User talk:Elli

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 8 sections are present.

Hi! This is my talk page, feel free to drop me a message. To experienced editors: feel free to stalk my talk page and reply to any threads here.To admins: I prefer that my talk page remain unprotected, even if it's being vandalized. Such edits do not particularly bother me and I prefer to remain accessible to anyone who would like to reach me. However, if the volume of vandalism is so high that no other solution would stop disruption, I don't mind if my talk page is semi-protected for a day or two. Hopefully, this is a rare occurrence.

How do I create a citation? --AndaMasroor (talk) 07:49, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @AndaMasroor see WP:REFB. JuniperChill (talk) 21:31, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can I have my extended confirmed thing back now. I made lots of edits the last 25 days and I think 99% of them are constructive. HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 23:02, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HumansRightsIsCool: given some of the recent situations you've been involved in (e.g. Talk:Americans#The current situation (pl)), I don't really think you should be editing in contentious topics at this point. You've been pretty close to getting blocked recently -- this sort of behavior would almost certainly get you blocked and/or topic-banned if you're editing about Israel and Palestine. You can request this back at WP:PERM though, but I do not recommend it. Elli (talk | contribs) 18:56, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I already resolved the "Americans" issue on the talk page before starting a edit war, and I can't edit Israel or Palestine topics, even if I wanted to, because all of them are locked. Since you don't recommend me going to WP:PERM rn, when do you recommend it, when I get more skilled at editing in a few months? HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 18:59, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HumansRightsIsCool: just keep editing about less controversial topics. Add well-sources content to articles, avoid getting dragged into disputes, etc. Even just a month of more experience would probably be fine, but you need to prove you have the right attitude to work in these controversial areas, and I'm not seeing that. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:05, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

got it. I'll avoid content disputes and fights, and most of my reverts will try and combat vandalism and try to be respectful to every user, even if they start the fight. HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 19:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Elli! How do I make a citation? --WikiPedian0036 (talk) 01:01, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) @WikiPedian0036: Help:Referencing for beginners offers guidance on how to make a citation. Left guide (talk) 02:18, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Elli, I want to add 2 notable alumni to Santa Monica High School who both have their own Wikipedia pages. I also want to add a 3rd person who I am not sure actually graduated, but I know was still attending the Santa Monica High School in the 11th grade. He is a major skateboarder legend who also his own Wikipedia page. Can you please tell me how to add them ? Thanks --Jimbillc (talk) 06:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimbillc: you should be able to click the "edit" link next to the section and add them to the list. Be sure to add references to reliable sources to demonstrate that they did go to the high school. Can you please explain what in particular you need help with doing? Elli (talk | contribs) 06:30, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elli, I went to Santa Monica High School when all 3 were there and personally knew 2 of the 3. I played on the same football team as Dennis Thurman who went on to an NFL career with the Dallas Cowboys and hung out and skated with Tony Alva a lot. I didn’t know Dennis Smith although he may remember me. He was an All Pro football player with the Denver Broncos. Am I considered to be a reliable source ? 2600:1010:A010:F2C0:D4E0:2296:1D33:8454 (talk) 06:53, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No; you cannot cite your own experiences or knowledge as that is considered original research and is impossible for other readers to verify. Elli (talk | contribs) 06:54, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what about the Wikipedia pages for the 2 football players? Can that be my reliable source ? Both pages state that they went to Santa Monica High School 2600:1010:A010:F2C0:D4E0:2296:1D33:8454 (talk) 07:23, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, but those pages likely do contain a source for that statement that you can cite. Elli (talk | contribs) 17:39, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When the page lock expired the persistent vandal returned and again deleted "China" from the Infobox with no explanation.(diff) (The film is quite clearly a Chinese co-production as explained in the Production section.)

I don't want the article to be locked but I fear it is unfortunately necessary. (My personal preference would be for you to allow flagged edits or to range block the IP where this vandalism is coming from or both.) Please reapply the lock. -- 109.79.168.9 (talk) 19:11, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re this: You can usually just use the "b" argument in {{RFPP}}, followed by the blocked user's name, IP or range, and then in the third argument the blocking admin, to indicate that a block has accomplished what was sought through protection. I usually add in text how long the block will be. Daniel Case (talk) 03:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) meant to use that template, but had temporarily forgotten it... Elli (talk | contribs) 20:10, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The fourth round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 29 August. Each of the 8 contestants who advanced to Round 4 scored at least 472 points, and the following contestants scored more than 700 points:

• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,150 points, mostly from 3 featured articles, 2 featured lists, 7 good articles, and 13 did you know nominations;
• Arconning (submissions) with 791 points, mostly from 2 featured lists, 8 good articles, 4 did you know nominations, and plenty of reviews;
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) with 718 points, mostly from a high-multiplier featured article on Genghis Khan and 2 good articles; and
• BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 714 points, mostly from 1 featured article on Susanna Hoffs, 2 featured lists, and 3 good articles.

Congratulations to our eight finalists and all who participated. Contestants put in extraordinary amounts of effort during this round, and their scores can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 36 featured articles, 55 featured lists, 15 good articles, 93 in the news credits, and at least 333 did you know credits. They have conducted 357 featured content reviews, as well as 553 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 30 articles to featured topics and good topics.

Any content promoted after 29 August but before the start of Round 5 can be claimed during Round 5, which starts on 1 September at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. If two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether for a good article, featured content, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Remember to claim your points within 14 days of earning them, and importantly, before the deadline on 31 October.

If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:12, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just checking in to say hello.

I am a long time Wikipedia consumer and monthly financial contributor.

Retired, with a background in STEM and technical writing.

Not yet ready to edit, but if there are contributions to make within my scope, I'm ready to help. --Grickerd (talk) 04:12, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Grickerd: hi! Just let me know if you have any questions. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:10, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sennecaster (Chat) 02:42, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Elli - Bumped into an IPBE request that you addressed in July. First, thank you for taking the initiative to do so; speaking as the checkuser who is currently working to clear the VRT backlog of requests, I really appreciate you stepping up. I know many admins are a bit uncomfortable doing so, and it occurred to me that as a checkuser team, we could probably provide more useful information to admins who are willing to go out on a limb a bit more.

Once I get through the backlog, I'm thinking about creating a bit of a cheat-sheet for admins who are considering granting IPBE so that we can be a bit more standard across the board. Things like what to check about the requesting user (clear block log, no worrying messages on talk pages especially copyvio messages), standard length of IPBE (even as checkusers, we rarely grant more than a 1-year IPBE, for first time requesters/newer users it may only be 3 or 6 months), and common issues that may lead to an IPBE grant. Also probably adding that, if a user has a prior IPBE grant and has not had any "red flags" or behavioural issues in the interim, they would probably be okay with a renewal for the same length of time. I was thinking that it might be a bit too far to include geographies where IPBE may be needed, as there might be a temptation to abuse that information, but other opinions on this might be helpful. Do you have any thoughts about this? What information would be helpful to you in deciding whether to grant an IPBE?

Just for the record, I did modify the IPBE grant you made from "indefinite" to one year (as it's our usual standard), but I'm really glad that you were able to help that user when the few CUs who manage the VRT requests were tied up with other things. Risker (talk) 03:26, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Risker: I think you may have misidentified me... it looks like Bearcat actually did the grant in question. However, I also happen to be interested in this, I was just indeed too shy to act in such situations. So I would be interested in such a cheat-sheet if you create it :) Elli (talk | contribs) 03:36, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, remedies 5.1 and 5.2 of World War II and the history of Jews in Poland (the topic and interaction bans on My very best wishes, respectively) were repealed.
• Remedy 3C of the German war effort case ("Cinderella157 German history topic ban") was suspended for a period of six months.
• The arbitration case Historical Elections is currently open. Proposed decision is expected by 3 September 2024 for this case.

Miscellaneous

• Editors can now enter into good article review circles, an alternative for informal quid pro quo arrangements, to have a GAN reviewed in return for reviewing a different editor's nomination.
• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in September 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,900 articles and 26,200 redirects awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!

---

Formulas of Microsoft Excel --Mukundane Darious Kigundu (talk) 07:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mukundane Darious Kigundu: hi; is there anything Wikipedia-related you'd like help with? I can't really help you with Microsoft Excel. Elli (talk | contribs) 14:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I just created an account to do a specific edit, and I'm not sure what the process is. I was planning on creating a topic on the "Talk" section before making any changes, since I'm brand new at this, but are there other procedures I should follow? --AndrewWSHutchinson (talk) 18:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AndrewWSHutchinson: hi and thanks for reaching out. In general you're actually advised to just be bold and make the edit, but asking on talk is a good idea if you expect it might be contentious. There is nothing else you have to do. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:32, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yo wag1 --Ibriaid8eu (talk) 19:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Statistics on Allentown, Pa buildings that are 9 stories or greater WarriorofWord (talk) 22:02, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@WarriorofWord: hi; I'm not sure how I can help you with this? The relevant info, if we have it, is probably in Buildings and architecture of Allentown, Pennsylvania, which I see you've been editing. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So… major cities have a page with the heading "Tallest Buildings in _____". It is specific to BUILDINGS and not a broader subject of ARCHITECTURE (which, in addition to buildings, would include churches, statues, etc.) Allentown is the 3rd largest city in PA (population of about 120,00) and is currently constructing new high rise buildings and has two proposed skyscrapers on the table. I thought it would be appropriate for Allentown to have a page designated to the specific topic of BUILDINGS, as do other major cities. WarriorofWord (talk) 11:11, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@WarriorofWord: ah, you could probably create such a page then. You can look at Category:Lists of tallest buildings in the United States by populated place to find comparable pages to model it off of. Elli (talk | contribs) 15:30, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you sir! WarriorofWord (talk) 16:49, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do I create a new page? --WarriorofWord (talk) 22:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have requested on Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests, but it takes too long to move, I don't know who to ask, can you help me?  Rafael Ronen  05:24, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rafael Ronen: I think those moves are something that would likely benefit from more discussion or at least explanation (of why the titles are an improvement) first. RMTR is usually for obvious things; you might want to open a requested move where you bundle all the relevant pages and explain the rationale for moving. Elli (talk | contribs) 06:05, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Elli: Greece's Next Top Model season 1 and Greece's Next Top Model season 2 has been changed, only 3-5 haven't changed, the reason I want is to move quickly so I can edit the blue link in the related article  Rafael Ronen  07:12, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification on Link Removal and Tone of Feedback Regarding Demidov Contribution

Hello I recently made an addition to the Nikolai Vasilievich Demidov Wikipedia page, including a reference to the International Demidov Association, specifically linking to a page about Andrei Malaev-Babel and the Assotiation (the link in the page are dead). Malaev-Babel is a well-regarded expert on Demidov’s techniques and has been instrumental in preserving and promoting these methods through his work as a professor and as a leader within the association. The link I included was removed, and the editor, APK, left a message stating that my contribution "did not appear constructive," with an utterly insulting suggestion to "experiment" in my sandbox next time.

While I understand the importance of ensuring Wikipedia maintains high standards, I found the tone of the feedback somewhat dismissive and not conducive to constructive dialogue. I believe that Malaev-Babel’s contributions are highly relevant to understanding Demidov’s legacy, and the link provides verifiable information on his work and influence. Could someone help clarify why the link might have been considered inappropriate, and how I can reintroduce this important information properly? Is there a more appropriate way to cite this source or explain Malaev-Babel’s significance in the article? I’d appreciate any guidance on how to handle this situation and ensure that the content meets Wikipedia’s standards. Thank you so much for your help! Best regards, kimon Fioretos

ps should i stop using my real name because APK tone was inna[ropriate and scary --Kimon fioretos (talk) 10:47, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you're well. I would like to ask for your guidance regarding a recent interaction I had with an editor (APK) while contributing to the Nikolai Vasilievich Demidov page. I attempted to add information about the significant role Andrei Malaev-Babel plays in preserving Demidov’s techniques, but I unintentionally removed a Commons link. This led to a misunderstanding, and I wish to formally apologize to APK.

APK, in good faith, advised me to use the sandbox. However, because the link appeared in red (not leading anywhere), I misread the suggestion as an innuendo to “mind my own business.” When APK later sent the sandbox link in blue, I realized that the sandbox is an actual tool and not an insult (as in "go play in your sandbox"). In retrospect, I still can’t understand how I managed to misinterpret the situation, but I sent APK several misguided messages, and I now feel quite embarrassed.

Could you advise me on how to frame a proper apology and how to move forward in a constructive way? I also understand that my additions might need refinement, so I would appreciate it if you could guide me on how to send my contributions to someone more experienced with the page, allowing them to integrate the information appropriately.

Additionally, I would like to change my username or even leave Wikipedia, as I don't feel capable of contributing in a meaningful way, as has been clearly demonstrated. Could you help me with this issue as well?

Thank you in advance for your help. I want to ensure I approach this respectfully and in line with Wikipedia's standards.

Best regards, Kimon Fioretos --Kimon fioretos (talk) 14:22, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kimon fioretos: thanks for reaching out. I think your apology that you've left is probably about all that can be done. We all make mistakes when we start out editing, and I wouldn't worry too much about this; it's just a good lesson to maybe assume a bit more good faith of others before reacting negatively. Also, just so you know, links that are red are that way because they link to a page that currently doesn't exist; your sandbox (at User:Kimon fioretos/sandbox) is currently one of them. Plenty of experienced editors use sandboxes for various things too (such as when making a particularly complex edit), though they aren't necessary to use.

Please let me know if you have more questions. I hope you don't leave the site; again, we all make mistakes but I think you can definitely be a valuable contributor here. Elli (talk | contribs) 15:28, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Elli, how do I go about moving my published page from the sandbox to an live article? --Peacehappinesslove (talk) 18:53, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]