User talk:Bonadea/Archive 23

Edit to Shivaji article


Please look the version after my edits. Would you let me know whether I removed content or added!. I have, in fact, added more clarification around his birth date with references.

I have not intended to remove absolutely anything else. I'll look again and if I unintentionally removed anything I will correct it.

P.S. On checking the version comparison again - I do see some content removal which I absolutely never touched! '''I have now fixed the content removal issue. Frankly, I have no idea how it got removed. A mystery to me!'''

Thank you and I hope this resolves the issue.

Before edit: The Government of Maharashtra accepts 19 February 1630 as his birthdate; other suggested dates include 6 April 1627 or other dates near this day.[4][5]

After edit: Based on multiple committees of historians and experts, the Government of Maharashtra accepts 19 February 1630 (Julian) as his birthdate. This date matches those of contemporary records [4][5][6]. Other suggested dates include 6 April 1627 or dates near this day.[7][8] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkarja (talk • contribs) 05:46 6 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you for double-checking. It was indeed the content removal that all the other editors objected to and since you fixed that, I have no issues with your sourced additions. --bonadea contributions talk 06:54, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Catie Munnings page
Hi - I’m Catie’s mum. You’ve reversed some info that was put on caties page. Please can you take that reversal off; as when you google caties name it now comes up with her being a television actor - which she’s not. She’s a professional Rally Driver! We are trying to change her title using the google search algorithm as suggested by the admin at Wikipedia. Your help would be appreciated as this incorrect information is not great for catie whilst she’s trying to secure her rally budget for next year. Thank you Tracey Munnings RallyMum1 (talk) 21:19, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi - it’s the changes that we’ve made that need to stay up there but you have reversed it. Those things need removing as it’s reflecting incorrect information on google. Please put your corrections back up. Thank you RallyMum1 (talk) 21:34, 7 November 2018 (UTC)


 * as other people have pointed out, what happens when you enter somebody's name in Google is outside Wikipedia's power, and Google algorithms are not a reason to remove information from Wikipedia. You'll need to contact Google if you have issues with how they present the info. The Wikipedia article about Munnings is almost entirely focused on her rally driving, with one small section about her television programme, and there is no reason to remove that. The edits here removed well-sourced information about the TV programme, and they also added non-neutral text which is unfortunately not appropriate for a Wikipedia article. Note that Wikipedia articles are not owned or controlled by their subjects (or by anybody else) so it is not really "Catie Munnings' page" but "an article about Catie Munnings", and people who are directly connected to the subject of an article should not edit the article about them. More info here. Thanks! --bonadea contributions talk 21:36, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your lengthy reply. However, I am not in the least interested in editing anything on Wikipedia. What I am trying to do is correct my daughters title page from television actor to British Rally Driver. She was previously known in Wikipedia google searches as British Rally Driver - only since Wikipedia have added her tv show the google search now calls her television actor which is incorrect. So I don’t care you edits it - I just want the correct information out there. I’ve contacted google and admin at Wikipedia and am astonished at how unhelpful people are being!! Perhaps if someone updates her rallying information (which hasn’t been done since Azores) and since then she has completed the entire ERC Championship, it may trigger the google algorithm to pick up the rally driving! Thank you for your help with this Tracey Munnings RallyMum1 (talk) 21:54, 7 November 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry you have experienced people as unhelpful. The fact remains however that what you see in Google is not controlled in any way by Wikipedia. In fact the phrase "Television actor" that shows up in the Google search does not appear anywhere in the Wikipedia article! I thought maybe it came from Wikidata but that also doesn't seem to be the case. I hope you will be able to report to Google successfully, because they are the only people who can assist you with this. As an aside, about the "edit" terminology - changing, adding, or removing anything on any Wikipedia page is the same as "editing" it, and as soon as you do that, you are an editor. I hope that makes things a little more clear. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:12, 8 November 2018 (UTC)


 * If the google search is nothing to do with Wikipedia can you please explain how she was initially known as British rally driver; then when the first Wikipedia edit was made she was known as British television presenter; after the second edit she was known as Television show host; after the third she was known as british presenter and now a television actor!! I think it has everything to do with Wikipedia and the people who edited the articles ...... Wikipedia are being unhelpful in correcting the error caused by editing the page about catie. Extremely frustrating
 * Tracey Munnings RallyMum1 (talk) 08:25, 8 November 2018 (UTC)


 * No, I have no idea why Google has changed their text on their own website. This is because I know nothing about how Google works or where they get their information. I am a volunteer editor at Wikipedia, which is completely separate from Google. Some of the info they display in their information boxes is clearly taken from Wikipedia, but some of it equally clearly isn't. Wikipedia does not control that. And text that appears nowhere in the Wikipedia article cannot possibly come from here. I understand your frustration, but Wikipedia editors are not able to help you with issues on a different website. --bonadea contributions talk 08:35, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Todd Howard
I don't see why being a real person disqualifies him from being into this category. Going into the category, I see like five or six real people who are in the internet memes category, so I figured it was fine. Promestein (talk) 06:47, 9 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Take it to the article's talk page if you disagree. --bonadea contributions talk 06:48, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Response to your note on my Talk Page
I placed the mesaage on the Talk Page (the one that you removed) just moments after NorthBySouthBaranof sent me his message, but certainly before I had read his message. I saw that my Talk Page edit was not there, and thought that I must have messed up in trying to post it, so I wrote another one. I certainly did not write anything on any BLP Talk Page after reading NorthBySouthBaranof's message to me. Vcuttolo (talk) 19:56, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

why clear my talk
hello i know i cleared talk before but i think it was kind of uncalled for and vandalism that you cleared it. if there is a way to revert it plz let me Know thanks! &#32;hello im handatoe come with me (talk) 12:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Sup Bonadea?  Your talk page was cleared by other people. Bonadea reverted an edit on your user page. This was because the editor who had made the original edit was both a) directly violating a closely followed behavioural guideline, and b) a sockpuppet whose edits can—and usually should—be reverted on sight, almost wherever they are. Hope this helps.  ——  SerialNumber  54129  12:51, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I have never edited your talk page, as you can see from its history. I did revert some disruptive editing to your user page, here. --bonadea contributions talk 12:48, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

ok thanks didnt know &#32;hello im handatoe come with me (talk) 22:24, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Not paid advocates
Hello there,

I am writing to let you know I am not a paid advocates. I am a staff of Bliss Media and would like to make updates on Wei Han, Bliss Media CEO's profile and also company profile. Please be aware I am not what you called Black Hat SEO.

Shirley ac (talk) 09:58, 16 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Being an employee equals being a paid advocate - but it does not imply that you are automatically black-hat SEO. Thank you for disclosing your paid relationship with the subjects. More info on your user talk page. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 10:50, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018
Hello ,
 * Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW
 * Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.


 * If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.


 * We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.


 * With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Indeffed again
I've indeffed O again, and am rather red in the face for creating more work for especially you with that AGF unblock I made. As if you don't have enough on your plate. Sigh. Have a tastier kind of plate! And thank you for your inexhaustible patience. Bishonen &#124; talk 15:57, 20 November 2018 (UTC).


 * Hey Bishonen, thanks for the heads-up and the amazing assortment of goodies, but most of all for your kind words! I admit I was reaching the end of my patience, though. Nothing that a few pastries won't set right. --bonadea contributions talk 17:21, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Ron Kitchens Conflict of interest and Speedy Deletion
Hi Bonadea,

Thank you for your note concerning the Ron Kitchens Wikipedia article. I am hoping to discuss your recommendation for a speedy deletion so as to incorporate any edits you may have. The page is not meant to be promotional, simply informative as Ron Kitchens is an author and speaker, therefore I believe, it would be beneficial to have his page included on Wikipedia. Edits that you have to accomplish this goal would be greatly appreciated.

The nature of the relationship that I have with Ron Kitchens is that we work for the same company, however, he is not paying me to create the page. I will disclose that we work for the same organization wherever you think will be most beneficial for users.

I appreciate any feedback!

Thanks SMFTDunham (talk) 13:33, 27 November 2018 (UTC) SMFTDunham


 * as the article has been deleted I'm afraid I would be unable to offer any input. It may not have been intended as promotion, but it did in fact contain promotional language, as well as a large number of external links. When you have a conflict of interest such as yours, it is always better not to create or edit articles directly; instead, use the Articles for Creation process. Information about how to disclose a conflict of interest is found here. In any case, any article needs to show that the subject is notable according to Wikipedia's definition of notability, and from what I remember of the article, there was nothing there to suggest that he does meet those criteria. (That is something he has in common with almost every other person in the world, of course ;-) ) Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 15:46, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Sonyaa
Why have you deleted a reference of Times of India? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boyofjawad (talk • contribs) 14:41, 27 November 2018 (UTC)


 * in this edit I removed a source that had been added twice. I could have removed one copy of the source, leaving the other one, but since the references had been inserted at the top of the article with no indication of what they were, or what they were supposed to source, I wasn't quite comfortable with leaving it there. Furthermore, it did not actually say anything about the person, since it's a press release about the TV show she is in. I see that you have added it again in the article text and I am not going to remove it, but you should be aware that as a self published source (press release) it does nothing to support the person's notability. (As an aside, IMDb should never be used as a reference in a Wikipedia article - it is possible to add the  template, modified so it leads to the right IMDb page, to an external links section.) --bonadea contributions talk 14:51, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Can you please update imdb name as i am not getting how to do it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boyofjawad (talk • contribs) 15:00, 27 November 2018 (UTC)


 * OK, no problem. I've done it now, but just so you know: th URL for an IMDb actor page looks like this: imdb.com/name/nmxxxxxx where "xxxxxx" is a number. In the template  you add that number, like this:  . The "nm" part of the number in the url should not be included. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 15:31, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much bonadea and one more thing i want to ask that which are other accounts can be added like iMDb. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.218.84 (talk) 12:55, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

New Skylab controversy RfC proposal
Hi! I have drafted another RfC at Talk:Skylab_controversy. Please comment on how best to get appropriate input from the Wikipedia editor community. -- ke4roh (talk) 14:44, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank You
Thanks for reverting that unnecessary message from my talk page. It's been going on since end of November and I'm getting sick and tired that user coming back all the time. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 08:32, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
 * My pleasure. Makes you wonder why people keep doing that kind of thing - surely there are more useful and/or fun pastimes than childish harassment of random strangers online? There's nowt so strange as folk, I guess. :-) --bonadea contributions talk 10:03, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks sir for lifting my spirits up It is from you people I m going to learn I m much abashed for the thing I did Can you please forgive me ArashdeepKaur (talk) 09:25, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

link
you are right I confuse about the link, sorry — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexartu (talk • contribs) 14:36, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Editing Babu Gogineni Page.
Hi,

This is AKhram. I have done few changes to Babu Gogineni profile. You have rolled back those changes. I am a direct friend of Babu Gogineni and editing his own profile with his full permission and the context which he provided me to do. There is no misleading content updated there if you can read the complete content. Akhramshaik (talk) 08:14, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Responding on your talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 08:16, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi,

Could you guide me and suggest me how to continue to edit the context without any conflicts. He is a public profile person and growing popular now. We could see many people complaining lack of information when they look Wikipedia. so I am taking this initiation to update this information so that it would be available to everyone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akhramshaik (talk • contribs) 08:35, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * If you have specific pieces of information that are missing from the article, please post them to Talk:Babu Gogineni. Put the code in a new section on the page, and under that, explain the changes you want to make. However, you should be aware of the fact that you can't use your personal knowledge or text you get straight from Gogineni - everything needs a reliable independent source. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:55, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi Bonadea,


 * As advised by you. I have created request to edit on Talk page. There is no misleading content on the page. Do review the changes and approve so that i can move further. I would further provide more reference links supporting the content from News portals and multiple official and popular media sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akhramshaik (talk • contribs) 12:30, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Well, there is a bit of a problem: What you did was adding a whole long stretch of text to the article talk page; as far as I can tell it is the same text that you added to the article, which was removed because it is inappropriately promotional and does not refer to any sources. It has unexplained reference markers such as "[1]" and "[2]" - those are supposed to be actual sources that support the information! I understand that it is difficult to edit Wikipedia, and especially things like adding references can be tricky because it involves special code. But all the same, please try to follow the advice I gave above: add the code to a new section on the page, and below that code, explain the changes you want to make. Don't add a lot of text without any explanation. And please focus on smaller changes - if you think the entire article needs to be rewritten, explain that and explain why, and don't forget to provide your sources. Remember that there is no deadline here, and all Wikipedia editors are volunteers - we do this in our spare time. The code  will make the talk page show up in a list of edit requests, and so it will attract the attention of other editors, but if a few weeks pass and nobody comments on the article talk page, you could ask at a noticeboard such as the Tea house. If there are glaring errors in terms of the information presented, you can post to the noticeboard for biographies of living people and explain briefly what the issue is. Thank you. --bonadea contributions talk 13:23, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * (Just for the record, I have not removed anything from your edit to Talk:Babu Gogineni, but I put the paragraphs of text into a collapsable box, so it's possible to view it but it doesn't clutter up the page.) --bonadea contributions talk 13:36, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

About Maroon 5
Your recent deletion of the whole section on the Maroon 5 page is really a wise decision and i appreciate it. But that was not the real version of the content. That was the result of a recent revision by FlightTime which reversed back all my corrections and re-established that poor version. I have a newer version of that data with a suitable title. So im going to re-add that section as many in talk page of Maroon 5 supported that stuff and said this enhanced the material with updated content. Wish you a very nice day.HardSunBadMoon (talk) 12:16, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Please don't - please discuss it on the article's talk page first and get consensus. I had seen your version (don't call it the "real version", it was simply your phrasing) which you added here and which contained language errors, instances of unclear language, unencyclopedic wording, and the same overlong quote. You said that many in talk page of Maroon 5 supported that stuff and said this enhanced the material with updated content - could you please provide some diffs of that, since no such support is in fact visible on the talk page? --bonadea contributions talk 12:24, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The content which i added just now was the updated version of the section you saw earlier and it had no mistakes, was a reliably sourced content which only added more meaning to the page about the band's dynamic genre and clarified their interests simultaneously stating a controversy as well. and  supported the matter because they both understood that the section proposed two things in such short which only enhances the quality of article . ABELMOSHCUS reviews articles and so he has the most knowledge about all of this in all of us. And he himself added it when two unauthorized editors were removing it. Thus, i want to have your permission to re-add my content. Yours Sincerly HardSunBadMoon (talk) 12:42, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey I am not a NPR and do not review articles (although I seldom review AfC submissions). Bonadea is right, you should discuss first. ― Abelmoschus Esculentus talk /  contribs 12:49, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * it had no mistakes The version you added most recently was identical to the one I linked to, except that you changed one progressive tense verb form to a simple form (arguably an improvement) but the other issues I mentioned were still there - ungrammatical constructions such as "Following this, the band received huge criticism from rock fans around the world", unidiomatic constructions such as "Regardless of all this, the band enjoyed its commercial success in 2018 and continued its work" - and both those assertions were unsourced! Having an entire "controversy" section built around one single very recent quote, with unsubstantiated assertions of criticism, is really over the top for a GA classed article.  In any case, you have to discuss this on the article's talk page and get consensus there. You still haven't provided any diffs for where people (allegedly) agreed with your additions. --bonadea contributions talk 12:59, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Leave it brother. I barely get time to do all this. What i just try to as a wikipedian is to add updated content cited with reliable source and try to add a conclusion based on that incident so that readers don't need to stress their minds up. Wikipedia calls that helpful conclusion a self-made research. Anyways, HAPPY NEW YEAR IN ADVANCE brother. Hope you progress towards your aim.

HardSunBadMoon (talk) 14:42, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * But we can't add our own conclusions in Wikipdia, and what you refer to as "self-made research" is specifically prohibited. Please take a moment to read this. Wikipedia is also not a news service and editors should not try to capture minor current events as they happen. There is no deadline, and if something notable happens and is discussed in multiple reliable sources, it can be added to the article without any commentary or original research. Happy new year back at you! :-) --bonadea contributions talk 19:57, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Citation
Thanks for. Could you add a url or page number? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:35, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018
Hello ,

This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.
 * Reviewer of the Year
 * Thanks are also extended for their work to (15,059 reviews),  (12,760reviews),  (9,001reviews),  (8,440reviews),  (8,092reviews),   (5,306reviews),  (4,153 reviews),  (4,016reviews),  and  (3,615reviews)., , , and  have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only sevenmonths, while , with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.

See also the list of top100 reviewers.

The backlog is now approaching 5,000, and still rising. There are around 640holders of the NPR flag, most of whom appear to be inactive. The 10% of the reviewers who do 90% of the work could do with some support especially as some of them are now taking a well deserved break.
 * Less good news, and an appeal for some help

At #1 position, the Community Wishlist poll closed on 3December with a resounding success for NPP, reminding the WMF and the volunteer communities just how critical NPP is to maintaining a clean encyclopedia and the need for improved tools to do it. A big 'thank you' to everyone who supported the NPP proposals. See the results.
 * Really good news - NPR wins the Community Wishlist Survey 2019

Due to a number of changes having been made to the feed since this three-minutevideo was created, we have been asked by the WMF for feedback on the video with a view to getting it brought up to date to reflect the new features of the system. Please leave your comments here, particularly mentioning how helpful you find it for new reviewers. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Training video

As Good as I Once Was
i disagree with what you said about my edit. i want a neutral third party — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.132.173.146 (talk • contribs) 07:46, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * You have bot reacted to any of the comments, explanations and warnings put to your talk page but edit warred to keep the promotional trivia in. By all means ask other uninvolved editors, but do not add the content back unless and until you have a clear consensus in favour of adding it. --bonadea contributions talk 08:14, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

About the changes to Sambhaji page
hi i am clsasmit.

I had lately made changes to the wiki page of Sambhaji, which had been removed by you due to no cited resources. I don't have any sources, but in reality i am myself a descendent from the royal family and i felt that what was written by someone I don't know was actually not right. It wasn't right for people to know something wrong. So bonadea please understand.

i am not so good at this.But this is history and shouldn't go wrong. I am an Indian, Jai Hind.

regards, clsasmit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clsasmit (talk • contribs) 15:53, 16 December 2018 (UTC)


 * thank you for your message. There were two main reasons why your edit here was reverted: for one thing, as you saw on your talk page, there were no reliable sources supporting the edit. The text also (partly) contradicted the sources that are in the article. We can never use our own knowledge as a basis for what we write in Wikipedia (unless it's a matter of extremely general knowledge), I'm afraid. Please see this page for more information. The second reason, which I also mentioned on your talk page, was that you included an editorial comment of a kind that is never appropriate in a Wikipedia article. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 16:48, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Edit to Wrench Solutions
Am not a paid editor, Please suggest me the solution for the approval of the company "wrench Solutions" .Am actually from the same place where this company is from,so i thought of doing this.Sorry for my language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhilinraju (talk • contribs) 09:00, 17 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi the company Wrench Solutions does not show any signs of being notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Unfortunately, articles about the company have been created so many times that the title Wrench Solutions has had to be protected against recreation. --bonadea contributions talk 10:22, 17 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi @Bonadea according to your view is there any chance for this company to approve in wiki now?. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhilinraju (talk • contribs) 10:47, 17 December 2018 (UTC)


 * No, like I said above and as Daiyusha explained on your user talk page, there isn't. It's not "my view", it's a matter of not coming close to meeting Wikipedia's notability requirements. --bonadea contributions talk 10:52, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Merry

 * Thank you, M! Very much appreciated. What an excellent story. That's the kind of aunt I aspire to be. All the best to you and yours, too! --bonadea contributions talk 09:17, 18 December 2018 (UTC)


 * You are most welcome B. Your kind words are much appreciated! MarnetteD&#124;Talk 09:21, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Why did you revert all the edits to Demonetization page?
What made you revert the edits on that page? Half of that page is pure garbage based incorrect factual analysis that doesn't even present the whole picture. For example, Refer the following text, "Prominent businessmen stated after the announcement of demonetization that they had received prior warning of the move, allowing them to convert their money into smaller denominations" It refers to an article titled, "Before PM’s Announcement, Rumours of Demonetisation Abounded"

The statement sounds like an assertion, a POV that is incorrectly based on an article that is rumour and not fact driven.

What kind of vandal fighting is this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shashank5988 (talk • contribs) 16:57, 19 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I reverted the edits because they added personal opinion, original research, editorialising comments, and assertions not supported by any sources. --bonadea contributions talk 18:06, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 31
 The Wikipedia Library Books & Bytes

Issue 31, October – Novemeber 2018  French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
 * OAWiki
 * Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
 * Global branches update
 * Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping an eye....
...on the HardSunBadMoon sockpuppet inquiry. Disturbing that today there is editing as an IP attempting to disappear evidence of past Talk contributions. David notMD (talk) 15:30, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

List of churches in Sweden
Hi! I also voted to keep and clean up this list. I have started going through the churches. The first couple that I've done, I've found an article on Wikipedia.se. What I'm planning on doing is wikilinking those that do have an article on Wikipedia.se as well as adding where they are (I would dearly love to add Wikimedia Commons photos and when the church was founded, but that would just make the references as long as the list. There is also an excellent reference on Swedish churches that is published in collaboration with the Church of Sweden. Aurornisxui (talk) 23:59, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Report
Hi,

I am disappointed that the report has been removed without due consideration, while still retaining Madrenergic's mirror report. The dispute Madrenergic began arose from his dispute of the word "largest," to which the Oxford English Dictionary definition did not match his. The edits to the page were constructive and an attempt to preserve the integrity of the page, which Madrenergic has reverted in favor of subjective content. I am happy to discuss it and determine the validity of Madrenergic's argument in the article's talk page, however so far the user has failed to backup his assertions with evidence. My only objective is for an accurate and consistent Wikipedia to ensure its use by so many dedicated students, teachers, and more, is preserved. 75.28.18.138 (talk) 22:13, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Editing of Arun Bhaduri
Hello.Recently I've re edited the Biography of Indian Vocalist Arun Bhaduri. As I knew Him personally so i've added his life,career of music. But you cleared it. why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srgmpdn7notes (talk • contribs) 16:58, 30 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Replied on the user's talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 09:40, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

There was indeed a valid reason
Something being well-sourced does not make it an appropriate subdivision in its length and content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.37.57.129 (talk) 15:10, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Ok why do you keep removing that
? Midwestman1986 (talk) 20:35, 1 January 2019 (UTC)


 * As you know, it is promotional and not informational. Since other editors have agreed on this and removed the text, it is (as you also know) up to you to discuss it on the talk page of the article (not here where nobody will see the discussion) and try to get a consensus in favour of adding the text. Did you have a chance to fix the promotional wording in the other Kansas article we discussed, btw? --bonadea contributions talk 20:51, 1 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Be advised that Midwestman1986 along with a dozen or so associated accounts have been blocked indefinitely for sock-puppetry and nonconstructive editing. Grey Wanderer (talk) 23:08, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Princess
Why you keep revert my edit on princess which does not contain any false information nor copyright violation? Gogo8611bar (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2019 (UTC)


 * It is a copyright violation. See the info on your talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 20:27, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Adding Facebook Profile
hey bonadea,

can you tell me how to add fb profile to an article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boyofjawad (talk • contribs) 12:43, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Continuing editing ...
Hi Bonadea, Hope you are doing well. Back in Sept 2018 you had asked me some questions on my talk page to which I had responded. Since you had asked me to stop making any further edits, I have not been making any. However, having responded to your query and then later asking couple of times to you on your talk page, and not getting any response from your side, I am assuming that you are satisfied with my response. This is to inform you that I will be starting to make edits. Thanks for your guidance. Vishaalgautam (talk) 09:47, 6 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry about the misunderstanding. I did not ask you to stop making edits, only to declare whether you had a financial interest in the topics you were editong (specifically "heartfulness meditation".) Since you declared that you were not paid to make the edits, there is nothing to prevent you from editing, provided that you do not edit against consensus, promote anything, or violate Wikipedia policies in any other way. Since you do have a conflict of interest as declared on your user page you should not edit any articles about heartfulness meditation directly, however. I'm not sure why I did not respond in September, and I apologise for that. -bonadea contributions talk 10:06, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your prompt response, no issues about missing to respond in Sept. One clarification needed - reading upon WP:COI, while I understand about not editing any article directly where there is a COI and use the talk page to propose changes, what about making small edits like making corrections or adding a reliable reference to improve the article. Is that also not permitted, even if it's clearly not promotional in nature? Many times it's the subject matter experts who would have the correct info, hence the question. What would be the right way for making such minor corrections? Vishaalgautam (talk) 01:57, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

TomWatkins sock
Could we add "Davecoperjones" to the investigation of "Jenny0987Walsh", please? Richard3120 (talk) 13:30, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

hello why is my own userpage set up for speedy deletion?
i am wondering why my own userpage is set up for deletion? could you pls explaine why to me thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redordercaveman (talk • contribs) 20:16, 9 January 2019 (UTC)


 * See your user talk page for an explanation. (User pages are not "our own" in the sense that we can write anything there - again, more info on your talk page.) --bonadea contributions talk 20:20, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know about paid contributions- question
I created a new user page with my username and put the paid by text inside, did I do it right to show that I was hired to help? I never meant to break the TOS in that regard and I apologize- Wikipedia was very confusing for me starting out, and I created the page as a favor for a friend. Afterwords she said "I believe in paying people for their work" and gave me some money, so I guess I do fall under a paid user? In any case, most of the work I did is removed from the page and I've been asked to not edit any further, so I'd like to know the legal way to go about this to increase the length and show what she has been involved in, while removing anything that sounds promotional. I'd love to get some help, is there a forum I can ask users to add for me if I'm unable to edit myself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatrimBloodyCauthon (talk • contribs) 20:40, 9 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi and thanks for your message. Wikipedia can definitely be a bit confusing with all its regulations and guidelines! I can't see in your contributions that you have created an user page - you should go to User:MatrimBloodyCauthon and add the "paid by" template there.  As for how to proceed, the place for you to suggest changes and additions to the article is Talk:Georgia_van_Cuylenburg. However, right now there is a discussion here about whether the article should be kept at all. You are welcome to participate there, but first please read the information here about how to participate. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 21:22, 9 January 2019 (UTC)


 * (Oh, and regarding your user name - that's a blast from the past. I was a WoT fan for a while in the 1990s, but I must admit I never read past the first six books or so. Mat was definitely a favourite character though :-) ) --bonadea contributions talk 21:25, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

User:MatrimBloodyCauthon Thank you! I added a section on the talk page and argued my case. I'm feeling extremely disheartened as she's such a lovely person and I just wanted to help, and it feels like I just got her Wikipedia deleted by not understanding the rules. I would've helped her out for free, but she insisted on paying me and I guess that was a big no. I love WoT too, happy that username was available :) edit: Sorry didn't mean to be dramatic thanks for doing your job well :) MatrimBloodyCauthon (talk) 22:00, 9 January 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatrimBloodyCauthon (talk • contribs) 21:44, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Edit: I can't figure out how to add the template for paid contributor on my page :( No templates are loading and when I type paid contributor nothing comes up MatrimBloodyCauthon (talk) 22:10, 9 January 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatrimBloodyCauthon (talk • contribs) 21:48, 9 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I fixed it for you. It displays properly now. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:42, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

User:MatrimBloodyCauthon Thank you!! I hope I formatted this reply correctly. I appreciate the assistance. MatrimBloodyCauthon (talk) 22:44, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Sonyaa
why did you deleted her birth date? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boyofjawad (talk • contribs) 13:08, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry Queen70 (talk) 16:23, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

draft help
hello, could you please assist me regarding the draft which i created recently Draft:Meri Pehli Mohabbat is the theme track of India's Raw Star the single by Darshan Raval. AR.Dmg (talk) 09:51, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

McCurdy’s Armor™ listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect McCurdy’s Armor™. Since you had some involvement with the McCurdy’s Armor™ redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:41, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

What should I do?
There's only a Korean web page. Should we leave it false information?

Wikipedia is so irrational. Leave it as a fake birthday. 에휴 등신들 Roiejwfwertwe (talk) 09:16, 26 January 2019 (UTC)


 * No, there is no "false" information, it's just a birth date that follows the Western Gregorian calendar rather than the Korean calendar. Both dates are equally "true". We can't use different systems for information about years and dates without telling our readers what kind of date it is, and there is a general agreement on Wikipedia that the Gregorian date should be used as a default. What you need to do is to follow Wikipedia's manual of style, as discussed on the article talk page, and leave the Gregorian date in - it would be fine to add a Korean date as well, with a source and an explanation of which calendar it is. What is not okay is to edit war, and the only reason you got a warning was because you kept reverting without first discussing your reverts. But now you are using the article talk page for the discussion, so all is well. If nobody comes to the talk page to disagree with the changes you propose it's usually fine to add them in a day or so. --bonadea contributions talk 11:33, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

hello
Hi, I got a lot of messages from you, but I am a bit confused. I am not an official of Okawa. Please do not get me wrong. It was the first time that I reacted excessively to writing. Well, this is also a culture shock. Lol

By the way, what I used was the quotation origin of the original article. Is not this a reliable source of information? Sorunikusu (talk) 15:41, 31 January 2019 (UTC)


 * What Okawa says about himself, or what his publishing machine says about him, is absolutely not a reliable source for that kind of claim. --bonadea contributions talk 15:46, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Anyway I'm glad that your misunderstanding could be solved. For example, how about such an article? Article of a newspaper company. About the movie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sorunikusu (talk • contribs) 16:06, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Fredrikson stallard
I almost never disagree with you, but I think that this article is sufficiently notable that it is worthwhile  removing the promotionalism, especially because it'll be so easy to do.  DGG ( talk ) 17:29, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Request for comment List of churches in Sweden
Hello1 YOu made some good observations in the AfD for this list. I would appreciate some ideas for making the list better. Aurornisxui (talk) 17:47, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Cut Copy paste
How can I cut copy paste information on Wikipedia Muhammad Ahmad&#39;s Wiki World (talk) 16:29, 13 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I am not quite sure what you mean by your question; I see that you asked the same thing over at the Tea house, here, and had one response there. If that was not what you were asking about, please continue the discussion there. It is better not to split a discussion into several places. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 17:35, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Any idea who Thefederationrestore is?
Obviously only here to revert you, so I've indeffed him. Doug Weller talk 11:29, 18 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Oh. I've just looked at Straydog. Is there any chance we aren't looking at a sock? Doug Weller  talk 11:37, 18 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Cheers, - yes, there's been a few accounts lately that were created only to revert random edits I'd made:, , , ... I think the sockmaster is probably  / , since a couple of the accounts have been CU-blocked as socks of them. Nsmutte has resurfaced recently, but it's not really his MO. Thanks for blocking this one! --bonadea contributions talk 11:47, 18 February 2019 (UTC)


 * So not Straydog but someone else watching you revert him? Doug Weller  talk 11:49, 18 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I have revoked TPA after an obviously dishonest unblock request. Which troll this is (Nsmutte, whoever) doesn't really matter. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:02, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

The disruption
If you ever want this talk page temporarily protected due to abuse, just let me know. I have a talk subpage myself for such times as my talk is protected, where well-meaning IPs can still post (but trolls have less incentive to as it doesn't get them any attention). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:07, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

You are biased(Regarding Anu Malik)
When user:Ravensfire removed the sourced content related to the allegation(on 18 February 2019, 15:12 IST), you were nowhere to be seen. Why did you not revert that? Don't act like a big boss. Warning me of getting blocked will not help, especially with your partial behaviour. I can have certainly followed all wikipedia's policy. And i have also discussed the same issue on the article's talk page. Seems like you are adamant and don't want to listen at all! nkupad User talk:Nkupad —Preceding undated comment added 16:14, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Ravensfire had discussed their edit on the talk page and there was no opposition against it. That's the difference. They edited per consensus, you edited against it. --bonadea contributions talk 16:21, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Anu Malik
we need to understand that the wiki user nkupad has balanced the allegation part of article of Anu Malik. He has tried to mention needed facts which i personally believe they don't undermine the allegation anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ethicaleditor1234 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 22 February 2019 (UTC)


 * use the existing discussion on the article talk page, not here.  Ravensfire  (talk) 17:40, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for my activities
I assure that you that there would be no violations next time. Sorry! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ethicaleditor1234 (talk • contribs) 18:03, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 32
 The Wikipedia Library Books & Bytes

Issue 32, January – February 2019  French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
 * # 1Lib1Ref
 * New and expanded partners
 * Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
 * Global branches update
 * Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:30, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Barons of Chirbury
Hi.

I have looked back through my family tree and I am descendant of 1st Baron Herbert of Chirbury and Castle Island. I have sent a letter away claiming this title and I am currently going through legal processes to do so.

I am trying to put sources in on this page but I don't know where I should make them, could you help please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esei99 (talk • contribs) 15:05, 26 February 2019 (UTC)


 * If and when the claim is recognised, there will presumably be independent sources discussing it. Until then, it can't go into the article, I'm afraid - we can't go adding information about things that may come to pass in the future, as if they were alrady factual. --bonadea contributions talk 15:14, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

university article under Russia category
there are few articles which require attention and cleanup. Could you provide some help to it ?Rusedu (talk) 19:46, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Ref spam
Hello. Can you tell me why you consider this a ref spam, please? It isn't according to WP:REFSPAM, or is it? --► Sincerely:  A¥×aᚢ Zaÿïþzaþ€ ⚔  (hail sithis!)  20:45, 7 March 2019 (UTC)


 * It is called "Backlink building strategies for 2019", which in itself is a sure-fire sign that this is a low-content link. It constitutes WP:REFSPAM since the purpose is to driv users to the website and not to verify articl content. Wikipedia articles need scholarly sources that support the content of the article. --bonadea contributions talk 20:58, 7 March 2019 (UTC)


 * , thank you. I will try to be more careful in the future. --► Sincerely:  A¥×aᚢ Zaÿïþzaþ€ ⚔  (hail sithis!)  08:55, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

List of most expensive buildings
Please take a look. an ip just made some significant edits and I'm not familiar enough with the article to judge it Hydromania (talk) 05:26, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up. It looks like the edits were indeed disruptive, and they have been reverted (Materialscientist did so before I saw this). Cheers, --bonadea contributions talk 05:42, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 * ThanksHydromania (talk) 05:46, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17


Hello ,


 * News
 * The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.


 * Discussions of interest
 * Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
 * db-blankdraft was merged into G13 (Discussion)
 * A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
 * There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.


 * Reminders
 * NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD  because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.


 * NPP Tools Report
 * Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
 * copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
 * The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828 Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review. Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Morrison Academy discussion
Hello,

We've previously had a discussion about the curriculum section at Talk:Morrison Academy. CensoredDog and I want to restore and rewrite the deleted section, but we are awaiting your reply before we make further changes. CensoredDog seems to really want the passport section and I feel like it should be omitted, but we can deal with that later. Let me know what you think. ◢ Ganbaruby! 02:11, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Adminship (again)
A few minutes searching shows I'm at least the tenth person to ask you this; but I'm an obstreperous guy, so I'm going to ask anyway. I think you'd make a great admin. I think we need more admins. Would you be willing to run at RFA? I would be more than willing to nominate you, although I'm quite certain there are more qualified nominators around. Vanamonde (Talk) 05:54, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Since you've been active, just want to make sure you've seen this. Best, Vanamonde (Talk) 20:09, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * thank you! I truly appreciate your confidence in me. If it weren't for the RfA process I might take you up on your kind offer, but quite frankly, I'm not tough enough for that. (Also, I suck at responding in a timely manner, which is not ideal in an admin....) --bonadea contributions talk 21:08, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Reluctance can be a positive trait. We could use more admins that put the 'pedia before the 'politics. Samsara 20:00, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * *mutters*... ——  SerialNumber  54129  21:22, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * But you'd be able to block what'shisname yourself, and immediately! Tasty! Bishonen &#124; talk 21:28, 28 March 2019 (UTC).
 * It's sad how many great candidates do not want to be an admin because of how unpleasant the RfA process is. But if you ever do decide to run, you have my support!-- SkyGazer 512 My talk page 22:35, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I do think, that RFA has gotten less nasty than it was a few years ago; not more reasonable, necessarily, but perhaps less mean. You would have the advantage of many heavyweights nominating and/or supporting you, too. What I mean to say is I think you should run, and if too many people with absurdly high standards oppose you that's the community's problem, not yours. But I won't insist. Best, Vanamonde (Talk) 04:42, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not a great believer in the "RFA is broken" motif, personally, although I quite understand the perspective of those that are; it's what the candidate brings in the first 24 hours" that sets up the outcome. If you bring baggage/poor temperament/skeletons in closets than, yes, it's going south. If you give people things to oppose over, they certainly will! But that's clearly not the case here. Although, admittedly, I haven't decided meyself, yet, whether not answering emails is sufficient to oppose over. ——  SerialNumber  54129  11:26, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * @Bonadea: You have created quite a bit of content, have been editing since 2006 with zero blocks, and are well respected. You are used to the rich tapestry of life as seen at Wikipedia so RfA would be a very simple affair. RfA runs for seven days so responding within 24 hours is all that is required. Johnuniq (talk) 06:11, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree, and the calmness with which you deal with that harassing one shows your temperament nicely. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:54, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Hmm. I honestly didn't expect so many heavyweights to turn up and be supportive! I will give this some more thought, when I am less inundated with marking. :-) Thanks, all. --bonadea contributions talk 10:05, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Heavyweights? I'll have you know I'm less than 100kg! :-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:13, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I’ll add my voice too. The calmness with which you’ve dealt with spiteful and often demeaning harassment is deeply impressive, and I have no concerns over your knowledge of WP policy. RFA has improved. I have no doubt that somebody will find fault, but that’s inevitable if you’ve been here long enough.  Acroterion   (talk)   13:47, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I hope you go for it, we could really use more admins like you. As someone who was terrified of the rfa process, it wasn't nearly as bad as I had anticipated. The hardest part is probably the first day or two, then after that it gets easier. If you have a clue and aren't a jerk then you should be fine. Sro23 (talk) 23:39, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Want to chime in here again. You have The Right Stuff for adminship, and we'd appreciate your joining the admin corps. I'd be glad to provide a co-nom statement, if desired. GABgab 09:03, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

The City of Brass
Hello, I am the writer of The City of Brass. I use shortened notes linked with sfn and citation templates, styled Sudirman. - NorthPark1417 (talk) 21:40, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * yes, I'm aware of that. That system does not quite make sense in a short article with non-book references that are used only once each, however. It is ideal for situations where books or other kind of longer sources are used repeatedly for different sections in a long article, and we need to use citation markers to refer to different pages in the same publication. --bonadea contributions talk 06:28, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I prefer it because using sfn creates no large interruptions in prose when editing, and citation for the alphabetization of the bibliography. - NorthPark1417 (talk) 06:34, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Misleading entry
Hi, the second source does not say that Bong Revilla has to pay 124M, since the court hasnt ordered him to do so. The article indicates that the state prosecutor "have urged the anti-graft court Sandiganbayan to issue a writ of execution that would compel former senator Ramon Revilla Jr. to pay P124.5 million in civil liability". This is why it is incorrect to state on the wiki page "but was required to return to the government ‎₱124.5 million (US$2.47 million) in civil liability" since he has not been required by the courts or the government to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbrteamrevilla (talk • contribs) 03:01, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Hey
Just stumbled upon your user-page since I noticed you made a minor edit to one of the pages on my watchlist and just wanted to ask - is your username taken from The Man Without Qualities? It's one of the very few books that I can say have in some ways changed my life. Live well, Yakikaki (talk) 20:27, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi thanks for stopping by. No, I have not read that book (perhaps I should!) - my user name originates with one of my favourite authors, Irmelin Sandman Lilius, who had a character called Bonadea in some of her books. Cheers, --bonadea contributions talk 20:55, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Thamkuenwei
I hereby declare I have no connection to Tham other than I interviewed him before for a Chinese paper. A young chap but famous within the real estate experts and industry, he was one of the recipients of the royal education award, by the rulers conference of Malaya (an association of all the kings and rulers of malaya). Just thought that it would be a waste that if intellectuals like this who are usually media shy would not be published. Ask any real estate practitioner and experts in Malaya. I can assure you all, if not all then most will know him. You may delete him but I felt obliged to fend for him as he is instrumental in cooling the real estate bubble in Malaysia Junthree (talk) 19:25, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Levent Heitmeier
Appears we both filed a sock puppet investigation for Levent Heitmeier being a reappearance of Chandra Shekher Mishra. At SPI, collapsed into one investigation. This person had been very annoying as HardSunBadMoon, so it was deja vu all over again. David notMD (talk) 15:01, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Need ur attention on article
Hello I kindly need your attention on the article Dabangg 3. I will be obliged if u give ur valuable time and feedback towards the betterment of the article and Wikipedia. AR.Dmg (talk) 15:39, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Nsmutte
Thanks for cleaning up the Teahouse and my talk. It's been a while since I was last trolled by Nsmutte. Meters (talk) 21:42, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

netflix is global right?
netflix is global right anyone can watch it from any country after paying to the service right so only i added it Gfhffh4556 (talk) 11:09, 15 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Netflix is available globally, but what you can see depends on where you are at the moment and/or on where you bought your subscription. Different countries show different movies and TV series. The UK, for instance, has a strict policy where you can't watch UK Netflix even if you are in the country, if you used a non-UK credit card to pay your subscription. The US on the other hand just tracks where you are when you are watching, so if you're in the US you will be able to watch the shows that are available there, but maybe not the ones that are available in your own country. --bonadea contributions talk 11:13, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

ok understood but can the sentence be mentioned as "sarkar online streaming rights was bought by netflix web-plaform". atleast now this sentence adds some encyclopedic information and it be useful for some users who were searching where to watch the movie now. Gfhffh4556 (talk) 11:19, 15 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Maybe, if there are reliabl sources reporting on it - just knowing it yourself isn't enough I'm afraid. Whether it is appropriate content to include or not is something you might find more info about here. --bonadea contributions talk 19:26, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18


Hello ,

, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:
 * WMF at work on NPP Improvements
 * Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
 * Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.
 * Reliable Sources for NPP

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.
 * Backlog drive coming soon


 * News
 * Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.


 * Discussions of interest
 * A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
 * There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
 * What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 33
 The Wikipedia Library Books & Bytes

Issue 33, March – April 2019 
 * # 1Lib1Ref
 * Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
 * Global branches update
 * Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:41, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Possible SKS sock
Hello Bonadea, can you please take a look at this user who is editing in the same area, creating the same kind of articles and recreated Sunila Karambelkar. Thank you GSS (talk |c|em ) 05:26, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Naming of an apparent paid editor
Hello. I noticed that you added a note about an apparent paid editor on the Little River Band talk page based on a comment about this. You may well be right but I cannot see any editing evidence which supports that the named editor is definitely the one who mentioned being paid. Can you please clarify your reasons for this. Thanks, Yahboo (talk) 10:47, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, if you click the wikilink "Declaration of paid status" in the template, it leads to a diff of the edit where the user declared that they are paid to edit the article about the band. Here is a direct link to the diff. --bonadea contributions talk 10:58, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I did see that before but didn't notice who wrote it at the top. The editor's name didn't appear with the comments for some reason. Yahboo (talk) 13:23, 28 May 2019 (UTC)