User talk:RileyBugz/Archive 1

Question - Where to put references
I want to reference something for a Supreme Court decision, in the infobox for them, but I am unsure whether I should put the reference on "ArgueDateA" or "ArgueDateB". Does it even matter? This question is posted on the Teahouse/Questions page.RileyBugz (talk) 21:51, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, Riley! I saw your question and thought I'd try to help. What page are you looking to edit? What citation are you looking to add to the info box? You don't necessarily need it in either ArgueA or Argue B, you could simply add the in-line citation right after the text in the info box. Point me in the direction of the page you are working on and I will take a look at it. Cheers! Comatmebro  User talk:Comatmebro 00:04, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I want to edit the article Norwood v. Harrison, and I want to add this citation: . I want to put it, specifically, where it says argued, decided, and probably a few other places.RileyBugz (talk) 00:20, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
 * My question has been answered, thank you though for helping. RileyBugz (talk) 14:01, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Nomenclature
I'm not totally sure what you meant in your email, but I've added a referenced etymology for the binomial name. I looked at oed.com for an earliest date for the English name, but no entry for "mangrove swallow". Jimfbleak - talk to me?  06:47, 9 November 2016 (UTC)


 * What I meant was why is the common name of the mangrove swallow "mangrove swallow". I assume it's because they were first spotted nesting in a mangrove tree, but I don't know.RileyBugz (talk) 23:08, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

RfA
Thank you for your participation in a Request For Adminship discussion. Please read this guide. If you have any questions don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:49, 30 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the guide you provided! I will definitely take it into consideration next time I vote. RileyBugz (talk) 21:37, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Nigel Cleere


The article Nigel Cleere has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * Does not pass criteria of Notability (people)

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TheCrazedBeast (talk) 21:14, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Nigel Cleere for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nigel Cleere 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 Articles for deletion/Nigel Cleere until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. TheCrazedBeast (talk) 15:04, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 4 December
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
 * On the White-winged swallow page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=753002797 your edit] caused a URL error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F753002797%7CWhite-winged swallow%5D%5D Ask for help])

Mangrove swallow
Hi, I won't review your article at FA because I've been involved already with it. A few comments looking forward to FAC, although some might be raised at GAN. It generally looks pretty good, so the following are suggestions rather than criticisms
 * You might have to explain why Birdfellows is a high-quality source. Personally I'd replace it
 * Have you checked for predators and parasites? You probably won't find anything for a central American species, but worth a Google
 * At FAC, it's standard to not link countries and continents, not sure at GA, so leave for now unless it's raised there
 * If you want to write the breeding area in millions (your choice) the format is in the Status section of water pipit
 * I assume you use WikiEd (in Preferences- gadgets if you don't), but you may want to add some scripts. The duplinks script is a painless check for overlinking
 * I'll look to see if I have any other sources that might be useful to you

Good luck Jimfbleak - talk to me?  07:10, 18 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I have now gotten rid of Birdfellows (I found what it was sourcing in other sources I had), I checked for predators and parasites and added a section about that (not much is known, but there is still some info), and I fixed the sources. I don't know how to run a script for WikiEd, but I already use it. I did fix the problem with 3 links to cornell, so now there is only one. It does drop it down to 14 sources though, including one I found for parasites. Thanks again, I really appreciate your help with this. RileyBugzYell at me &#124; Edits 16:39, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Jangid Brahmin is a paste-over of a valid article
I see you submitted Jangid Brahmin for deletion, but please note I wrote an actual decent article for that space, and the bad article you saw there is just something that an inexperienced editor is repeatedly pasting on top of my good article. Please instead revert their edits to my sourced version rather than delete. MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:31, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

December 2016
Hello RileyBugz. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that there is consensus that we shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1) and/or content (CSD A3) moments after they are created, as you did at Giordan Gosling. It is also suggested that pages that might meet CSD A7 criteria not be tagged for deletion immediately after they are created. It's usually best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course still be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. Adam9007 (talk) 23:55, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Mahatma Ramchandra
Hello RileyBugz, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Mahatma Ramchandra, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  01:17, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Hasty patrolling
Further to my comment about WP:BEFORE at Articles for deletion/Saman Halgamuge, I notice you nominated the article a mere nine minutes after it was created, which you were warned was inappropriate just yesterday. We all mistakes but new page patrol—both our only firewall against unwanted content and our first and usually only chance to welcome new editors—is a very sensitive task and that amplifies them a great deal. Please try to slow down and be a bit more cautious until you have more editing and patrolling under your belt. Personally I like to patrol from the bottom of the queue to make sure I'm not stepping on toes. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 02:48, 26 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Ok thank you! I think that I will go back to mainly adding content, and occasionally patrolling the page. When I do, I will, as you suggested, slow down and do my research. I will also probably just patrol articles that are created later. Thanks! RileyBugzYell at me &#124; Edits 02:58, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Help me
The unregistered user deleting my sourced edit on Looney Tunes: Back in Action has been harassing me using multiple IP's for several weeks now, and I'm sick of it! This is because of an edit dispute we had a few weeks ago on the Jeff Bergman article. I'm really tired of this harassment, and I was wondering if there was anything you could do to stop this.

-- Dpm12 (13:39 PST; 26 December 2016)


 * Well, there is the possibility of a range block. If you could provide me with some of the IPs of the unregistered user in question, and most of the IP is the same, then it is possibly that a range block could be done. I am really inexperienced though, but I will try my best. For now, you could warn them with Twinkle (with the appropriate category). You could also get an admin to try and help you. RileyBugzYell at me &#124; Edits 00:23, 27 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I warned the user, and I also suggested the page be protected. Dpm12 (talk) 01:14, 27 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Welcome. I told an admin also, so yeah. Also, you should use colons to indent your message. I put indents on your most recent message, but just add one more colon than the user you are replying to has. From there, I don't really know what to do. RileyBugzYell at me &#124; Edits 02:25, 27 December 2016 (UTC)


 * It is now semi-protected. Also, the admin I contacted told me that it would be helpful if you provided edit summaries, which is something that is pretty helpful. You can basically tell what they did at a glance, and people that do not provide summaries are suspicious. Thanks for contacting me to resolve this, it is never good to try and resolve things like this with edit warring. RileyBugzYell at me &#124; Edits 16:44, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Mangrove swallow
Hello, I've reviewed the article to which you have heavily contributed on the Mangrove swallow and deemed it is worthy of good article status. Congratulations! Best - Dr Strauss   talk  18:16, 27 December 2016 (UTC)