User talk:Darcyisverycute/Archive 1

A belated welcome!


Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Darcyisverycute! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:


 * Introductory tutorial
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Writing an article
 * Five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Community portal
 * Help pages
 * The Teahouse (newcomer help)
 * Main help desk

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes ( ~ ) to insert your username and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! Perfect4th (talk) 15:43, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Theybie has been accepted
 Theybie, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Theybie help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Tol (talk &#124; contribs) @ 21:02, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:27, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Food psychology has been accepted
 Food psychology, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Food_psychology help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! HenryTemplo (talk) 18:49, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Food psychology
Hello! Your submission of Food psychology at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! FacetsOfNonStickPans (talk) 12:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Food psychology
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency has been accepted
 Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Australian_Health_Practitioner_Regulation_Agency help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Gusfriend (talk) 11:09, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Darcyisverycute! Your additions to Compulsive hoarding have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.


 * You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
 * Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
 * We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
 * If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Donating copyrighted materials.
 * Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 21:21, 23 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you for pointing this out and removing it. I am certainly no expert on copyright, and so I have a question for you about this: The ICD-11 seems to be under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 according to which is non-free according to WP:F but would seem to meet all 10 criteria listed at WP:NFCCP, except minimal usage which is unclear to me. For example since I have no control over how long a diagnosis listed in the DSM or ICD is, the inclusion based on a certain character limit or a fixed number of words would lead to an inconsistency of coverage across articles. More importantly, copying the DSM and ICD verbatim is a practice that I haven't seen copyright violations flagged for before, with many of the articles I've worked on having them verbatim; should these be removed? Here are a few examples of that which have been around for some time: Schizoid personality disorder Borderline personality disorder Conduct disorder Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
 * Schizotypal personality disorder also has close paraphrasing. To what extent is that not copyright violation? I'm also not ruling out that better paraphrasing of this could be done on-wiki.
 * Would you happen to know if there has been a larger scale discussion/consensus about this? Darcyisverycute (talk) 00:58, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Non-free content needs to be compatibly licensed to be copied verbatim. Attribution is required. For info on how to do attribution, see Plagiarism.
 * CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 is not a compatible license.
 * "Brief verbatim textual excerpts" means quotations. Brief quotations are allowed, but only when there is no alternative. In most cases the content can be paraphrased, or you could offer the reader an external link to where they can read it themselves. The publishers of the DSM have specifically told Wikipedia that they don't want their content copied to our website. You are welcome to clean up any examples of violations of our copyright policy (including verbatim copies or too-close paraphrasing of the DSM) that you might find. Any help in that regard is appreciated. There's some basic instructions at Text copyright violations 101.
 * Everything at Wikipedia is done via discussions and consensus. Our policies as written are the products of discussions and consensus. — Diannaa (talk) 01:45, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. The publishers of the DSM have specifically told Wikipedia that they don't want their content copied to our website. Is this public? Can I link to some specific policy or discussion archive in edit summaries if I'm changing this? Since I wasn't aware the DSM said that, I imagine other editors wouldn't be either. Especially with the ADHD article being a GA and it didn't get flagged in the review here. Also curious in what year the DSM told Wikipedia not to do that.
 * When you say CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 is not a compatible license. do you meen incompatible to be included under NFCCP because of the non-commercial part? Do you know of any correspondence from the WHO about including their verbatim definitions of mental illness? Similarly, any prior links to discussions on this would be much appreciated. Darcyisverycute (talk) 03:05, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I remember seeing that we're not allowed to quote from the DSM but it was several years ago, possibly as many as ten years ago. It is likely in the Wikiproject Medicine talk page archives. "Not a compatible license" means that we can't copy it here like we can public domain content or compatibly licensed content. Please see FAQ/Copyright for more information. This is not the same thing as fair use, which is copying material while acknowledging the source. Non-free content covers this topic. In general, copying text from sources that are not compatibly licensed or in the public domain is not allowed, outside of short quotations. Wikipedia has a very strict copyright policy, stricter in some ways than copyright law itself, because our fair use policy does not allow us to copy material from copyright sources (or content that's not compatibly licensed) when there's a freely licensed alternative available. In this case the freely licensed material is prose that we write ourselves. Correspondence with the WHO is pretty far outside my wheelhouse as a volunteer editor who works on Wikipedia in my spare time. If such correspondence exists, it would be between the WHO and the Foundation, and I have no knowledge as to whether it exists or not. The WHO licenses their material under a CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO license, which is not a compatible license, because it does not allow commercial use, and our license does. — Diannaa (talk) 03:35, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you again for the reply. I've spent the better part of two days reading about this in the WikiProject Medicine archives, and found three particularly relevant things, which no surprise you were involved in along with SandyGeorgia:
 * (1) in 2013: DSM specifically asked us not to use their criteria a while ago. It seems you are right that it was probably over 10 years ago.
 * (2) in 2014: Helping Give Away Psychological Science students were given a handout saying against verbatim copying from the DSM.
 * (3) in 2020: About potentially getting WMF to change their license which doesn't seem to have changed at all for the ICD-11 and still presents an issue. I Don't anticipate that individual editors have the heft to persuade the WHO, but perhaps we could persuade the Foundation to take this on.
 * I'm in the process of collecting a bigger list of articles which currently have verbatim ICD/DSM sections to change. So I have a question: what is the best way to handle this? Here are the ideas I have:
 * Posting all the articles to WP:CP
 * Removing the content in each article and replacing it with paraphrasing in the same edit
 * Removing the content and replacing it with paraphrasing in separate edits
 * Post on each individual article's talk pages, or leave a message in the edit summary mentioning the DSM/ICD can't be quoted this way
 * Post about it on a WikiProject talk page and then maybe also linking to that from the article talk pages and/or the edit summary
 * I would also think that revision deletion wouldn't make sense to do for most or all of the articles since in my experience the DSM/ICD sections tend to be one of the first added in the article. Only asking about this since Text copyright violations 101 doesn't talk about groups of articles with similar problems.
 * Side note: You and are amazing editors. For me it feels like since deciding to pick up editing I've spent 80% of my on-wiki time reading policies and so so many archives. I still feel slow at writing content and understanding policy, especially the copyright parts. Don't know how you do it. Darcyisverycute (talk) 08:36, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your kind words, and thank you so much for taking the time to do the research to confirm what I said about the DSM. I took a cursory look using the search feature and found some clues (such as this discussion) but didn't have the time to do the work on it that you did, as most of my editing time is spent working the queue at CopyPatrol. The main problem with us copying the DSM is of course that if we reproduce all their diagnostic criteria here where people can access them for free, there's no reason for folks to buy the books, which are expensive even by medical-book standards.Regarding next steps: Posting at WP:CP would likely result in the content being removed in its entirety, as the people working that page are super busy and are under no obligation to perform re-writes. So re-writing the material in your own words would be the best alternative, if you have the skills to do that. Removing the content in each article and replacing it with paraphrasing in the same edit would work best, as it is easier for people to review your changes. A suggestion: Start with articles where you are least likely to meet with resistance, and always post on the talk page to clarify what you've done and why. There's technically no need to post to talk first if you are removing copyvio, as consensus is not required for its removal, and you have the policy to back you up that it has to go. But I am sure you will get a feel for which cases and which editors might like a bit of notice. Please also consider posting at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine when you are ready to get started and tell them your plans, maybe with a list of a handful of articles you intend to do first. Thanks again for your interest in helping with copyright cleanup. Cheers, — Diannaa (talk) 13:23, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks from me as well for the kind words. I would like to be a better position to help out with this project, but regret that I am not due to some serious real life issuess.  Please do not hesitate to ping me if I can be of any limited help, but understand I may not be in a position to respond. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  19:33, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * PS, unsure if you have found these helpful links?
 * Talk:Narcissistic personality disorder
 * Copyright problems/2010 March 9 Sandy Georgia (Talk)  19:58, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much Sandy for locating the posts where the actual takedown request is mentioned. I will bookmark that page in case I need it in the future. — Diannaa (talk) 20:59, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks SandyGeorgia for the DSM complaint ticket link. I agree with the pragmatic ideas raised there; many of the diagnoses which require eg. 5 of 8 criteria, are difficult to paraphrase preserving that information - looking again at ADHD I think the paraphrasing they did there is probably the best that's possible without changing the meaning of the original text.
 * Also, I have to agree that Wikipedia seems in practice, at least right now, not substantially different to countless publications which copy DSM and ICD criteria verbatim and I have to question in many of those cases if permission was obtained, and why in psychology the copyright enforcement seems to be far more lax than other areas. Systemically paraphrasing all the current copied diagnosis criteria is going to be a lot of work and I am willing to try (I think I have the skills to do that, at least for some articles).
 * Here is my current list: User:Darcyisverycute/DSM and ICD related articles that need criteria paraphrasing. It is apparent to me the US focus on how Wikipedia often only includes the DSM criteria and not the ICD criteria, which I will hopefully improve, although the ICD does tend to be more brief about mental disorders. Some of these are fairly contentious topics but I think in most of them paraphrasing will be pretty non-controversial.
 * Will make a post to WikiProject Medicine. Darcyisverycute (talk) 08:16, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Everything in psychology articles is far more lax; they are usually a mess, and there are few qualified editors in that area :) :) Sandy Georgia (Talk)  14:32, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * PS, I've looked at your list now ... take great care in the gender dysphoria area, as those are hotbeds of controversy and are subject to discretionary (arbcom) sanctions ... in those articles, you might announce on article talk first what your concerns and intended improvements are. The rest are just the typical psych article Wikipedia messes, where Wikipedia suffers from POV pushing, COI editing (publishers trying to include their own primary research), and not enough qualified eyes to review and fix. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  15:33, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Respectful Relationships education (July 16)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Akevsharma was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Respectful Relationships education and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Respectful Relationships education, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "Db-g7" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Respectful_Relationships_education Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Akevsharma&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Respectful_Relationships_education reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Akevsharma (talk) 00:58, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Manipulation (psychology)
I've had a block for Wikispace but you can go ahead and remove the unreliably-sourced portions. I didn't know about that. Thank you for your mention. Altanner1991 (talk) 16:29, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft
Please look over the draft at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles and let me know what you think (I'm subscribed to this section, so you can reply here if you want). If it looks like a plausible question to you, then I could start it soon. If you think it's a disastrous question, then please let me know ASAP. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:05, 16 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you for leaving this message!
 * Regarding your draft, I think it is well phrased to resolve the issue that arised at ANI and similar issues for alcohol related terms. So I do think it is a plausible question. The words as words italicisation is spot on. The only thing I would suggest to maybe change is the list being drunk, drinking more than the average person, high-risk drinking, any alcohol consumed during pregnancy, drinking before driving, underage drinking, binge drinking, heavy alcohol use, etc. Drinking and driving is a crime in many jurisdictions, so I would think WP:BLPCRIME applies to their usage in the article. Underage drinking is also often a crime although I believe the blame falls on the person supplying the alcohol, I think BLPCRIME is still relevant. For drinking alcohol during pregnancy, I am not sure if that one is a crime in which jurisdictions currently. But the other examples are not terms for crimes. I would add a sentence to indicate the ones that are not crimes or medical disorders can be used in articles if sourced and the sourcing does not need to be as strict for medical disorders or crimes. So I suggest adding "Using non-medical terms other than alcohol abuse which are words for crimes should also be consistent with the people accused of crime policy for biographies of living persons".
 * I suppose I was more inclined for a generic approach that would give future RfCs/discussions more guiding precedent. The line of thinking with WP:BLPCRIME suggests it's conceivable to propose a similar policy for mental illness; for any disorder in any edition of the DSM or ICD which has a known stigma attributable to reliable sources, claiming someone has that disorder requires there be reliable source indicating a diagnosis was made consistent with the qualification requirements of the country/state. Of course this is less strong than a legal conviction but many mental health and criminal convictions are similar so as to both hold large stigma. Correct me if I'm wrong that no such policy currently exists. In any case, that should not hold you back from starting the well-formed RfC you have drafted.
 * Also, I did notice your ping at "Language around migraine", I didn't reply purely because I couldn't think of anything useful to add. Hoping I'll be able to go back to spending more time on-wiki soon. Darcyisverycute (talk) 01:39, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Wrt BLPCRIME issues, what I'd like to achieve is "Don't say alcohol abuse when you mean drunk driving".  I'm not sure that your suggested sentence will be understood that way.  "Using non-medical terms other than alcohol abuse which are words for crimes..." sounds like alcohol abuse is being recommended in that situation.  For our purposes, it might be sufficient to just mention BLPCRIME.
 * On the broader concept, Biographies of living persons and Biographies of living persons would apply, though nothing in the policy explicitly mentions mental health or stigmatized conditions (e.g., sexually transmitted infections). Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles mentions identifying individuals, but that's mostly aimed at disease-related articles, rather than an editor who wants to write something like "His son was diagnosed with bipolar as a teenager" in the ==Personal life== section of a BLP.
 * I'm not sure we could get a strong statement adopted. We'd have the "don't censor me" folks plus the "privacy causes stigma" folks, and between the two, it might be difficult to form a consensus to make any change. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:24, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Respectful Relationships education (October 14)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by S0091 were:

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Respectful Relationships education and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Respectful_Relationships_education Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:S0091&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Respectful_Relationships_education reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

S0091 (talk) 16:59, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Recovery Record (app)
Hello, Darcyisverycute. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Recovery Record (app), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 10:22, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Flyability (company)
Hello, Darcyisverycute. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Flyability (company), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:03, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Emotional undereating
Hello, Darcyisverycute. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Emotional undereating, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:03, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Risk taking
Hello, Darcyisverycute. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Risk taking, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:04, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Flyability (company)


Hello, Darcyisverycute. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Flyability".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 16:25, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Respectful Relationships education
Hello, Darcyisverycute. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Respectful Relationships education, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:01, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Respectful Relationships education


Hello, Darcyisverycute. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Respectful Relationships education".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 05:33, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Medicalisation of sexuality
Hello, Darcyisverycute. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Medicalisation of sexuality, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:08, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Your Teahouse question
Did you ever find answers for these questions I'm not saying I would know how to answer them but I saw the questions in the archives and there was no response.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  21:23, 2 October 2023 (UTC)


 * @Vchimpanzee - thank you for asking, actually, this surprises me a bit because I just happened to look over that old question too a few days ago! In the time since, I learned about Citoid, which is the code to interface with the user to generate citation in Visual editor, and as part of Wikimania 2022 I wrote some Zotero translator code, which is what Citoid uses as a backend. I remember being so surprised to learn that Zotero translators are used by Wikipedia, because I've used Zotero a lot longer than I've edited Wikipedia. I was this close to applying for an Outreachy WMF internship to try doing work on Citoid...
 * Anyway-- I did not repost the issue at the technical village pump, but I did figure out that the issue was with the translators Citoid uses, and it is basically most of them. This is because Zotero uses a different internal format for storing dates than Wikipeida's citation templates expect. For example, if you see this file:, at lines 262 and 302 in the test cases, the DOI internal storage format which Zotero uses, is actually the same as Zotero - in this case Wikipedia is the offender for not accepting the date standard in its cite templates. So as far as I can tell, there are three ways to fix this:
 * 1. Add code internal to Citoid which converts the date from this format to Wikipedia's expected format. I think this is the best option. Actually, I try to have a look into it now at but obviously there is something wrong with my Gerrit account because I cannot clone it. Honestly, it would probably take me a few hours to report and fix in the learning process of using Gerrit (at least for enwiki only), and I feel like I should do that, that it would be worthwhile. I guess it feels a bit like 'everything at once' with so many things to work on/fix. It would take quite a lot of validation to get this working correctly for other language wikis too, though.
 * 2. Manually change each translator in WMF's forked version of Zotero's translators, to use the Wiki citation format. This seems like a bad idea / overengineered because I see this being a lot of work.
 * 3. Request onwiki that the citation templates be updated to accept multiple formats for the 'date' field, presumably only in the YYYY-MM-DD format that Zotero produces. The drawback of this is that some raw templates may incorrectly have their date format interpreted, for example, if someone was not paying attention to the tooltip and put the format YYYY-DD-MM in the cite template code instead, some work would be involved to validate that. It is possible that WMF would prefer this for Citoid, because I don't know what other language wikis do, they might have done local patches to their MediaWiki setup to fix it, but it's unlikely.
 * The issue should probably be posted here on Phabricator. If you haven't asked elsewhere in the technical village pump yet, I can try and pick this up again. I remember making a Phabricator account and then never using it -- Oops Real Life Moment. If Only My Real Life Could Be Working For WMF. I suppose it doesn't have to be just a dream... Darcyisverycute (talk) 08:45, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm way behind reading the archives, but every now and then I am able to help someone. Glad to know you are still pursuing this.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  16:31, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Moderator Tools newsletter - Issue #1
Welcome to the inaugural Moderator Tools newsletter! We’ll aim to publish new issues whenever we have big new updates about the projects we’re working on.

PageTriage
We’ve now wrapped up our work to support the English Wikipedia’s New Pages Patrol community by tackling some major technical debt in the PageTriage extension. The final project update gives an overview of all the work that we did over the past 6 months.

Automoderator
We’re currently working on a project called Automoderator, which will enable communities to automatically revert bad edits based on community-defined settings. We’re looking for input and feedback on our plans so far, and have a number of questions on topics we need patrollers and administrators to help us understand better. In addition to the overview and questions on the main project page, we now have two sub-pages with more specific information:
 * If you want to investigate Automoderator’s accuracy rate and check out how it would behave in practice, we’ve set up a testing process with data and scores so you can help us find new patterns we can take into consideration before Automoderator is deployed.
 * The measurement plan is the first draft of our plan to measure whether Automoderator is achieving its goals and not having negative consequences. Want to propose some data for us to capture to help evaluate this project? This is the place to go!

Other
Our team has also been working to ensure that software we’re responsible for is updated to support temporary accounts. We’ve made changes to PageTriage, Nuke, and The Wikipedia Library.

Although we have active engineering projects ongoing, we're always happy to chat about your community's content moderation tool needs - feel free to get in contact at Talk:Moderator Tools.

Read past issues or sign up to this newsletter here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:21, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 06:11, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

The extremely unpopular opinion
Me too, actually (although I disagree on the policy issue). Of course it's hard to know for sure, but I think the argument to the contrary leaves a lot to be desired, and I look forward to it being investigated with actual rigor... jp×g🗯️ 00:30, 16 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know :) Hard to have unpopular opinions, and I've rarely participated in RfCs but I hope my contribution is useful for the discussion. I've actually been meaning to publish a few papers about it -- my PhD has kind of taken priority this year, but it might interest you to read some of my research as it is now: Darcy<span style="transform:rotate(10deg);display:inline-block;color:#0645ad">isvery cute  (talk) 01:31, 16 December 2023 (UTC)