User talk:Dovid/Archive 2

Ways to improve Selwyn (name)
Hello, Dovid,

Thanks for creating Selwyn (name)! I edit here too, under the username Boleyn and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 19:14, 9 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for looking at this. I merely moved the "article" content off the DAB page, which didn't fit well with MOS. I did not provide content. I used to do new page patrol, so I understand exactly where you are coming from. Dovid (talk) 22:35, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Dovid, I'll see if I can verify some of the lead section. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 07:06, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

A page you started (Ben Zion Shenker) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Ben Zion Shenker.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

MainlyTwelve (talk) 17:12, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Charles Rothschild
Hi Dovid, many thanks for your edits to this article. However, when an article uses the or  templates, it would be appreciated if new citations could follow the same pattern. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:41, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I think you may be confusing my edits with someone else's. I didn't add, remove, or change any of the citations. I just improved some of the copy for style and readability. I noticed that previous edit was done by "Citation bot," which is an automated system to fix certain citations. Perhaps it made an edit that you found unwarranted? Dovid (talk) 20:22, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Many apologies, it seems so. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:33, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Dovid

Thank you for creating Angela Orosz.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 19:50, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * bothhave been addressed. Thank you. Dovid (talk) 20:20, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Lydia Reid (Scotland)


A tag has been placed on Lydia Reid (Scotland), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. Praxidicae (talk) 14:52, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Tibor-and-Vera-Bein.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Tibor-and-Vera-Bein.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:00, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Please take care with biographical information
Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons. Thank you. --Hipal (talk) 21:34, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

George Seitz
Hi Dovid, please refrain from re-adding superfluous detail viz. discussion of investigative processes, as well as terms such as "novel" which do not follow WP:NPV. Sideriver84 (talk) 05:08, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * please respect WP:REMOVAL. Have a discussion before you remove sourced content, which you did previously. "Superfluous" is a judgement call, and my judgement is different than yours. That's OK, but again, it calls for discussion.
 * I understand NPOV, but I don't think there's any violation here. If you don't like the term novel, fine, but it seems completely in line with the NYT-sourced description of "advanced technology." Advanced tech = new tech = novel; it loses its novelty whne it becomes common instead of advanced. Dovid (talk) 22:24, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * sourced information is not always necessary information. I will create a discussion in the future. Thanks, Sideriver84 (talk) 05:56, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

May 2022
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Alex Clare. ''The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution. This is especially important for WP:DOB.'' Toddst1 (talk) 15:44, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Toddst1@undefined Kindly demonstrate how that burden applies to reversions of inappropriate edits. Your previous reversion was inappropriate; you could have removed the birth dates without reverting other material. Would you have a BLP violation enforced against an eidtor who undid vandlasim, where the vandal happened to have deleted both sourced and uncourced material? Note that the birthdate was added over 13 months ago by another editor. I'm not sure how you managed to manually revert other material; I just did a standard revert of a bad edit using the automated tools. Dovid (talk) 18:03, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Yup. Restoring the unsourced DOB - Not ok. There was no vandalism. You don't have to like my edit but repeating yours will get you blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 16:12, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Reverting multiple edits from multiple editors without reviewing each one is vandalism. Restoring is not the same as reverting a bad edit. If I'm wrong, point me to teh specific policy that equates them, please provide. Dovid (talk) 17:42, 20 May 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) 00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

gas ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 16:24, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics
Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:50, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Glass–Steagall: legislation, limits and loopholes for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Glass–Steagall: legislation, limits and loopholes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glass–Steagall: legislation, limits and loopholes until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Dylnuge (Talk • Edits) 07:37, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Other uses subtopic
Template:Other uses subtopic has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:34, 15 August 2023 (UTC)