Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

→

Archive 15

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sciences Po. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Yea sure I will ask questions whenever I have any doubt. Thanks again. SBson1357 (talk) 04:23, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

hi, the club does not have any references on internet accept the onec on facebook which i think are not reliable. how do i then write a completely new article that has never been on the internet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rightwayfc (talk • contribs) 08:06, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Please post your follow-up question at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#my_article_does_not_meet_requirements, Rightwayfc, so that we can keep the discussion in one place. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:10, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States presidential election in the District of Columbia, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Larry, I don't know why I would have a conflict of interest when I am only trying to find positive information to offset the negative, to balance the information regarding Allen Meadors. I am not Allen's personal friend. I am trying to make sure he is fairly represented including the information already available on other Wiki sites. Are you seriously having a problem with cited information too? I am a writer. This is a job that I want to complete adequately, and to date, I feel that I have not been allowed to do so. I have no idea why you have it in for me when I am trying to learn the Wiki process. I simply can't read the volumes of information and do it correctly the very first time I do an article. I have asked for help and been respectful, I have read the information you have given me and understand it the best I can. This site is not very user friendly. The volunteers seemed bent on being rude and unhelpful. I have never met Allen in person. I want the 50 years of experience represented, not the 2 years in Arkansas. Debate if you will, but it seems to me that the controversy here is that Wiki people are biased against anyone who doesn't have their same level of knowledge and also against paid writers. I bent to every single rule without question. I left revisions alone unless I mistakenly thought I was allowed to edit referenced material. So sorry. Juno771 (talk) 00:17, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Juno771, you have a conflict of interest because you are being paid by Meadors to add "positive" material to the article. What you describe as "negative" is neutrally worded, whereas what you are adding is promotionally worded (e.g. "Dr. Allen Meadors has helped raise well over 100 million dollars in external funds for the institutions in which he has played an integral role. He has served as master and dissertation chairs for hundreds of students"). Your text reads like a biography on a university website, not an encyclopedia article. I realise that you need to learn how to edit Wikipedia properly and to learn the rules, and that is another reason why I keep suggesting that you propose changes on the article's talk page rather than edit it directly, but you seem unwilling to listen. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:00, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Agree - also, wishing your colleagues and friends 'Merry Christmas' could also be interpreted as socialising behaviour!! Merry Christmas!! Buckshot06 (talk) 14:18, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Heaven forbid! Cordless Larry (talk) 14:28, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

I've recently been reading that apparently there's some old guy on the loose who grooms kids by promising them toys and sweets, and then sneaks into their bedrooms in the middle of the night. He appears he have been getting away with it for years under innumerable aliases and it's even international in scope. It seems as though Interpol are also looking for him for unlicensed moving of animals across national (and even terrestial) boundaries.

Now I know this is getting confusing, but the old guy's activities tie in somehow with a pregnant teenage Middle-Eastern migrant who refuses to disclose how she begat her child, but who insists that her much older fiancé, who she is travelling with, isn't responsible. Apparently this unlikely pair are not only the 'cover' for the old guy, but they are also said to motivate lots of people all over the world to indulge in spontaneous acts of kindness towards their fellow humans! Sounds pretty unlikely to me! By best guess is that these people are behind it all somehow, only rational explanation!

ps … This site claims to be tracking the old guys whereabouts, is it WP:RS do you think?

HAPPY HUMBUG

Ebeneezer Scrooge (Bah!) 18:02, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning, Pincrete...I mean Scrooge. Are you sure this isn't all part of our politically correct masterplan to censor Wikipedia, though? Either that, or Middayexpress is behind it all. Merry Chistmas to you either way! Cordless Larry (talk) 19:28, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Please don't use message discipline anymore. When you want to violate WP:TRUTH and WP:WikiVoice, at least do that properly and discuss the rules you're violating. When someone figures out a propaganda technique, it doesn't work anymore. 130.105.213.86 (talk) 07:36, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. Here's one back: if you want to report my behaviour, please do so at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Beware the boomerang though. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:42, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Sorry for any confusion at Teahouse/Host landing. I agree with your assessment, but self-reverted my action to the same effect because it was made unintentionally. I have now posted a message to the user concerned, suggesting that they remove themselves from the list. --Boson (talk) 09:50, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Boson. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:31, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corless Larry,

Thank you for responding on Teahouse. REally really appreciate it.

I am at a loss for things right now. I am not sure how I created two pages( I thought i had created only one. the "(author)" one. and I have been working on editing it since an hour now.

What do you suggest I do now?

Also I apologize in advance If i should have left a message on my 'talk'. Please let me know if I should start a convo on my 'talk'.

Today is the first day I am on wikipedia editing/creating.

Thanks much.

Regards Pri D (talk) 16:12, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

I suggest that you just continue to work on the version of the article that isn't about to be deleted, Pri D. Please post any further questions back at the Teahouse, to keep the discussion in one place. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:04, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello, this is Upal2017. I have got your message. This is my first time creating a wiki page on my late father Dr. Lalit Mohan Nath. He has worked there for couple of years at the International Center for Theoretical Physics (ICTP).

As per your email, I have deleted the link to ICTP. Can I use the name of the institute though? Because my father had worked there very closely with Dr. Salam for couple of years.

Please advise/guide me in creating/editing this page as per Wikipedia rules.

Many thanks,

Upal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Upal2017 (talk • contribs) 18:34, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Upal2017. The message I left on your talk page concerned the article International Center for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, Italy, which you appear to have created as a copy of International Centre for Theoretical Physics. I'm not sure why you thought it was necessary to do that - were you trying to move the article? If you want to link to the article about the institute, then link to the existing article at International Centre for Theoretical Physics. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:44, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello,

I really appreciate your kind comments and help in this regard. As I have mentioned, this is my first time ever creating a Wikipedia page. If I search Google by "Lalit Mohan Nath", it comes up with the Wikipedia page but it shows the following messages at the top of that page. This article needs additional citations for verification. (January 2017) This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. (January 2017)

Can you please let me know how to resolve the above-mentioned issues?

I will really appreciate your help.

Regards,

Upal2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Upal2017 (talk • contribs) 02:24, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello again, Upal2017. You will need to add references to sources that support material in the article and to rewrite parts of it in more neutral language. See Wikipedia:Verifiability, Help:Referencing for beginners and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view for guidance. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:14, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Also, since you are related to the subject of the article (my condolences on your loss), you need to consult Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and follow the instructions there (at WP:DISCLOSE specifically) to disclose this relationship. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:42, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

The article I included is not a new reserch article. My article "Gravitation Interaction Delay" is based on the Reference included.

Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).

^[1]

^[2]

^[3]

^[4]

Why was it rejected?

Philipp Kornreich Professor Emeritus, EECS Department Syracuse University e-mail: pkornrei@syr.edu18:51, 3 January 2017 (UTC)Philipp Kornreich (talk)Philipp 18:51, 3 January 2017 (UTC)18:51, 3 January 2017 (UTC)18:51, 3 January 2017 (UTC)18:51, 3 January 2017 (UTC)18:51, 3 January 2017 (UTC)Philipp Kornreich (talk)

Hello, Philipp Kornreich. The message on your talk page with my name on it is an invitation to the Teahouse. I suggest that you ask questions about editing Wikipedia there. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:55, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

--OddsBodkins (talk) 21:58, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Please see my explanation at User talk:OddsBodkins#Disruptive edits at the Teahouse. Let's keep the discussion in one place. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:10, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, This is Wikipedia user chaabano, I have received an email to talk, it's my first time here and trying to learn the procedure. Thank you --Chaabano (talk) 20:10, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello and welcome, Chaabano. The message left on your talk page was an invitation to the Teahouse. Please do head there and ask any questions you have about editing Wikipedia. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:14, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello Mr Larry, This is the user chaabano, or Omar Chaaban as full name, I have edited some of the page of article Al-Ahbash since it contains some wrong information. I am raising a concern because I have read the book published by Shaykh Habashi which is called • Mukhtasaru ^Abdillah-il-Harariyy, al-Kafilu bi ^Ilm-id-Din-id-Daruriyy, published and another book called Ad-Dalil-ul-Qawim ^alas-Sirat-il-Mustaqim in at-Tawhid, published. In the Article it is mentioned that "according to Shaykh Habashi, following the Mu'tazila school of thought". The editors have not mentioned under "Rejection of anthropomorphism" that the reality Shaykh Habashi has mentioned in his books about following the well known Muslim Scholars that Most Muslims would know about the four sunni madhabs: Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali. The editors had written the word " following" which according to Merriam Webster has many meanings such as to seek to attain <follow knowledge> or to copy after : imitate. The argument is that the editors have fail to mention that Shaykh Habashi had followed some of the "Mu'tazila" beliefs not all of them in particular to Rejection of anthropomorphism . Also I have found numerous conflicts of opinions by the editors based on non facts, I had gathered some of Shaykh Habashi books and read many URL website citing his books about the above mentioned matter and would like to provide them as proof of my argument. http://www.shaykhabdullah.com/archives/42 contains the name of books he had written and this URL contains detail of the books I have found written about the four sunni madhabs Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali. It is mentioned by the editors that Al-Ahbash groups has had violence whereas the Wahabbis are not being mentioned at all; although, it is well documented all over the world that they are the most extreme and violent groups that promote killings and beheadings. What I am requesting is for me to mention my point of view based on these facts and let readers read them. Thank you so much and looking forward for your inputs. Omar ChaabanChaabano (talk) 02:36, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Chaabano. As above, if you have questions about editing Wikipedia, then the place to ask those is at the Teahouse. If you have a concern about the accuracy of an article, then please raise the issue on the talk page of that article. If you have a content dispute with other editors even after discussion on the talk page, then you can follows the steps outlined at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution to get external input. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:56, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Dear Larry, I am writing this to avoid wasting your time.

After cropping the newspaper photo I can now upload it to the Commons, but I now need to check the permissions situation.

I would like to include say three/four pictures. 1. Group photo of artist at art school (c1906). 2. Photo of artist for the Infobox (extracted from the newspaper article(1928). The article is included in the References 3. One or two photos of typical oil paintings

I will be checking the permissions for all of these.

In the meantime, is it worth considering the text? I have tried to keep it relatively neutral. There is a lot of material from primary sources (archives etc)that corrects/clarifies existing scattered published material

David HDavid hewick (talk) 09:57, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi David hewick. If you have any questions about the permissions, I suggest asking those back at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#New article, as I'm not that familiar with the copyright rules for images and I don't want to give you bad advice. The draft is looking good. I'll give it a proper look over it and then add the code to it that will allow you to submit it for review. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:37, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Right, I've tidied the draft up a bit and added the submission button, David hewick. Before you submit it, I suggest removing the image link that isn't working from the infobox. Having images in the article isn't crucial to passing review, so those can come later. It would be good to add some links to other articles to the text. I've done this in the introduction to give you an idea of how. Don't go crazy with links, but do link any key terms on first use. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:46, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

I have removed all the unofficial content, can you check & confirm.

Also if you could tell me how to add image? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steeve Austin (talk • contribs) 12:45, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

The issue is not about "unofficial content", Steeve Austin, but that Steeve Austin is completely unsourced. Verifiability is a core policy of Wikipedia, and is especially important for articles about living people (even if the person you're writing about is yourself, which is not advised). Your question about images has been answered at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#Adding image to member page. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:57, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

The page is about Dance teacher and choreographer from Berlin & Belgium. can you please give me what information is required to verify it. A website or business name will be enough? Thanks for help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steeve Austin (talk • contribs) 13:02, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Everything in the article needs to be supported by references to reliable sources such as newspapers, books or journal articles, Steeve Austin. See Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and Help:Referencing for beginners. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:06, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Ok, got it.

But what references for Dance competitions and events participated.? Steeve Austin (talk) 13:11, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

You know the topic better than me, Steeve Austin. Perhaps the competitions were reported on by newspapers, magazines or websites? If there aren't reliable sources for them, then they shouldn't be in the article. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:25, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

I got it what you need in terms of newspaper or websites, but I want to know how do I add it is it by "references"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steeve Austin (talk • contribs) 14:09, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

As mentioned above, please see Help:Referencing for beginners Steeve Austin. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:15, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Right I have added it earlier in the content and will take care of it. However I'm not sure as in for what I need to add the reference and dont want to delete the article for this reasons. Steeve Austin (talk) 14:28, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Everything in the article needs to be referenced, Steeve Austin. If you can't find a source, it shouldn't be in the article - that's what WP:VERIFY is about. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:30, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Ok,thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steeve Austin (talk • contribs) 14:40, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

You removed the vital statistics table for the United Kingdom, citing the "Not stats book" clause. If you're going to single out the United Kingdom's statistics, what's keeping you from deleting all the vital statistics tables in all the other countries? Some people would appreciate having these tables as an easily-obtainable reference, and your removal of the statistics for the United Kingdom makes it harder for getting cross-country comparisons. I'd appreciate it if you were a little less bureaucratic and ridiculous. 50.37.81.132 (talk) 17:23, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, IP editor. There was significant debate about the inclusion of these figures, and an editor was blocked for persistently adding them against consensus. It's not clear that the figures in all of those articles are properly supported by references, and the tables are often poorly formatted. While I would like to check every demography article, there are simply too many for that to be practical. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:27, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive920#178.217.194.100's long-term edit warring and continued addition of unsourced statistics. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:32, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2016 United States election interference by Russia. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your leadership on this. Regardless of the outcome of the RfC, I think it was much needed and hopefully it will make things clear going forward. Just wanted to drop a note thanking you for your efforts! TonyBallioni (talk) 19:36, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

No worries, TonyBallioni! Thanks for your assistance. Yes, it would be good to get clarity on this either way. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:09, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

I came here to thank you too - I was actually just searching for previous RfCs in preparation of starting my own when I saw that one was already running! Sam Walton (talk) 13:18, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Samwalton9. You sum up my own frustration with the status quo very well here. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:27, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Please see this. Thank you, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:30, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Turkish involvement in the Syrian Civil War. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

I was curious about this name so I went to the person's user page. It looks like an autobiographical Wikipedia article, and I wasn't sure what the correct procedure was. You said on The Teahouse you deleted a similar user page.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:47, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Vchimpanzee. You can request speedy deletion of articles posing as user pages under WP:U5. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:09, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. The advice given said to go to the talk page first so I linked to that section.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:16, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Germany. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

I requested the importation of the article "Harald Sicheritz" from German Wikipedia. My importing administrator xaosflux worked fast and created the sandbox page User:Arigo/Harald Sicheritz for me to translate it. Now I think I'm done, except for the section Authority Control. What's annoying is that "Weblinks" automatically shows "Arigo/Harald Sicheritz" instead of "Harald Sicheritz" - how do I get rid of that? Apart from that I'm obviously too dumb to submit the drafted article. Please advise! Arigo (talk) 22:00, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Arigo. I suspect that the authority control issue will fix itself when the page is moved into mainspace, but the best place to ask these questions is at the Teahouse. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:41, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi can you look at the band page we are attempting? Musicbyshineywater (talk) 21:33, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

As far as I can see, you haven't created an article, Musicbyshineywater. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:42, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi:

This is my first message on Wikipedia Commons so please excuse me if I am not following proper protocol.

I have been asked to edit the following draft Wikipedia page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Glidden_Doman Can you, or someone in your network, please kindly arrange to review this page at your earliest convenience? Thank you in advance for your consideration!

Also, feel free to ask if I can assist you.

Thanks,

Ray — Preceding unsigned comment added by Green Storm 7 (talk • contribs) 01:42, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Green Storm 7. This is the English-language Wikipedia, not Wikimedia Commons (which is where images are hosted for use on all Wikimedia projects). I have added a template to Draft:Glidden Doman that includes a button for you to press to request a review. Note that there is a bit of a backlog, so you might have to wait a while for the review to be conducted. If you have any further questions, please do ask them at the Teahouse, where they will be seen by more editors and are likely to be answered more quickly. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:04, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Cordless Larry, thank you so much for editing the Draft:Glidden Doman Wikipedia page to be ready for review. I have just submitted the page for review!

Thanks,

Ray — Preceding unsigned comment added by Green Storm 7 (talk • contribs) 16:17, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi. I think mentioning the impersonation case might be more appropriate on AN, instead of ANI, since admins are more active on AN comparing ANI.

Plus, I want to point out that your eternal good faith regarding Srednaus Lenoroc will not help to solve this mess. In fact, it worsened it and creates more mess and confusion. Please tell me one single reason if this guy is Srednuas Lenoroc himself, then why doesn't he just admit it, flagged that on his user page, and then just continue his contribs? He should know that admitting of being Srednuas Lenoroc will help him, if he is not an idiot. So why doesn't he just admit it? The reason is simple: Because he is not Srednuas Lenoroc! He bluntly asserted that he is a seperate editor and all the resemblance is just a coincidence. Please note that, the editor commented on 7 times on 9 January 2017 case with an inexplicable attempts to acquite the ip socks and sock accounts of sockmaster Lrednuas Senoroc whereas he just made 5 comments on 16 February 2017 case, the case that about him. Isn't it weird? I think this "new" account is just a new sock of notorious Lrednuas Senoroc and aims to create mess and confusion to undermine the previous SPI case. So, I suggest you not to insist on that he is Srednuas Lenoroc when he lucidly asserted that he is a seperate editor. Bests, 46.221.172.216 (talk) 06:22, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

@Bbb23:, could you please come to an end this mess and vandal-show? 46.221.172.216 (talk) 06:29, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Equally, the new editor could claim to have just created a new account to evade scrutiny. Plus, here, SL does state that they created a new account. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:18, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

"They"? How many users operating those accounts? The problem is that, either intentionally or not, the editor's responses, answers are not clear and are open-ended. In his answer regarding @Ermanarich:'s comment, he simply said that all those resemblance is a coincidence. Why don't this annoying editor just give simply, short, clear answers to questions of others? YES or NO. No one have to " interpret" or puzzle his/her brain because of his blurred answers. YES or NO. It's that simple. 46.221.219.63 (talk) 10:06, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm using "they" in the gender-neutral, singular sense. I agree that their answers are unclear at best. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:34, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

As I said here, if he keep continuing such blurred, confusing responses, instead of giving a simple, clear answer, I support a block for him. Because the mess he created, is really trolling the previous cases. 46.221.219.63 (talk) 10:14, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Boyo why are you wasting your time with him? I mean, you are gullibly asking the same question on his talk page. Did you count how many editor asked the same question to him? I gave up responding him, after realized that he is just trolling, if he is not a retard. 46.221.178.57 (talk) 15:35, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

I would like to see the case to a close, whether that be a resolution that allows SL to continue editing, or a complete block. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:36, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Larry. Thanks for bringing that issue to my attention. I don't see a problem right now; maybe the editor just had a change of e-mail and forgot his/her password. If the new account is an impersonator, he/she is patiently doing a lot of useful Wikignoming. And the two names are too similar to be used for secretive purposes. To be honest, although I have admin tools I have had little experience at vandal fighting; I do mostly deletions, restorations and history merges. I'll keep an eye open, though.—Anne Delong (talk) 16:24, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Anne Delong. I'll keep an eye out too. I was just unsure whether to ask the editor why they seemed to have created a new account, but I'm happy to leave things be as long as they don't do anything untoward. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:05, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Another editor has asked the question, at User talk:Srednaus Lenoroc#New account. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:22, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Well, that went well, didn't it? (sigh)—Anne Delong (talk) 11:55, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

No it didn't, Anne Delong, but while it's a shame to lose an editor, I have to say that my sympathy for Srednaus Lenoroc/Srednuas Lenoroc is limited given that this is the second time I have had an intemperate response from this particular editor when I was trying to help extricate them from an SPI. A skim of User talk:Srednuas Lenoroc suggests that this user has a problem interacting with other editors in a constructive manner. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:46, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, he seems easily flustered and overreacts at times. I just don't understand why any of this started in the first place. It was obvious to me that this fellow wasn't "abusing multiple accounts". I appreciated your measured response. Anyway, I've said enough about this now and will get back to my editing.—Anne Delong (talk) 23:08, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Gggtt told me to rely on you, so I shall do so, though not very much. If that's OK with you?

The next time I witness a religious cult trying to bring itself into existence by telling people about the many Wiki pages it has itself confected, I shall call you.

FYI, I'm david.lloyd-jones.391, I think it is, on Facebook. I spend my time learning Chinese, currently at about middle-school (HSK 3~4) level. This is great fun right now because I'm in the early stages of learning finance vocabulary and protocols at exactly the time that China is in the early stages of making those ver-ree interesting topics.

Cheers,

David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 20:21, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello, David Lloyd-Jones, and welcome to Wikipedia. I'm not sure what I can do to help you. Wikipedia:Teahouse is a better place for new or inexperienced editors to ask questions than my talk page. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:10, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Larry. Pleeezd tameetcha. Yes, I'll go hunt up Teahouse sometime soon.

Meanwhile, I've just run across something that I'm going to have to fix over the next little while. There is a little knot of errors around the Second and Third Congressional Districts of Indiana, and this unfortunately means errors in a whole bunch of places.

I was reading up on Mike Pence someplace, and it said he represented the Second District at some point. This seemed unlikely to me, since I knew he was from the south end of the state, and from there I found that Wiki had John Brademas in the Third, which is incorrect, and Earl Landgrebe in the Second, which is also false. I know John Brademas was in the Second because I worked for him in the 89th and 90 Congresses, and have walked the streets and driven all around the place, but I don't know the others at all.

I'll e-mail John's ex-LA (Legislative Assistant) Jack Duncan, and I'll see who I can make contact with in the others just to make sure I get it right. I'm fairly busy, so I doubt that I'll get around to it for a while, but...

Anyway, at some point in the middle of the year I'll probably ask you for help. So thanks in advance.

Cheers,

David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 04:54, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

I was keen on moving my page and publish it in Wikipedia I don't find the "move" button. can you help me please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Det1234 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Det1234. You're better off asking this sort of question over at the Teahouse, where you'll get quicker answers. You won't be able to move pages until you account is a little older. In any case, if User:Det1234/sandbox was moved into the article space, it would likely be deleted as too promotional. See WP:NPOV for guidance on this. I will add a template to your draft that will allow you to submit it for review once you've fixed the tone. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:54, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump–Russia dossier. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

I just heard about this! So overdue! Thank you for taking this on! Well done, sir. KDS4444 (talk) 16:50, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

I am Thapene, new comer. I just made an new article, name: Ban Thapene, a location in Luang Prabang, Laos. I am happy to have your help and review. I am also curious to know when this article is approved. Thank you very much. Thapene — Preceding unsigned comment added by Banthapenlaos (talk • contribs) 06:32, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Welcome, Banthapenlaos. The article you created, Ban Thapene, was created in the main article space of Wikipedia and not as a draft, so it is already "live" without having been reviewed. If you have further questions about editing Wikipedia, please do ask them at Wikipedia:Teahouse. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:03, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you very much for your advice. Do you know when it will be reviewed? Regards. Thapene — Preceding unsigned comment added by Banthapenlaos (talk • contribs) 14:21, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

When you wrote "review" and "approved", Banthapenlaos, I assumed you were referring to the draft review process, which the article is not subject to, but perhaps you are instead referring to Wikipedia:New pages patrol? If so, I think there is somewhat of a backlog, but it's best to ask at the Teahouse. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:22, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for this. Thapene — Preceding unsigned comment added by Banthapenlaos (talk • contribs) 22:50, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Cordless Larry!

I am having trouble having my article approved. I believe I have followed all the guidelines for creating a new article, however, I found out today that it was declined given the grounds of not having enough independent sources. Then again, upon checking and comparing with other similar articles, I can say that I disagree with this decision. Is there any help I can get to have my article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ang_Bandang_Shirley, reviewed by another editor?

Hoping for a positive response. Thank you!

TheBandShirleyFan (talk) 03:24, 4 March 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBandShirleyFan (talk • contribs) 03:22, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Welcome, TheBandShirleyFan. The best place to ask questions about editing Wikipedia is over at Wikipedia:Teahouse, or you could raise this with the reviewer themselves. Without having looked at your draft article in detail, I would suggest having a read of Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. There are lots of poor articles on Wikipedia that were created before the draft review process was established, but they shouldn't be used as templates or models. Newer articles are held to a higher standard and hopefully the older, poor articles will be improved or deleted in time. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:00, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Cordless Larry! I have raised the issue with the reviewer but there still isn't any response. TheBandShirleyFan (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

In that case, I suggest asking for advice at the Teahouse, TheBandShirleyFan. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:28, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Protests against Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Southern Poverty Law Center. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions. Yourgirl (talk) 10:32, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

And thank you for showing your appreciation, Yourgirl. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:19, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure if the Teahouse goes to the Help Desk to fix their template, the entire project explodes and we have to start over from zero articles. TimothyJosephWood 21:12, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

I laughed out loud at the mental image of a collective Teahouse-host post at the Help Desk, Timothyjosephwood. I quite like the idea of starting from scratch, though - would clear out a lot of unsourced rubbish! Cordless Larry (talk) 21:18, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

It helps me sleep at night thinking that the worst of it are orphans that no one really sees anyway. I occasionally visit BACKLOG for a reality check, and the garbage there sometimes is breathtaking, especially from before things like NPP got going. TimothyJosephWood 21:32, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

In all seriousness though, I did wonder whether if we bucked the WMF folks enough, if they would stop actively supporting it. If that's the case, I'll post at the help desk myself, and ping every technical editor I know, and I certainly wont lose any sleep over that. TimothyJosephWood 21:36, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Timothyjosephwood. I think that if any WMF folks are annoyed, it's more to do with the replacement of the landing page with the questions page, rather than top versus bottom posting. Perhaps I'm not fully aware of all the politics though. I did have a conversation with Jonathan some time ago that touched on moving to bottom posting, but I can't remember exactly what his stance on it was. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:45, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

There seems to be a lot of friction there lately, at least in my limited view, and that isn't limited to the Teahouse. In the last 48 hours there was also this discussion, which resulted in folks withdrawing a mobile feature. I dunno, I may likely be ABF a bit too much here. TimothyJosephWood 23:12, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

I am able to edit my article with your valuable suggestions. Few others are also helping me out. Thanks once again Yourgirl (talk) 03:32, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much, any feedback is appreciated, or if you prefer to make changes yourself that is fine too. I followed your guidelines about the table and removed the LGBTQ video of Alice talking. Hopefully it is starting ti take shape... this is much more difficult that what I thought lol your help is so much appreciated...

Besides correcting all external links and swapping them to press citations, what else could I do with the page for it to not get deleted when uploaded? Am I doing the citation game correctly?

Also, could I publish the article as a stub this weekend to indicate that I understand it is not finished but that I would appreciate collaborations?

Martha.

MarthaDaisy (talk) 03:16, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

There are still some sentences that need to either be referenced or removed, MarthaDaisy, such as the claim that "Alice will become the youngest Spanish woman to ever direct a feature film at 26 years old" (that should also be reworded to use her surname, if it can be sourced). I would highly recommend submitting the article for review rather than publishing it yourself, but ultimately that is your call. I am pinging Theroadislong, who has made some edits to the article, and who might have thoughts or suggestions. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:14, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

You guys are fantastic (that also means you Theroadislong). Thank you both for helping me so much, otherwise I would be too lost. I will modify the things you are mentioning today and bring the article to your attention again afterwards. Is there a way for you guys to submit the article for review for me once it is finished? Thanks!!!

MarthaDaisy (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:11, 2 April 2017‎ (UTC)

It's probably quickest if you submit the article yourself, MarthaDaisy, by pressing the "Submit your draft for review!" button on the template at the top of the page once you're done making the changes. Pinging Theroadislong as a notification won't have been triggered by the above mention as MarthaDaisy's signature is incomplete (please sign by adding four tildes to the end of your posts, MarthaDaisy). Cordless Larry (talk) 20:20, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

This is just to say thank you for responding to my general message. What you said was useful. Many thanks. TinaTinatamman (talk) 09:21, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

No problem, Tinatamman. Happy editing to you. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:57, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

you slammed an article here with an A7 but the article was not written in english, guess this was an oversight or accidental. I have removed it now, you can add a CSDtag to it but not A7. Happy edititng!!! 20:16, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Mahveotm. I asked an Icelandic speaker to translate the article, and there was no credible claim of significance or importance. That's why I tagged it. Have I missed a rule that says non-English articles can't be tagged as A7? Cordless Larry (talk) 20:18, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Ow! never knew you did that, would restore the tag instanta, thanks for your contributions to the project. -And no, I don't think there is any. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 20:24, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

No problem, Mahveotm, and thanks for reverting yourself. For reference, the editor who created that article appears to be here to write about himself and his friends. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:31, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

i am now editing .... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ismailim (talk • contribs) 20:46, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

it's CMV is a Popular Bangladeshi Record label. i am not it's owner i am only wikipedian http://www.bd-pratidin.com/entertainment-news/2017/01/06/197901

http://www.thedailystar.net/arts-entertainment/tv/abul-hayat-makes-maiden-music-video-appearance-1362151

http://bangla.thereport24.com/article/145143/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ismailim (talk • contribs) 21:45, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

You might not be the owner, Ismailim, but the article is still promotional. I suggest following the advice I left you at User talk:Ismailim#Article creation. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:52, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

This is not a promotional this is a company of bangladesh. and Bangladeshi Record label — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ismailim (talk • contribs) 22:05, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Sentences such as "As a producer, CMV is the pioneer of the latest revolution of band music and modern songs in Bangladesh" are promotional, Ismailim. Please review WP:NPOV. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:09, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

CMV like of Bangladeshi record labels please follow this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Bangladeshi_record_labels — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ismailim (talk • contribs) 22:12, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes, some of those seem overly promotional too, and should probably also be deleted or rewritten. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:14, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

if i will resubmit article this is oky !22:18, 8 April 2017 (UTC)Ismailim (talk)

This is Bangla wiki about G-Series

https://bn.wikipedia.org/s/14c6

Ismailim (talk) 22:26, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

The English version of the article contains copyright material, so has been nominated for deletion. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:31, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Cordless Larry. Your name came up at Bri's list of potential admin candidates and having looked at your contributions and editing history I think you would make a great administrator! You've got experience in most if not all of the areas RfA voters look at, and from a first look I can't see that you'd face any major hurdles if nominated. What are your thoughts on running for the tools? Best, Sam Walton (talk) 14:39, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Samwalton9, and thanks for your note. I'd by lying if I told you that I've not occasionally thought about running for admin status, but I've always concluded that I don't really need the tools for the sort of work I do and haven't wanted to run just for the chance to say that I'm an administrator. I have recently volunteered to join the OTRS team, and I suppose that admin tools might prove useful for that. I'm not sure what my chances would be in an RfA, though, given that I've never really contributed to admin-like tasks such as discussion closures. I've probably not made many friends with my stance at school AfDs lately, either! Those are my (somewhat disorderly) thoughts. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:56, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

I think you have enough relevant experience for voters to be able to trust you. Your AfD stats are good, and looking through your votes they always seem to be sensible and knowledgeable, you've written more than enough content to convince the content creation crowd, and you spend time helping new users which is always a plus for me. Some experience at SPI and your long tenure also give me confidence, and while I notice you've only just started a CSD log, it's looking good already. As for school AfDs, you're going to have someone disagreeing with you whatever your stance on them! No pressure from me, and if you want some more confidence before running then feel free to start a poll at ORCP, but I would be happy to nominate you either way, so let me know if you'd like to go for it! Sam Walton (talk) 11:14, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

If it's OK with you, I'll sleep on it a bit, Samwalton9. My immediate task is getting my head around OTRS. About the CSD log, I only started using Twinkle yesterday - mostly out of slight frustration with page curation - but I've been aware for a while that it's probably a good idea to maintain one, so it was about time. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:56, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

No worries at all. Just drop me a message if you want to go ahead with it or have any thoughts/questions :) Sam Walton (talk) 23:02, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Khan Shaykhun chemical attack. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your all contributions to Wikipedia so far; they are very much appreciated. Your experience and tenure have been an asset to the project.

Have you ever thought of becoming an administrator? It can be enjoyable, challenging, and a great way to help Wikipedia.

If you would like to find out about your chances of a successful RfA, please visit:

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

If you have already taken the poll recently, please disregard this notice.

Thank you!

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:55, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Anna Frodesiak! This made me laugh - did you co-ordinate this with Sam Walton (see above)? Cordless Larry (talk) 13:42, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't think so. Anyways, you were vetted through a sub page of the candidate poll. Others have received this message. Anyways, I would support you in an RfA. RileyBugz^{Yell at me} | _Edits 16:42, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

I wasn't being entirely serious, though it's odd that I've gone years without anyone ever asking this, only to be asked twice in a few days! I think my answer remains the same as I gave Sam Walton: I'll think about it, but not right now, thanks. Special thanks to Anna Frodesiak for giving me reason to revisit your beautiful user page. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:24, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Larry! I'm so sorry. I didn't notice Sam's post above. I scrolled up a bit, and then figured there was no Sam post. This is because the project that brought me here is only a day old.

Anyhow, no pressure about becoming an admin. But, think of the gnarly tools! The glamour! The prestigue! The sheer exhiliration of it all! Alright, scratch those last three and focus on the gnarly tools. :)

I do hope you become an admin one of these days. Wikipedia sure could use ya! Thanks for the kind words about my userpage.

My very best wishes. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:49, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Do it. I'd support you. Hell, I'd co-nom if my opinion actually mattered. TimothyJosephWood 22:00, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

+1, I've always had very good interactions with you, and think you'd be wonderful at it. I tend to !vote on temperament, which might not say much about what other people would think, but you are very level-headed, and that is what we need in admins. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:35, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Larry! Thanks for reviewing a page I created. I was wondering if you could guide me to a tool we can use for adding categories automatically to pages. I read it somewhere in a thread but forgot its name. Any idea where I can find it and how to use? Thanks, man. Teranair (talk) 11:43, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello Teranair. I've never used it myself, but it sounds like you might be thinking of Wikipedia:Hotcat. If that's not it, you might want to ask at the Teahouse, where I'm sure someone will know. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:04, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes, Hotcat. Hotcat it is. Thanks, Larry. Teranair (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Dear gentlemen,

humanities in general and literary theory in particular represent one of the most neglected sections of en.wikipedia.org and they do not excel as compared to other national Wikipedias, either. Your wiki entries grind off only traditional terms of elementary-school stuff and anxiously watch over trivial commonplace technicalities without paying heed to serious science and all innovative ideas. For instance, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Literary_theory includes only one twentieth of the most urgent and indispensable entries and lacks mention of narratology, imagology (theory of poetic imagery), poetology, generative poetics, systematic poetics, versology, literary thematics, rhematics, cognitive poetics, literary genology (theory of literary genres), ethnopoetics, geopoetics, periodology, literary sociology, literary historionomy, literary historiography, stadiology, literary text analysis, literary textology, sociocritique, let alone less necessary terms such as geocritique (géocritique), literometry (littérométrie), metahistory (métahistoire) etc. French https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat%C3%A9gorie:Narratologie includes 80 lexical entries on subfields of narratology, while your https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Literary_theory includes none.

Your approach mistakes theoretical disciplines for their practical subject matter, for instance, the term ‘comparative literature’ is as nonsensical as a concept of ‘comparative potato’ for systematic comparative botany. If you had a headword ‘(literary) trend’, which you actually haven’t got, you would think that ‘trendology’ is not necessary. It is like mistaking politology for politics, theoretical poetics for poetry and professors of medicine for their patients. Such misunderstandings metamorphose the noble mission of Wikipeda into parody and a ‘kangaroo court’.

I am convinced that every contributor has a right to hear a proficient expert appreciation of his contribution in at least two or three sentences. My decent request concerns one text with two embedded materials: My contribution ‘literary trendology‘ is an output of thirty years of research summed up in two inserted links: http://www.democritusassociation.org/Literature/English_Literature_in_Trends.pdf http://www.democritusassociation.org/Literature/The_trendometric_timeline_of_English_literature.pdf.

I would be very obliged and thankful to all of my reviewers for a critical judgment of their theoretical content and scientific import. Thank you very much,

Pavel BělíčekPavel Bělíček (talk) 09:36, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Pavel Bělíček. The place to discuss this is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Literary Trendology, but please note that Wikipedia only covers topics that have already received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:45, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Pavel Bělíček (talk) 04:42, 23 April 2017 (UTC)Dear sir,

I must strongly protest against your hasty decision to nominate my entry Literary Trends for deleting. It gave me an unpleasant surprise and made me wonder how anyone can propose for annihilation fifty years of hard and demanding research without any serious arguments.

The way you edit humanities and literary theory in Wikipedia is so conservative and hostile to modern innovative ideas that it should be submitted to higher supervision.

I suppose you have read my arguments against deletion adressed to Mr. or Ms. Anachronist.

My contribution Literary Trends contains links to two valuable results of my research.

http://www.democritusassociation.org/Literature/English_Literature_in_Trends.pdf http://www.democritusassociation.org/Literature/The_trendometric_timeline_of_English_literature.pdf.

I do not know what field of research is your college major but I am convinced that any university graduate can immediately grasp their import for Anglicist philology and other fields of humanities. I believe that once they will become materials pertaining to the backbone of Anglicist studies.

Thank you for liberal tolerance and understanding my bitter exasperation.

Pavel Bělíček Pavel Bělíček (talk) 04:42, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello again, Pavel Bělíček. As stated above, you need to make your case at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Literary Trendology rather than here on my talk page. That said, I agree that Wikipedia is rather conservative in what it includes, because it is reliant on summarising what existing reliable sources say about topics. As far as I can tell, the two sources you have linked to don't contribute to establishing the notability of the concept "literary trendology", as they don't actually use that term. You might be better off submitting your essay to a scholarly journal and then, once there is an established literature, we can cover the topic here on Wikipedia. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:52, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Conservative Party of Canada leadership election, 2017. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 30 April 2017 (UTC)