources about the name "Rohnayra"? Thank you. —Ganesha811 (talk) 01:37, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Question from Sergio M Alonso Sanchez on User:Sergio M Alonso Sanchez (11:21, 3 July 2025)

Hi, why is not published my article? Sergio m alonso sanchez --Sergio M Alonso Sanchez (talk) 11:21, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Wikipedia does not encourage people to write Wikipedia articles about themselves. See WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. —Ganesha811 (talk) 11:46, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
Ok, how to publish information about one person then? Sergio M Alonso Sanchez (talk) 12:07, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
I don't follow your question, could you explain further? —Ganesha811 (talk) 12:19, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
Im publishing about a famous equestrian athlete.
I follow all steps from wikipedia, even chatgpt has arrange all and put all necessary entries and you say is an autobiography.
How can somebody publish an article if it will be considered autobiography?
in this case, can you review the article and tell me where are the weaknesses? Thanks Sergio M Alonso Sanchez (talk) 13:17, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
Yes, your username implies that you are the same as the subject of the article. This is against Wikipedia's policies. The article reads like a resume, violating WP:NOTRESUME. The article has no sources; Wikipedia requires WP:Reliable sources. Finally, the article doesn't make any claim to real notability; Wikipedia's general notability guideline describes what is usually required. —Ganesha811 (talk) 13:33, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
P.S. The use of ChatGPT and other LLMs is considered to lead to unreliable content and is discouraged. —Ganesha811 (talk) 13:33, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
No, no, the use of chatgpt it was inly to compose the necessary points. All sources were provided. Sergio M Alonso Sanchez (talk) 13:58, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
So as is not possible to publish the article, how can I delete my wikipedia account it was only open to publish , but now it has not sense to have it🤷🏼‍♂️ Sergio M Alonso Sanchez (talk) 14:00, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
Wikipedia accounts cannot be deleted entirely, but can be renamed and anonymized via WP:Courtesy vanishing. Follow the guidelines on that page. You can also just delete the content from your userpage so it is no longer visible and abandon your account - that would be simplest. —Ganesha811 (talk) 14:14, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ganesha811/Archive_13&oldid=1303947393"