This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III.
Question from MagicCactus (19:26, 20 November 2024)
Hello,
I'm trying to publish an article about "Operation Grange" an underground punk rock band from Suffolk Virginia. The only problem is that there are no citations online with which I can verify my information. I tried to use YouTube, even though it was an unreliable reference but it was declined. Do you have any idea about what I can do? I'm up for anything as long as I can get my article published properly.
Thank You and Best Regards. --MagicCactus (talk) 19:26, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @MagicCactus - unfortunately, if there are no independent, reliable sources that provide in-depth analysis about the band, then it cannot have an article on Wikipedia. The basic criteria for whether a subject should be in Wikipedia is called the general notability guideline (GNG). I'd encourage you to read that to get a full understanding of how Wikipedia determines whether a subject should be included. Also, do you have a connection to this band? In general, editors should declare if they have a conflict of interest in an area they are writing about. In this case, you may just need to be patient and see if this band develops a profile, if so, then it's possible it will become notable. Feel free to ask me anything else that you would like. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 02:39, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Goldsztajin. I'll look into it and let you know if I have any more questions. My friend is the guitarist in Operation Grange, and I just thought it would be cool to publish an article, but I understand, they have like 30 subscribers on YouTube and haven't played any gigs around town. MagicCactus (talk) 01:00, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I work for the Seminary and need to post updates to our Wikipedia page. Our edits keep getting rejected for multiple reasons. How do we update our information so that it will be accepted? Or how do I tell you I work for the Seminary? This is confusing and annoying. --Rdimon (talk) 14:22, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Rdimon - I can see that some messages have been left on your talk page. I'm sorry you've found this confusing and annoying. It is helpful that you've declared your association. One of Wikipedia's most important principles is neutrality and where editors may have, or have, a conflict of interest they are discouraged from editing subjects they have a relationship with due to potential bias; it's also good that you requested your edits via the talk page. However, another important principle in Wikipedia is all material used must be free from copyright restrictions. Using material from your own organisation does not escape this problem. The ideal situation is to find sources independent of your organisation and summarise yourself the information in those sources and provide that as a requested edit. I hope this helps and feel free to ask for more assistance or questions. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 21:05, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Women in Red December 2024
Women in Red | December 2024, Vol 10, Issue 12, Nos 293, 294, 324, 325
Women in Religion have a monthly virtual edit-a-thon and the next session is December 2nd 4:00 - 5:00 p.m. CST. For Zoom meeting details, contact Dzingle1 or RosPost. Women in Red members are welcome to join the Zoom Meeting here
Tip of the month:
Think of rewarding contributors, especially newcomers, with a barnstar.
Hi @N.JAYOFFICIAL1 - unfortunately, you are using your userpage in a way which is not in line with Wikipedia's policy and guidelines, which do not allow self-promotion or conflicts of interests. I've tagged the user page for deletion as it is inappropriate according to WP:G11. If you wish to contribute towards building an encyclopedia, I'm happy to assist, but I can't help if your intention is to promote yourself or someone you are connected to. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 01:02, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
November 2024 WikiProject Unreferenced articles backlog drive – award
Citation Barnstar
This award is given in recognition to Goldsztajn for collecting more than 10.0 points during the WikiProject Unreferenced articles's NOV24 backlog drive. Your contributions played a crucial role in sourcing over 8,000 unsourced articles during the drive. Thank you so much for participating and helping to reduce the backlog! – DreamRimmer Alt (talk) 18:03, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for good article nomination reviews will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog.
Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age of nominations reviewed.
Each article review will earn 1 point; for each 90 days an article has been in the backlog, an additional half-point is awarded; one extra point will be awarded for every 2500 total reviewed words.
Hi @Pk rest - according to my stats, I've made edits on a little more than 7,000 pages, articles themselves would be hundreds. If you have any questions about editing Wikipedia, feel free to ask me. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 22:54, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Goldsztajn, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, Abishe (talk) 04:19, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have posted my concerns in the talk page about its potential bias, i.e. veritable opinions against it, deprecated news citations. However there is no response after a long period.
Hi @Naphxing - if no one has responded to you after what looks like four weeks go ahead and make the change. If someone reverts the change ask them to discuss it with you on the talk page. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 12:50, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Abedmhaiss - editing means changing the content of articles on Wikipedia. There's an introductory message on your talk page - have a look through that and feel free to come back and ask me any questions you might have. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 02:51, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hope you’re doing well, mate! I’m looking to add a section about a controversy related to the 2021 Copa América, but I want to make sure I’m ticking all the right boxes when it comes to Wikipedia’s guidelines. Could you give me a hand with structuring it so it stays neutral and well-sourced?
Would this kind of source be good enough, and are there any dos and don’ts for adding a section on controversies? Cheers for pointing me in the right direction! --Sniphelp (talk) 13:12, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Sniphelp - I've had a look through the sources. A couple of points. First, I would advise against using the India Times, or The Hindustan Times pieces, in general these are not strong sources and given they are from far outside the region, better sourcing can be found. Second, El Pais is a newspaper of record, so is a strong reliable source. Third, conmebol.com is WP:PRIMARY, so can be used for basic facts, copaamerica.com is owned by CONMEBOL so is also WP:PRIMARY. The other sites look to be news recycling sites, so would not be very strong. Fourth, you mention "controversy" and I see from the editing history of 2021 Copa América you added material which was subsequently reverted; as far as I can see none of the sources above speak of or mention any controversy. If your intention is to add material about a controversy, these sources do not appear to support your claim. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 08:48, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
2024 has wrapped up, and what a full year it was for WikiProject Women in Green! Over the past year, we hosted two edit-a-thons, one themed around women's history and another on women around the world. We also managed to achieve most of our 2024 annual goals, nominating 75 articles for GA, reviewing 64 GA nominations, nominating 8 articles for FAC, peer reviewing 3 articles and reviewing 10 FAC nominations. Excellent work, and thank you to everyone involved!
For 2025 we have a new set of goals for nominations and reviews. In particular, we would like to see more articles on our Hot 100 list being improved and nominated for GA this year. If you take a look at the list and see an article you are interested in contributing to, feel free to add it and yourself to our Hot 100 project discussion. You might even find someone interested in collaborating with you!
This year, as with every year, we hope you will join us in helping improve our coverage of women and women's works on this encyclopedia. Every contribution helps. We'll see you around!
This award is given in recognition to Goldsztajn for conducting 127 article reviews in 2024. Thank you so much for all your excellent work. Keep it up! Hey man im josh (talk) 18:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Goldsztajn. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi @Goldsztajn Just replied you on the project discussion page. Please let me know if you have more questions. To protect our participants' personal information (as the participation will be anonymous), we highly encourage communication through emails. Thank you for your interest! Phoebezz22 (talk) 16:36, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Luizcribeiro001 - in general, it is not recommended at all. Have a look at this: WP:YOURSELF. I've left some links on your talk page that provides an introduction to Wikipedia, have a look and if you have any other questions, feel free to ask me. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 02:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there! I have joined Wikipedia today as I am looking to request edits to two articles:
The Times
The Sunday Times
Some of the information on both pages is outdated and I would like to bring it forward.
As this is my first time requesting edits I want to ensure I am doing it properly. To start, I have disclosed that I have a COI on my account. Is there anything further I need to do?
Second, I have a lot of requests to make in bulk and am conscious that I might be occupying lots of space in the Talk section of both pages with them. Is this the preferred method for bulk edits? Or is there a more appropriate space to make these requests?
Finally, I wish to swap out links in the citations section for both articles. The Times and Sunday Times recently migrated to a new .com domain, meaning all citations are currently redirecting from former .co.uk equivalents.
Thanks so much for your time, it's greatly appreciated.
Hi @Lukethetimes. In terms of the changes, without actually seeing the detail it is hard to comment, so I think the simplest thing would be to post all of them to the talk page and see the reactions. It might be helpful to classify the changes between those which are uncontroversial and relate to material already in the article (eg updating the name of the editor) as against those that introduce new material or are potentially controversial (again it's hard to say what might be controversial without seeing the material itself). It terms of changing links - do you mean those which appear in the infobox? Yes, if those are the links you are speaking of, I don't consider that to be an issue to change those yourself. Let me know if I can help any further. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 23:08, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Hi @Lightshieldanon - are you asking about creating an article? For new users it is usually recommended that you learn about how Wikipedia works (there are lots of links on your talk page), however, if you are keen to create an article, this link tells how to use the drafting process which would be most appropriate to begin. Be conscious that subjects for Wikipedia articles must be notable and have supporting reliable sources. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 22:02, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
