This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
WikiShootMe has a lot of new updates: OAuth-based image upload button, uploads to Commons and adds to Wikidata item with one click, right-click on the map to add a missing item, build-in Wikidata search, free images search (example for Central Cambridge)
A famous Italian song, Tanti Auguri by Raffaella Carrà, states "Com'è bello far l'amore da Trieste in giù" (literally, in English: "How great it is to make love from Trieste to below"). This is a query to find out where you shouldn't make love.
Hi Doug, I know that you're very busy, and I'm sorry if you had deliberately skipped it (as opposed to having missed it), but I had one more important question regarding a matter that needs to be stopped. Its about a so called "source" added everywhere by user "Freedom Wolfs". I presented the matter in a reply to your last message on your talk page. Just in case. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 03:38, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
@LouisAragon:No, I just got too busy and forgot it. I finally found a mention on WorldCat.[1] No copies in the UK, 3 in the US:[2]. I'd say definitely not an RS, but I'd advise you to take it to RSN to make it more 'official'. Tertiary sources such as encyclopedias are sometimes acceptable, but the one being used now? I'd say no. Doug Wellertalk14:50, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Numerous image files copied from elsewhere. I've deleted a couple, raised one here hoping for more attention but there might be a backlog. I wouldn't be surprised if he's doing copy/paste translations. Doug Wellertalk15:22, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Doug, do you have the article (just for an example here) "Ethnic groups in Pakistan" on your watchlist? I just hopped by, and I'm noticing some very odd a la 19th century/early 20th century racialism on pages alike, where IP's/accounts (without edit-summary) drop stuff everywhere regarding "ethnolinguistics" of its ethnic groups (seems to be very important for people of that region) throughout the entire article. Even, as we can see in this particular case, its just a plain article regarding ethnic groups of a modern-day nation. Hence I just reverted all of it. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:38, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
I just encountered WP:HD#Ongoing semi-protection of the Race and intelligence talk page while scrolling through WP:HD. If you've not already addressed the situation, could you look into what the IP's talking about, and if appropriate, remove semiprotection here or at the article's talk page? I know nothing of the situation (I don't think I've ever looked at the article, its talk page, or the Arbcom case), so I can't offer any constructive input. Nyttend (talk) 17:27, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Nyttend Weird. Bish protected it for one day but it seems to have become indefinite. We were getting loads of socks on the R&I talk page. And of course IPs who may be socks pushing a pov. It's no secret there's been an off-wiki campaign to get editors to change the page. But I'll unprotect it and only protect it again if there is blatant socking. Otherwise I'll leave it to others as it's an R&I page and withdrew from that some time ago. Doug Wellertalk17:55, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Looks to me like the settings got switched around: it had already been on indefinite move protection, and somehow the indefinite got attached to the edit protection while the move protection expired in one day. I'm restoring the move protection now, but of course undo me if you don't want it to be move-protected. Nyttend (talk) 20:09, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
See the protection log for User talk:ThisIsaTest. I didn't know this, but it's easy to set a separate duration for move protection and edit protection, and you can even set it so that editing requires admin rights but moving requires only confirmation. Bishonen found a page with move protection but no edit protection, so she would have found "Unlock further protect options" already checked. I'm just guessing that she set the top one to "indefinite", scrolled down, noticed that it shouldn't have been set to indefinite, and changed it to one day, all without noticing that she'd changed the duration for the wrong option. Nyttend (talk) 21:34, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
@Nyttend: Thanks. Yes, I definitely think R&I needs move protection. And thanks for the detailed explanation. Explains why a new account couldn't post to my talk page also. I'll tell Bish. Doug Wellertalk07:51, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
No, I restored the former move-protection here at your talk page; I haven't done a thing with the R&I subject area. Nyttend (talk) 13:01, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Doug. There is another aggressive user at the Race (Human Catergorization) page. I suspect this user is a sock puppet of the previous user Captain TJ Verity/mikemikev based on the user's aggressive and sarcastic tone, use of specific labels (Marxists) to discredit other WP editors, and aggressive editing. I just wanted to alert to this possibility. Thanks. danielkueh (talk) 16:51, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm not entirely sure what this guy is going on about. I apologise about his opinion of my tone, but he has to admit I supported my position with sources and logic. In fact it's safe to say that I am correct and he is incorrect. Maybe he feels defeated and has to go complaining about how my tone frightened him or something, because he cannot back up his position logically and honestly. Tiny Dancer 48 (talk) 17:22, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
Planet to Earth: this tool uses data from Wikidata to visualise the links between places on an astronomical body named after a place on planet Earth.
WikiDataScape is a Cytoscape app for interactive browsing of Wikidata.
The property "KML file" was created last week (see list below) and has already a full list of values, sample LUA module and property documentation page available (Property talk:P3096)
Hi, regarding those edits from earlier today, it looks like most all of the copyvio came from http://www.taneter.org/moors.html and subsequent pages. I think a revdel may be in order given the amount of copied text, but the template rd1 doesn't have a provision for "all edits by Rodten1", so I mention it here. Thanks! CrowCaw19:30, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Purrhaps You'd do better thinking about why 2 editors reported you for editwarring, ending up with your being blocked. Use the article talk page when your block expires, don't go back to adding the same stuff. Doug Wellertalk18:04, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello Doug, I see you edit SC Bose often amd monitor it. I have recently edited to include details of a recently declassified report of the Japanese government. Can you look at it? If there are any mistakes in content or the style is not proper, please correct it. Thank you. DinoBambinoNFS (talk) 04:18, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Welsh Wikipedia includes Wikidata-based article placeholders, like this one
Wiki Loves Monuments started! You can help by improving the items about heritage buildings or use Wikishootme to find unpictured monuments
English Wikipedia now has a WikiProject Wikidata to coordinate integration with Wikidata. Why not start one for your local Wikipedia? Add it to Q20855878 if you do.
Polentarion thinks that theology is an empirical, methodological science. Try reading through their comments on the page and you'll see that I'm not picking out the worst thing they've said, but a representative example. So yeah, that's who you're dealing with.
MjolnirPants - nice to know that you go adminshopping. I wondered why Doug seemed to ignore my comments respectively did some c&p of links without much reflection. Seems you smeared me, and I don't like that. Polentarion Talk11:11, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Once again I don't understand some of what you've written - "ignore my comments respectively did some C&P of links without much reflection" seems to be missing some words and is of course just another silly attack on me. And it's not smearing to point out that writing that "theology is an emperical, methodological science" is, um - well he doesn't actually say much about it except that you've written worse. As a statement about theology it's misleading. There is an American tradition of empirical theology but that doesn't make all of theology empirical and certainly not a science as we understand science today (yes in the past it was described as a science, that's irrelevant. Doug Wellertalk13:29, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Sorry to say, but you quoted the smear and ignored what I had been writing. The statement versus Mjölnir claimed that theology is scholarly and modern science is very much based on the heritage of theology, take the Merton Thesis. What is the problem? And why does Mjoelnir starts to preach (as in [3]) with inches of sermon about 18th century DWEM? I had been referring a) to Wissenschaft, less to science. German DFG currently spents 1.6 million € to evaluate that for the catholic case just in Bochum (the Emmy Noether http://www.theologie-als-wissenschaft.de/). Polentarion Talk16:20, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
I see there is an edit to the contents of this page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sathatha_Sri_Vaishnava) at 08:01 on 1 September 2016 in the 'History' section. I tried undoing the edit on 3rd September. However, I think that was blocked by you.
Could you please let the changes in. The 'History' section had valuable information about the surnames of this caste.
13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)49.205.8.26 (talk) 13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Doug for the elaborate details about the policies.
From your note, I understood that, the book which has the 'surnames list' has copyright violation issues and hence cannot be used.
However, I have many other sources, which give similar information. Let me know, how I can add the information to the Wikipedia page.
Thanks Doug for the elaborate details about the policies. From your note, I understood that, the source referred at "https://www.jstor.org/stable/604951?seq=15#page_scan_tab_contents" has copyright violation issues and hence cannot be used.
However, this source doesnot have the 'surnames list' about which I am interested in. So I assume that putting back the surnames list doesnot cause any harm.
Also, I have many other sources, which give list of such surnames/last names. Please help me in adding information to Wikipedia page and cite the reference.As of now the page is edit protected.
--Old note for your reference ----
Hi Doug Weller,
I see there is an edit to the contents of this page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sathatha_Sri_Vaishnava) at 08:01 on 1 September 2016 in the 'History' section. I tried undoing the edit on 3rd September. However, I think that was blocked by you.
Could you please let the changes in. The 'History' section had valuable information about the surnames of this caste.
13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)49.205.8.26 (talk) 13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
No, they were copyright violations, I'll post a longer explanation to your talk page. Doug Weller talk 13:32, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Referring to our convo regarding the mass-cross article bogus spamming by Freedom Wolfs
Regarding "Freeom Wolf" his rampant editorial pattern (see for our previous discussion regarding this; [4]), I'm afraid that another warning or notification simply ain't gonna help, given that he's still at it, spamming the same OR/non-RS nonsense in a frantic way on so many articles.[5] - LouisAragon (talk) 03:16, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
LouisAragon, I did say go to RSN. I'm happy to support you here but you've got to do the heavy lifting by going to RSN. Tell him you're doing that. Revert him, whatever, but I can't do the heavy lifting, no time for a start. Doug Wellertalk16:22, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
I share LouisAragon's concerns over Freeom Wolf, and have in the past attempted to remove some of the very low-grade content he has been adding (such as spamming the repeated "the population is busy with gardening, farming, animal husbandry"-type stuff) - though there is so much of it I stopped doing it. Some of the claims, like villages of a few hundred people having libraries and secondary schools and hospitals, are unbelievable regardless of the Azeri source claiming them as true. His sources used for the meanings of place names in Azerbaijan (in particular Nakhchivan) seem pure propaganda, works produced to deny the Armenian past of most of these settlements. Other content he has added have presented Armenian monuments as Azeri ones. However I have not wanted to start an edit war by basically reverting everything he has added as soon as he adds it, even though the quality of the material he has been adding would justify such an action. The easiest solution might be to get the sources he is using for all this content be declared unsuitable. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 23:07, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi,
Purrhaps is back again and I'm not really sure how to go about dealing with those crazy edits. It might come to NOTHERE but someone is not getting what is being said. Sir Joseph(talk)16:53, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Artice revision (all the necessary details including the link and name of the article, aswell as the diff included in the body)
Dear Mr Weller,
First of I'd like to thank you for taking your time to read the message.
Also, I'd like to apologize to you in advance for any typing mistakes that I made, as english is not my native language.
I'd like to disscuss more about the recent edits (changes) that I've made (which were reverted) on the following article.
There have been many debates about the content found on the page not so long ago and many changes were made during last few months - even days, if you look at the View history tab.
Before I do start, if you'd allow me, I'd like to cite your revision page:
Any edit that personally attacks someone or something. [1]
Any edit that involves a person, place, or thing that is not especially important, or that does not provide enough information to positively identify the subject of the sentence or phrase.[1]
The first revision I've made was due to the lack of references and a lot of missunderstandings and inaccurate information (whereas, I wanted to point out that the whole "Controversey" tab was based on missleading/false positive newspaper/tabloid articles and claims).
The references left in the controversey tab (where most of the text comes from), are all gone (removed from the online newspaper's due to the fact that were false accusations).
The references left are as follow (I'll post a link of each of those with an short summary):
This one is the only valid link, as it is the one that actualy do exist; mainly due to the fact that this online portal is based all arround gossips and (mostly!) false positive information and inaccurate claims that has something to do with controversies.
The link provided is archived (old cached version of the website). As you can see it is prefixed with Web Archive that captures the old content that was removed from the Internet (not to name the reasons as I don't want to sound subjective on the matter).
This is the invalid link, with a deadend (the actual link doesn't take the visitor to the article it was referencing, as it was deleted long ago, but rather to the latest news from the politics category).
This link, same as the previous ones, is from the Inserbia Info domain and its' content was removed. This one is not prefixed though, so it points to the deadend - 404 page.
This link, as most of the others, is pulled from the archive (as the archive subdomain proves, when you visit the actual page). The web page is not a 404 link, but rather pulls the deleted article from the archive - http://arhiva.alo.rs/...
Also, as someone who resides in the same country as Mr Mića Jovanović., I'm totaly aware of the controversey that was going on, last year, but as you already saw from the listed, all the claims made were false positive and had certain political conotations during elections (in Serbia).
Once again I'd like to thank you Mr Weller, for your time and patience.
Thanks for the change. I was looking for an "assault" and didn't see one. It was an odd altercation so I wasn't exactly sure how to characterize it. The initial version just seemed to sensationalize the incident. - jag7211 (talk) 12:47, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
I would like to propose locking of the article "John Naisbitt University". I think that article is targeted by ex-rector M. Jovanovic or his associates.
Saw a comment by a Norwegian IP over on Talk:White nationalism that seemed familiar. Found that their IP range has been commenting a long on white supremacy/Nazi stuff. This a known sock perchance, or just some rando user? Thought I'd ask you and your TPSs if they recognized it.
<tps>There was a blocked account that socked for a while from Bergen earlier in the year. This one geolocates to Oslo, but that's not conclusive one way or another. Acroterion(talk)03:30, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Doug pinged me about this, since I blocked Olehal09 a year ago, but I don't have any useful insight. As I vaguely recall, Olehal made it fairly easy by being an obvious racist. I don't know of any sock tells if they're being slightly less obvious this time. Also busy this week so can't look at the page myself. Sorry I can't be of any help. --Floquenbeam (talk) 11:56, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
My MFD
Yeah... I have screwed something up big time.... and can't figure out how to undo it. Can you help?
My rational would be this: Talk sub-page is one huge WP:SYNTH vio... the page creator has a unique (original) take on the "13 families" (a sub-theory within the broader NWO theory). He created the sub-page to lay out the "evidence" supporting his original theory. While he does cite sources... he does so as "evidence", not verification. The problem is that he is the one making the connections, not the sources. Blueboar (talk) 16:43, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Doug, what do you think about Armenian transliterations for figures that were not Armenian in origin (the Orontid dynasty) and lived during a time when it still would take about a millennium for the Armenian language to be actually attested (5th century AD) and on top of that to be written in that alphabet as well (also 5th century AD). There are multiple issues with this anachronistic fashion in my opinion. What's your take on it? - LouisAragon (talk) 13:58, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker)MOS:FORLANG says “If the subject of the article is closely associated with a non-English language, a single foreign language equivalent name can be included in the lead sentence ….” So I guess it hinges on whether or not shared geography makes for a close-enough association of an ancient dynasty with a modern language. I would think not: for example we don’t provide the Egyptian Arabic for Ptolemaic dynasty, rather the Greek. If the native form of the name is unattested it should be left out; extended etymological discussion, including modern & variant forms, belongs in the article body.—Odysseus147920:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Doug Weller. You have new messages at CatcherStorm's talk page. Message added 21:33, 11 September 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.
Frank Gaffney founder of Center for Security Policy
Hi, Doug:
I'm writing in regard to my recent attempt to edit the Frank Gaffney Wiki page. Wikipedia claims to have a policy of maintianing neutrality in it's content; however I noticed that there is an extreme left-wing bias in the information provided on this entry, such as "Known For: Conspiracy theories"! Citations include such extreme left-wing organizations as "Southern Poverty Law Center," which gets its funding directly from George Soros! You can't get more biased than that.
The Southern Poverty Law Center is basically a "thought police" site, and the organization deems any speech they don't like (such as Frank Gaffney's work and that of others like him (Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller, Brigitte Gabriel and many others), which is exposing the truth of Islam, terrorist organizations or those who support terrorist organizations, like CAIR (one of many "unindicted co-conspirators" in the Holy Land Foundation trial) and other related work, as "hate speech," "Islamophobic." This is hardly a "neutral" source.
I don't know who created the original page for Frank Gaffney, but it seems it could have been written by none other than Grover Norquist, who many people know has animosity toward Mr. Gaffney, because of his work. You may know Mr. Norquist's wife is Muslim.
This being the case, in an effort to provide some balance (or neutrality), I would suggest that this page be "cleaned up" and these biased sources be either removed or balanced with other sources with an opposing view. Or at least change the wording so that a reader knows that these sources are biased.
It is pages like this one which give Wikipedia a bad name, and we often are ridiculed on forums, etc., when we use Wikipedia as a source of information.
Please consider these suggestions, if you are serious about maintaining balance and neutrality in your articles.
Simple, if you wanna help, provide reliable sources for any information you provide in the article. Not to mention try to remain neutral. I honestly don't know if you can seeing as you said this: "Citations include such extreme left-wing organizations as "Southern Poverty Law Center," which gets its funding directly from George Soros! You can't get more biased than that." Don't get me wrong, I understand different sources have different political leanings, but your statement is also biased. See what I mean? You need to find something that talks about the points you want to source in a neutral tone. (talk page stalker)CrashUnderride14:45, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Temple of Edfu
Hi Doug. Thank you to pay attention to Temple of Edfu article. Regarding my edit that was reverted, I do agree with you that there are many real good images to be show, but I don't think the article must be turned into a giant gallery, and there are pictures there that are placed in a very bad way, turning the article layout and diagramation awful. Finally, the image of the game is the only one that shows a restoration of the temple, so, I think that it deserves a place there. Regards, Sturm (talk) 20:23, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
@Sturm: I agree there are too many images, but I thought you removed some of the best. As for the game image, how do we know the reconstruction was done by an expert on such temples? Doug Wellertalk20:50, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Well, talking about the fact of there are too many images, go on, please, select the best ones and reduce the number of images. As for the game image, you are right, we don't know how good/precise is that CG restoration. Anyway, I think that its still possible to show that image as a "free restoration", and indicate also that the temple is shown inside a computer game (a relevant info for itself). Regards, Sturm (talk) 20:51, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
I won't weigh in on the photos, but I oppose the video game image. I can spot four inaccuracies in the architecture (the pedestals under the falcon statues, the soffit and the stairs in the doorway of the pylon, and the over-elaborate paving in the courtyard) before we even get to the artwork on the walls (a willy-nilly collectionn of Egyptian imagery from multiple sources, including the illustrations of Egyptian deities that User:Jeff Dahl created specifically for Wikipedia). If the video game's references to the Temple of Edfu aren't notable enough to describe in the article on the temple—and I very much doubt they are—I see no reason why the image should appear there. A. Parrot (talk) 01:51, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Wikidata weekly summary #226
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Upcoming: Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing) & Liam Wyatt (User:Wittylama) speaking about GLAM-Wiki (including Wikidata) in Warsaw, 19 October. Details tbc.
Upcoming: Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing) speaking & running workshop about Wikidata at SFK 16 ("Software Freedom Kosova Conference") in Pristina, 21-23 October.
#SundayQuery on Twitter: every Sunday, you can ask for help or advice about SPARQL queries, how to build or fix it, some SPARQL-ninjas will be there to answer you!
Researcher? You can participate in the WSDM Cup 2017 challenge and improve Wikidata vandalism detection
New templates: ((Denmark properties)), ((Greece properties)). Please add labels in your own languages, and consider making a similar template for your country or region.
Development
Lowered relevance threshold for ArticlePlaceholder search results from 3 to 2 sitelinks (T144188)
Added 'otk' as an available language for monolingual text values (T137809)
Working on making it possible to paste partial URLs into the site selector (T144310)
Made progress on showing editors on all Wikimedia projects which articles on their project use data from a given Wikidata item. We will also show in the page information (action=info) which items a given article uses. Also worked on showing which projects use a given item in the page information. (T103091)
Added meta information to the html header of item pages (T88475)
Made progress on making ArticlePlaceholders indexable for search engines (T144590)
I explained why I reverted you, you'd have to ask the other editors why they reverted you, but it appears that you might have been lucky to avoid a block. Instead the page was protected. It looks to me as though you are only editing there to attack the subject of the article. Doug Wellertalk17:57, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) On the contrary, to my reading if anyone was attacked it was the critics, with the suggestion that the subject’s history with doping was being used as an excuse for politically or racially motivated disparagement. I haven’t looked at the sources, so I’m not defending the edits (which do strike me as a bit coatrackish), just observing that WRT the subject they make for a counter-attack rather than an attack, so to speak.—Odysseus147918:28, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Doug Weller. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((You've got mail)) or ((ygm)) template.
Hello Doug, I'm hoping you can provide some advice here. I don't know if this is something that is directly relevant to the current discussion on Jared Taylor. I took a look at stormfront.org just now and did a search for "wikipedia", just on a hunch, as there's been a flurry of activity on the Taylor page recently, along with a talk page comment at white nationalism from a brand-new user. This post, dated 9.10.2016 at 0120, asks for users there to come and support the removal of the terms "white supremacist" and "white nationalist" at Taylor's article. I don't see any evidence that that's happened yet, as the people commenting so far have all been established accounts, but I did think it's worth mentioning. Your thoughts? Rockypedia (talk) 14:54, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
@Rockypedia: The article is fully protected for a couple days. And if I'm the one handling the request at WP:RFPP, you won't get it (sorry, but requests to protect against future disruption that never happens are not unusual). --NeilNtalk to me15:36, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Solely looking at article content, Taylor's has one sentence on Trump. Gaffney's has substantial political references. Someone else can apply DS but it's too much of a stretch for me. --NeilNtalk to me15:45, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
I figure it can wait until the current protection on Jared Taylor expires. At that point, if we see a flurry of activity from anon IPs or from newly-registered accounts, that Stormfront post should probably be mentioned, yes? Rockypedia (talk) 17:37, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
I want to recognize your integrity in handling problematic articles with which you are involved (e.g. here and here). As an admin with the power to protect articles yourself, you've stayed honest in realizing your involvement in editorial disputes, no matter how petty, and requested un-involved, third-party administrative assistance instead of using your own. Exemplary. Cheers, Airplaneman ✈15:01, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
I believe this on commons may be related:[6]. Some of the users aren't blocked on enwiki, and it's probably not necessary since the master uses so many throw away accounts that are abandoned within a few days. Just thought you might be interested in knowing. 16:30, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
@Sro23: Interesting. I also know of 3 earlier socks on Wikipedia, PENTAGONALIS and PENTAGONALIS 2. And an even earlier one whose name I forget, begins with a T. As you say, they're soon abandoned. Doug Wellertalk17:56, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) @Sro23 and Doug Weller: couple of suggestions; possibly (?) User:S7771 who started Joaquín F. Chicarro which two early socks User:PENTAGONALIS777 and (maybe the one you were thinking of DG?) User:BenTTT, who also both edited the Rafael Olvera Ledesma article. Shouldn't they both be deleted too, by the way? Also User:PENTAGONALIS 2 and User:Tuesttay both started / edited Rafael Camacho Guzmán, which is in exactly the same style. Tuesttay has done loads of them. Just FYI, sorry so long. MuffledPocketed18:35, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Requesting lock
Hi Doug, requesting permanent lock on El Clásico article. If there is an article subject to more vandalism than this one I've yet to see it. It's the same repeated vandalism over and over (this has been going on for years)..the odd brief lock here and there achieves only a temporary solution. Cheers. Carlos Rojas77 (talk) 20:04, 16 September 2016 UTC)
As a long time Talk-page stalker here, and a bit of a fan, I'd just like to make clear that Mr. Redding ≠ me. I shouldn't need to state the obvious, but I didn't want to risk any misunderstandings. Especially after this monument to lunacy recently regurgitated the old conspiracy that Reddi and I are "Likely" the same person. Best regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 20:44, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
@Xenophrenic: You two are nothing like each other. Reddi knows I am dubious about his understanding OS RS and OR to say the least. I'm not alone there. And thanks for the compliment. Doug Wellertalk21:04, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
A while ago, I spent some time improving an article which was riddled with unidiomatic and incorrect English, and in which the subject of the article was referred to by her first name. I assume you are familiar with the English language, and with Wikipedia's manual of style, and that you want to make articles better, not worse. But you left the edit summary "Find a grave not an RS for birth", which made no sense for two reasons: firstly, I had not added the link you referred to, and secondly, you didn't even remove it. Why, then, did you undo all my work? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.151.178.168 (talk) 20:30, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
(From a wandering Recent Changes vagrant) His revert reason is stated pretty clearly. You added that link in the previous edit, what good could possibly come from denying that? You claim in talk pages that you've been editing since 2002 but every one of your edits seems to be reverted for poor sourcing, removal of factual content, or disruption, not to mention the edit warring. Jergling (talk) 20:47, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
What good could possibly come from your ridiculous lies? As I already said, incredibly clearly: I did not add that link in the previous edit; it was already there. And Doug Weller did not remove it; it was still there after his edit. What motivation do you have for lying about me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.221.40 (talk) 21:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Indeed, what motivation could I have? It's almost as if I'm an impartial third party who has examined the situation, collected evidence, and drawn my own conclusions! Jergling (talk) 21:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Jergling (talk·contribs) Careless of me not to remove the findagrave source, but the main reason for reverting was in any case sockpuppetery. see Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Best known for IP - the IP above and another who edited my page after your response, and whose post I've deleted, have both now been blocked by other Admins. Thanks for dropping by, sorry you were subject to abuse. Doug Wellertalk09:04, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Watching this on my watchlist; if the only source available (after a quick search I couldn't find another one), then use it. There are so many pages that have blogs etc. as sources and until a better source comes by, I suggest to use the one available. That date of January 11 wouldn't been invented or something; it needs to come from somewhere (probably the family themselves), so it's good to add to the article. Tisquesusa (talk) 19:00, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Sorry about this but I was trying to do something different, but unfortunately I uploaded a file that i would like to be deleted. The following can be typed into the search engine in order to see it before it can be deleted.
The Project Grants program is accepting proposals from September 12 to October 11 to fund new tools, research, offline outreach, online organizing and other experiments that enhance the work of Wikimedia volunteers.
The RevisionSlider is now available as a beta feature, try it to have a visual overview of your diffs.
The Wikidata team attended and participated to a lot of conference these past days (WikiCon, ViewSource, DPpedia, SoCraTes, Write the doc) that's why we don't have many tasks to share with you this week :)
Cite: It is difficult not to suspect that the tradition places the prophet's career in Mecca for the same reason that it insists that he was illiterate: the only way he could have acquired his knowledge of all the things that God had previously told the Jews and the Christians was by revelation from God himself. Mecca was virgin territory; it had neither Jewish nor Christian communities.
The suspicion that the location is doctrinally inspired is reinforced by the fact that the Qur'an describes the polytheist opponents as agriculturalists who cultivated wheat, grapes, olives, and date palms. Wheat, grapes and olives are the three staples of the Mediterranean; date palms take us southwards, but Mecca was not suitable for any kind of agriculture, and one could not possibly have produced olives there.
In addition, the Qur'an twice describes its opponents as living in the site of a vanished nation, that is to say a town destroyed by God for its sins. There were many such ruined sites in northwest Arabia. The prophet frequently tells his opponents to consider their significance and on one occasion remarks, with reference to the remains of Lot's people, that "you pass by them in the morning and in the evening". This takes us to somewhere in the Dead Sea region. Respect for the traditional account has prevailed to such an extent among modern historians that the first two points have passed unnoticed until quite recently, while the third has been ignored.
End cite.
Concerning Dan Gibson it is clear that he is a kind of unprofessional enthusiastisc "Heinrich Schliemann", yet, he has a point and deserves to be mentioned, since he points exactly to Petra. It is a kind of trivia worth to be mentioned. I read his argument, it is too good to be simply dismissed, in my humble opinion.
Maybe we can put the sentence back into the article? I read that trivia sections are unwanted but maybe a trivia section would please you better?
@IbnTufail: thanks for the detailed reply. As we are discussing the Petra article, is Crone specifying Petra? Because if she isn't then we can't suggest it is, we can't interpret our sources. As for Gibson, the way I read WP:Fringe it could be in his article but not Petra's. Doug Wellertalk18:31, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Crone specifies the same region, but no place. Well, then we omit it. What a pity. But let us keep it in mind: The research goes on, and reviews admit that Gibson's hypothesis has adherents in academia, without mentioning names. --IbnTufail (talk) 19:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Doug!
Thanks for your help.
I have noticed, that some of these "Relisters" are on WP for less than a year, bragging on their user pages about the articles ( on computer games etc. ) they created. Although i am not a native speaker and on WP for only 3 years i have a degree on history and feel to a certain extent insulted, to say the least.
This fact kind of discourages me to 1. further leave any statements on this discussion page and 2. to further contribute on WP altogether. ATBWikirictor (talk) 12:12, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
@Wikirictor: I understand your concerns, but I think that the editor who relisted this did it in good faith and is an experienced editor. Don't despair. I've posted to their talk page, by the way. Doug Wellertalk15:14, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
RE:Era Styles
Yes, you are correct, I will be sure to provide proper edit summaries from now on. Thank you for providing me with the links regarding dating styles, they would have been very hard for me me to find otherwise. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Klanko (talk • contribs) 15:59, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
As are mine. User:Klanko, with your latest edit, you were correct, but did you check for the established style? You can click on view history, then on revision history search, and look for bce or bc and see when it was added and whether there was an era style before that. Sometimes going back a bit before that is useful. Doug Wellertalk18:19, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Doug, I think you're better versed on this topic (Gutians) than I am, but I stumbled across some huge amount of disruptive IP hopping on the article (see revision history), dating to not that long ago, which has resulted in the addition of a plethora of non-WP:RS sources which are "ought" to to back up the "claim" that Kurds are supposedly descendants/linked to Gutians. Oh, and that most scholars back this up as well (!). Would you agree with the entire removal of that part + categories "Kurdish people", etc? - LouisAragon (talk) 04:09, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Hmm that's odd, I always thought that the Ancient Near East was in fact your niche. :-) I was wrong then, sorry for presenting you with this. @Kansas Bear:, you perhaps there willing to say something about this? - LouisAragon (talk) 01:50, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Doug Weller. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.
Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.
In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:
Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you. This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
An FYI
I have restored referenced information in the Afshar people article which was previously changed by an IP, later the "new user" Afshar Khan, then user:Samak. There is evidence on user:Samak's talk page that would indicate canvassing.[8] I have posted a warning on Afshar Khan's talk page and expanded the information to include Turkomen, which oddly redirects to Turkmen, which is what they(Afshar and Samak) were removing.
Both Afshar Khan and Samak, who seem to be unable to find the article talk page, should be given the warning for AA2, since Afshar people is directly related to Azerbaijan. Their continuous edit warring may draw a sanction at some future point. --Kansas Bear (talk) 06:47, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Doug, unfortunately, I have to add to this, that its seemingly continuous, and we wouldn't even bother mentioning it to you if this would be the first, second, or even third time.
Having said that, Samak is a nice guy and does alot of valuable work overal. The vast majority of his contributions are useful and good, and the same goes for his overal activity (he does alot of anti-vandalism/anti-disruption work). At least, in my honest opinion. He's really helpful as well overal. However, the core of the problem is that all these sock accounts/IP's (of likewise Azeri ethnicity) keep using him as a canvas target and he, unfortunately, succumbs to it. Such as this "Afshar Khan". I'm pretty sure that a formal AA2 warning should do the trick. - LouisAragon (talk) 04:40, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
@Kansas Bear and LouisAragon: First thing is we really need to have people communicating in English. So far as I'm concerned, that's a must. How else can other editors tell whether they are attacking each other, plotting to take over the world, or something really bad? So I've left them both messages about that, and DS alerts. Hopefully that will help. Sorry, I've been busy lately. Still must finish up a new SPI I think. Doug Wellertalk18:18, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm not the only one reverting you. What I reverted there was the change from "biblical to figure" to "middle Eastern epic hero" - unsourced and presumably your opinion, a label that is unsourced and imho inappropriate even if true, and a change from "Samson "had two vulnerabilities—his attraction to untrustworthy women and his hair, without which he was powerless. These vulnerabilities ultimately proved fatal for him." to "His supernatural strength relies on a "magical vow with God", which imposes the rule that Samson gets to be invincible so long as his hair is intact". That included an unsourced quote about a magical vow, we always source quotes. Doug Wellertalk08:53, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Sir, I came across this page and saw NO reference/citations whatsoever, those present are the ones from a personal blog. Since you are experienced with Wikipedia for a long time. Please give your expert advise further if I can take this to the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks in advance. Best - Worldandhistory (talk) 16:58, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
TXT Werk is doing automatic entity recognition in text with the help of Wikidata. Previously only German was supported. English is now supported as well.
Hi - I emailed Opabinia about this, but I see you're active now so I thought I'd stop by. Vote (X) for Change is causing some problems in my section and in Vanja's. It's not bad yet, but I've had two IPs in the last couple of hours ask questions about my recent protection of a couple of Vote (X)'s target pages, and spout some nonsense about an administrator superseding their community ban. I blocked the obvious IP for evasion but maybe it would be best to semi-protect the candidate pages for a couple of days. If you guys want me to answer the questions, I'll do so, but I don't think any good comes out of this. Thanks for listening. :-) Katietalk14:46, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Does this mean I get "Honorary Arb Emeritus without Portfolio" status, and can do it on any Arb-related page? I think I could single-handedly solve most of ArbCom's problems if given free rein... --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:56, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Oh Dear God no (This took a sudden sinister turn). I don't want to be part of a committee ever again, I just want permission to solve problems any way I think best. I've found I can be (well, feel) much more useful off the committee, because I can actually look, think, and act without getting permission from 15 other people (or 14, or 13, I've lost track). I'd make an excellent God Emperor of Wikipedia (he said humbly). I made a terrible committee member (ask around). --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:34, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
You know, I did some statistics on arb-related email traffic not too long ago and the 2014 committee was actually one of the least chatty groups.
We also have WP:BB which I can highly recommend to you. The citation is stated clearly and in just the line above. If I may make another suggestion, perhaps familiarise yourself with what you are doing before pushing buttons in future. I trust that you won't make me clean up after you - thanks! Samsara11:32, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Generally, being bold refers to fixing the problem, which you neglected to do, apparently preferring the undo button because hey, someone else will come along and do it for you, right? Samsara11:51, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Off topic, but I love how Samsara is being so snarky to an admin. lol. But hey, Samsara, why don't you format the citation properly? Crazy thought, I know. lol. (talk page stalker)CrashUnderride11:56, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Things are getting hot again on Mahidevran Gülbahar. Could you have a look please, as you did in the past? I don't know what to do since this article attracts people who just don't want to hear about reliability of sources, avoidance of OR and basic wikipedia principles. Thank you in advance.--Phso2 (talk) 00:20, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
((yo|Phso2]]. Looking at the first bit of the section on origins, I see "*According to some unpublished and non-scholarly sources, she is of Circassian origin, and is the same woman as Malhurub Bahar Idarovna (daughter of Idar of Kabardia) as both woman share same date of birth, date of death and the literal meaning of Malhurub (Малхуруб) and Mahidevran is same, "Moon of Fortune" or "Always Beautiful". This can be confirmed by the Genealogy of the princely family of "Cherkassky" (pictured right).[unreliable source] Some contemporary Venetian sources also confirms that she was of Circassian origin.[1][2]"
The bit about "unpublished sources" is wrong, as we only use reliably published sources. So that and the use of an image from a blog can be taken to WP:RSN although really you should start this on the talk page - start a discussion on sources and original research. The word 'confirm' needs to be removed also as if it's disputed than all we can say is that they state she is whatever. The problem is that it seems that you've added some sources that fail our criteria. I still think a discussion is needed on the talk page, you can always say that you were wrong. 18:04, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your answer. I can start a discussion about the reliability of blogs, but I wonder why there must be long tedious discussing when basic rules of verifiability, reliable sourcing etc are simply ignored.
Anyway I didn't erase this unsourced theory since it's too difficult to observe basic wikipedian principles on this article, but the main problem is that I was edit-warred when I added some sourced content; I don't understand what you mean by "some sources that fail our criteria", since the source I added seem to meet those criteria.
If I start a discussion on the TP, will you give us third party advice about the sourcing and then take adequate measures consequently? Regards.--Phso2 (talk) 07:45, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi. It doesn't seem that the discussion on the TP is leading somewhere, with strange accusations of OR and violation of NPOV made against sourced content. It requires someone to explain what OR and NPOV are and to stop this edit-guerilla; could you have a look (or tell where to ask in such cases)?--Phso2 (talk) 07:50, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
References
^Dr Galina I Yermolenko, Roxolana in European Literature, History and Culture, pg.2, citing Navagero ("la circassa"), Trevisano ("una donna circassa") in Eugenio Alberi, ed. Relazioni degli ambasciatori veneti al Senato, ser. 3: Relazioni degli stati ottomani, 3 vols (Firenze [Florence: Società editrice fiorentina], 1840–1855), 1: 74–5, 77; 3: 115.
^Marie Broxup (1996). The North Caucasus Barrier: The Russian Advance Towards the Muslim World. Hurst. ISBN978-1-850-65305-9. p.29
Hi, Doug Weller. At first you can check the article Oghur languages, were this equality is mentioned. As for a quote for my edit and added reference, you can check it on page 535 from the cited book The Turks: Early ages, vol. 1 от The Turks, Cem Oğuz, ISBN9756782552, Yeni Türkiye, 2002. Also, I did not understand while the explaination that Granberg is a Bulgarian was deleted. Regards. 46.238.25.84 (talk) 08:32, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
On page 470 from his book The Hunnic Language of the Attila Clan, Harvard Ukrainian Studies, Vol. 6, No. 4 (December 1982), Pritsak wrote as follows: Our detailed analysis of the Hunnic onomastic material, together with examination of it from the point of view of Altaistic linguistics, has yielded very positive results indeed. It has proved that it is possible to determine the character of the Hunnic language. It was not a Turkic language, but one between Turkic and Mongolian, probably closer to the former than the latter. The language had strong ties to Old Bulgarian and to modern Chuvash, but also had some important connections, especially lexical and morphological, to Ottoman and Yakut. Regards. 46.238.25.84 (talk) 17:11, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Wikidata weekly summary #229
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Proposition for upgrading the default copyright license for Wikimedia projects to CC-by-SA 4.0 (does not affect the structured data part of Wikidata, which uses CC0).
More work on automated sitelinks for Wiktionary (phabricator:T987)
More work on federation for Commons in order to be able to use Wikidata's items and properties there (phabricator:T76007)
Adding entity usage information in action=edit on Wikipedia and co (phabricator:T144921)
Working on making it possible to get formatted values back on the client. With this we will for example link the value to a Wikipedia article where possible. (phabricator:T142940)
Hi User:Troy Oakes. Our content guideline says that "Adding external links to an article or user page for the purpose of promoting a website or a product is not allowed, and is considered to be spam. Although the specific links may be allowed under some circumstances, repeatedly adding links will in most cases result in all of them being removed." That's not the only problem. You've clearly got a conflict of interest. We sometimes have similar problems with academics adding academic articles as sources. You also should read WP:ELN and think about why your link meets the criteria, and if you do find some articles where you think it does, post to the article's talk page asking what people think. If it's a very quiet article with no one discussing it on the talk page, you can ask at WP:ELN. You aren't in any trouble and it may be that there are a few articles where people might see it as useful. Doug Wellertalk12:19, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
User:Afshar Khan
On 23 September 2016 you notified Afshar khan of discretionary sanctions for pages regarding Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts. Would Afshar's continued edit warring(which he has been reported) of Oghuz Turks into the Nader Shah article be sanctionable? --Kansas Bear (talk) 08:53, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
This is just borderline WP:CANVASSING. Your push to erase the modern Armenian name for these dynasties would be deemed correct if you can actually prove to us that the Orontid Dynasty wasn't Armenian in nature and that it doesn't have a relevant importance to the Armenian people today. So to insinuate that it should be removed on the basis of "Armenian transliterations for figures that were not Armenian in origin" (as you say here) is outright POV pushing and a severe violation of what is suggested at WP:NCGN. If it's relevant to a certain group of people speaking a certain language, it should be there. Simple as that. Étienne Dolet (talk) 04:57, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Upcoming: Andy Mabbett speaking about Wikidata & running a GLAM-Wiki workshop at SFK 16 ("Software Freedom Kosova Conference") in Pristina, 21-23 October.
New template: d:Template:Poland properties. Please add labels in your own languages, and consider making a similar template for your country or region.
Development
Worked further on automatic linking of pages between Wiktionary language editions
Worked further on making it possible to use Wikidata's items and properties to describe files on Commons
Reviewed error messages and made them easier to understand
Added tooltips in some places in the UI to make them more understandable (e.g. ranks, special values)
Made the loading animation clearer in embedded query results (phabricator:T148042)
Making it possible to paste the full URL of an image on Commons into image properties (phabricator:T147917)
Worked on a small birthday present
Fixed run button not being reenabled after some queries (phabricator:T147114)
More work on better parser function and Lua functions that return formatted values (phabricator:T142940)
Undoing the last edit to an item will now show a undo summary, not a restore one (phabricator:T147631) Thanks Matěj!
Lule Sami and Pite Sami are now supported languages in Wikidata (phabricator:T146707)
Brainstormed about how to make it easier to write queries without knowing SPARQL
Hey Doug! Responded yesterday to your email, but not sure if you saw it. I've just been on an extended wikibreak. Things got a little too "real" a few years ago. Between all of the constant stress dealing with vandalism and true believers of various stripes, pseudoscience pushers, and you know how it goes, I decided I didn't need the drama. IRL career wise it has also been pretty hectic the last few years so I can say I haven't really missed it all that much. I log in maybe once or twice a year, sometimes do some minor fixes by IP, but that is about it. I have done quite a few new illustrations for various archaeology subjects (majority of them for archaeolgists books, museums, magazines, etc.) so was trying to add a few of them. Hope you have been well. Heiro17:13, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Recently an editor wanted my opinion concerning the validity of The Races of Europe, by Carleton Stevens Coon, 1939. It is a revised edition by William Z. Ripley's 1899 edition. To me it appears a bit out of date, but this is out of my area of study. It is currently being used as a source on the Kabyle people article. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:57, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Sorry. It is not my intention to change quotes. I only wanted to change unnecessary usages of the Arabic 'Allah' into the English 'God' in texts that aren't quotes, because most of it says 'God' anyway. But I don't want to vandalize anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noah Glimmerveen (talk • contribs) 19:10, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
@Noah Glimmerveen: There are a lot of articles that need work. I suggest you find them and not do this anymore before you get the attention of others. Doug Wellertalk19:17, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
One shouldn't go round changing things like that mechanically. But any Arabic-speaking Christian calls the Christian god 'Allah', and that is not noted enough.Nishidani (talk) 21:00, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I'd forgotten that, User:Nishidani. Does that mean you want to reinstate some of his edits
No. I stalk your page Doug, and hadn't looked at the edits in question. I'm just against mechanical editing that plunks in something everywhere, and I got the impression this was the problem. I recalled a bishop's remark - a very conservative Catholic - telling me about his visits to prison, not to evangelize, but simply to see if he could help Islamic believers out. He said that he was compelled to rethink a lot of his received views when, on bidding one fellow goodbye for now, he said:'Pray for me', and the Arab apologized, saying he could not. This stopped the bishop in his tracks: he took it as a negative Islamic kind of diffidence about the people of the Book. On inquiring 'why not', the prisoner told him, that in Islam, God's will determined whatever occurred (Insh'allah), and that to pray for intercession was sacrilegious, an attempt to bend the will of the Almighty. In short, intercession was theologically impossible because it implied man's relationship with God/god was a do ut des mercenary bargain. A very good point, esp. to anyone familiar with Marcel Mauss's seminal essay on 'The Gift'. Must get back to reading up on the Damin language, though. Cheers Nishidani (talk) 21:13, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I have followed the breadcrumbs from some of those edits. There are people who strongly prefer one or the other variant and both are commonly used. While I understand Doug's reaction to seeing this debatable change made across multiple articles, it happens to be consistent with WP:ALLAH. Eperoton (talk) 00:16, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
So it is. ((yo|Eperoton|Nishidani]] if WP:ALLAH applies to all articles, then virtually all of our Christianity and Jewish articles break it by using "He" in the middle of sentrnces. Something needs fixing. Doug Wellertalk06:23, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
A lot of surprises, stories and presents will be shared between October 29th and November 4th. Check the project chat or the mailing-list every day to see what happens!
You can also participate by posting a story (more info here), a tweet with #WikidataBirthday, let a message or a present on the birthday page.
If you're participating to Wikidata's birthday, you can add this template to your user page.
Someone who's using a secure device has been adding the same OR since Oct. 17. Could you please protect the page? Thank you & Cheers! — JudeccaXIII (talk) 15:36, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Talgai Skull
Hi Doug, I managed to find some pics of the Talgai Skull on a 1918 English paper. However, it is a work by Stewart Arthur Smith who is pratically unknown aside being an anatomist and the younger brother of the more famous Grafton Elliot Smith. I was wondering if you could find his nationality (most likely Australian though) and above all his death date in some database or way unknown to me, hoping he is gone long enough for this work being in PD now. Khruner (talk) 17:30, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
How fast, anyway I see... the picture will be provided by a visitor in Sydney some day. Thanks for the accurate search! Khruner (talk) 18:00, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker)@Khruner: although the image is still under copyright in the UK, so cannot be hosted on Commons, to be allowed here it only need be PD in the USA—which it is, having been published before 1923. So ISTM that, unless you consider yourself subject (practically or ethically) to British law, you could upload it locally with a ((PD-US-1923-abroad)) tag including the parameter out_of_copyright_in=2032.—Odysseus147921:42, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
@Odysseus1479: I was already thinking of drawing the skull from the picture by myself (a thing I used to do quite often in the past) in order to upload the result on Commons and making that available to everyone. However, at the moment the only wiki where such drawing could be put is en.wiki, so I can seriously consider your idea. Thanks for letting me know about this template. Khruner (talk) 22:00, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Reply: The first edit (as I am new to Wikipedia) did not leave a edited summary. The second attempt at editing the page used the summary of: "Statement was based on testimony of other peoples thoughts and opinions via staffers/bodyguards. Not Alex Jones' own opinions. Recorded video of live broadcast (segment at 6:20): www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOxiNRLmp4ok)" -- The show was on a live broadcast across the nation. The statement of "sulfur" was redacted by Jones as a slip up instead of using the words quote: "[...] a latrine or shit". Regardless, the issue in question was statements taken from bodyguards and staffers -- Not Alex Jones. He was quoting what other people had said about these political figures. By stating that Alex Jones made the claim that they smelled of surfer is slander.
I am aware of the broken reference tag; however, I do not have the functional capabilities to correct such errors in a timely manner with the approval request process at every minor change.
Moving a page
Hi Doug Weller. I think you as an administrator can help me with this article. I don't know whether you can remember it or not but you had previously protected this article because of the disagreemants among the users about the material and of course the title of this page. At the end no one was able to prove what her royal title was so everyone decided that the title of the article should be only her name but as it was one of the previous titles of this page users were unable to move it back and User:Nedim Ardoğa came up with this new title and put her actual name and nickname together. Now it's impossible for me or anybody else to change the article's title to Mahidevran. As there has been no official move request for this page as long as I know, I think it's possible for you to move the page as an administrator. Can you do it? Keivan.fTalk09:17, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Why have I been reverted by two Administrators? Do you work for wikipedia 24/7?
You said you are from Derbyshire in your userbox I never claimed anything! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vorpzn (talk • contribs) 16:06, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
They are Mexican archaeologists, authors of an Atlas of prehispanic Mexico.[12] I don't understand why we can use it however, perhaps the original has an appropriate licence. Doug Wellertalk16:05, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Doug, if you can reference the text, Atlas del México prehispánico, (Spanish is my worst language) then I don't have any objections to its inclusion. It should be referenced in that article to be included as a resource for that Wikipedia article... I am actually surprised that something as valuable as that resource, was never translated into English. Regards, Steve. Stevenmitchell (talk) 02:24, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Pseudoskeptics As Liars
Doug seems like you misinterpreted my question. Let me state emphatically I was not referring to Dr. Ortiz de Montellano in that regard. I don't know him and did my best to avoid any possible appearance of a personal attack on him.
The liars were the ones who sttarted the Melanin Theory article and placed it under the category of skepticism while questioning only the work of so-called Afrocentrics. True skeptics would have questioned everything, which is what I attempt to do. At best the article's topic is controversial. Claims of pseudoscience are shredded when the work of F.W. Cope is analyzed as pertaining to melanin being a superconductor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhotep (talk • contribs) 09:14, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Mhotep Ok. but that just means that you are calling other editor's liars, which is unacceptable. Please read WP:AGF. We call it skepticism if reliable sources treat it as skepticism, and please don't go on about a source getting one thing wrong proving that they don't meet our criteria for reliable sources. In any case, if you have to analyse a source you are doing original research which is firmly against policy. Doug Wellertalk09:48, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Wikidata weekly summary #233
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Four new types of charts for the Query Service: line chart, bar chart, scatter chart and area chart (read more and try examples in the documentation) by Jonas
((#statements:…)), a new parser function is currently in development with better features that you can try on beta by the Wikidata dev team and volunteers
Search field added in Scholia, a tool to create scholarship profiles, by fnielsen
The birthday party is not finished yet, every day until November 4th you will discover new presents and stories. Follow the project chat or the mailing-list or #Wikidatabirthday to get the news!