User talk:Cahk/Archive 12

Regarding deletion of Pickyourtrail
Hi, I request you to help me understand the reason for speedy deletion of my page Pickyourtrail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Div23 (talk • contribs) 12:54, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * See .--Cahk (talk) 19:26, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I see that but now that I have changed the content and added more reliable citations, how can I put the content for reconsideration. Please suggest the right way. Shall I add this to the draft?
 * I suggest you go through the Article for Creation process.--Cahk (talk) 08:04, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

FYI
WP:ANI Really doesn't like it. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 09:53, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Also a Sock.--Cahk (talk) 09:55, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

problems with a user
Hello, I am having serious problems with a user. I have attempted to edit content regarding Ryan Wiik and user Danig55 continuously reverts all changes. He has assumed a monopoly on any and all information and does not allow anyone to make changes and updates to this page. This is incredibly damaging to Ryan and the people that are engaging with him as we speak. This has turned to that users personal page which would be fine if the information was about him. But it is not, it is about Ryan Wiik and he will not allow anyone else rights to maintain changes. This can not be what Wikipedia is about. Any help would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FilmExec (talk • contribs) 09:14, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your message. I have looked at your latest edits, and cannot understand why you are removing information that is well-sourced, including a IMDB reference. I think there is a difference between someone "owning" a page, versus someone engaging in a discussion about the issue.--Cahk (talk) 09:35, 22 January 2018 (UTC)


 * The original changes that were made left all of the sources there. But they were continuously reverted by Danig55.  So in an attempt to edit it down to mutual agreeable information, down to the bare minimum facts, I removed it all.  The sourced links in many cases are tabloid articles and not valid sources.  Therefore, a generic page with information regarding Ryan is the only fair path forward.  The litigation is private and undisclosed, the matters of the company are private and undisclosed as they would fall under insider trading laws.  This user is insistent in making sure that only their version exists.  Now I am blocked from making any attempts to limit the article to known facts.  There must be legal implications here.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by FilmExec (talk • contribs) 09:38, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * While tabloid articles may not necessarily be the best source, the fact that information is reported meant it is in the public domain (it's another question/debate as to whatever extent it is). It's one thing to say there are inaccuracies to the article, but it's a completely different matter when you remove voluminous number of sources to the article. I understood an administrator is already involved in the discussion, so I am leaving the matter to his/her hands. I have requested temporary page protection as there was clearly an edit war, for which it is considered vandalism regardless of the arguments made. --Cahk (talk) 09:44, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Well this makes absolutely no sense at all. Attempts were made to correct these issues, and now they are blocked to reflect the full extent of the issues.  Makes no sense.  This is the most illogical and irrational position I have ever heard of.  Ryan can not edit his own information and others that may need to reference him can not make changes, but a person that has malicious intent has made information on him the public basis for his persona online and he is protected?  This seems to me that Wikipedia is open itself up for hard litigation in the future.  This page just needs to be stripped down to the base of information on Ryan, period, that's it.  The rest of the information is not substantiated and those that they claim are, are false and incomplete. And now this has been made a protected page.  This person is on a campaign to solidify falsely information about our client and you are not allowing us to correct it and protecting the perpetrator of false information  — Preceding unsigned comment added by FilmExec (talk • contribs) 09:51, 22 January 2018 (UTC)


 * This is the only information on that page that can be substantiated for sure.
 * Ryan Wiik, born September 23, 1981), also known as Ryan Wiik, is a Norwegian entrepreneur.
 * all other information can not fully be validated as they fall under legal or corporate jurisdiction and to state it would be breaking those protocols. Especially since legal and ethical and moral codes prohibit Ryan or is Agents to speak on his behalf regarding those matters.  What you are allowing is this one person to promote information that he has no authority to do so or actual legal, moral or ethical obligation or right to do so.


 * I have no vested interest in the article, or the subject himself so your frustration directed at me is misguided. You have now made it clear you are editing on behalf of "your client", which means you have a Conflict of Interest for which you did not declare in accordance to Wikipedia guidance. Further, please refrain from making claims/reference for legal action, as you will most definitely be permanently blocked. --Cahk (talk) 09:57, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Merchantrade Asia Wikipedia
Hi @Chak, we're new to Wikipedia please bear with us. Would appreciate if you didn't report us. Will get the copy on the page amended.

Review
Greetings, I am launching a review and in order to complete the review I need to ask you why you removed my talk page message on Bbb23’s y’all page “ Is there any way I can prove my innocence? This block being on my record is hindering my attempts to become a better editor. It is also hindering my attempts to request more rights.Ral 33 (talk) 22:44, 6 January 2018 (UTC)“ and replaced it with “You may wish to revoke talk page access - including the socks.--Cahk (talk) 08:11, 13 January 2018 (UTC)”? Link to the revisions: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABbb23&type=revision&diff=820330228&oldid=819016494 Ral 33 (talk) 01:18, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I think you are confused - I didn't remove any message from BBB23's talk page. The link you posted indicated an automated bot archived the message because Bbb23 dealt with the issue (which has nothing to do with me). My message on his page has nothing to do with you, unless you are self-proclaiming you are related to the sockpuppetry account?--Cahk (talk) 01:25, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * No, on the right side under “==[User talk:Stephen Vince Coxxx]==” it looks as if part of my message was removed but part of it was not. The reason I’m looking at this is I can’t get a straight answer from anyone on if I can get this off my record or have the accidentally blocked template or something to show that I am not this “Jim from Idgeon” Do you know any way? Ral 33 (talk) 01:34, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Again - the edits done on the link you sent is done by an automated bot. My message also got archived after it was dealt with so it may look to you as though I overwritten your message (but I didn't, and it had no effect to your message either way). I have no knowledge on your issue, and it may be best that you leave a message with Bbb23 if you are concerned.--Cahk (talk) 01:40, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, he deleted my last reply because he thought he already answered but I will try again. Thank you, Ral 33 (talk) 01:47, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:PC Optimum.png
Thanks for uploading File:PC Optimum.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Daylen (talk) 19:35, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Meowstash
Hello Cahk. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Meowstash, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The user page content relates to a fictional television series. Thank you. Mz7 (talk) 08:23, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Hello, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

Backlog update: New Year Backlog Drive results:
 * The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
 * We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!
 * We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update: If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
 * Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

Pocket Listing revert
With all due respect Cahk, I do not think adding a "Price Range" edit to the Pocket Listing page is at all promotional or commercial. It is useful information, as many people are under the mistaken impression that pocket listings are only available for high priced homes. If you would like to edit the additional factual information I added, then please feel free to do so. But the pricing information should be included in the section.

If you want to remove promotional material, please take a look at the other material on the page, and links, which are blatantly promotional in nature.

Next time, I would have recommended you reach out before doing a full revert of my work, as per Wikipedia guidelines.

Please undo your revert so the information I added about pricing is left intact on the Pocket Listing page.

Best Regards,

Fogmutable ````
 * I disagree. The website URL added is promotional in nature. Wikipedia guidelines does not require that I reach out to you before reverting. See WP:SOAPBOX. I have no intention of adding the information back, you may appeal to an administrator if you feel the information should be included.--Cahk (talk) 16:40, 23 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Maybe I misunderstand something here. I thought it was best practice to cite where the information came from? It came from that website. The other information on the page has similar citations. Please educate me. Should there be no citation of what page the information about price ranges came from? Should it have been entered differently? Why are the other citations on that page ok -they are clearly commercial? From what I see on the guidelines, sources should be cited. Thank you in advance for your help. --Fogmutable (talk)Fogmutable (talk) 22:47, 23 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Yes, you should cite where you found the information, no doubt. However, the website is just a real estate listing site, albeit not the traditional brokerage/agent site (Sign up here, Advertise with us, etc. are clearly designed to advertise and attract new users). Say for example, you cite a news article about this particular subject, no problem. To me, the URL you put points to the website that is promotional in nature.--Cahk (talk) 04:14, 24 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Ok, if you scroll down to the bottom of the site I linked to https://www.homeqt.com/ it describes pocket listing price ranges. Since the whole site is about pocket listings it would seem to be an authoritative site on the subject matter which is missing from the wikipedia page about the subject. It would seem that rather than doing a 100% revert on the edit as you did, you should have considered sourcing material that, in your belief, would be more authoritative. Furthermore, if you thought it was promotional and thus a problem, then you should have also edited the cites from LAloftBlog and Jessica P PocketDeed - both of which are clearly promotional since they actually mention the sites in the edits.  So, once again, rather than start an edit war, I request that you undo your revert, or in the alternative, you source more alternative material on pocket listing price ranges, which may be discussed between us as to which is more authoritative and non-promotional, your cite or my earlier one. And then, once we agree, we can have the edit on the page. But to revert the edit 100% without a better solution on your part seems to be a situation where you are "problem identifying, rather than problem solving". I would also suggest you do the same with the other information on the page that has cites which by your definition are clearly promotional. You should source more authoritative cites for that information as well, and then perform the edits. Thank you for helping to make Wikipedia a great resource.--Fogmutable (talk)Fogmutable (talk)Fogmutable (talk) 06:10, 24 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Your reply makes me suspect as to whether you are really a new user. I am not certain what made you think we are (or will be) in an edit war. I have no intention on editing on this topic. I came across your edit as part of my regular patrol and my issue with your edit was WP:SOAPBOX (and specifically, WP:CITESPAM). The URL, coupled with a copy and paste word-by-word from the site, would be enough for an unconnected person to suspect it was done for promotional purposes. If you are concerned about the issues you have listed, then WP:BOLD. There are numerous patrollers (and even more editors) out there, and they may agree (or disagree) with your edits. I have assumed good faith by explaining my rationale, and advised you can seek second opinion on this issue. You are welcomed to seek second opinions via the Teahouse, or directly to an administrator if you wish to raise the issue.--Cahk (talk) 07:44, 24 February 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm glad my reply was eloquent enough to have you suspect that I was being disingenuous and attempting to falsely pose as a new user. The fact is this is the first edit I've ever made on wikipedia. I have used it before as a resource. This experience has made me question its usefulness as a resource (as have many others), and I will no longer accept information from wikipedia as authoritative. My contribution of a quote from https://www.homeqt.com/ is about pocket listings. The information was copied word for word, because it seemed to be the best way to do it, and therefore it was also cited as per what I thought were the wiki guidelines. I've searched for the methods you recommended, and it is unclear exactly how that process works, or even if it does work. I've suggested you add the information and citation in a way you, as an apparently, WPBOLD, editor see fit. I've also suggested you address the other issues on the page. Instead, your response is that I should ask for second opinions, and I should be WPBOLD and edit the other citations that violate the WP rules as per your interpretation. I don't have a problem with them, you do. To me, they add information to the subject, as did my edit. Your revert, does nothing to increase the usefullness or authority of the page. Rather than reach out to me to discuss your concerns, and suggest a better edit or citation, you instead did a full 100% revert on my edit. Your only response is that it looked promotional and WPSPAM to you. Why did you not clean it up? That would have added needed information to the page. Instead, your response is to tell me to go get a second opinion, go to the teahouse, whatever that is, and to accuse me of ulterior motives and disingenuous actions.  Your actions, attitude, and demeanor are certainly not helpful in building a better, more authoritative wikipedia. I would suggest you take a moment, look in the mirror, and consider what your motives are for taking the actions you do on wikipedia. Are they sincere, do they help the community, do they follow wikipedia guidelines, do they make the wikipedia experience better and more authoritative for other users? So, do the right thing, either reverse your revert, or put up your own edit with citation about the information I provided about pocket listings and price levels.  Furthermore, to maintain your intellectual honesty, you should also do the same for the other information on the page that I have identified for you. It's easy to destroy things, it's harder to build them. So, Cahk, try being a builder, rather than a destroyer. Make wikipedia a better place for you having used your intellectual power to build a more authoritative, well cited, source of information. Cheers! --Fogmutable (talk)Fogmutable (talk)Fogmutable (talk)


 * I think my track pattern of editing (and in particular, removing spam) speaks for itself. I advised you can seek a second opinion because the entire point of Wikipedia is consensus based editing. You and I clearly see the issue on the exactly opposite spectrum, and thus, having a 2nd opinion (either via the Teahouse or Dispute resolution noticeboard) would have resolved some of the issue being discussed. I have considered the matter closed, and will let other editors to decide the issue in the future.


 * You said "I don't have a problem with them, you do." and asked "Why did you not clean it up?" To be clear, you are the one who posted on my talk page about the other citations: "you should have also edited the cites from LAloftBlog and Jessica P PocketDeed - both of which are clearly promotional since they actually mention the sites in the edits". I am trying to be civil here. Do you really think posting on another user's talk page questioning another person's "intellectual honesty", implying that I am a "destroyer" or demand what you want (3 times I counted, no less) would get a nice reply back? To be clear, I am not looking for a reply. --Cahk (talk) 20:09, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

WP:UAA reports on users with no edits
Generally, there is no reason to report usernames with no edits whatsoever. Per WP:UAAI: "Wait until the user edits. Do not report a user that hasn't edited unless they are clearly a vandal. We do not want to welcome productive editors with a report at UAA, nor do we want to waste our time dealing with accounts that may never be used." The exceptions are obvious hate speech or names that attack a living person/Wikipedia editor, those are blockable even without any edits, but other run-of-the-mill violations need not be reported unless and until they at least attempt to edit, and you should be able to clearly explain what the problem is if it is not immediately evident.

For whatever reason, every day dozens, if not hundreds of accounts are created that never make one single edit. It is our responsibility as admins to conscientiously review every report a user makes at UAA, so we have to check for contribs, deleted contribs, and tripping of the edit filter for every one of these reports, only to find out there's nothing there and therefore no problem to be solved. So we add the wait tag to the report, it goes to WP:UAA/HP for a week or more, and must then be reviewed again to see if the account has since become active before removing it. That's time that could be spent doing more productive things, but you basically obligate admins to do it by making such reports. User:Beeblebrox (talk) 20:24, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Talkback
 ...SerialNumber 54129 ...speculates 11:26, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Londonpd.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Londonpd.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:33, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Londonpolice.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Londonpolice.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:33, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Ethan McBride
Hello Cahk. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Ethan McBride, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''unlikely to be notable but sufficient claims of significance to fail A7. Take it to AFD instead.''' Thank you. SoWhy 09:03, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Page deletion?
Hey Chak,

I hope you’re well and good. I see you’ve been on Wikipedia for long time and I’ve just received a notice to say that my page may be deleted. And I’m wondering if you could explain to me as well because I followed all of the guidelines and providing high-quality links confirming everything that has been wrote.

Any help would be greatly appreciated

Thanks,

Louy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Louy Armstrong (talk • contribs) 07:43, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:UP. Userpage is not meant to be used as a vehicle for posting semi-articles, especially the content has nothing to do with Wikipedia. --Cahk (talk) 21:42, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

New Page - Draft:Anthony Martinez
Hey Cahk, not to long ago you contacted me on behalf of a page I edited incorrectly, You advised to create a new page and place the information in which I did. The reason I'm contacting you today is to see if it would be possible that you could publish my draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft%3AAnthony_Martinez, Thanks for your help!
 * You can certainly try to move the article in the main space for review. Again, be mindful you should create the article under Anthony Martinez (boxer) and not override the Anthony Martinez page as there are other people with the same name.--Cahk (talk) 21:39, 14 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your help Cahnk ! I was finally able to creat the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Martinez_(boxer) but for some reason wiki claims that the page is an orphan ; What does that mean and how can I fix that ? - Thanks again Cahk Whitechocolateboxing (talk) 03:04, 16 March 2018 (UTC)


 * It just means the article is not linked from other pages. As such, it would be difficult for users to find this article unless they are specifically searching for the subject.--Cahk (talk) 07:04, 16 March 2018 (UTC)


 * How could I link the page ? Whitechocolateboxing (talk) 15:10, 16 March 2018 (UTC)


 * You may have to expand on the article to have sufficient connection with other articles. Essentially linking up related subjects in different articles. --Cahk (talk) 17:27, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

How Was My Edit On Berlin Attack A Test?
I was writing a paragraph summarizing the Berlin Attack. I do not see how it is a test. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex Billings (talk • contribs) 21:32, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Replied on his talk page. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:40, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

New Page Review Newsletter No.10
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages! ACTRIAL:
 * ACTRIAL's six month experiment restricting new page creation to (auto)confirmed users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the feed again, and the backlog has since increased already by ~30%. Please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day.

Paid editing
 * Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary.

Subject-specific notability guidelines
 * The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
 * Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies. A further discussion is currently taking  place at: Can a subject specific guideline invalidate the General Notability Guideline?

Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled
 * While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the 'Autopatrolled' user right HERE.

News To opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.

Canine Distemper
You cannot hide the cure of Distemper as I am one of Dr. Sears researchers and the cure is fully genuine. I also had my own website on Canine Distemper and has saved many animals with the proper medical protocol. Your interference constitutes a means to stop other owners of saving their animals for your own given pleasure. Do not get involved with medical discoveries as you do are not a medical researcher nor ever shall be. I myself can VERIFY this cure because I had 3 of my own dogs that had this disease and have tons of proof. I did specify it on that page, so please leave it well enough alone. I myself is the verified reference to such cure. DVM's that can verify is Dr. Alson Sears from Utah, Dr. Suthee from Thailand who did the CNS, Dr. Mueller from Georgia who participated in the medical protocol itself. We are all very experienced in this Disease. All of us know that this disease is the same known as Multiple Sclerosis, which is also measles. Contact me at PurpleWitch2@msn.com and leave my statements alone. For this reason that is why the protocol is preserved to prevent others of changing or modifying or deleting the infomation. The people have a right to know that there is a cure that is medically proven with over 2,000 dogs saved!!!!! If not I would not be putting such information down. End of discussion.PetroDave (talk) 08:42, 30 March 2018 (UTC)


 * It doesn't matter who you are in real life - the addition you made to the article had no citation, which means no one can verify whether the information is true. Just because you have knowledge in a particular field does not mean citation is not required. Wikipedia is not a generic website or forum for posting information - there are rules and standards here.--Cahk (talk) 17:47, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

I believe you have made a mistake.
I was not testing the editing tool, I was making an edit that was a legitimate topic I researched. I believe you should look into the attack more because my information was all resourceful and it was better than the references linked before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex Billings (talk • contribs) 17:40, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

LifeMel
Hi. I have made changes because thats something wrong there! Life mel DOES NOT CURE CANCER !!! nobody claim that! Life Mel can improve immunity system in cancer patients as helping them to get over the worst stage in radio therapy 4 to 5. keeping their blood cells in the right way,hemoglobin levels, etc, its a good health source for every human. P.s. I hope you understand and if you really like you can see feedback over internet like Amazon or Ebay. But my example is my mother! which she claims that I saved her life, and including few other friends:) . I would like you to understand that what I wrote there is true and please undo your changes. thank you and have good one, GOD Bless — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Cipri (talk • contribs) 08:10, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Self-created testimony/original research and/or unverifiable statements are not allowed. To be clear, the article did not claim the product cured cancer. Indeed, it is indicating the exact opposite as "false claims".--Cahk (talk) 08:23, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

c-b oz
she really needed that - but at least it looks as though she (they only have female agents in their Sydney office as far as I could tell from their very spiffing website) has got the message by now - there are a few industry groups in Australiat hat WMAU could well have discussions with about their trying to manage clients online image/etc - but thanks anyways - if they ever return to the edit and find the range of topics covered - I suppose every bit counts in the end - thanks

actually, is the canadian project in a similar situation - PR people from a range of industries/areas think they can just id themselves as acting on somebody/somethings behalf and update pages within the project? we must have almost the average of one a week at least in the oz project - we dont catch em all thats for sure JarrahTree 08:40, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I am not sure if the articles of Canadian artists face similar issue ... I don't come across COI issue too too often, as I primarily deal with spam and advertising.--Cahk (talk) 15:18, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Akshayasawa199423
Hey the image is of current finance minister I just removed and redirected to 1 St finance ministerof India link because the topic is of 1 St finance minister of India (talk) 12:08, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * You are misreading the page. The article is about the Minister of Finance, and in relation to the current office holder. --Cahk (talk) 12:11, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Promotional users/AIV
Greetings, Cahk. You do a lot of good work in reporting spam to AIV. However, I often find myself unable to issue blocks on your reports, because the users in question have received no warnings whatsoever. I suspect I am not the only admin who is unwilling to block a user who hasn't been warned; so I respectfully suggest that you may use your time more productively by warning users first, and reporting them if they persist in promotional editing. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 08:20, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
 * While you may have a different perspective, I do check and see if my reports are blocked. In majority of time (98%+), they are blocked. If I make a report to AIV, it's because the account was clearly meant to be advertisement and/or spam. Otherwise, I just CSD tag it. Given the large number of reports I make, I can't say I remember what made me report the one you saw. There are persistent editors with numerous new accounts created strictly for spamming ... the utility of warning is futile. --Cahk (talk) 13:49, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think your report was wrong, at all; statistically, a user whose first edits are promotional is unlikely to mend their ways. That said, blocking them without first asking them to stop is excessive; or at least I feel so. Just as we don't block all but the very worst vandals without first warning them, I think it's helpful to follow the give out warnings to all but the worst spammers; even if only 5% respond, I would consider it time well spent. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 14:09, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll keep that in mind.--Cahk (talk) 14:30, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Rest assured, I appreciate very much the time you spend fighting spam. Vanamonde (talk) 14:31, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Posting factually incorrect and out of date information.
Hi Cahk,

Could you please let me know who published the information (which happens to be factually incorrect and outdated). What recourse does the company have, since it is damaging, and how does the company publish the correct information?

Regards, Fulviman Fulviman (talk) 09:43, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Based on your response above. it makes me think you are representing the company in some capacity. Per my note on your talk page, you must disclose conflict of interest editing (which you have not done). Further, I did not say information cannot be added to update the information. You just can't remove sourced information from the past, which you have not shown to be incorrect. --Cahk (talk) 18:48, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:
 * WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags
 * Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:
 * A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons
 * There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy
 * Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines
 * The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
 * Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English News Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.
 * Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
 * The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

Edit to DRM page which was undone
Hi Cahk,

Please can you explain why you undid my edit on DRM?

I added a section on a major shortcoming in DRM which is currently not mentioned on the Wiki page, which is the Content Sharing problem, i.e. users legally buy digital content but then are restricted in how they share the digital content, and can't share it in the same way that they share physical content such as newspapers, books, CDs etc.

This is a shortcoming which currently does not appear on the wiki page, but does appear in academic papers and in industry discussion.

This is my first contribution to a Wiki page, and it could be that other contributors may want to edit my contribution, but I humbly suggest that you do not delete the section on Content Sharing that I added, rather leave it open to future editing.

Msd1986 (talk) 17:02, 31 May 2018 (UTC)msd1986


 * I am afraid you are talking to the wrong person. User:Objective3000 was the one who reverted your edit. My edit to the page had to do with vandalism that, unless you indicate that was you as well, then you are indeed talking to the wrong person.--Cahk (talk) 21:32, 31 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I didn't do any vandalism that I am aware of. I merely submitted a section on the content sharing restriction in DRM. User:Objective3000 Can I repost this edit? I have many academic references to substantiate it.


 * Again ... I was not the person who removed the information. You will need to post on User_talk:Objective3000 if you wish to speak with him about the matter.--Cahk (talk) 07:28, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Eric andre Arnoux
Good Morning Cahk,

I read carefully your message I’m new on Wikipedia. I’m allow myself to contact you because I’m living a big nightmare concerning the media’s on internet.

Let me explain you in few words:

A big negative campaign on the web has take place anounymously since 2015 by my ex wife and friends closer on anounymous blogs. Where a lot of things said are wrong. After that many blogs about me where written they used them so send them to real newspapers (one newspaper tribune de geneve) And they use the real articles to cause me a lot of pain (world check etc) but all is manipulated by this group of people.

The amounts on my criminal case have nothing to do with 200 m or 300m as spoken in the web. And from this day no sentence have been made against me after more two years of instruction. I have today a virgin criminal record.

And in my criminal case there is only two creditors and not hundreds or many as they say on internet. And this two are the authors with my ex about these articles. They use internet so I can’t work and lose my credibility and reputation. And at the same time they use it to put pressure on the swiss authorities.

And don’t want to delete things but I want to rectify some wrong informations by the truth.

If you want me to proof what am telling you I can send you an letter of my lawyer in charge of the procedure.

Could you please tell me with who i can contact or which is the process so I can edit the real informations or a professional from wiki can do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eric andre ARNOUX (talk • contribs) 08:38, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I see you've also left a message on another editor's talk page, and a reply has been given. I am in substantial agreement with the response, and have no additional comments to add. --Cahk (talk) 22:03, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Nongriat Edit
Hi Cahk,

Please let me know how do I retrieve the edit I have made. Will be providing the ink source as well.

Kindly revert as early as possible as this is a part of a time lined project.

Thanks Prerna — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prerna.bose.07 (talk • contribs) 09:52, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * You can see the previous edit at --Cahk (talk) 09:54, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive! Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
 * Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: NPPbarnstar SE.png. Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: RR3217-0014 100 rubles USSR 1989 Gold avers.png, Swiss-Commemorative-Coin-1991-CHF-250-reverse.png, Coin of Kazakhstan 500Thinker averse.png, US-$1000-SC-1878-FR-346a-PROOF.jpg.
 * Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

Orphaned non-free image File:Great Seal of QC.png
Thanks for uploading File:Great Seal of QC.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:47, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Regarding company page
Hi Cahk,

I don't think it's a permission it's just like we are introducing a company here we can remove text if you can help with the text which is unacceptable. Please help with this — Preceding unsigned comment added by Infotheme.inc (talk • contribs) 11:27, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Akhiljaxxn. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Vignesh Mani, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Akhiljaxxn (talk) 10:33, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Please be careful with your reviewing. Beyond clicking on unreviewing, you have done nothing to the article nor indicated why the CSD tag should not apply. --Cahk (talk) 10:36, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi. When an article is marked for csd, twinkle automatically marks it as patrolled. When any article is taken to csd, it is either deleted, or kept. In other words, if it is deleted; the problem with article is gone with the article itself. If the article is kept, most probably the issue gets solved. In either case, it doesnt need to be "reviewed" as it goes through few different sets of eyes. See you around :). Akhiljaxxn (talk) 10:45, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
 * You are missing the point. You UNREVIEWED an article I tagged (by clicking on the review button to reverse). The review function exists to save new page patrollers (NPR) from having to re-review the work already done. As a NPR, I expect you to know that instead of doubling up the work for all of us NPRs. If you think the CSD tag is invalid, then, by all means, remove it. Otherwise unreviewing the article serves no purpose but create more work for everyone. --Cahk (talk) 10:48, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User talk:MA NAME AH JEFF
Hello Cahk. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User talk:MA NAME AH JEFF, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Retaining user talk page leaves a visible record of why user was blocked - no fault on your part, good call on your part. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 09:17, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

File:NWPD.jpg
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:28, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Iv420 20040004 arms greater.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Iv420 20040004 arms greater.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:10, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Senate Canda.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Senate Canda.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:27, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Eric Arnoux page
Hello, Would you be able to check the situation on the Eric Arnoux page and possibly add a semi-protection? I believe there is repeated vandalism (please see the discussion page). I tried to add some comments but not sure about the format. Many thanks SarahMitchels82 (talk) 08:10, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I am not an administrator, so I can't protect a page. You can do so by filing a report at Requests for page protection. --Cahk (talk) 08:40, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Cahk!
Hello! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adloonix (talk • contribs) 09:56, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Cahk!
Hello! — You reviewed my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Adloonix/sandbox and put it in deleted list. I edited it and hope that it is ok now. Please review once again and tell what to do. I hope that now it is ok.. Thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adloonix (talk • contribs) 09:59, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi Cahk, sorry you thought what I posted in my own sandbox was a misuse. I only wished to explain who I was before making any edits. I had just signed up and am trying to adhere to the rules.

Please write Rick — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greensidey (talk • contribs) 15:12, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello!
Hello! Thank you for taking a look at my article, i was a little hurt when i have seen it was deleted (not to come off sensitive) I was confused why it was put on hoax. My family and i are eljiks and we were discussing how there is not much (if any) information about us so i thought it would be nice to add something about eljik on here. Sorry for this being so long! Could you give me any advice to better my page? Thank You! :) Bellemikov (talk) 15:55, 3 July 2018 (UTC)bellemikov (my English is not the greatest so if i have misunderstood anything please let me know) Bellemikov (talk) 15:55, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The information written had no citation, nor can I find sources online to backup your writing. If you have sources to confirm, you are welcome to recreate the article.--Cahk (talk) 07:19, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank You!
I will definitely look into that. Thank you for the help Bellemikov (talk) 14:35, 4 July 2018 (UTC)bellemikov Bellemikov (talk) 14:35, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Li Kui
Never mind, I won't contribute any more editing on Wikipedia. Not worth the effort. Bye. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lixiaojiulang (talk • contribs) 06:44, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Autoguard
Morning Cahk, I have seen your message and have edited the source to fit the guide line. I didn't actually mean to publish the source I was just trying to preview it. Any chance you could have a look over it and see if there are any changes that could be made,

cheers Keir — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autoguard (talk • contribs) 08:50, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The page has since been deleted, and I can no longer see what was on it. You may wish to check with the administrator who deleted the page for further information. --Cahk (talk) 09:07, 5 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Autoguard won't be replying to your comment as he's been blocked. The deleted sandbox says, verbatim, "Autoguard Warranties Ltd is one of the largest providers of extended vehicle warranties and Motor Trade Insurance products in the United Kingdom today. By working closely with motor dealers, we offer a wide range of bespoke warranties and competitive insurance products......" I could go on, but I think you probably get why I won't be restoring that. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  09:33, 5 July 2018 (UTC)


 * The other piece of advice I left on AIV (and this is really only my personal opinion, your mileage may vary etc etc) is if somebody is very obviously not here to write an encyclopedia, I wouldn't bother leaving a welcome template. It's slightly contradictory isn't it "Hi, welcome to Wikipedia, I hope you like the place ... oh by the way an admin's going to chuck you off in about five minutes, so have a nice life". Obviously as an admin I can quietly block without comment, so I appreciate for non-admins a little more communication is necessary, but probably no more than just the required pings on the relevant noticeboards. Just my 2c. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  09:36, 5 July 2018 (UTC)


 * I don't disagree with you on the sentiment. However, as mentioned on AIV, it is automatically done by Twinkle, if the user talk page is new. --Cahk (talk) 17:47, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Sharon Mina Myoui
I removed the speedy tag from Sharon Mina Myoui because I think the article passes A7 and is probably notable. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 17:45, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Project Maitai / Mahitahi speedy deletion
Hello, thanks for the information about the speedy deletion of the page I created. The reason cited for the speedy deletion was that it duplicated paragraphs from another website (the story map https://arcg.is/1XCCrj). I am the author of the story map so I thought it would be okay. I will read some more of the wikipedia guidelines. Regards Shareabit (talk) 04:04, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Gryann Mendoza tagged for speedy deletion
In regards to the article Gryann Mendoza, which you proposed for deletion, I have marked the article for speedy deletion, as I think that the article meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion. In cases where it applies, speedy deletion is preferable to proposed deletion. I have left the prod tag in place, so that if speedy deletion is rejected, your proposed deletion will remain in place. Thanks! &mdash; Alpha3031 (talk &#124; contribs) 06:21, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers. Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.
 * June backlog drive


 * New technology, new rules
 * New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
 * Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
 * Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.


 * Editathons
 * Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The Signpost
 * The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

Luke Jackson
Re: Luke Jackson (singer) - do NOT edit a page while it has an 'in use' tag on it. The 'in use' tag means that a page is under heavy editing and if you then edit the page you will interfere with the work being done by the other editor. In this case you proposed a page for deletion when it had just been created and was being heavily edited, as clearly indicated by the in-use tag. Ross-c (talk) 08:08, 17 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Articles in mainspace, as it relates to BLP, must have sources to back it up. The use of "in use" tag does not otherwise exempt the article from the requirement. The BLPPROD tag is a reminder to add sources, and in no way interfered with your edit (indeed, by the time I tagged it, it was almost 30 minutes since your last edit and certainly not "being heavily edited"). Your article was not at risk of being deleted for 7 days even if you were to add no sources. --Cahk (talk) 08:22, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * That's not the point at all. I 'know' that BLPs require references, which is why I was spending time collecting them and adding them to the article. 30 minutes is nowhere near long enough to assume that an article has been abandoned as editing, including finding copious sources, usually (not even just occasionally) takes longer than that. You should NOT edit a page with an in-use tag on it as you interfere with the work being done by the other editor. That is the entire point of that template. This was an entirely inappropriate action on your part. Do NOT edit pages with in-use tags on them.Ross-c (talk) 08:26, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * If you read the in use tag page - nowhere on the page indicate another editor CANNOT edit on the page (indeed, "The article remains open to editing"). You have also misunderstood BLPPROD - an article does not need to be "abandoned" to be tagged ("a nomination may also be used to involve the article creator or to ensure that a problematic entry is being attended to more swiftly than by tagging it with (BLPPROD)"). If you wish to have the article as a draft, then you should have used your sandbox or create it as a draft instead of creating a mainspace article. --Cahk (talk) 08:36, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I have read the page thank you very much. None of what you write excuses your action. By your own admission the page had been tagged as in-use only 30 minutes before you proposed it for deletion. The tag does not say that an editor cannot edit the page, but it is a very clear and direct request not to. I quote directly This template page is actively undergoing a major edit for a short while. To help avoid edit conflicts, please do not edit this page while this message is displayed.. That isn't a rule saying that you cannot edit the page, but that does not in any way excuse you for ignoring that request, yes. But, I'm not saying that you have broken any Wikipedia rules. I'm saying that you've behaved in an inappropriate, and far from constructive way, that interferes with the work of editors. The problem with your prod was that it was performed at a time when the page had been created (by your own admission) minutes before, and had an in-use tag applied to it. The whole point of the in-use tag is to allow editing of exactly the type that I was doing. So, your discussions of the general case simply do not apply. You can't argue that the situations that the in-use tag was designed to be used in should not occur, and that therefore people should do things differently. I've read and considered what you say, but do not feel that I should change the way I do things in case of editors such as yourself behaving uncooperatively. Ross-c (talk) 09:10, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * You are free to edit as you see fit. However, you don't own the article per Ownership of content. Your article was bound to be BLPPROD tagged. It took you almost an hour between the page appearing in main space and when at least one source was added. Arguably, the BLPPROD tag achieved its desired effect - for a source to be added. Articles in the main space have been CSD tagged much quicker than an hour, esp. given the very limited information you posted at first. We will just have to agree to disagree. --Cahk (talk) 09:57, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Jana Duggar
I just created the page and I didn't finish my category as I was working on the references when my wifi went out. I will be finishing it as soon as I can so keep the page up as there isn't one so I made a page Wifey93 (talk) 17:16, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Nemo9049 (talk) 08:56, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Nemo9049
Sir please dont demand to delete my page as i have worked very hard for it this is my first article and i want it to be pulished on wikipediaNemo9049 (talk) 08:56, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

IP talk page spam
Good catch finding those. Looks like some had been around a little while. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:52, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Shoichi Ida
HI! I am currently editing an entry for japanese artist Shoichi Ida. I understand that you have some concern? I am fairly new to this and I apologize if I can't immediately finish an entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satoshikyo (talk • contribs) 09:42, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

The page Soumya Chakrabortty
Please note that the page Soumya Chakrabortty created by me has been further modified to incorporate some internal and external references. Thank you.

About Chicago Blood Cancer Foundation
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Chicago Blood Cancer Foundation a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Charlene McMann. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Requests for history merge. Thank you.

What you should have done is to move the Chicago Blood Cancer Foundation page back to Charlene McMann. I have asked for a speedy deletion of your copy-paste move so that the move you wanted can be done properly. Toddy1 (talk) 08:17, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I deliberately copy-and-pasted the article back to its place, because a move protection is in effect. As such, only an administrator can move the article. As mentioned in my edit summary, the administrator has chosen to ignore my messages (and despite previous community comments). As such, the only action I can do is to make a copy and paste version.--Cahk (talk) 08:59, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, you are right. I had not realised that an admin had applied a move protection to the page.


 * I suggest that you use the process at Requested moves.-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:14, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Editing Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
How could i make the necessary without it being considered “abuse”? Iamthesublimeservantwhocarrieshiscrown (talk) 10:29, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
How do i make the necessary changes without it being considered abuse? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamthesublimeservantwhocarrieshiscrown (talk • contribs) 10:30, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * You edit suggests you are a troll, and therefore WP:DENY--Cahk (talk) 10:32, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Now, now, Cahk, we shouldn't call people trolls without very good re... Oh:. Carry on. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:52, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
But, i am not a troll. the information about Chardin is inaccurate, blatantly misleading, vague, mendacious, and demands a truthful revision.

I am new to Wikipedia, and admittedly have not read all the multitude of rules, all of which have rules within themselves. In fact, i have no idea how to properly navigate through such a complex web of rules. I am not being facetious, only honest. Iamthesublimeservantwhocarrieshiscrown (talk) 10:47, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Regarding my wiki page on Tovo infusions
HI Cahk,

That wiki was written on a personal interest since I am food blogger. Pls approve it and help me. Thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamcreator25 (talk • contribs) 17:07, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Regardless of whatever your relationship is with the subject, the draft was an advertisement. Wikipedia does not allow advertisements.
 * Also, you just copied and pasted the text from the restaurant's website. Wikipedia does not tolerate copyright violations. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:47, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail!
GABgab 19:54, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

15 reports to go!
You're going to hit 10,000 reports @ AIV shortly! SQL Query me! 21:33, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * That seems .... scary?! 10 and counting down ... --Cahk (talk) 06:35, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.


 * Project news
 * The New Page Feed now has a new "Articles for Creation" option which will show drafts instead of articles in the feed, this shouldn't impact NPP activities and is part of the WMF's AfC Improvement Project.
 * As part of this project, the feed will have some larger updates to functionality next month. Specifically, ORES predictions will be built in, which will automatically flag articles for potential issues such as vandalism or spam. Copyright violation detection will also be added to the new page feed. See the projects's talk page for more info.


 * There are a number of coordination tasks for New Page Patrol that could use some help from experienced reviewers. See New pages patrol/Coordination for more info to see if you can help out.


 * Other
 * A new summary page of reliable sources has been created; Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources, which summarizes existing RfCs or RSN discussions about regularly used sources.


 * Moving to Draft and Page Mover
 * Some unsuitable new articles can be best reviewed by moving them to the draft space, but reviewers need to do this carefully and sparingly. It is most useful for topics that look like they might have promise, but where the article as written would be unlikely to survive AfD. If the article can be easily fixed, or if the only issue is a lack of sourcing that is easily accessible, tagging or adding sources yourself is preferable. If sources do not appear to be available and the topic does not appear to be notable, tagging for deletion is preferable (PROD/AfD/CSD as appropriate). See additional guidance at WP:DRAFTIFY.
 * If the user moves the draft back to mainspace, or recreates it in mainspace, please do not re-draftify the article (although swapping it to maintain the page history may be advisable in the case of copy-paste moves). AfC is optional except for editors with a clear conflict of interest.
 * Articles that have been created in contravention of our paid-editing-requirements or written from a blatant NPOV perspective, or by authors with a clear COI might also be draftified at discretion.
 * The best tool for draftification is User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js(info). Kindly adapt the text in the dialogue-pop-up as necessary (the default can also be changed like this). Note that if you do not have the Page Mover userright, the redirect from main will be automatically tagged as CSD R2, but in some cases it might be better to make this a redirect to a different page instead.
 * The Page Mover userright can be useful for New Page Reviewers; occasionally page swapping is needed during NPR activities, and it helps avoid excessive R2 nominations which must be processed by admins. Note that the Page Mover userright has higher requirements than the NPR userright, and is generally given to users active at Requested Moves. Only reviewers who are very experienced and are also very active reviewers are likely to be granted it solely for NPP activities.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Umm..
In extreme cases like this, we don't soft-template the users with a level 1 warning.It's almost-always a straight escalation to level 4. &#x222F; WBG</b> converse 13:34, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey ck, notice you reported my profile.

What did i do? Miketabansi (talk) 07:30, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Great Seal of QC.png
Thanks for uploading File:Great Seal of QC.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:32, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Please delete!
Thank you for explaining. This makes complete sense. Can you please delete this draft from my sandbox? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianivie (talk • contribs) 17:44, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Hello, I am writing this to contest the deletion of Aqoom's page. Like other companies listed on Wikipedia such as Cryptokitties, Aqoom is also a blockchain based company. I would like to kindly request that the page on wikipedia be kept. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AQOOM (talk • contribs) 07:27, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Cease and Desist
Hello,

The enclosed domain/URL is infringing upon our clients - Dhanlaxmi Bank - Intellectual Property / Private Information.

We are making an urgent request of yourself and organisation to;

PLEASE REMOVE THE FOLLOWING OFFENDING CONTENT -

BRAND : Dhanlaxmi Bank

DOMAIN / URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhanalakshmi_Bank_Officers_Organization

Type : Social Media

iZOOlogic provides Security Services to the client and are fully authorised to represent Dhanlaxmi Bank in regards to this matter.

The enclosed domain/URL needs to be removed, based on the following one or more of the following reasons;

- the URL contains Intellectual Property or Private Information that is owned by the client where the publication of such content is detrimental to the client. - the domain or URL displays displays the copyright property of the client, this copyright content maybe a trademarked name, or an image/text based logo, or a designed image or colour scheme representing the client's copyright brand.

iZOOlogic provides security services to the client and we are fully authorised to act on behalf of the copyright owner. The copyright owner have instructed us to engage with any relevant third party or law enforcement agencies to resolve this copyright infringement. We can provide this evidence of authorisation from the client if required.

The information we have provided to you today is true and accurate and we are authorised to act on behalf of the copyright holder.

Please let us know if you have any queries or require any further information to help solve this matter.

We appreciate your urgent attention in removing the above content/domain/URL as soon as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IZoolabsiZoologic-Emjei (talk • contribs) 09:24, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Golden Key.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Golden Key.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:32, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

, there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.
 * Backlog


 * Community Wishlist Proposal
 * There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
 * Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!


 * Project updates
 * ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
 * There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.


 * New scripts
 * User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js(info) — A new script created for quickly placing copyvio-revdel on a page.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Sarath Das Article was proposed to deletion by you
I have made relevant changes to the subject. Please verify the same and check whether it has relevant sources and if it follows the criteria by Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anjali Ichu (talk • contribs) 16:21, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Orlando Adrenaline
Hello Cahk. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Orlando Adrenaline, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: being part of USA Rugby League indicates significance. Thank you. So Why  13:33, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Re: Speedy Deletion of my Page
Hello Cahk,

I am Giridhar and working as an employee in Miracle Software Systems and I have seen that you withhold my article which I had created to showcase my company's wiki page. As I was here in Wiki to showcase my company's Wiki Page and could you please help me out step by step on how to get approved and how to crate a wiki page on behalf of my company. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giri1994 (talk • contribs) 15:22, 13 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)

Orphaned non-free image File:CBSA Badge.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:CBSA Badge.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:29, 11 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