User talk:Becky Sayles/Archive 6

Categories
HI Becky, I'm still working on Peter Bjarkman's page. I edited one of the categories SABR to change it to Society for American Baseball Research, which has a wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_for_American_Baseball_Research but the entry stayed red. Is this because having a wiki page is not the same thing as being a wiki category? If not, how do I get things that are red to go blue? And how does it get red in the first place - is that automatic (by program) or does someone have to watch every edit and check every change? Thanks. Rbwilbur (talk) 00:24, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * See Red link. It may be helpful to see if a category exists before adding it.  In the search box, type "Category:insert name of category".  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  02:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

5 January 2015
An award was for willingness to help a sock of a globally banned sockmaster? Legacypac (talk) 06:44, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Clarify?  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  06:53, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The efforts of bunny. The accts creating the article have all been blocked as socks of a globally banned user. It was only help to disrupt - with full knowledge of what he was doing it seems. Anyway... Legacypac (talk) 06:57, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not seeing disruptive edits. What do you mean by "full knowledge"?  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  07:14, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Dear Becky, sorry for any problems or hardship here. See full information on the subject (person) here . No further action needed.77.234.45.130 (talk) 18:47, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Phil Gough
Hi Becky, I am trying to verify the "Phil Gough" page for you. Can you please assist me. I am mostly trying to tie up the wikipedia links between the groups he has worked with and also his movie and soundtrack work on IMBD. Do I need something more specific for Wikipedia?

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bozohands (talk • contribs) 10:43, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:RS.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  10:48, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Becky, Thanks for your response. But I am still wondering if the criteria has been met? Is there something specifically that can be included or excluded to meet Wikipedia standards? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bozohands (talk • contribs) 10:54, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * There are multiple requirements of Wikipedia articles, the templates on the article now only address some of them. For this article I would suggest a few things. Find multiple references about the subject from reliable sources. These references should be to something that covers the subject with some depth. Something written about him, instead of just mentioning him in reference to someone else. The sources you use should be independent of the subject. So don't use his website, facebook, twitter, etc., or websites promoting him or selling anything made by him. The sources should not be from user generated content like wikipedia or imdb. Once you have found the references, add them to the article as inline citations.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  11:13, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Edits to Generation of Youth for Christ
Edits proposed for the Generation of Youth for Christ page as detailed on the Talk page, particularly the pejorative use of "liberal" and "progressive" on the GYC page to describe criticism from independent journals Spectrum and Adventist Today should be approved. Those terms as used there are misleading and inaccurate. Jwrightable (talk) 08:27, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Requests for edits to semi-protected articles use a particular format. Identify what text you are requesting to change and what text you are requesting to replace it with, as indicated in the instructions on the form.  Example: Change "ABCD" to "EFGH" because of insert-reason. Another Example: In section IJKL, delete text "MNOP" for insert-reason.  If you have difficulty, recheck the instructions on the form. The process for responding to edit requests generally follows a particular pattern.  After a request is made, it is evaluated and the responding editor either accepts the requested edit, rejects it, or asks questions.  If a request does not follow the format described above, it is rejected.  Requests that are rejected for format are not revisited, in part because the edit requested cannot be determined.  Contacting the editor that rejected a request, as you have done here, is not useful as there is no longer a pending request.   Please review the instructions on the form before submitting another request.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  09:25, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

10:19:56, 7 January 2015 review of submission by Darren joyce
Darren joyce (talk) 10:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC) Hi Becky;

U just declined my draft:Zulficar Moussa, I would like to what is needed by me in order for the draft to go through.

Regards;
 * Hello . Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.  The draft Zulficar_Moussa was declined for failing to provide reliable sources.  Please see WP:RS for more info.  On the draft itself there are multiple templates, the pink boxes at the top of the page.  Each one contains information from a reviewing editor about the reason it was declined.  You should expect that if concerns from previous reviewers are not addressed, that the draft will be declined again.   B E C K Y S A Y L E S  18:51, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Adolf Hitler - Relationship with Mussolini
Thank you for looking at the edit request. I have not made enough changes for people to react to an edit (as it suggests under consensus building) and would prefer not to be confrontational. Any suggestions about getting a consensus? Historicat (talk) 20:03, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Without making a disputed edit, you may build consensus in other ways. Starting a discussion on the Talk page for the article could help. But it may be slow, depending on how active editors are on there. You can also seek outside opinions.  Request for comment seems like a good option.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  20:17, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. Historicat (talk) 20:31, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Deepak Chopra
Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Deepak Chopra. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:09, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  18:20, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thank you for this! WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:52, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Regrading the Solar energy
Hi, I totally understand why you remove the link. As a matter of fact, I didn't know how I can share a website address (url) without a link? However, I just want to edit the dead link and replace it with updated resource. (alternativepowerstation (dot) org)

Best regards, Teddy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teddymamo (talk • contribs) 07:12, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Freemium Isn't Free redirect
Just an FYI, but your edit summary for Freemium Isn’t Free said my previous edits were vandalism, but two of them were just null edits because my iPad doesn't have "retarget" in its dictionary and autocorrected it to become "retarded".  NFL  is  Awesome   18:15, 9 January 2015 (UTC)