User talk:CFA

Wikipedia ads	file info – show another – #24

Click here to create a new section.

Other talk page banners

CFA is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. Welcome to my talk page! Please remember to be civil. My watchlist is large and hard to manage. Please ping me with the {{ping|username}} or talkback template if you're trying to get my attention on a page that isn't this one. If you can't find a previous discussion, it was probably archived. Create a new section if this happens. If you have come here to ask for help because I declined your AfC submission, please leave a message with a clear format, like "Draft:Your draft's name", or click the "reviewer's talk page" link on the decline notice on your talk page, and it will do so for you. I will not re-review your article unless I've said otherwise. I'm happy to help answer any questions you have, but you'll have to resubmit and wait for another reviewer to keep things fair for you and everyone else. This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics: post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people pseudoscience and fringe science India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues COVID-19, broadly construed climate change complementary and alternative medicine articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles abortion the Arab–Israeli conflict He should not be given alerts for those areas. This user is a regular and doesn't mind if you template him.

What does this mean?

As you have now discovered, I have listed my version and sources on the disk: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eduard_Elbogen&diff=prev&oldid=1233581635
I have to sleep first before I add the most important (of 58) sources.
Which do you prefer? In GE, IT or SK language? --Virtualiter (talk) 21:17, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Virtualiter: That's fine. I tagged the article for {{one source}} before I saw it was a translation. It just means the article only has one reference. Since you appear to still be working on it, I suggest you add a {{under construction}} tag so other editors know it is still a work in progress. I assume you're referring to the language of the sources: the language does not matter as long as it accurately verifies the information. If you're using a {{cite}} template, you can use the language= parameter to specify the language and the trans-title= parameter to add the English version of the title. Let me know if you have any other questions. Happy editing! C F A 💬 21:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://youtube.com/@ersamimkhan?si=O0IxUhTfFwUz4eu9 --Er samim khan (talk) 09:58, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CFA,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Significa liberdade, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged an article that you started, J.E.W. for deletion, because it appears to be about something that you or someone you know personally invented, coined, or discovered, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important and/or recognized enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Significa liberdade}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

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

Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:36, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there If you would have talked to me first I would have made changes there was no reason for a speedy deletion Afghan1235 (talk) 01:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Afghan1235: The entire article was copied from https://www.academia.edu/4335943/THE_OTHER_SIDE_OF_THE_MOUNTAIN_Mujahideen_Tactics_in_the_Soviet_Afghan_War. Removing the copyright violations without deleting the entire article would've just amounted to blanking the page, which is essentially the same thing. I suggest just recreating the article, this time without stealing content from somewhere else. C F A 💬 02:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Btw when I created an article page it doesn’t show on google when I search it Afghan1235 (talk) 02:18, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Afghan1235: Articles will only appear on Google after either:

• A new page reviewer marks it as reviewed
• 90 days have elapsed since the article's creation

Let me know if you have any other questions. Happy editing! C F A 💬 02:26, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But I have seen someone creating an article without getting reviewed and showing on google but I created some pages on Wikipedia you mind reviewing it? Afghan1235 (talk) 02:29, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Afghan1235: As far as I'm aware, articles can only be indexed by Google if they meet one of the criteria above. What articles have you created? I'm happy to take a look — no guarantees though. C F A 💬 02:33, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It’s Ok just review and let me know what wrong with it

1976 Afghan coup d'état

Battle of Qahrawa

Battle of Nalos (1947)

Battle of Bagh (1919) 2001:8003:3F8E:1F00:E491:108C:3F12:3B5D (talk) 02:37, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: These articles were all created by other users, not by yourself as you claim, many of whom seem to be involved in the Blurewhale11 sockpuppet cluster. Afghan1235, have you ever edited using any other accounts? Pinging Bbb23 who started the initial SPI. C F A 💬 03:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know it’s other user this guy is my friend I helped him creating these pages now this is my only page on Wikipedia Afghan1235 (talk) 03:23, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the new article of Parwan operation Parwan Operation (1984)# Afghan1235 (talk) 03:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Afghan1235: Parwan Operation (1984) is another blatant copyright violation, this time of https://books.google.ca/books?id=XILyYPv_3a0C. Have you not learned your lesson? I have a feeling I'll find many more copyvios if I look through the articles created by this group of accounts. C F A 💬 03:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bro it’s not a copyright I wrote this on my own words I swear Afghan1235 (talk) 03:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Check it now Afghan1235 (talk) 04:08, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Afghan1235: 1976 Afghan coup d'état was copied without attribution from Mir Ahmad Shah Rizwani. I have left you the appropriate notice on your talk page. Battle of Nalos (1947) was evidently written entirely using AI with little to no review afterwards. It is not worded neutrally (ex: "their actions during this period are emblematic of the broader Kurdish struggle for autonomy and resistance against external domination") and I have not checked for factual accuracy. Battle of Bagh (1919) is very-closely paraphrased from https://books.google.ca/books?id=1XvKDwAAQBAJ and some senteces have just been completely copied (ex: "British casualties were eight killed and 31 wounded, while Afghan losses were about 100 killed and 300 wounded"). This whole ordeal seems very suspicious to me so unless you give me a convincing reason as to why you claim to have created the articles (when they were actually created by a blocked account), I will file a case at either WP:SPI or WP:ANI. You are also clearly not listening (or don't care) about copyright violations and have outright lied about them. C F A 💬 15:45, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mostly used my own words in there but no problem I will just recreate it Afghan1235 (talk) 02:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Afghan1235: You did not mostly use your own words. Literally every single paragraph was copied from the paper above. If there actually was some content worth saving, I would've just tagged it for revision deletion. C F A 💬 02:24, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All the Superwomen characters don't have nuclear or radiation abilities, aren't psychics, and can't teleport, but three of the characters do have solar abilities. The external links on it doesn't work anymore and one of them is not secured. 172.13.193.84 (talk) 15:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose you are able to remove (or replace) the external links because they are probably in violation of WP:ELNO (a wiki and a blog). I do not recommend removing categories without discussing on the talk page because they were evidently added there for a reason. Next time, please leave an edit summary so other editors know why you are removing content from the article. C F A 💬 15:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On 12 July 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Radcliffe Telescope, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Radcliffe Telescope was the largest telescope in the Southern Hemisphere when it was completed in 1948? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Radcliffe Telescope. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Radcliffe Telescope), 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 suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Valereee (talk) 00:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Change it into research interpretation, because its more neutral. There is no so-called evidence here, the sources have the author's personal interpretation of the Chinese material. The original text does not have any clear evidence of those conclusions, only sure thing is that her name was mulan by text. But a researcher suggested its possible, so it is more interpretation. 2001:14BB:AE:CEE0:B093:8E5E:C8BE:56D7 (talk) 11:25, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you just moved Fort Myers, Florida to Fort Myers as a non-controversial technical move. I contest that such a move was non-coontroversial, as the name of that city is governed by WP:USPLACE, and should remain at Fort Myers, Florida. Donald Albury 19:34, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Donald Albury:  Done: OhHaiMark, if you still support this move, you'll have to start a requested move discussion on the article's talk page. C F A 💬 19:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Donald Albury 19:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised this move was even approved. – The Grid (talk) 13:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you I am curious to understand this realm as a well read for fellow my age. Robbie Gemini (talk) 21:35, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CFA — I noticed that you draftified Lissa Schneckenburger (created by Wings Commander) when you patrolled it with NPP, claiming that it needs more sources to establish notability. The four sources that were present right after the first sentence — ^[1][2][3][4] — are to my reading clearly enough to meet the NARTIST/GNG standards, so I am reverting the move.

Please remember that NPP is about quality, not quantity, and it is always okay to slow down when needed. Unjustified draftifications damage the encyclopedia, both in terms of lost content and in terms of biting the article creators, so we want to minimize them as much as possible.

Best, Sdkb ^talk 03:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe, based on the sources in the article and a BEFORE, that the subject meets GNG. They are mostly, local, routine WP:INTERVIEWS. The Rutland Herald source is the best available, and I suppose the Bluegrass United is short but gets the job done, but the other sources are interviews with little coverage outside of the transcript. Regardless, if you disagree, I won't do anything further. Thank you for letting me know. C F A 💬 03:52, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Thomas Matthew Crooks is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

―Howard • 🌽³³ 11:56, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

well the problem here is that this is such a minor thing, no reliable source or news outlet would mention it. I would use youtube, but thats against wikipedia policy. any idea? unless mario wiki can be cited Sir Grodus II (talk) 19:17, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, welcome to Wikipedia, Sir Grodus II! Unfortunately if a claim cannot be verified by a reliable source, it is not suitable for inclusion in a Wikipedia article. One of Wikiedia's core content policies is verifiability. YouTube is generally considered an unreliable source because it is user-generated content. Other wikis are also considered unreliable for the same reason. Let me know if you have any other questions. Happy editing! C F A 💬 19:36, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i get youtube for most things, but think about it, if youtube video is LITERALLY the game itself, how is it unreliable? its LITERALLY the game, its not really user generated. Sir Grodus II (talk) 22:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ambush of Polish partisans against Russian forces during the January Uprising, 1863 Hello, CFA. The article for improvement of the week is: Ambush Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: Applied science • Mechanism (engineering) Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 15 July 2024 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • Opt-out instructions[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Thomas Matthew Crooks is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Matthew Crooks (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

-bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 01:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted my AfD and attempted to G6 the AfD page, as I incorrectly assumed Twinkle would notify of past AfDs when trying to AfD a page. I apologize for this notification - and it will either be closed as speedy keep, or my preference of reverting it completely as it was my error for not knowing about the prior AfDs. Apologies. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 01:42, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing MOS:LISTGAP violations on the redirects for discussion page. It is an accessibility issue - and to help others understand it may be beneficial to consider referencing MOS:LISTGAP specifically in the edit summary - both helps others know what you're doing is an accessibility fix rather than just cosmetic, and also helps those who don't know about the issues swapping between indents, bullets, and number lists to see the reasoning behind it. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 21:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery 01:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CFA I am baffled why you nominated it originally (when I created it as a redirect) for speedy deletion, deleted it even after sources were added, and afterward, instead of restoring the page I created; you created a brand new one under your name. I find it to be dishonest editing. To rectify, restore mine, and merge the current one into it. Bohbye (talk) 00:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bohbye: You created the article when it was an unsubstantiated rumour published in the New York Post. Tabloid journalism aside, The New York Post is considered unreliable on Wikipedia because of their history of fabrication. That is a massive violation of our biographies of living persons policy. Please take a look at all the other redacted BLP violations of people posting rumoured names on the talk page of Attempted assassination of Donald Trump. I suggest you read WP:BLP. Please stop hounding me. I have nothing to do with this. C F A 💬 00:25, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grow up, no one hounds you. Deleting pages by others and recreating it right after under your name shows your true character. Enjoy your day. Bohbye (talk) 00:31, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CFA. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Phil Robertson (disambiguation), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: G14 does not apply to dab pages with two or more targets. Thank you. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:42, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Firefangledfeathers: Huh. Didn't know that. I've never used it before. Thank you for letting me know. C F A 💬 17:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Thanks for patrolling new pages. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero women Superhero --Bubkijo1 (talk) 18:36, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]