Hi Orange sticker! I noticed your contributions to John Wilkinson Jr. and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Erna Wazinski, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Air raid. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
Greetings,
When adding the "att=" to orphan articles, please do not remove the original Month/Year, like here. Just ADD the |att= to the existing. For example {{orphan|date=October 2022|att=December 2023}} <-like this. JoeNMLC (talk) 13:39, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For the Edit summary, please add Attempted to de-orphan. Wikiproject Orphanage: [[Wikipedia:ORPHAN|You can help!]] Thanks for helping improve Wikipedia articles. JoeNMLC (talk) 16:24, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
➡️ Looking at Category:Attempted de-orphan you will see a small number of articles with that att= tag. When the tag is added, those articles drop off the regular Category list and are much less visible to most editors — making it more difficult for them to be improved. Pardon the expression (not meaning to be negative), attempted articles are sortof like the "garbage dump". Not many editors know of or work on these articles. Just wanted to let you know. Cheers, JoeNMLC (talk) 00:30, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok so if I can't find links it's best to just not touch the page at all? I thought the att tag would save other editors the time of checking in the same month. Thanks for your help! Orange sticker (talk) 00:46, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
With over 100 months of backlog, (other than the two newest months) chances are slim of multiple people re-checking the same articles. Extra sets of eyes on an article can be a good thing in that many different editors can contribute out of their variety of knowledge and expertise. JoeNMLC (talk) 01:51, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Please only remove the uncategorized tag if the article has content categories added. Stub tags and "X needing attention"[1] do not qualify. LadyofShalott14:26, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own personal sandbox for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}} on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.
Please remember to:
Always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes~~~~ at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to your talk page, and a timestamp.
Leave descriptive edit summaries for your edits. Doing so helps other editors understand what changes you have made and why you made them.
The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to have some fun!
Hi Orange_sticker, Check out a bot-generated report at Wikipedia:Database reports/Orphans with incoming links. Almost all of the reports can have the orphan tag removed. Strangely it says the bot runs Daily, however it only updates on month-days like 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, etc. If the report sits too long with no orphan tag removal, yet another bot goes through & deletes the orphan tags. There are a few editors who also know of the report & sometimes when I check, the removal already done. Happy editing! Cheers, JoeNMLC (talk) 01:24, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your contributions to Titles in medieval Wales. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and on reading your comments, and with my apologies, I should have started this page as a draft from the start .
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Thanks for your contributions to Petz recovery map. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and there appear to be more references on this topic, I suggest including them and expanding by a paragraph or two so it is more useful to novices.
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Hello, Orange sticker, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages that you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum see the Wikipedia Teahouse.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. Again, If you need help visit the Teahouse or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! We are so glad you are here! Sm8900 (talk) 17:17, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do not add personal information about other contributors to Wikipedia without their explicit permission, as you did at Talk:Liverpool City Region. Wikipedia operates on the principle that every contributor has the right to remain completely anonymous. Posting personal information about another user is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's harassment policy. Wikipedia's policy on this issue is strictly enforced and your edits have been reverted and/or suppressed, not least because such information can appear on web searches. Wikipedia's privacy policy is to protect the privacy of every user, including you. Persistently adding personal information about other contributors will result in being blocked from editing.I have redacted and suppressed some of your edits to this page. Unless an editor makes a link to their real life identity themselves, it is unacceptable to add content that reveals that identity. Please do not re-add it.Katietalk00:51, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I understand. I was careful not to explicitly identify the editor but I can see how someone could use jigsaw identification and come to the correct conclusion. Can I ask what the best approach is when you know someone has WP:COI or isn't adhering to WP:NPOV as I couldn't think of a way of raising it on WP:AN without explicitly pointing to the evidence and revealing the editor's identity? Orange sticker (talk) 07:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's a whole section in that COI guideline to which you linked about this – WP:COICOIN. I suggest letting it drop, since the other editor has decided to leave Wikipedia. Katietalk12:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Hi there, Orange sticker, and welcome to Women in Red. Thank you for translating several biographies of women from the French wiki over the past few days. I hope there will be many more. Even if the French version does not include pertinent inline citations, you should try to include them in accordance with our Ten Simple Rules. (In some cases, sources already cited can be re-used as necessary.) If you would like others to see your interest in the project, you can sign up under "New registrations" on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/New members. Please let me know if you run into any difficulties or need assistance. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 12:31, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for participating in the June 2024 backlog drive!
You scored 611 points while adding citations to articles during WikiProject Reliability's first {{citation needed}} backlog drive, earning you this barnstar of diligence. Thanks for helping out!
Yeah but we're talking about some of the most famous brands on earth here, I don't know why Givenchy would be so eager to have citations added about their new CEO that they'd risk the reputational damage, or not just get some intern to do it if it mattered so much. Orange sticker (talk) Orange sticker (talk) 14:38, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Big brands rarely do all of their marketing inhouse. Big brands outsource part of it to marketing companies. Also, commenting on ANI on topics in which you are not involved is usually a bad idea unless you have spent a lot of time researching and have an unique insight that others might miss. Polygnotus (talk) 14:42, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All the paid editing and COI I've come across so far has been small companies or individuals trying to gain notability - like this one. I think if you've uncovered large scale paid editing from global blue chip household names, then that would be quite a big news story. I also think if they were going to go to that trouble, it would be a bit more interesting and bit more subtle. Orange sticker (talk) 14:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
After over a decade in marketing it is quite easy to recognize the patterns. Subcontractors of brands you know do a lot of shady stuff to market products; see data broker and Dark pattern for example. Of course this isn't at the same scale, which is why it apparently flew under the radar, but it still causes damage. Polygnotus (talk) 14:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I still don't think that there's any evidence that this is what's occurring here and you should really consider if a company like Dior or Prada that can get their PR stories into publications like Vogue and Harper's Bazaar would really need to make sure every banal detail is also on Wikipedia, at massive risk to their reputations. Also, this exchange should really be taking place on the ANI. Orange sticker (talk) 15:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you think there is a massive risk to their reputation? We all know brands do terrible things. They can easily blame subcontractors. Nike, Inc. (look at that controversies section!)for example has done a lot of bad stuff but despite or because of it it is still worth a lot of money. The subcontractors hired by big brands often do not have the same ability to manipulate the media. Polygnotus (talk) 15:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think to prove my point I'd have to ask you why you think the editor on the Simon Jupp page had COI and was not just biased? You could make favourable edits to any number of topics you are supportive of - filling celebrity bios with every good deed they've ever done, making your favourite city seem more important than its rival neighbours or like in this case, removing embarrassing details from a politician's article. That would be wrong. But it's not COI unless you can show to some level of certainty that the editor is the subject of the article themselves or has a relationship to them. If not, it's likely just biased editing, which is a common problem. And when you claim COI (or UPE, which is just professional COI) you're not just accusing (rightfully or wrongly) the editor but the subject of the article, implying they or their associates are manipulating Wikipedia against its policies and for their own benefit.
The outcome that the admins have chosen for [redacted] is, like I've said, imo harsh but that's not a hill I'm going to die on. I'm more concerned about people rushing to claim UPE or COI when there's no evidence as it could bring the whole project into disrepute when dealing with such famous, high profile companies. Look through WP:COIN or search WP:AFD for cases of COI and UPE - you'll struggle to find a single topic you've ever heard of before so if this is "as clear a case of WP:UPE as I have ever seen" as Allan_Nonymous said, and others have agreed calling it WP:DUCK, I would urge them to spend a bit more time making themselves familiar with the topic first and remember that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
So, a lot to unpack here.
I think the editor on Simon Jupp had a COI, likely was a UPE, because of the behavior I described. It's classic UPE behavior. It is not classic inexperienced newbie behavior.
Bias can be COI. A fan of a musician may have strong enough feelings that they rise to the level of a COI. It is incorrect to say it can't be a COI unless the editor is the article subject or has a close connection.
Questioning someone about a COI isn't an accusation of the article subject. See above. Questioning about UPE can certainly be, but that doesn't mean we can't ask those questions. I try to ask them carefully.
I'd have p-blocked from article space, but all the editor in question needs to do is file an unblock that indicates they understand that what they were doing looked like paid editing, explain that it wasn't (or that it was but they'll now declar their UPE and will no longer edit directly), and promise to stop directly editing articles of wealthy brands. I don't think that's harsh, really.
Not sure what you mean about not finding a single topic you've ever heard of before at COIN. We see COI pretty often. At AfD, sure -- there are tons of obscure bios there.
COI isn't unusual at bio and business topics. Especially bios of minor entertainment figures, but also at small businesses and huge wealthy brands. Happens all the time, so it's kind of not extraordinary. I regularly interact with paid editors who are doing it right: by making edit requests at the article talk. Just responded to one this morning. Valereee (talk) 12:15, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Simon Jupp editor was asked to declare COI, but frankly the way they were asked I'm not surprised they were defensive! I think a lot of what you're saying here doesn't link up with Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#What_is_conflict_of_interest? it really does specify that the editor has to have an external relationship to the subject. Which may well turn out to be the case, but I think the chance to prove anything may now have been lost, and it is better to err on the side of caution (lots of great examples of here though! As I've said, these things do often end up attracting media attention).
I've been looking for examples of UPE that involved high profile, established businesses, the type of who afford the very best level of PR, and struggled to find anything beside the well publicised cases of it backfiring that I already linked - [2][3]. I'm interested if you can show me more recent examples. But like you say, it seems most companies with a professional standard of PR know how to go about this and do it right. Orange sticker (talk) 12:48, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, closing that ANI thread may be the best idea now because having two people repeatedly tell me I'm wrong and that I need to go away is going to have the opposite effect!!! Orange sticker (talk) 13:01, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do we have a list of domain names of Reach PLC? If so, we can make an overview how often each is used. I agree that many or most of these titles have limited reliability (depending on the context). Polygnotus (talk) 13:05, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, but I'm sure it wouldn't be too much work to collate them. I'm still debating whether or not to proceed, I've been encouraged to reinstate my post on RSN but funnily enough, the recent discussion on ANI has made me think about whether or not I have a COI with regard to Reach plc! Though whether or not that matters in this context I'm not sure. Orange sticker (talk) 08:11, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2024 Southport stabbing I fail to see what the issue with citing a source as video of Nigel Farage?! He is an elected member of Parliament and a British broadcaster so can you explain why you thought this as one of the legitimate reasons to remove this?Tad102 (talk) 17:23, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
'A self published YouTube video doesn't count'? This is not a YouTube video of Dave Bloggs in his mother's spare bedroom this is a YouTube video of a member of parliament and well-known broadcaster who was stating fact not speculation and you say it doesn't count... I think either you need to go back to school or this policy needs a definitive revision Tad102 (talk) 23:40, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Orange sticker, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the new page reviewer user right to your account. This means you now have access to the page curation tools and can start patrolling pages from the new pages feed. If you asked for this at requests for permissions, please check back there to see if your access is time-limited or if there are other comments.
This is a good time to re-acquaint yourself with the guidance at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Before you get started, please take the time to:
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed 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.
Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your permission "patroller" (New page reviewers) will expire on 00:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC). For most rights, you will need to renew at WP:PERM, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion.Leaderbot (talk) 10:14, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Women in Religion have a monthly virtual edit-a-thon and the next session is December 2nd 4:00 - 5:00 p.m. CST. For Zoom meeting details, contact Dzingle1 or RosPost. Women in Red members are welcome to join the Zoom Meeting here
Tip of the month:
Think of rewarding contributors, especially newcomers, with a barnstar.
Ah I see there was a mistake in the caption of the first map which I have now corrected. So presumably @Guy Without Name got the wrong info from the first map when they added it to Russia as well. If @Guy Without Name had said that was the source in an edit comment I would not have bothered going to ANI which would have saved us all time. Anyway I have now asked for my complaint to be closed. Chidgk1 (talk) 18:43, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When creating biographies, don't forget to use Template:DEFAULTSORT. Accessible from "Wiki markup" at the foot of the page being edited, it allows categories to be listed under the subject's family name rather than their first or given name.
Who are the most overlooked and interesting Women in Red? We've no idea, but we're putting together our list of the 100 most interesting ex-Women in Red. We are creating the list to celebrate 10 years of Women in Red and we hope to present it at Wikimania. We are ignoring the obvious, so do you have a name or subject we should consider? Can you suggest a DYK style hook? If you are shy about editing that page, you are welcome to add ideas and comments on the talk page.
Every language Wikipedia has its own policies regarding notability and reliable sources. Before translating an article from one language Wikipedia into English Wikipedia, research the subject and verify that the translated article will meet English Wikipedia's policy requirements.
Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission, and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions here. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.
Done - fyi, at Category:Attempted de-orphan from December 2023, I fixed those articles by adding back the original orphan date back into the orphan tag. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 16:28, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
Welcome Orange sticker!
button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes 
Thanks for contributing to the article Newgate Prison. However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. Please help by adding more sources to the article you edited, and/or by clarifying how the sources already given support the claims (see here for how to do inline referencing). If you need further help, you can look at Help:Menu/Editing Wikipedia, or ask at the Teahouse, or just ask me. Thank you. Dormskirk (talk) 17:18, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Liverpolitan1980 (talk) 23:24, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Do not add personal information about other contributors to Wikipedia without their explicit permission, as you did at Talk:Liverpool City Region. Wikipedia operates on the principle that every contributor has the right to remain completely anonymous. Posting personal information about another user is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's harassment policy. Wikipedia's policy on this issue is strictly enforced and your edits have been reverted and/or suppressed, not least because such information can appear on web searches. Wikipedia's privacy policy is to protect the privacy of every user, including you. Persistently adding personal information about other contributors will result in being blocked from editing. I have redacted and suppressed some of your edits to this page. Unless an editor makes a link to their real life identity themselves, it is unacceptable to add content that reveals that identity. Please do not re-add it. Katietalk 00:51, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
