User talk:Xpander1

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Xpander1. Thank you for your work on Vahid Karimipour. Another editor, Ldm1954, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

With an h-factor of 24 and 2457 total cites he does not pass the bar for academics (WP:NPROF) by a long way. No major awards; being commended by APS Afor refereeing does not count. Sorry, I see no possibility to improve, but I will let you try. Try nominating him as an APS Fellow as that would count.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Ldm1954}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Ldm1954 (talk) 11:11, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

@Ldm1954 Hi, Thanks for taking a note of this article. Sorry did you mean APS or TWAS fellow? As I was assuming that the latter would count. Also they used to be chair of Sharif University's Department of Physics from 2009 to 2012. https://www.physics.sharif.ir/previous-chairs Does that count? As per WP:NACADEMIC:5. Xpander (talk) 12:53, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Chair does not count at all. I did mean APS, I am not convinced by TWAS. Ldm1954 (talk) 13:02, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

@Ldm1954 Ah, I see, named chair is different from that of simple chair. By "try nominating him as APS", did you mean just mentioning the fellowship in the article and submitting the draft for review? I've already done so. But if the review process took too long would it be fine if I moved the article to back to main space myself? Best. Xpander (talk) 13:47, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

You misunderstood what being elected as an APS Fellow is -- being mentioned as a referee is different and not notable.

I recommend that you let someone else review it; in general I don't review twice. If you move it back to main then I will probably nominate it for deletion, WP:AfD Ldm1954 (talk) 13:52, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

@Ldm1954 True, That's why I asked. There was a source in Persian which mentioned the APS 2019 appreciation as "fellowship" which I cited in the draft. Would you mind elaborating on what you meant by being elected as an APS Fellow? Perhaps a source I have not seen? Xpander (talk) 13:59, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

https://www.aps.org/funding-recognition/aps-fellowship/aps-general-fellowship Ldm1954 (talk) 14:05, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Vahid Karimipour moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Vahid Karimipour. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and see talk page comments. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Ldm1954 (talk) 11:12, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Vahid Karimipour has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Vahid Karimipour. Thanks! Ldm1954 (talk) 11:12, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Vahid Karimipour (April 5)

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

Theroadislong (talk) 14:27, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Italic links

Thanks for adding Hegel Bulletin to List of philosophy journals, but please don't complicate things unnecessarily as you did here. Just put the italics marking outside the link - I've fixed this one. PamD 17:41, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @PamD, This must be an issue with the visual editor. I didn't check for the wikitext, as there was nothing wrong with the visual appearance of the article. But I get the gist, thanks for notifying. Xpander (talk) 06:55, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Islamic Bank of Iran has been accepted

Islamic Bank of Iran, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

NiftyyyNofteeeee (talk) 12:03, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Arnold Vincent Miller (April 18)

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

Theroadislong (talk) 08:13, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Theroadislong, The subject has at least three obituaries dedicated to them, as well as a review of their work, all in reliable sources, possibly meeting GNG as well. Their translations has had an immense impact on the literature. Xpander (talk) 09:48, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Xpander1! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 08:13, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Non-Capitalist Way of Development (April 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Samoht27 was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:Non-Capitalist Way of Development 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.

-Samoht27 (talk) 19:15, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Samoht27 as per your suggestion, I added in more context. Xpander (talk) 07:17, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Political capitalism has been accepted

Political capitalism, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 02:42, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Recent edit reversion

In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. ~~~~ S Philbrick(Talk) 13:34, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Sphilbrick, I think there's been a mistake. Most of the material were not from the allegedly infringed source, and the rest were adequately rephrased/reworded not to impinge on copyrighted material. However a subsequent editor has already added back a truncated version of the content. However If you see no problem in terms of CV, I would prefer the original version. Best. Xpander (talk) 21:06, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm frankly puzzled by two things.

The first is I reviewed the edit and the source and the report. The report said that there is a 71.59% match between the source and the edit, which is quite high. My surprise wasn't that it was not higher, as it looked to me like the two paragraphs in the "life and works" section were virtually word for word matching the source. The only thing I can think of is that the highlighted edit included the opening paragraph and that may have contributed to a match of less than 100%.

The second thing that puzzles me is your assertion that your edit didn't come from the source I identified. It's pretty much Word for Word which makes it statistically close to impossible for your source to be something else unless you found some other place that also copied from the Stanford University faculty bio.

Sorry, unless you can point out that I've made some egregious blunder and your edit was not close to the Stanford bio, I'm not comfortable giving permission to copy a Stanford bio fully subject to copyright S Philbrick(Talk) 22:32, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

@Sphilbrick Oh, I see. The whole infobox was also deleted which didn't come from that source. Also there was a Selected pub section, and some other lines such as the thesis title as well. So it's more like throwing the baby with the bath water kind of situation. With that said as for word for word, there must have been an oversight on my part, I don't know how one puts together a list of achievements and topics differently, do you just change the order?

At last, hope the article is in good shape now. Xpander (talk) 23:36, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, you are correct, while the main problem was the "life and works" section, the edit that added that section also made some changes to the info box. While I can understand the desire that any removal of copyrighted material be surgical, it is accepted practice to revert all consecutive edits by the same editor when a copyright issue is detected.

Just changing the order of accomplishments doesn't cure a copyright problem but if you make a bullet pointed list of keywords related to the accomplishment and then write a summary in your own words you might be surprised how different it is from the original source. S Philbrick(Talk) 12:29, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion @Sphilbrick. There's one last issue, I want to add some more material to the article, mostly through translating from the other wiki, I would cite the source given in the original wiki, but I think there's need to be attribution to the original wiki, and citing the source is not enough? If that is the case, how should attribution to another wiki take place for individual edits? The translation tool of course does that, but it only does so if are creating the whole page from scratch, not for individual sections or edits. Xpander (talk) 08:10, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

I took a brief look and I was surprised not to find a clear definitive statement on what needs to be done. It does require attribution but I think identifying the source material in stating that it's a translation in the edit summary should be enough. Sorry I can't point you to a definitive guideline, but to the extent it triggers a report in copy patrol, I am reasonably confident that that an edit summary will preclude a knee-jerk reversion. S Philbrick(Talk) 12:23, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks @Sphilbrick! I also found this: WP:TFOLWP which pretty much says what you said above. Best Xpander (talk) 13:41, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Internationale Marx-Engels-Stiftung

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Internationale Marx-Engels-Stiftung, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Uncle Bash007 (talk) 16:45, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

May 2025

Hi Xpander1! I noticed that you recently made an edit at Ebrahim Karimi (physicist) and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. "Minor edit" has a specific definition on Wikipedia: it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. Kj cheetham (talk) 10:13, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

@Kj cheetham Thanks for the note. I try to avoid that but it sometimes happens by mistake. Best Xpander (talk) 10:15, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Easily done. :-) Keep up the good work overall. -Kj cheetham (talk) 10:20, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Xpander1. Thank you for your work on Société française de philosophie. Another editor, Noleander, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Wording could use some work. For example: "it has welcomed the greatest representatives .." The word "greatest" is not appropriate in an encyclopedia, because it is a judgment. The voice of the encyclopedia should be very neutral and objective.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Noleander}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Noleander (talk) 12:50, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Noleander, thanks for the reminder. I have addressed that specific line in the article. If you see other issues, please let me know. Best. Xpander (talk) 12:59, 17 May 2025 (UTC)