Filing cabinet

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

Hello. Just to let you know I changed the short description back to "1920 film" as that format is the de facto standard for film article shortdescs. All the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 15:28, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, No Great Shaker. If that's the case, it's a strange de facto standard to me: short descriptions allow for 40 characters and the format "[year] film" seems like we could be adding a lot more information. A frequent short description format I've seen in movie articles is "[year] [genre] film by [director]" or at least something descriptive, like in the FAs (choosing the most famous examples here) Jaws ("1975 film by Steven Spielberg"); Alien vs. Predator ("2004 science fiction action film"); E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial ("1982 film by Steven Spielberg"). If this is the de facto standard, it might be worth formalising in the Manual of Style. Sdrqaz (talk) 15:45, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point, Sdrqaz. It should really be made formal but I've no doubt it would involve considerable discussion. I have an open mind on it, actually, so if you feel that the full 40 characters should be used, then that's fine by me. Thanks again. No Great Shaker (talk) 15:48, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Conversation was regarding this edit at The Kelly Gang.

uhh i dont understand how to find information with a page that just redirects to roger taylors page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Queen fan who edited ogre battle article (talk • contribs) 20:31, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Queen fan who edited ogre battle article: If you click on this link and remove the redirect, you can create the page there. I had originally planned on moving the page you created (Outsider roger taylor) to Outsider (Roger Taylor album), but it already existed. Another editor about a week ago began work on it here, but it was changed into a redirect. Sdrqaz (talk) 20:40, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Conversation was regarding the creation of this page.

I dont now how to add the fact that I am Sepehr Haddad of Shahin and Sepehr but am also an author which has written a book. I tried to make a separate page for myself only ( Sepehr Haddad) but it seemed I could not since I am part of Shahin and Sepehr because of my music. If you could be of assistance to show me how to do it as I am a public figure, I would appreciate it. Thank you for all your support and the time you take to make things right. Much appreciated Sepehr — Preceding unsigned comment added by SEPEHRHADDAD (talk • contribs) 20:56, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SEPEHRHADDAD, thank you for your message and my apologies. I thought that you may have been adding information on a different Sepehr Haddad (something we call article hijacking). I've reverted my edit on that page, sorry. However, since you're one of the subjects of that article, I'd advise you to follow the conflict of interest guideline (I've posted some relevant information on your talk page). If you wish to create a standalone article on yourself (I do not recommend it), a good place to start would be to look at the Articles for Creation process and clicking the blue "click here to start a new article" button. Sdrqaz (talk) 21:18, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly for your excellent explanation and so prompt response. I really appreciate it and also the info you provided. I am very impressed with how quickly you got to this and I know how busy you must be, so thank you kindly. Best regards, Sepehr — Preceding unsigned comment added by SEPEHRHADDAD (talk • contribs) 21:53, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sepehr, when I make a mistake it's my duty to make it right. Thank you for your kind words and have a nice day. Sdrqaz (talk) 22:24, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Conversation was regarding these edits at Shahin & Sepehr. Part of the message was titled "Thank you kindly for your excellent explanation and so prompt response"; this heading was removed and merged into the previous message.

I am not sure how Ralph Pelleymounter page is a conflict of interest? I did approve a page about myself of which I hadn't realized I shouldn't and I apologize but I believe both have merit to be listed due to the public nature of both of our collective works. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peteroberth (talk • contribs) 19:42, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Peter, going off the material at Draft:Peter Oberth, you've worked with Pelleymounter on over twenty projects. As I stated on your talk page, conflicts of interest come about when people have "external relationships" with "family, friends, colleagues". In this case, I think there is quite a clear conflict of interest. Since you believe that "both have merit to be listed", please submit the drafts for review by our reviewers instead of just reverting and moving it back into the mainspace. You can do so by adding ((subst:submit)) to them. Sdrqaz (talk) 22:47, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Conversation was regarding the page move of Peter Oberth to Draft:Peter Oberth and page move of Ralph Pelleymounter (Singer) to Draft:Ralph Pelleymounter (Singer).

Hi Sdrqaz. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

• Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:09, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rosguill, thank you for taking the time to go through my request and contributions; I will use patroller with care. Yours, Sdrqaz (talk) 00:36, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the hard work on ENwiki \(^_^\ ) ToffeeQueen (talk) 02:55, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the encouragement, ToffeeQueen! Sdrqaz (talk) 15:35, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On 25 October 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Raed Ahmed, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Olympic flagbearer Raed Ahmed defected after he saw Bill Clinton clapping? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Raed Ahmed. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Raed Ahmed), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. (t · c) buidhe 01:59, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello my name is BloxyColaSweet! I have been strolling on both user and talk page. They are interesting but they arent very notable! But they are notable for a deletion, regards. BloxyColaSweet (talk) 10:09, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, BloxyColaSweet, I'm afraid I don't really understand what you're saying. User and talk pages don't need to be notable; only articles need to be notable. I'm also not sure what "notable for a deletion" means. Sdrqaz (talk) 12:54, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sdrqaz Hello again! This is very notable for deletion for user notices, often needs to be 'not here'. If you are very confused about SDN (Speedy Deletion Notices) you can go to my talk page or go see SpeedyDeletionNotice! (SDN). BloxyColaSweet (talk) 21:36, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I'm getting increasingly confused. I would like to think my grasp of the speedy deletion policy is reasonable and I still have no idea what "very notable for deletion" means (your subpage did not clear anything up). As an aside, your user page is highly misleading, as you do not have any of the four permissions you claim to have in your top-icons. Please remove them. Sdrqaz (talk) 00:32, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello my name is BloxyColaSweet! I have been strolling on both user and talk page. They are interesting but they arent very notable! But they are notable for a deletion, regards. I noticed that you replied an answer of a excuse that both user page and talk page are "Very Notable" I would say its not notable, the fact that there are so many DDCs, DDCs make User pages and Talk pages not notable dude to their policies. BloxyColaSweet (talk) 05:20, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid you're making very little sense: this conversation is going 'round in circles. I did not "repl[y] an answer of a excuse that both user page and talk page are 'Very Notable'". I advise you to focus on building an encyclopedia instead of making strange statements on policy, and perhaps (if applicable) contribute to another project in your first language because others are having difficulty communicating with you here. Sdrqaz (talk) 09:58, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]