User talk:AirshipJungleman29/Archive 11

This is an archive of past discussions with User:AirshipJungleman29. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Per the GA review

Hello,

I'm so sorry to put even more work on your plate, but for your information, the articles I reviewed that likely have unreliable sources and information are: Oduwa, Ohuede, Obioye, and Arigho.

Thank you, ‍🌷Reverosie🌷^★talk★ 17:49, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

No worries Reverosie. I saw on the GA review you said you're willing to take responsibility for the consequences of the actions, or something like that; don't worry about that at all. No one who reads the review will think you were acting in anything other than good faith. The important thing now is that you learn from past mistakes.

When reviewing for sources, you can keep User:Ealdgyth/FAC, Sources, and You in mind—yes, it's for the higher standards of FAC, but the principles apply to GA as well. You may perhaps have assumed that if a source is a book, or if it's not highlighted in red or yellow by your sourcing script of choice, it's fine. You can't do that.

For websites, Ealdgyth says it better than me. For books, the first point I look at is the same that Ealdgyth looks at first: the publisher. If it's a major university publisher, or academic publishers like Routledge or Brill, or even a well known brand like Penguin or Palgrave Macmillan, that's perfectly fine and you shouldn't bat an eye, because they'll have done their due diligence for the author's capabilities. In this case, "Nosa Computers" set the alarm bells ringing. Then you look at the author, which you especially must do if it's on a topic which the traditional Western publishers may not have covered, such as West African history. If that investigation comes up with problems ... you probably have a non-reliable source on your hands.

(This also applies equally well when you've found a source for your own article writing and are not entirely sure if it's reliable).

On what to do next with the four articles you mentioned—well, I suppose the rule-stickler thing to do would be to nominate them all at WP:GAR ... but if Vanderwaalforces feels that they can excise the source in question without harming the quality of the article too much in, say, the next couple of weeks...? Up to them, really. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:05, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Yeah! I already mentioned I will be cleaning them up. I'm definitely not being timed, as there's no deadline but based on my personal capacity I think cleaning them would not be difficult. Let's see what I can do. Thank you! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:25, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

WikiCup 2025 September newsletter

The fourth round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 29 August. The penultimate round saw three contestants score more than 800 points:

BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,175 round points, mainly from sports-related articles, including 17 good articles, 27 did you know articles, and 9 in the news articles
Arconning (submissions) with 1,090 round points, mainly from articles about athletes and politicians, including a featured article on Philippines at the 1924 Summer Olympics, 9 good articles, 28 did you know articles, and a wide assortment of featured and good article reviews
AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) with 854 round points, mostly from a high-scoring featured article on the Indian leader Rani of Jhansi and two good articles, in addition to 13 featured and good article reviews

Everyone who competed in Round 4 will advance to Round 5 unless they have withdrawn. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far, while the full scores for Round 4 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 9 featured articles, 12 featured lists, 98 good articles, 9 good topic articles, more than 150 reviews, nearly 100 did you know articles, and 18 in the news articles.

In advance of the fifth and final round, the judges would like to thank every contestant for their hard work. As a reminder, any content promoted after 29 August but before the start of Round 5 can be claimed in Round 5. In addition, note that Round 5 will end on 31 October at 23:59 UTC. Awards at the end of Round 5 will be distributed based on who has the most tournament points over all five rounds, and special awards will be distributed based on high performance in particular areas of content creation (e.g., most featured articles in a single round).

Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges – Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), Frostly (talk · contribs), Guerillero (talk · contribs) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) – are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck!

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

Questions (August)

Question from FellowEsin

Hello! I want to upload an image that I'm planning to use on my user page only. Is there a category for such images? What do you suggest me to do? Thank you! --FellowEsin (talk) 11:50, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi FellowEsin, you can upload as many images as you want as long as they meet WP:IMAGEUSE. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:36, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you!! FellowEsin (talk) 21:21, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Question from Victoriaelizabeth9275

Hey, idk why my edits disappeared on the Wormsloe historic site page. --Victoriaelizabeth9275 (talk) 19:30, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Another editor reverted them Victoriaelizabeth9275; the normal procedure to follow is to discuss on the other editor's talk page or on the article talk page. If you choose the latter, make sure you WP:PING them to the discussion. If you have any further questions, please let me know. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:34, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Question from Susanndelgado

Hi, I was taken to a link to create a gallery on wiki commons through a notification I am not sure why but I did not because I do not know what it is and did not want to get in any trouble. If you can please explain some of this environment and how it works. --Susanndelgado (talk) 00:20, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Susanndelgado, a key principle of editing on Wikipedia is to be bold all the time. If you want to make an edit, make an edit. If it's wrong, someone will come and tell you about it, and that's fine. If you really want to ask specfic questions, there is the WP:TEAHOUSE. Good luck! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:24, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you Susanndelgado (talk) 22:29, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Question from User972364

Hello, could you please help me with an article im creating, I have provided well structured references but the person revieweing it keeps rejecting it. Would appreaciate some guidance. Thank you so much --User972364 (talk) 09:15, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi User972364, as has been explained to you several times by many editors, none of the references you have provided showcase significant coverage of the article subject. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:55, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I have reworked. My question is- I'm following some of the references that this user added here because they belong to the same topic and in this case the article was approved :Robert Parks-Valletta

The type of articles included in sourcing are the same typology. I would like to further understand. I just modify it the article but haven't submitted yet. I created a discussion to help with guidance before to officially submit. User972364 (talk) 10:40, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi User972364, you are correct that the sourcing in Robert Parks-Valletta is not up to Wikipedia standards. Thus, I have nominated it for deletion. Hope that helps, ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:22, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello @AirshipJungleman29, I’d like to clarify that my intention in bringing up the Robert Parks-Valletta article was not to request its deletion. I respectfully suggest reconsidering or withdrawing the deletion proposal. As I see it, the only non-independent source in the article is the PR Newswire release; the remaining references are from reliable, independent outlets that provide significant coverage of the subject in line with WP:RS and WP:SIGCOV.

Separately, I have made revisions to my article on Staycation to improve sourcing and structure. If possible, I would appreciate your review of those changes before I formally resubmit, to ensure they meet Wikipedia’s notability and verifiability standards. User972364 (talk) 13:45, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestion User972364 but I don't intend to reconsider, especially as we have seen that you don't actually understand Wikipedia's sourcing policies, as shown by your "revisions" to Staycation "to improve sourcing and structure" which consist of adding a promotional YouTube video featuring Mr Parks-Valletta. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:50, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. I’d like to clarify that the YouTube link I added is not a promotional upload from the subject or their company—it’s an interview segment from Good Day Sacramento, a program on CBS News (official site). CBS News is considered a reliable source under Wikipedia guidelines.

The video is hosted on YouTube, but it is the official upload of the segment. My intent was to cite the content of the interview to verify details about the development history of the series, in the same way other approved articles—such as You (TV series)—have cited televised interviews.

If the concern is with the YouTube link format rather than the source itself, I’m happy to adjust the citation to clearly indicate CBS News as the publisher and primary source making this a reliable source. User972364 (talk) 11:12, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@AirshipJungleman29 sorry i didn't mention in my previous comment. User972364 (talk) 11:13, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

User972364, thank you for the feedback. I'd like to clarify that I have a mental age greater than ten, which you seem to be unaware of.

Pretending that a segment introduced as "tell[ing] us about all the great things this company is doing" which includes advertising footage from the company and which highlights that Mr Parks-Valetta's book is selling on Amazon is somehow not promotional is straightforward misrepresentation of the facts.

If you continue with such tendentious editing, I will be compelled not only to cease this unproductive conversation but also to seek sanctions against you for your promotion of Parks-Valetta and his works. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:28, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Question from Rajputpawanpardesi999

I m artist singer n performer how i edit my bio links n all information pls help me --Rajputpawanpardesi999 (talk) 08:01, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Rajputpawanpardesi999, Wikipedia is not a website to promote yourself. Please use websites such as LinkedIn for that. If reliable, indepedent sources have written about you, please provide them to me and I will see if you are notable enough for an article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:24, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Question from Buddhimatta

Hello Mentor, AirshipJungleman29 , I noticed that the article Aditya Jha was the subject of an AfD discussion in 2007 (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aditya Jha), where the result was **delete** by Kurykh. However, the article still exists.

Will you know why the 2007 deletion outcome was not implemented base don any tags that I might have missed on the page?

At present, the article still appears to fail WP:N, reads like a résumé and is promotional in tone (see WP:PROMO), lacks significant coverage in independent, reliable sources (WP:RS), and contains many unsourced or unverifiable statements (WP:V). A PROD was recently removed, and these issues remain unresolved.

Should I initiate a new AfD nomination, or is it possible to action the original deletion result? . I am asking in good faith as a newer editor aiming to understand and follow proper deletion processes, and to help improve Wikipedia’s content quality. --Buddhimatta (talk) 07:34, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Buddhimatta, following the 2007 deletion discussion, the article was indeed deleted; it was subsequently re-created in 2009. This is perfectly acceptable within Wikipedia's norms. If you want, you can nominate it for deletion again. Please do not, on the other hand, edit long-archived pages such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aditya Jha. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 07:38, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Dear AirshipJungleman29,

Thank you for the clarification. I now understand that the article was re-created in 2009, and I will be careful not to edit long-archived AfD pages.

Could you help propose deletion for Aditya Jha if you feel that is the appropriate next step, so I can learn how to do it correctly?

As a new contributor starting to learn the ropes, I’d appreciate your advice on two quick points: 1. From your perspective, what are some of the biggest content gaps or underdeveloped areas on Wikipedia that I could aspire to help improve over time? 2. I came across this page by chance while searching for something unrelated on Google. When I tried to follow the instructions to make the article less resume-like, I could barely find reference material/links. I attempted PROD, thinking that was correct, but another contributor suggested AfD instead. What’s the best-practice path for nominating deletion in such cases?

Thanks again for taking the time to guide me. I’m here to learn and contribute. Buddhimatta (talk) 12:08, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

@AirshipJungleman29 Wanted to follow up on above. Many thanks! Buddhimatta (talk) 08:17, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

I have done it but clearly made some mistakes and don't know how to fix. Please help:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aditya Jha (Aditya Jha (2nd nomination) nomination) Buddhimatta (talk) 09:16, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Buddhimatta others have sorted it out. The best way of learning on Wikipedia is to be bold and find out. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:31, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Question from Crystalsinthysky

How do I add refs to an article? --Crystalsinthysky (talk) 21:14, 17 August 2025 (UTC) @Crystalsinthysky, please see Help:Referencing for beginners. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:29, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Question from Advocate Manikandan Murugan

How to publish my wikipedia --Advocate Manikandan Murugan (talk) 16:15, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Advocate Manikandan Murugan, please see the advice I have provided on your talkpage. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:52, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Question from Mustaqeem aali khan

hi theres one people even u can check on google namely mustaqeem ali khan he is actor of bollywood worked in many movies like mere husband ki biwi amd welcome to kashmir has done many high profile ott series kuku and quick tv which are quite propular his team contacted me and want his profile to get seen on wikipedia official front page to people can more get to know about him --Mustaqeem aali khan (talk) 22:37, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Mustaqeem aali khan, it doesn't matter if Narendra Modi himself contacts you and asks for someone to get a Wikipedia page. The only thing that matters is if there are reliable sources which provide significant coverage of the subject. Hope that helps, ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:14, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Question from Mahels

Hii --Mahels (talk) 06:53, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Question from Woodywoods369

Can I get a business start up grant or funding off you --Woodywoods369 (talk) 10:16, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Woodywoods369, as a person I am not really in the habit of funding businesses, and I don't believe Wikipedia is either. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:20, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Question from Bulyan

if i edit iraq's formation section to this, would it be a problem? --Bulyan (talk) 18:13, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

Bulyan, probably, as most don't have anything to do with the country of Iraq save for geography. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:07, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

ok, well what about M.bitton's case with the algeria page,is my edit right or wrong? Bulyan (talk) 19:53, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

I don't know Bulyan, you can discuss on Talk:Algeria. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:21, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

Template:Did you know/Preparation area 5

Hi AirshipJungleman, I can agree with this edit, but I'm not sure if this one doesn't bring back the WP:SOB issues. Nobody (talk) 17:01, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

The comma in between should handle that 1AmNobody24. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:04, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Outrageously false Wikipedia Musk biography data, especially strikes his "EDUCATION", the only one I reviewed

Hi, I'm writing this as you seem to be only one of the few who are interested / motivated to correct Musk's wikipedia biography data. I spent about 2 days reading court cases about Elon Musk, including his depositions, evidence, and complaints dating to 1990s and find his "Education" part article outrageously false, fabricated and up for removal. It's a shame for Wikipedia to have this on one of the most-read articles on the Wikipedia, that has 99% of the world populations, simply trusts.

Elon Musk has no degree in Physics, only bs in economics. All sources cited rely on Vance's book, which is BASED on what MUSK said to her. I've searched all data on the internet, including court deposition, where Musk was caught lying on deposition in 2007, here are (just some, simplified for you) sources, – https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1zPeWaaCZHqfq0tnkPwc61A6bGHySdj91
The notion "wrote a business plan for an electronic book-scanning service similar to Google Books" cites article by the British Guardian, which is based on their interview with Musk himself (as Guardian replied to me in an recent email I can show).
The notion that "Musk held two internships" relies on Vance's book, self-interviewed. No one from Pinnacle Research Institute specifically had ever stepped up and confirmed it in ANY form. The company had a big presence in 90s.
The notion of "his acceptance to a graduate program in materials science at Stanford" is wrong, as there's no one who's ever confirmed Elon's acceptance, nor anyone who remembers him and there's no possible to verify it without Elon Musk's (confirmation). Information on it is substantially revealed in the lawsuits against him, where he was forced to reveal information (some of the lawsuits mentioned in the link above). Furthermore, there was no such department as "material science" at Stanford in 90s; at the time he claims acceptance, he didn't have graduation diploma from Wharton (which he, as confirmed in court depositions, had NOT received until 1997), Stanford would had never accepted ANY student against its own protocols (someone without a diploma). Stanford acceptance doesn't exist. Neither anyone from the faculty remembers reviewing his application.
The notion "applying for a job at Netscape" is based on Musk's own self-given interviews to CNBC (which it was happy to provide him with due to the views and publicity).
The rest two sentences are based on what "Musk has said". Everything is a blunt lie and it's heart-breaking to read it publicly.

I couldn't not proceed further because, apparently, everything is fabricated and I just wanted to start with a little note (this note with you), as you are the only who can do a change on Wikipedia and has power to do it.

Reading court cases and his depositions and the lies that he fed court is utterly painful (nevertheless it still recommended as all of his court cases against him must be read by anyone to see how much of a swindler he is).

Since I cannot edit, neither semi-edit, I reach out to you as the only remedy either to reach out to Wikipedia / or edit / lead discussion with Wikipedia yourself.

Thank you very much for reading it! Ruslanhonchar1997 (talk) 17:43, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Ruslanhonchar1997, the above seems to be original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. Please note that as with most biography articles on Wikipedia, we take Musk's statements on themselves in good faith, as long as they aren't "unduly self-serving". Looking at just the first point of yours, the sources in the article indicate that Musks's degree in Physics has been confirmed by Pennsylvania University, including in this email exchange. Best, ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:02, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Your nomination of Jim Corbett is under review

Your good article nomination of the article Jim Corbett is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kusma -- Kusma (talk) 09:26, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Jim Corbett has

passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kusma -- Kusma (talk) 09:44, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Current DYK (Warming stripes link)

As we discussed this point earlier, I thought it might be appropriate to share a curtesy link. I'm really not sure how or where these matters are decided, but after all effort I put in, it's a bit of a surprise (and something of a disappointment) to see the link re-added once more. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 05:18, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

August music

The last four stories were about Bach's Mass in B minor (because I heard it), and about three who died, including two women. - What do you think about this nom? -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:48, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

I think that you must love pointless arguments and consistent disrespect. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:10, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

I agree that some arguments look pointless. Thank you for ending this one. I love music. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:51, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you today for Rani of Jhansi, introduced: "We don't know much about much of her life, nearly all the bits we do know about have been controversial, and her legacy has been heavily contested. Still, I hope I've managed to muddle through this mess to create a coherent article on India's most revered heroine."! - I think you did. I also like the DYK, talking about her greatness. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:01, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Today a great singer, pictured on my talk twice. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:17, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Today's story - short version: ten years ago we had a DYK about a soprano who sang in concerts with me in the choir, - longer: I found today a youtube of an aria she sang with us then, recorded the same year, - if you still have time: our performances were the weekend before the Iraq war ultimatum, and we sang Dona nobis pacem (and the drummer drummed!) as if they could hear us in Washington. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:59, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I clicked thank you for the promotion of the Price discography, but wish I could withdraw that. I was so sure that the only "interesting" part of that numbers only (no music) hook was her face. We'd miss the chance to picture a woman who was a pioneer for a minority. Please consider. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:39, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Sure, I can unpromote, but no guarantees it'll be promoted again. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:43, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. - Check out my talk for an Independence day, or: the pic of Oksana Lyniv was taken on 24 August. There's listening and reading in today's story, and I like both. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:15, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

On top of my talk: birthday of a great violinist and Requiem for a great friend. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:42, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Nomination for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open!

Nominations for the upcoming Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 September 2025

News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation loses a round in court
UK Online Safety Act remains undefeated.

In the media: Congress probes, mayor whitewashed, AI stinks
Plus Wiki rules, Wiki Spin, and physicists get street cred!

Disinformation report: A guide for Congress
The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance.

Recent research: Minority-language Wikipedias, and Wikidata for botanists
And other new research findings.

Technology report: A new way to read Wikisource
Tis true: there's magic in the web of it.

Traffic report: Check out some new Weapons, weapon of choice
With the usual mix of war, death, super heroes, a belt, and Wednesday.

Essay: The one question
It's an easy one.

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:02, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Parwan battle

Can I ask why my change was reverted? If it was a mistake, I won't do it again. BEFOR01 (talk) 20:02, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi BEFOR01, both flags you added to the infobox were historically inaccurate. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:25, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

George Lincoln DYK

Thank you setting George Lincoln to run on the anniversary of the end of WW2. Could you possibly add a link to the Japanese Instrument of Surrender in the hook? I linked the full name in the article. I think readers would be quite interested in it. Best, Thriley (talk) 01:17, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Thriley, the idea of DYK is to draw attention to newly improved articles. From there, readers can click on all the links they want to. I prefer not to link unless absolutely necessary. Best, ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:17, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Cite Unseen September 2025 updates

Hello! Thank you for using Cite Unseen. We are excited to share details about a big update we just deployed. With grant support from Wikimedia CH, we've added several new features, including a citation filtering dashboard, settings dialog, support for localization, and the ability to easily suggest domain categorizations. Cite Unseen now also lives on Meta Wiki, as part of our effort to serve all Wikimedia projects. Our source lists are now also on Meta-Wiki, where they can be collaboratively edited by the community.

Please see our newsletter on Meta-Wiki for full details. If you have feature ideas, notice any issues with our new updates, or have any questions, please get in touch via our project talk page. Thank you!

From SuperHamster and SuperGrey, 05:43, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

This message was sent via global message delivery. You received this message as you've been identified as a user of Cite Unseen. If you are not a Cite Unseen user, or otherwise don't want to receive updates in the future, you can remove yourself from our mailing list here.

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open!

Voting for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open! A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. Voting closes at 23:59 UTC on 29 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

The Life of a Showgirl

Hi, thank you for your comment on the subject's DYK nom. Just wanted to invite you to present your opinion at Talk:The Life of a Showgirl#Swift vs Trump Saga?. M. Billoo 22:10, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

M.Billoo2000, information should never be included in articles so DYK hooks work. It should only be the other way around. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:31, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Really sorry, I could not specifically connect your replies. Please do not mind, but asking to seek guidance only as I am new in DYKs.

Earlier, you wrote, "ALT4 is not supported by the article", and now this reply above. When you see the article, section #Promotion and impact, a short history and the current highlight about Swift vs Trump is mentioned there. Plus I recalled DYKHFC in my mind as well.

Lastly, just a concern. Shouldn't National Boyfriend Day trigger interest? Unofficial and lesser known, I think people may want to know more of it. That would be the information not in the article; and I do not see its mention in references of only one country though.

Hope for a kind and helpful response, thank you! M. Billoo 08:41, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

M.Billoo2000, you suggested adding information "just so the DYK hook may qualify". This should never be the way encyclopedic articles are built—to satisfy the needs of DYK. The article should first be written to be accurate, neutral, and intelligible, and then DYK hooks should be created from the material present.

ALT4 reads "that Taylor Swift's new album announcement fueled her rivalry with Donald Trump?". This is in not supported by the article's "Some publications also believed this announcement was Swift's response to Trump's open criticism about her, after she had endorsed the opposition Democratic candidates for the 2024 United States presidential election."

You do not see how "National Boyfriend Day" references only one country? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:49, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Women in Green's 9th Edit-a-thon

Hello AirshipJungleman29:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Editathon event in October 2025!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2025, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) editathon event with the theme What Women Do! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 different occupations or professions (or broader roles in society) by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Grnrchst (talk), Spookyaki (talk) & Alanna the Brave (talk)

You are receiving this message as a member of the WikiProject Women in Green. You can remove yourself from receiving notifications here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:38, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Menora in p3

Hey, thanks for promoting my hook :) feels very weird to be on this side of the question, but I think the hook loses something without the indication that the league was ordered by a court to admit the schools, as opposed to, like, a parent organization. Could that bit be put back in the bolded link? (Fine with the word 'federal' being dropped.) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:10, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

I can see the legal angle. Restored. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:41, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Understandability guideline workshop

Hi Airship (and talk page watchers). A few months ago, you indicated that the WP:MTAU guideline perfectly captures your opinion. Since, I've been working on workshopping new text, and have been wondering whether it still captures your thinking: would you have time to give feedback on the workshop text (comparison with the existing text). So far, I've not tried to change how easy articles need to be, but mostly how to make articles easier when you want to. Always tough to write guidelines for a wide variety of topic areas, so hope you have time to chime in. Happy to trade this for a review at GAN or FAC if you've got something open. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:24, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

DYK nomination

Thank you for nominating The Magician's Daughter for DYK. I appreciate it. —Bruce1ee ^talk 00:38, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

You're welcome Bruce1ee. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:08, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

September music

My story today is about a composer and his ballerina wife, pictured as I saw them in 2009. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:49, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for approving Canto General, my story, and an interesting article and hook today! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:47, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

I enjoy a DYK that pictures a person together with achievements in art. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:51, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Our readers didn't, but who cares about them? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:18, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

I came to thank you for nominating Hymns from the Rig Veda, and for the Papua New Guinea set. - About the readers, we know "click" but not "joy". Some told me they did. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:24, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

No readers there. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:41, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

When I click on an article I am a reader. - Stats: his "low" is higher than those in the earlier months of this year, - perhaps wait until the month is over. I'm surprised that Leontyne Price was only about twice as high, would have expected more. Thanks to the image, DYK brought him about a third of the interest ever in him, that's enough for me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:59, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Good to hear that you've realised what a reader is, maybe a couple of comments too late. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:03, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you

Your rewrite of the lead section on Enid Hamilton-Fellows is much better. Thank you. (I dispute the notion that "offices" are government only but that's for another day)

Right now, I'm wondering if you know anyone in the Spanish Copyright community. Regarding the Countess's photos under the name claudek, the National Library of Spain lists their rights status as:

Acceso Libre.

Directly translated that means Open Access and not Copyright Free, but I want to be sure, and if it does mean open access, then I will create a gallery on her page under the war photography section of about six to eight of her photographs. But then the question in my head is... there are literally photos in there of massacres. Do I put any of those in, or just damaged buildings? I don't want to make anyone nauseous, but I also want to make sure the encyclopedic quality of her war photography is presented.

In an article I improved a while back, Revista Bohemia, in which I placed an image of a lynching that was published in the magazine and lead to a revolution when people saw it – but that was just one single picture.

The countess has dozens of photos with dead people in them. Thoughts? Guylaen (talk) 12:13, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Guylaen, image copyright is notoriously not my forte. I'd advise asking Nikkimaria instead; she can probably point you in the right direction. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:36, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Tomats

Did you know about that? I didn't. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:41, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

I believe ScottishFinnishRadish drew my attention towards it, Gråbergs Gråa Sång. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:35, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Don't forget {{tomats}}, for all your discussion measuring needs. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:54, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors – September 2025 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors – September 2025 Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the September newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since June.

Election news: Project coordinators play an important role in our WikiProject. Following the mid-year Election of Coordinators, we welcomed GoldRomean to the coordinator team. Dhtwiki remains as lead coordinator, and Miniapolis and Mox Eden return as coordinators. If you'd like to help out behind the scenes, please consider taking part in our December election – watchlist our ombox for updates. Information about the role of coordinators can be found here.

June 2025 blitz: 10 of the 12 editors who signed up for the June 2025 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited a total of 26,652 words comprising 13 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

July 2025 drive: 30 of the 54 editors who signed up for the July 2025 Backlog Elimination Drive copy edited a total of 379,557 words comprising 151 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

August 2025 Blitz: 11 of the 17 editors who signed up for the August 2025 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited a total of 65,601 words comprising 25 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

September 2025 Drive: Sign up here to earn barnstars in our month-long, in-progress September Backlog Elimination Drive.

Progress report: As of 06:43, 20 September 2025 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 222 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,010 articles.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we do without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:45, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

GA Reviewing

Hi! I recently completed my first GA review and noticed you're listed as a mentor, so I wanted to ask if you have any feedback or tips.

The page is Crystal Springs Dam, the review page is Talk:Crystal_Springs_Dam/GA2.

I also have another review I've started for McLaren MCL38 at Talk:McLaren_MCL38.

Thanks in advance! SnowyRiver (talk) 23:44, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Looks good SnowyRiver28! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:30, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Abyssinian hare

There are a few images from Flickr that could be used for the article (and the DYK), but I am working on getting them renamed since they were initially misidentified as Lepus starcki. File:Ethiopian Highland Hare (Lepus starcki) running.jpg, File:Ethiopian Highland Hare (Lepus starcki) in grass.jpg -- Recon rabbit 12:35, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the thought Reconrabbit, sadly both those images might be a bit too unclear for DYK's requirements though. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:15, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 233, September 2025

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content
Book review: Hawkeye7 and Nick-D look at recent works
Timeline: This month in military history

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:53, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

October 2025 GAN Backlog Drive

October 2025 GAN Backlog Drive
On 1 October 2025, a one-month backlog drive for good article nomination reviews will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog and to reduce old nominations. 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. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Society of Champa

Hello! Your submission of Society of Champa 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! 296cherry (talk) 18:17, 29 September 2025 (UTC) 296cherry (talk) 18:14, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

I also just accepted one of your hooks:

Template:Did you know nominations/Corrective Move 296cherry (talk) 18:52, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Amfioensociëteit

Hello! Your submission of Amfioensociëteit 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! AllWeKnowOfHeaven (talk) 23:14, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Tarikh-i Alfi

Hello! Your submission of Tarikh-i Alfi 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! Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:07, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Murder of Charlotte Dymond

@Launchballer and Moondragon21: You marked this for rejection, despite my acceptance, and Launchballer wrote "rejected by reviewer" which was not correct, I had already accepted it. I will also note you each have your own DYK nominations pending. That's just not fair. If you think there are too many DYK nominations, withdraw your own, not someone else's. --GRuban (talk) 13:10, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

GRuban, see WP:DYKTIMEOUT. I closed one of Launchballer's nominations earlier today which had also timed out for the same reason. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:12, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

But this is due to no fault of Moondragon's, who feels understandably upset. He did real work to get me to approve it, which work is now being thrown away (well mostly, I guess the article is better, but his goal was to get it approved for DYK, which he got ... only to have it taken away). What could he have done better? As for myself I did less, but some, real work to review it which is definitely being thrown away. This is a counterincentive to review the oldest articles in the queue, since they are at greatest risk of being timed out, if you don't want your review thrown away. Can you timeout those nominations that aren't approved, rather than those that are? --GRuban (talk) 13:16, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) GRuban, are you saying that the nominations which aren't approved haven't had real work put into them? The simple fact of the matter is that DYK receives far more nominations than it can handle. This is a zero-sum game—if Moondragon's nominations isn't rejected, someone else's would have to be in the future (I can promise you that if one of my nominations reaches that mark I will time it out with no hesitation). The DYK community believes that unapproved nominations should receive greater leniency than approved nominations—see the second sentence of WP:DYKTIMEOUT. The work that you have both put into the article will not be "thrown away", it will just be less prominent. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:36, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

If they haven't been reviewed, they haven't had work put into them in response to the review, no. But more on that second sentence, which doesn't seem to say that. Are you really saying that if a nomination is unapproved, you specifically wait for it to be approved before timing it out? Why, what could possibly be the advantage of that? --GRuban (talk) 13:42, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

GRuban, the article firstly gets a chance to be improved in the review (the end goal of Wikipedia), and secondly it also gets a chance to feature on the Main Page (the end goal of DYK), as we try give late-approved nominations a few more days to linger before timing it out. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:47, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

On a related note, how can we help the backlog? I have had a lot of fun nominating articles for DYK, 30 or so over these last 19 years, so I'm somewhat experienced, and I would like to shoulder some of the effort needed. What can we, or at least I, do to help? --GRuban (talk) 13:45, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

GRuban, in the past, the solution for dealing with the backlog has simply to run more hooks in shorter 12-hour sets. However, this piles huge amounts of stress on promoters and queuers who have to check twice the amount of material. Quite a few prolific DYK helpers have been burned out by these well-intentioned initiatives and have just not returned. We do not have the capacity anymore to run 12-hour-sets (increasing the output) so the only thing we can do is restrict the input—hence timing out older nominations.

What you could do at the moment is help check the upcoming sets in the prep areas. You cannot promote them to queue, as you need the WP:TE user right, but if you find any issues (or don't) please note it at WT:DYK. This will help ease the burden on the queuers. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:59, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Looking. I didn't realize I would ever need the Wikipedia:Tendentious editing edit right, but what do you know... --GRuban (talk) 14:40, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

WP:Template editor.--Laun chba ller 14:52, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

WP:ARGH! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:05, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

GRuban, you may be interested in an ongoing discussion at WT:DYK. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:09, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Technically mine hadn't (the earliest was nominated on 16 July), but I'll take both articles through GA in my time. "Rejected by reviewer" is a canned edit summary provided by WP:PSHAW, which automates certain processes including promoting hooks. I recommend installing.--Laun chba ller 14:12, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

DYK you might want to review

If you want a straightforward DYK credit, feel free to checkout Template:Did you know nominations/Rights Georgia. Of course, since I created the article I'm the least independent person available for judging how "straightforward" it really is to check the quality. It might actually relate to a newsy thing on 4 Oct 2025, as backround on Georgian NGOs - which do the long-term legal defences and organising work that's less dramatic and media-attention-grabbing than street protests and violent repression. Boud (talk) 10:50, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Rani of Jhansi

Please explain why you undid link to Indian Coast Guard Ship ICGS Lakshmi Bai from the article page for Rani of Jhansi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayonpradhan (talk • contribs) 06:24, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

See WP:WEIGHT. Huge numbers of places, objects, ideas are named after her, as summarised in "Cultural Legacy". There is not enough room to cover them all. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:15, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Questions (September)

Question from Abhaysingh2802

Hello, I have tried creating a page for my company, but even with just the basic information it is getting tagged as speedy deletion. How can I proceed to make a proper page for my company? --Abhaysingh2802 (talk) 10:10, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Abhaysingh2802, please pay attention to WP:NPOV and WP:WTW. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:38, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Question from Aura Tumuhaise

Hello mentor, Why is it that sometimes when I try to review the changes I made, I find some that I never made, yet when I go to the original edited version, they are not reflected there? Thanks. --Aura Tumuhaise (talk) 14:38, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Aura Tumuhaise, the only explanation is that you did not submit your changes adequately. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:40, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the response. I will to do better. Nice editing to you. Aura Tumuhaise (talk) 02:53, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello mentor, I need to remove the text I have highlighted since it has been repeated. How do I remove it at once? Thanks in advance. --Aura Tumuhaise (talk) 15:52, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Aura Tumuhaise, it's not entirely clear what you mean. Could you please explain? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:10, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, it is just that wanted to delete a repeated block of text at once. Aura Tumuhaise (talk) 08:39, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Which repeated block of text did you want to delete Aura Tumuhaise. Also, please stop creating new lines; see WP:THREAD for how to best communicate on Wikipedia. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:41, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Question from Timjck

Hi! I am many years late to this, but many of my peers have suggested publishing a wikipedia article about my work as 20-year entrepreneur and filmmaker. I have the full article drafted with loads of sources and citations, but from what I've heard the process can be tricky. I'd appreciate your help if you have any time! And if there's something I can help you with in return, I'd be happy to. -Tim --Timjck (talk) 04:08, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Tim, would you mind telling me what you think the three best sources which demonstrate your notability are? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:29, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello! I took some time to check out the links you sent. I've identified features in Forbes, The Seattle Times (which made it to print) and Rolling Stone as three sources specifically demonstrating notability for my work. There are further sources in Rolling Stone, New York Times, Huffington Post that are sourced in the draft that add further detail and context including references for notability including an Emmy Award. Welcome your thoughts. Timjck (talk) 20:51, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi there Timjck. Of those three sources, only the Seattle Times one is demonstrably reliable, and it more justifies the notability of the Gorge Amphitheatre than yourself. The Forbes source was written by a contributor—these types of article are written with minimal editorial oversight, are essentially self-published sources, and are generally considered unreliable (especially for an article about a living person, where the sourcing criteria are stricter). The same goes for the Rolling Stone Culture Council source. With only one, not-very-focused source in your top three, I'm afraid that the chances of a viable article being created is very slim. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:54, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your opinion! Let me know if there's anything I can do to support what you're doing, on Wiki or otherwise. Appreciate your time :) Timjck (talk) 18:07, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Question from Koach mike

Hi, I wonder if you could help me on an edit of an existing citation. I made an important one word change to an article and want to change the citation for that sentence. The current citation specifies the source and gives a page number. p47. I want to change that to "p47 and 53". The reason is that p53 makes a correction to p47 which critically affects the meaning. However when I click on [edit] at the top of citations it just comes back with a one line software command, and no list of citations. Another way could be to add an extra citation just referencing p53 but I'm not sure how to do that. Thanks --Koach mike (talk) 01:41, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Koach mike. Citations on Wikipedia are normally placed (and editable) next to the material they verify. More information can be found at WP:INCITE. The article World War I reparations uses a special type of citation, a WP:SFN, which is usually used when numerous citations cite different pages of the same work. Here, you can change the page number by editing the subsection "Initial demands" and then changing the |p=47 parameter in the sfn template to |pp=47, 53. (p means one page, pp means multiple) Let me know if you need further help. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:40, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Question from Lhcfu

Hello, I was just wondering how much should I link an article to another article? I'm just not always sure as I see many important words I can link but others that have previously contributed linked some words, but significantly less. Thanks! --Lhcfu (talk) 20:24, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Lhcfu, please see WP:LINK, especially MOS:OVERLINK. Thanks, ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Question from Saddiq89

Good day! I'm Abubakar Auwal. I just want to ask how can I upload a profile of some notable people on Wikipedia.

Thank! --Saddiq89 (talk) 08:40, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi there Saddiq89, please see the message I have placed on your talkpage. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Question from Mephisto Born Again

How can I increase the letters for Discography --Mephisto Born Again (talk) 08:53, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Mephisto Born Again, please see Help:Section. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:39, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Question from SimbarashePino

How do you put a person's profile on Wikipedia? --SimbarashePino (talk) 11:05, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi SimbarashePino, please see the note on your user talkpage. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:48, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Question from Khlx

Hi! I've edited Wikipedia a couple times before, but mostly to add sources or correct non-factual information. But now I want to create a page, and I've run into a couple hurdles : - The article is about a living person, but they're not particularly noteworthy as they mostly just paint nowadays (they were an up-and-coming folk musician in the 1980s and 1990s in NYC, with two published albums.) - Most of my sources come from clippings from the Internet Archive, and I'm having a hard time figuring out how to reference them here. - Above all else, does this effort fall under the Notability guidelines? I mean, she published two albums, that's not a particularly easy thing to do. Thanks in advance! --Khlx (talk) 18:00, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Khlx, please see the note on your user talkpage. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:49, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Question from Brentleberry

how do I create a new page? --Brentleberry (talk) 18:39, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Brentleberry, please see the note I have placed on your user talkpage. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:48, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Proposed decision for Transgender healthcare and people posted

You are receiving this message because you are on the update list for Transgender healthcare and people. The proposed decision has been posted. Your comments are welcome on the talk page in your own section. For the Arbitration Committee, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:39, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 October 2025

News and notes: Larry Sanger returns with "Nine Theses on Wikipedia"; WMF publishes transparency report
This time "not merely negative".

In the media: Extraordinary eruption of "EVIL" explained
Wickedpedia wrangles post-truth politics.

Disinformation report: Emails from a paid editing client
Unexpected news!

Discussion report: Sourcing, conduct, policy and LLMs: another 1,339 threads analyzed
Fifty hot topics from fourteen noticeboards.

Community view: The pressing questions of the modern WWW, as seen from the Village Pump
Policy, politics, icons, captchas, and LLMs.

Recent research: Is Wikipedia a merchant of (non-)doubt for glyphosate?; eight projects awarded Wikimedia Research Fund grants
And other recent publications.

Opinion: Some disputes aren't worth it
When to walk away.

Obituary: Michael Q. Schmidt
Rest in peace.

Traffic report: Death, hear me call your name
Celebrities, deaths and software.

Comix: A grand spectacle
All invited!

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:48, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Your edit to Republican makeup

I won't continue to revert on this because I see all too often where this leads and as an admin, particularly one involved in that area of enforcement I have an extra responsibility to not go there. But all the same, you have not bothered to offer an explanation as to why this information doesn't belong in the article in any form. Given that it supports the lead hook at the nomination, I would think the proper way to handle this would be to bring it up there, that we might reach a consensus as to that and deal with both the hook and the article at the same time (This has a practical dimension as well ... as things stand, someone might accept the article for DYK and prefer that hook, not knowing that the sentence supporting it has been removed from the article).

This isn't even reaching the fact that I have not yet read any sufficient explanation, indeed any explanation, from you as to why that information doesn't belong in the article at all. I concluded, from your still-puzzling decision to tag the article as {{overly detailed}} after you had already cut about a quarter of it on those grounds, that that was your primary reason for removing the paragraph, and since I saw no reason it wasn't relevant to the article, nor had any been proffered, I thought that was the only issue. Apparently I was wrong, but your edit summary gives no hint of why you are so determined that it be removed (especially given that you suggested, upon placing the tag, that you have more important things to do (whatever they might be) than continue to edit the article.

If I were to speculate, based on the tone (which to me has ~~a whiff of misogyny~~ given the article subject, but that's not an issue we need to discuss right now) of your edit summaries, you would prefer to keep citations to TikTok to some bare minimum. If that is indeed the case, that issue needs to be discussed on its own. And as an aside, I would suggest that you consider moderating your tone in the future. No, I am not going to call those personal attacks. But that kind of exaggerated, overly performative tone, while following the letter of "comment on the content, not the contributor" is IMO violative of its spirit and thus not conducive to the collegiality that Wikipedia (indeed, any Wikimedia project) depends on.

Lastly, this brings me to an issue that I hadn't seriously considered until this morning: my oppose !vote at your RfA almost a year ago. In the interests of assuming good faith as I did in casting the !vote, I expected that you would be able to move on and continue what everybody agreed was the good work you did in creating content and reviewing articles submitted for recognition. I noted that despite the issues raised by others who opposed, one of which was the main basis of my !vote, you and I had no personal difficulties.

I can no longer say that, and looking over the other opposes that brought up some personal interactions I now understand all too well what motivated them. The likelihood that I would support you at any RfA or admin election in the future has diminished significantly. To that end I am seriously considering requesting that the second and last grafs of my !vote be stricken from the archive, or at least noting on the RfA talk page that I no longer stand by them.

And unfortunately, good faith notwithstanding, I cannot help but wonder if your actions at this DYK nom and relative to this article are not to at least some degree a response to my !vote. I don't want to think that they are, but neither can I rationally exclude it as the basis for your still otherwise unexplained actions. While you could still choose to explain yourself, my good faith in you on this point is sufficiently challenged as to ask that if you don't want to do so, you at the very least recuse yourself from not only further participation in this nomination (including editing the article, particularly since you've otherwise implied you're not going to do that anymore) but indeed any nominations I make, or contribute significantly to, for DYK, GA or FA. And I shall likewise recuse myself from similar participation where you are involved. Daniel Case (talk) 18:53, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Woof, that's a lot Daniel Case: allegations of general disagreeability (probably accurate) combined with insinuations of bad-faith editing (rather inaccurate), misogyny (??? really??) and RFA grudge-holding, which ... mate, I barely remember that I did an RfA, never mind who voted in it or, especially, if they opposed me. I've probably interacted with many who opposed me since then, you included. And to be frank: even though I quite enjoyed my RfA (more than I think you're supposed to) I have no intention of doing another, so any threat of future opposes don't mean much to me.

You're right, I haven't explained why I removed the content, and the reason was that I thought it would be blindingly obvious to an editor of your experience (235k edits) if you stopped to think about it, and that was before I learned you have the mop. Please take this as a serious, good-faith {{trout}}ing. (It does occur to me that a trout is commenting on the contributor not the content—"Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly."—but I don't really care. Sorry. Let's go back to basics:

Any article on Wikipedia is required to comply with the core content policies: WP:NPOV, WP:V, and WP:NOR, complemented by the guideline on reliable sources. Some articles are part of contentious topics (CTOPs), which makes their adherence to these policies even more necessary. The article Republican makeup pretty much by definition falls under the CTOP for American politics, while parts of the article may additionally be covered by the policy on living people.
This was the version of "Republican makeup" which I first encountered. I was first struck by the lengthy "Technique" section (not including subsections), comprising over 20% of the article's prose, but relying on just three sources. Per WP:WEIGHT, a subsection of the previously-mentioned WP:NPOV, "Neutrality requires that mainspace articles and pages fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources". So I'd expect the three sources used to be not only ultra-reliable but propounding very significant viewpoints, to justify the article's outsized reliance on them. Were they?
No. The first is a TikTok video. TikTok is listed at WP:UGC, a subsection of the previously-mentioned WP:RS, as an "unacceptable user-generated source". In this case, it is also a WP:PRIMARY (a subsection of the previously-mentioned WP:NOR) source, which asks editors to "be cautious about basing large passages on them". The second is a Buzzfeed post which is essentially a transcript of the TikTok. The third is a quote from an interview, another primary source. Sorry to break it to you, but no misogyny here, just source analysis. I do not take kindly to that WP:ASPERSION in particular, so please strike it.
To conclude, we have a very high level of detail not supported in any way by the sourcing: inappropriate for any article, but especially inappropriate for a CTOP. So I combined the six paragraphs into one. You'll note that the seventh paragraph is still intact, because I had to buzz off, and so I left a tag indicating that my edits had not completely fixed the problems. That is the purpose of maintenance tags, is it not?

The same, or very similar, logic can be extended to my other content removals. You above say, with reference to the DYK hook information, that "I have not yet read any sufficient explanation, indeed any explanation, from you as to why that information doesn't belong in the article at all." I hope the guideline I linked to in the edit summary, as well as above, explains that to your satisfaction?

And finally, article content itself takes precedence over DYK hooks. Sourcing clearly marked by WP:PAGs as "unacceptable" do not need discussion to be removed. If a DYK reviewer approves of a hook without noting that the content has been removed from the article, that is a poor review (c.f. the instructions). Three of the five proposed hooks remain viable with the content removed. Best of luck with them. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:21, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Since in the wake of this we have actually resolved things, and after you thanked me for my edits last night I have decided to {{collapse}} my above remarks and consider anything I said in them no longer applicable. It is another example of how "grace makes beauty out of ugly things", a line that becomes especially apt when you yourself have been part of making those things ugly. And not the first time that's happened in my wikilife (or even online).

In retrospect I was just frustrated that you hadn't explained your edit in the detail you did above (WP:UGC is not an absolute ban on TikTok as a source, but all the same ... I had thought that there was an independent RS on the second video clip that I just hadn't found in my existing sources (I had actually found a lot of interesting stuff that, had it not been only on TikTok or YouTube, I would have included) but as it turns out there wasn't. So, you were right.

I didn't mind all the cutting you did, really ... my philosophy, from years of writing professionally and academically, is that it's easier to write more than you may need and cut than the other way around, even if it means (as Faulkner put it) killing all your darlings.

And lastly, around trimming the quotes: I understand that we're not supposed to build encyclopedic articles by just stringing a batch of quotes together (back in the old days, that was also a way people created some rather POV articles that they could then distance themselves from). And I don't do that. And, yes, there can be copyright issues.

But at the same time I think we insufficiently appreciate the pitfalls of underusing quotes. Paraphrasing is inherently an interpretive act, and that introduces (even inadvertently) the possibility of introducing a POV that isn't present in the original text, or misinterpreting it (what was going on here, but that's my fault since I hadn't chosen the right quote (as I did here to better support the new hook I wrote (one I had originally intended to, anyway). Or both. Arguably you could say that extensive paraphrasing, at a certain point, is indistinguishable from original research.

The more we paraphrase quotes rather than actually use them, in the name of brevity and originality, the more likely this becomes. And I think for this reason it is particularly important in articles in contentious topic areas (as, we both agree, this one is) that greater distance be kept from wikivoice, through both regular use of attribution and more direct quotation where the fact(s) reported are likely to give rise to allegations of bias. Of course that's going to happen, but it is easier to deal with on the talk page when the allegation is that the source is biased, not that Wikipedia itself is.

That's all. I am sorry this happened the way it did. Happy editing! Daniel Case (talk) 19:26, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for that Daniel Case, although I prefer not collapsing comments on my talkpage (you can strike what you feel is no longer applicable). On quoting vs paraphrasing, I fall sharply on the latter side for controversial articles. Saying "X said Y" is of course normally true and verifiable, but there is no way of justifying WP:WEIGHT, and in controversial or well-known articles, the latter takes on ever-increasing importance. To take possibly the prime example of controversial, a few months ago I carried out a thorough edit on Gaza war, which removed several thousand words and established a basic structure the article retains despite subsequent developments. Direct quotes were an especial target of cutting, because they can only represent the opinion of one person/organisation, when in that article you really need several RS backing up every sentence. Yes, there is a minute risk of introducing POVs, but that is the editorial discretion that we have to assume. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:47, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Sorry to be delayed in responding, briefly I hope, to this.

In the course of researching what guidance we have on using quoted material, I came across WP:QUOTEUSE, which seems to have been written by someone in the same frame of mind about this as I am.

Of course, there is, I think, a middle-ground solution to this: we should at least offer the full quotes somewhere outside the inline text, either in the quote= field of the cite or an endnote, if the same source gives rise to different quotes supporting different parts of the text. I have done the latter with the originals of quotes I've translated (this is more or less what WP:LONGQUOTE suggests, although it should include endnotes as well as footnotes).

And when there's a whole bunch of good quotes that you would only need one or two of to use in the article or support some statement in, it's perfectly fine IMO to start a Wikiquote page (or add to an existing one) on the subject (I did that when, during the GA nom for dump months, it was suggested that I take some of the many quotes out. As much as I loved them for offsetting our necessarily dry style (another value I put on quotes, I could see the point, so I added them to the Wikiquote page on January. Daniel Case (talk) 22:52, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Tubular lifeboats

Hi@AirshipJungleman29

Not quite sure what you need?

Martin Ojsyork (talk) 12:01, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Ojsyork, I was wondering if you could provide a quote from "Leonard, Richie; Denton, Tony (2025). Lifeboat Enthusiasts Handbook 2025. Lifeboat Enthusiasts Society. p. 130." which supported "although only seven Tubular-class lifeboats were built, they remained in service for 83 years". If that's not possible, no worries. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:11, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi @AirshipJungleman29

The Handbook is basically a directory of all the RNLI lifeboats and their dates in service.

So the 83 years is just the calculation of the dates of the first and last.

No quotes I'm afraid.

Martin Ojsyork (talk) 13:31, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Ojsyork, so it's just a table/diagram which says that seven boats were produced and gives their start/end dates? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:38, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

@AirshipJungleman29

Yes, its just a handbook of lifeboats in chronological order, listing RNLI number, type, size, name, and dates at stations, as per the fleet table on the page.

Just making the story from the facts.

Martin Ojsyork (talk) 21:46, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Society of Champa

Hi, I had a look at Template:Did you know nominations/Society of Champa as the reviewer is new and I don't think that all six facts are cited at the end of the sentences where they appear. Could you respond there, please. TSventon (talk) 19:00, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:07, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Read

Explain what your problem is with Siege of Nishapur 1221 article and stop making up shit saying im claiming it even tho im not have i said i own the article??? so fuck off with accusing me and stop ruining the article im working on it currently because im already done with the siege of bamyan 1221 article

For now stop editing the article until this discussion is finished. Shadow. 547 (talk) 19:43, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

You couldn't really find a better example of WP:OWN than ordering other editors to "For now stop editing the article until this discussion is finished" Shadow. 547. Two editors have reverted your article creation, another had said you need better sourcing, but because you know better you get to throw around "fuck off fuck off fuck off"? Sorry, but no. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:18, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

@AirshipJungleman29 Whatever but can I atleast turn it into a draft so I can work on it time by time? Also im currently working on a article which is Draft:Battle of Lahore (1241) and I was wondering if you could review it and see if it’s okay and if im doing anything wrong? Because once im done i’ll move it into main-space but for now I just want to see it’s good right now so I can fix them if needed Shadow. 547 (talk) 09:35, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Siege of Nishapur (1221). Draft:Battle of Lahore (1241) doesn't have anything on the battle and is unreviewable. Please don't ping me on my userpage. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:31, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

What? what do you mean Shadow. 547 (talk) 14:41, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

What didn't you understand? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:48, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

“doesn't have anything on the battle and is unreviewable.” Shadow. 547 (talk) 16:16, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Well, it's a very good copy of the first three paragraphs of Mongol invasions of India, but not much more than that. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:49, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Chagatai Khan scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 24 November 2025. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 2025, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/November 2025. Please keep an eye on that page, as notifications of copy edits to or queries about the draft blurb may be left there by those who assist the coordinators by reviewing the blurbs. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before it appears on the Main Page. Thanks, and congratulations on your work! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 15:31, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Siege of Baghdad

Moved to Talk:Siege of Baghdad

– ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:50, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

a question

hello in page Ai-Khanoum i separated the notes section from refrences cuz i thought notes aren't refs, they're need to be separated from that, only citations and sources belong to that section, although i saw in German wikipedia article de:Hudschr ibn ʿAdī that is a "good article" in there, sources and citations are separated and it seems better so why you brought notes back to refrences section? in ai khanoum Aquifer3001 (talk) 14:36, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Aquifer3001, this is the English Wikipedia, where Ai-Khanoum is a Featured Article, or one of the highest-quality articles on Wikipedia. There is no rule on separating notes, citations, and sources, or even if you should do so at all. The only rule is that you should not change them without a good reason. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:17, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

i know, but that IS a good reason to just separate notes and refs, cuz notes aren't refs, so I'll edit it back, a'ight? Aquifer3001 (talk) 04:53, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Why aren’t notes references? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:02, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

because, refrences are like citations or bibliographies, y'know, things that we used as a source like, "bluh bluh bluh"^[1]and this and Jameson's full source like full title and editions are in refs, BUT, notes are like "alex iv was the longest reigning king of shapatala"^[2]OR^[3]at best notes INCLUDE Citations, but they are separated explanations. Aquifer3001 (talk) 11:46, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

That's what you prefer, and you are free to style the articles you write in that way. Others are equally free to disagree, and use the method I use: Portland spy ring, Pendle witches. See WP:EXPLNOTESECT: it is perfectly fine to even have notes and citations in the same section, as at e.g. the featured articles Zhou Tong (archer) or Political history of medieval Karnataka. Please do not go around changing all of these to what you think reference sections should look like; it does nothing to help Wikipedia and will only annoy a lot of editors with unnecessary watchlist notifications. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:03, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

😂

NO, im not about to go separate all notes from refs, dont worry. yeah its totally fine, cuz it IS a preference.Aquifer3001 (talk) 15:23, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

you undid my edit on ai khanoum again. and u said it wasnt improvement, but it was. caption says clockwise upper left, and its describing pics, but its not describing 4th and 5th ones right, its describing 5th in place of 4th, and 4th in place of 5th, look. Aquifer3001 (talk) 07:34, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Clockwise ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:11, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

i know what clockwise is.
u actually acting kinda humiliating to me, dont continue it
4th is a antefix, 5th is a mosaic
and if we write left to right, up to down, its more clear, instead of clockwise, cuz its not like circular Aquifer3001 (talk) 09:05, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

I don't think you do know what clockwise is, is the problem. The mosaic comes fourth, and the antefix is last before you return to the mask. Here's another example: Caroline Flack is listed last, not Diana Rigg. Clear as day if you know what clockwise is. Top to bottom, left to right is less clear—I have seen people, especially non-native speakers, misunderstand whether you're supposed to go top to bottom or left to right first. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:15, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

References

^ jameson 2020, 19-42.
^ for full list of shapatala kings see ...
^ . scholars like Patterson believe he was the 4th longest reigning king (patterson 2000, 68-72).

DYK for Amfioensociëteit

On 11 October 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Amfioensociëteit, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the Dutch colonial Amfioen Society was designed to maintain a legal monopoly over raw opium? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Amfioensociëteit. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Amfioensociëteit), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:03, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

I found a draft that you can work on!

Hi! I just got AfC rights! I was searching for some drafts to promote and I found Draft:First Sichuan Massacre. I tweaked it and I also remembered that you are interested in these kinds of stuff. Earth605^talk 12:46, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Sadly, it seems extremely AI-generated and likely all fabricated; all the citations fail verification. Thanks for thinking of me, though! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:04, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi

Hello so recently like a few minutes ago you moved my article Siege of Lahore (1241) to a draft Draft:Siege of Lahore (1241) because apparently i need more sources well how come other articles (with bad sources and only like 3 and theyre poorly written and they are short) get to stay as articles but mine doesnt and its well written? Like example check

Siege of Bilär

Sack of Kraków (1241)

Sack of Sandomierz (1241)

Sack of Sandomierz (1260)

Battle of Sanfengshan

Battle of Tarczek

Battle of Opole | Shadow. 547 (talk) 11:47, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Three sources with WP:SIGCOV is better than a trillion without. And for the last time, stop pinging me on my talk page. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:17, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

What do you mean? Also can you unblock me on discord Shadow. 547 (talk) 13:29, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

No thanks. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:47, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

One question just wondering if you wanna help me work on Draft:Siege of Lahore (1241) ? I saw that you made Siege of Bukhara article and i see you work on mongol related articles do you wanna help? Shadow. 547 (talk) 17:11, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

I have worked on the draft already, and it seems much improved for it. I don't have any particular desire to work on it further. I can recommend you sources that may have more information? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:13, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Ohh alright thanks, also sure you can recommend sources that might have information Shadow. 547 (talk) 17:19, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

DCWC closing update

Two weeks ago, the 2025 Developing Countries WikiContest came to a close! After three months of stiff competition at the top of the leaderboard, we have our winners. vigilantcosmicpenguin (submissions), continuing his work on covering abortion in Africa, comes in third with 692 points. simongraham (submissions) comes in second with 763 points, largely from a slew of good articles about jumping spiders. And returning to the podium for the second year in a row, BeanieFan11 (submissions) takes the Gold Belt Buckle with a mind-boggling 946 points from his series of articles on sportpersons. Congratulations to our winners!

Amazingly, the award for the most countries covered goes to both BeanieFan11 (submissions) and simongraham (submissions), who each submitted articles under 30 flags! BeanieFan11 (submissions) also wins for writing the most quality articles (16 good articles). For submitting 16 articles related to El Salvador, PizzaKing13 (submissions) wins the award for most submissions under one country. The award for most submissions related to women goes to both Spookyaki (submissions) (7 biographies about women) and vigilantcosmicpenguin (submissions) (21 related articles). And for the second year, simongraham (submissions) wins for the most reviews, having submitted 21!

Among the participants' contributions were 2 FAs, 5 FLs, 124 GAs, and an uncounted number of DYKs, ITNs, and reviews of every kind! Regardless of your level of participation, every contestant can be proud to have contributed towards a major step in countering the systemic bias on Wikipedia. Every year, millions of readers and editors around the globe use Wikipedia to educate themselves and communicate with others about parts of the world that often receive less attention than they deserve. Thank you for participating with us in the contest and contributing to this effort. The DCWC will return next year, and we look forward to seeing you contribute again! However, before that...

We need your feedback! Join the conversation on the talk page to discuss your reflections on the contest (even if you didn't participate!) and help us make it better.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or ask one of the coordinators: Arconning (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:43, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 October 2025

News and notes: Board shuffles, LLM blocks increase, IPs are going away
And the "Global Resource Distribution Committee" emerges.

Special report: The election that isn't
Two shortlisted WMF Board candidates removed from the ballot.

Interview: The BoT bump
Who was bumped and why?

In the media: An incident at WikiConference North America; WMF reports AI-related traffic drop and explains Wikipedia to US conservatives
...while Musk prepares to launch "Grokipedia".

Traffic report: One click after another
Serial-killer miniseries, deceased scientist, government shutdowns and Sandalwood hit "Kantara" crowd the tubes.

Humour: Wikipedia pay rates
Don't get too excited before you read this.

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:40, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Hey

The siege of nishapur article is finished can you move it to article? Draft:Siege of Nishapur (1221) Shadow. 547 (talk) 15:17, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I decided to edit the redirect Siege of Nishapur (1221) Shadow. 547 (talk) 15:53, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Just to keep you informed

This has reference to draftification of the article Draft:My Choice (2015 film) and your message on my talk page. Since there was no mention of specific sentences of concern to you, and all the content is well sourced, I was bit confused hence requested peer feedback at WP:Teahouse.

After peer feed back I realized that I should have avoided wikivoice and given source author attribution. Though with attribution some adjective could have been retained to describe source still I avoided the adjective namely "powerful".

Besides have got very good support on copy edit side. Requesting your visit to Draft:My Choice (2015 film) and let me know if any specific concerns are still there, I would be happy to hear from you. Wish to submit the draft for review and see the article back in the main space as early as possible. Thanks. Bookku (talk) 03:48, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 234, October 2025

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content
Book review: Three Wikipedia editors review five books
Timeline: This month in military history

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:59, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Delisting of Oblivion (roller coaster)

@AirshipJungleman29: Hello! I was just wondering the reason for delisting Oblivion (roller coaster). Since the GAR notice on the talk page, there was lots of work done on the article to improve it; all unsourced statements had been removed.

I am unfamiliar with the GAR process, but I feel that there at least should have been some discussion? I was actively working to try and keep the article as GA and I would just like some clarification as to why this has occurred.

I may be misinterpreting the guidelines, but WP:GAR states, "After at least one month, if the article's issues are unresolved and there are no objections to delisting, the discussion may be closed as delist. Reassessments should not be closed as delist while editors are making good-faith improvements to the article."

Thanks - Plighting Engineerd (talk) 14:33, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

My mistake Plighting Engineerd, I must have viewed the history for the wrong article. I'll revert the close; in the future, if you work on a GAR, do you mind leaving just a little note on the reassessment page? Helps prevent silly mistakes like this. Sorry again! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:09, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

No worries! Thank you very much! I'll leave a note on the talk the future as well. Plighting Engineerd (talk) 18:25, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Guide to temporary accounts

Hello, AirshipJungleman29. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.

Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.

How do temporary accounts work?

Editing from a temporary account

When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern: ~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
- There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
- There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.

Temporary account IP viewer user right

How to enable IP Reveal

Administrators may grant the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right to non-administrators who meet the criteria for granting. Importantly, an editor must make an explicit request for the permission (e.g. at WP:PERM/TAIV)—administrators are not permitted to assign the right without a request.
Administrators will automatically be able to see temporary account IP information once they have accepted the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy via Special:Preferences or via the onboarding dialog which comes up after temporary accounts are deployed.

Impact for administrators

It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).

Rules about IP information disclosure

Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
See Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.

Useful tools for patrollers

It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via the User Info card, available in Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card
- This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
Similarly, Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.

Videos

How to use Special:IPContributions
How automatic IP reveal works
How to use IP Info
How to use User Info

Further information and discussion

For more information and discussion regarding this change, please see the announcement from the Wikimedia Foundation at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Temporary accounts rollout.

Most of this message was written by Mz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃 SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:47, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Questions (October)

Question from Toberg05

Hi I am planning on editing the Barong Tagalog page for a college project in order to add more historical context as to why certain materials were used and how the way one would wear their Barong could be and indicator of one’s social class. How do I? --Toberg05 (talk) 18:14, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Toberg05, please cite what you write to WP:RS. For instance, you have added "During the colonial times, the Barong Tagalog was worn primarily by natives and non-European settlers. Natives were required to wear the dress shirt as a simple way to distinguish between the countrymen and the nobles", without providing a source which verifies this information. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:51, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Question from Shrivali

Hello,how are you doing How did you create citations --Shrivali (talk) 06:43, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Shrivali, please see Help:Cite. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:06, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Question from Pointalize

Hi Airship, can you please assist me in finanlizing the article "Draft:Stopover_(aviation)". I rewrote everything again on my own and want to make sure it is now compliant with the Wikipedia standards. Thanks for your assistance. --Pointalize (talk) 09:09, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Pointalize, it would be better if the table in "Distinction from layover" was prose instead. See MOS:TABLES: "Prose is preferred in articles as prose allows the presentation of detail and clarification of context, in a way that a table may not. Prose flows, like one person speaking to another, and is best suited to articles, because their purpose is to explain." ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:29, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Question from Dtraorelw

Hello. I really want to create ONE Wikipedia profile and would be happy to outsource it to you all. So just let me know what to do to get that profile created. --Dtraorelw (talk) 14:31, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Dtraorelw, does this profile meet Wikipedia's notability standards? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:53, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Question from Mercimek12

Hello, I hope you’re having a great day. How can I cite my sources to make sure I have the correct information? Thanks. --Mercimek12 (talk) 18:25, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Mercimek12, please see Help:Cite. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:54, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Question from Cevat Kabataş

Hi ,I want to create my resume in Wikipedia so how I can do it ? --Cevat Kabataş (talk) 08:03, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Cevat Kabataş, Wikipedia is not for self-promotion. You can use websites such as LinkedIn instead. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:54, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Question from Rich Chrizo

Who are you --Rich Chrizo (talk) 15:36, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

I am a Wikipedia editor, Rich Chrizo. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:37, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Question from B-reliable

I need help assigning myself a article. I like to choose Nurse practitioner and I have a proposed plan on how to improve it. How can add the article? --B-reliable (talk) 03:57, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Question from Goodnyhte

Good day, I have found a case of what I think counts as "accidental misinformation" but I don't know which User_talk_namespace template to use.

I have spent days looking through the chapters titles in the "List of Fly Me to the Moon chapters" page and after comparing it with the titles used in the original Japanese source, I suspect the user reverse-translated from the English titles. I assume they were trying to be helpful, but it's just so much and many of the chapter titles are long... (I replaced chapter titles from volumes 1-12 yesterday)

Thank you for any advice. --Goodnyhte (talk) 00:23, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Goodnyhte, to be honest I'm struggling to see why the page is notable: it doesn't seem to have the sourcing required for Wikipedia's notability guidelines. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:45, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Question from Veeranat Intaraphaisal

Hi Airship, could you please review my new sandbox draft for neutrality and formatting? --Veeranat Intaraphaisal (talk) 08:10, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Veeranat Intaraphaisal, I cannot see it because it has been deleted. You can recreate it, but take care to avoid using large language models such as ChatGPT, and do not promote or advertise a subject. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:47, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Question from Tank9835

How do I make a page --Tank9835 (talk) 12:58, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Tank9835, please see Help:Your first article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:24, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Question from Pooladymez

How do I get my son on Wikipedia? He’s an up and coming athlete, growing a presence on social media --Pooladymez (talk) 09:28, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Pooladymez, has there been reliable, independent secondary sourcing describing your son? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:27, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Talk: Prince Andrew

Not sure how I managed to do that. Sorry. JJARichardson (talk) 19:38, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

November article improvement drive

Starting on 1 November, the month-long 2025 Article Improvement Drive will target a number of content improvement areas and backlogs. Participating editors will be in line for barnstars and other awards; articles from all aspects of the project will be eligible so there will be something for everybody. Interested editors are encouraged to sign up now! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:17, 1 November 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 November 2025

News and notes: Temporary accounts go live and WMF board member self-suspends
ArbCom elections draw close, and Wikimania '27 in Santiago.

Community view: Six Wikipedians' thoughts on Grokipedia, and the humanity of it all
It ain't a five course meal, according to one of our interviewees.

Wikicup report: BeanieFan11, WikiCup victor of 2025, covers the results
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

In the media: Jimbo's book, an argument about genocide, and a train of shame
Wikipedia's new rival, political controversy in Italy and other Wiki-reports.

Recent research: Taking stock of the 2024–2025 research grants
$400,000 USD in total funding: what did we get?

Opinion: With Grokipedia, top-down control of knowledge is new again
Does it shed any light on particular topics that are better suited to LLM-generation than others?

Obituary: Struway
Rest in peace.

Traffic report: The documentaried, the disowned, the deceased, Diwali and the Dodgers
You know your man is working hard, he's worth a deuce.

Comix: Head of steam
'Sblood!

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. 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 2025 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 235, November 2025

Your Military History Newsletter

Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results
Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content
Book review: Hawkeye7 and Nick-D look at four works
Op-ed: Nick-D on 20 years with Wikipedia
Timeline: This month in military history

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 08:11, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

WikiCup 2025 November newsletter

The 2025 WikiCup has come to an end. Our top scorers, based on the tournament point rankings (which can be seen here), are:

BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,604 tournament points, will receive the 1st place award.
Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,075 tournament points, will receive the 2nd place award.
Arconning (submissions) with 860 tournament points, will receive the 3rd place award.
History6042 (submissions) with 804 tournament points
Sammi Brie (submissions) with 635 tournament points
TheDoctorWho (submissions) with 386 tournament points
AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) with 373 tournament points
Thebiguglyalien (submissions) with 362 tournament points

Our high scorers in the final round were:

BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,035 round points, mostly from 19 good articles and 21 did you know articles about athletes
vigilantcosmicpenguin (submissions) with 819 round points, mostly from 13 good articles and 11 did you know articles about a wide range of topics from abortion topics to African cities
TheNuggeteer (submissions) with 508 round points from 9 good articles, 4 good topic articles and 6 did you know articles mainly about Philippines topics, along with 19 good article reviews

The final round was very productive, and contestants had 2 featured articles, 4 featured lists, 106 good articles, 5 good topic articles, 178 article reviews, 76 did you know articles, and 9 in the news articles. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

The top eight scorers will receive awards shortly. The following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. These prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field during the competition.

Gog the Mild (submissions) wins the featured article prize, with 12 featured articles total, and the featured topic prize, with 9 featured topic articles in total
Hey man im josh (submissions) wins the featured list prize, with 10 featured lists total
AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) wins the featured picture prize, submitting the only featured picture in the entire contest during round 3
History6042 (submissions) wins the featured content reviewer prize, with 127 featured content reviews. He will also share the ITN prize, with 20 in the news articles in total.
BeanieFan11 (submissions) wins the good article prize, with 100 good articles total, and the DYK prize, with 147 did you know articles in total. He will also share the ITN prize, with 20 in the news articles in total.
TheDoctorWho (submissions) wins the good topic prize, with 16 good topic entries in total
Arconning (submissions) wins the good article reviewer prize, with 68 good article reviews in total

A special mention also goes to these users who scored the highest in a particular category in a single round:

Sammi Brie (submissions), with 27 good articles in round 3, and 45 good article reviews in round 1
Tails Wx (submissions), with 10 in the news articles in round 3

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate. The WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2026 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement!

On behalf of the judges, Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), Frostly (talk · contribs · email), Guerillero (talk · contribs · email) and Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs · email):

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:24, 1 November 2025 (UTC)

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

Nominations are now open for military historian of the year and newcomer of the year awards for 2025!

Nominations now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2025! The top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Nominations are open here and here respectively. The nomination period closes at 23:59 on 30 November 2025 when voting begins. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 December 2025

News and notes: Election cycles come and go, and Wikimedia Foundation achieves record revenue in 2024–2025!
Admin and ArbCom elections upcoming, BoT elects two new members, task force advises to close Wikinews and keep Wikispore, and other news from the Wikimedia world.

In the media: Wales walk-off, antisemitism, supernatural powers, feminism turmoil, saints, and sex
Plus mammoth mummy sex-change operation completed!

Recent research: At least 80 million inconsistent facts on Wikipedia – can AI help find them?
And other recent publications about contradictions and retractions.

Disinformation report: Epstein email exchanges planned strategy, edits and reported progress
At work on Wikipedia whitewashing. How much should they be paid?

Traffic report: It's a family affair
Even in these times there is something to be thankful for!

Book review: The Seven Rules of Trust
Jimmy Wales and Dan Gardner write a book inspired by Wikipedia. What's in it?

From the archives: "I have been asked by Jeffrey Epstein ..."
The twists and turns of Epstein’s portrayal on Wikipedia.

Humour: An interview with Wikipe-tan
A conversation about being the mascot of Wikipedia.

Opinion: AI finds errors in 90% of Wikipedia's best articles
Using ChatGPT to fact-check a month's worth of Today's featured articles.

Serendipity: Highlights from the itWikiCon 2025
A recap of the latest convention of the Italian Wiki-community, held in Catania from 7–9 November.

Comix: Madness
It could happen to anyone.

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Nominations are now open for military historian of the year and newcomer of the year awards for 2025!

Correction: nominations are open until 23:59 (UTC) on 14 December 2025. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:20, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Source evaluation template?

Hi, on one of the (Wikipedia?) talk pages within the last month or so, you linked to the use of a template that allows one to evaluate sources in a table format. For the life of me, I can't find it. I need to add it to a new sandbox page. Viriditas (talk) 20:34, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

Found it! {{Source assess table}} Thanks for the inspiration. Viriditas (talk) 20:45, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

Mentorship

I noticed you stopped being a mentor because I got a bunch of watchlist notifications of your mentees that I had blocked being reassigned. That mentor system is top notch. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:24, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

A brownie for you

This brownie is for your work on getting Tanguturi Prakasam a DYK! After I had promoted it to GA status, I had thought about working on one myself but couldn't think of any DYK statements, as the one I had originally thought of (his whole Andhra Kesari thing) had already been a DYK quite a few years back. Thanks for working on this! I appreciate it :) — EarthDude (Talk) 06:14, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

The WikiCup

Awarded to **AirshipJungleman29** for being one of the eight finalists in the 2025 WikiCup.

– Epicgenius (talk) 23:36, 1 November 2025 (UTC)

Congratulations to these great achievements! - Today I remember a singer who impressed me on stage. - You are invited to the peer review after FAC, - in a poll, you could simply mark yes or no for the four open questions. It's an experiment. The piece has its 300th anniversary on Christmas Day, and should be as good as possible by then. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:02, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

I have three biographies on the main page today, miss a fourth one, nominated a fifth, that means little time for other matters. Verdi three times in music. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:19, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you today for Chagatai Khan, about "the second son of Genghis Khan and Börte (and the third to be brought to FAC). He lived a fairly good life—probably better than any of his brothers—and was the only one to get a state named after him personally; not even Genghis managed that."! - Look, today's image, - she "portrayed" herself with her husband at the end of the table, - would have been good for Thanksgiving ;) - I have a FAC open again, in case of interest. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:32, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

Minor technical question

Would you be so kind as to tell me how you find the precise number range to do this (i.e., link/highlight a specific text)? I've used {{oldid}} to do something similar, but the way you do it is much better. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 13:13, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Sorry Cl3phact0, missed this; if you mean linking to a specific comment, you click on the timestamp after the signature, and the link is automatically copied to your clipboard. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:44, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! I was doing it sort of half-manually and couldn't figure out how you were doing it so cleanly. Sometimes the most obvious things are the hardest to see. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 13:59, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

PS: I also came across this script while I was trying to solve the riddle. Very handy tool. Might be to your liking. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 14:01, 25 November 2025 (UTC)

Voting is now open for military historian of the year and newcomer of the year awards for 2025!

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2025! The top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Cast your votes here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2025. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:54, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 December 2025

Interview: Part 1: Bernadette Meehan
Say hello to the new WMF CEO.

News and notes: We're gonna have a party!
And a new WMF CEO!

In the media: The "bigg" bosses: Robertsky and the Pope
Pay up, big guys!

Traffic report: Death and stranger things
And going for the FIFA prize!

Gallery: A feast of holidays and carols
Something old and something new!

Obituary: Michal Lewi (Iwelam) and Alan R. King (A R King)
Rest in peace.

Concept: List of xxtreme sports (redirected from Electrojousting)
You are viewing an old revision of this page, as edited on 2065-11-10 04:33:10.

Comix: display: flex-inline;
ampersand nb semicolon ampersand nb semicolon ampersand nb semicolon

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:59, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

[1] son 2020, 19-42.

[2] r full list of shapatala kings see ...

[3] . scholars like Patterson believe he was the 4th longest reigning king (patterson 2000, 68-72).

[1]

[2]

[3]