User talk:Perryprog/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Jessica Mitford

Hi this is AssistantMaxwell! I tried to update Jessica Mitford's page with her biography, The Life and Times of Jessica Mitford, but the addition was removed because of the link to the author's page. Would the line of text about the biography be approved if it did not have the link, or if I used a link to the book itself? The Life and Times has invaluable insight into Mitford and her life. Here is the link I am considering:

https://lesliebrodyauthor.com/irrepressible/irrepressible-the-life-and-times-of-jessica-mitford-by-leslie-brody/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by AssistantMaxwell (talk • contribs) 22:21, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi AssistantMaxwell; thanks for reaching out. I had reverted the edit principally because you added the link as what's called an "external link"—this is different from a reference, which seems to be what you wanted in this case. I only undid your edit on the "external link" portion alone, as having external links in the body of an article in that manner is generally not permitted—hopefully that helps clarify things. Please feel free to let me know if you have any more questions. Perryprog (talk) 14:33, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

LoopUp wiki profile

Hi Perryprog! I work for LoopUp. There are some factual inaccuracies in the LoopUp wiki entry that we would like to address - specifically the description of the services that the organisation provides to customers which appears in the first paragraph of the entry.

We understand the issues with COI individuals changing wikipedia entries, but we're at a bit of a loss as to how else to ensure that the information is accurate. We have made these changes recently, but you appear to have reverted back to an earlier version of the entry which is no longer valid.

Your advice would be much appreciated!

RobJardine (talk) 09:44, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi RobJardine. First off, thanks for being up-front about your connection to LoopUp—that's greatly appreciated. This is a fairly trivial case, so I think the easiest thing to do would be to just follow the instructions in the Edit Request Wizard. That'll let you request changes to the article in a way that'll be reviewed by an independent editor before being implemented. If you have any other questions, please feel free to let me know. Perryprog (talk) 12:53, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Awenasa (Album)

Hello, I added a few references for the Awenasa album by the band, Offensive. I am a club owner and this band has performed at my club for many years. This is one of the best albums by any metal bands in my archive. Please consider publishing this page please. Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.153.77.4 (talk) 17:07, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

I see that Theroadislong has already reviewed your last submission. I'd highly recommend referring to the decline reason that they gave—it's the gray box of text that begins with "This submission's references". In it, there are multiple links to documents that describe how to correct the current issues with the draft, which are primarily "sourcing" and "notability" based (those terms are explained by said links). Please feel free to let me know if you have any questions regarding those. Perryprog (talk) 20:34, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Regarding You have Unedited My some Reference

I was trying to add a reference of the article which explains the difference between CGPA & GPA, What was the reason you have deleted please explain so I will use that knowledge to rewrite the reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndrewJee700 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

AndrewJee700 because the site itself looks incredibly fishy, as well as not at all appearing to be a reliable source. It's also not being used as a reference, so I'm treating it as if it were an external link, instead. (If that last sentence doesn't make sense to you, don't worry about it—it's not too important at the moment.) My general worry here is that you are adding it as a way to promote this site—is this at all accurate? Perryprog (talk) 23:15, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

If you took some time to read that article I don’t think you ever have to right that much and also has to explain me what happened or not you can check site credibility by knowing its spam rate if you wanna learn how to check that let me know i will teach you that…. AndrewJee700 (talk) 23:42, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

AndrewJee700, I'm really not sure what you're saying. Would you mind stating if you do, or don't, have a connection with this website? Perryprog (talk) 23:48, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Finally thanks you have guessed it AndrewJee700 (talk) 04:57, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Reply to [person]

Why are you asking me to come here, it will never be read and replied to properly. Missbellanash (talk) 05:24, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

STOP 🛑 doing things to send notifications, just stop and stop now!!! Such an aggravation, have loaded dozens of pages and there is absolutely NOTHING there. Stop, this is abuse! Missbellanash (talk) 05:32, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:Jaouad888

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User talk:Jaouad888, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Kent2121 (talk) 07:14, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Kent2121, for future reference, it's generally not worth it to request deletion of talk pages, especially when there were previous edits to them (as this one did—I was the one who created it). In this case, it would have been better to simply revert whatever the addition of promotional content was. Hopefully this helps! Perryprog (talk) 12:45, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Adding factual details about James Gordon Meek as co-creator of Task Force Pineapple with news citations.

I am trying to add factual details to the Task Force Pineapple page but I am confused about how to add news stories and tweets as citations. Meekwire (talk) 00:06, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Meekwire; thanks for reaching out. It definitely is a bit confusing, and I realize the message I left on your talk page wasn't directly helpful with regard to what you were trying to do, so I'm sorry about that. The easiest solution to this is probably just to use the "Cite" button that should be in the toolbar at the top of the editor, and paste in the twitter link there. It's worth noting, though, that Twitter is not generally considered a reliable source, as it doesn't have any sort of editorial oversight. Perryprog (talk) 00:11, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick reply. Yes, I was highlighting a sentence and trying to make it a hyperlink rather than a footnote. I got a bit confused reading the tutorial on adding footnote citations that link to news articles. Understand your point about Twitter citations. However, in this case, my Twitter account is verified, I'm a well known journalist, broke the story of the Pineapple Express for ABC News and was linking to a factual tweet about co-creating Task Force Pineapple with Scott Mann. I also read the COI section and believe my edits and adds were in line with correcting factual information about yourself. Meekwire (talk) 00:25, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Meekwire, ah, I see. Honestly, in that case I think your best choice would be to use the Edit Request Wizard, which is the recommended method of editing any articles you have a conflict of interest with—even though it's "technically" okay, it's generally just a lot easier this way, hopefully for everyone involved. The main downside is it can just take a bit more time before the edit is implemented. Perryprog (talk) 00:49, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Help

Why I'm unable to upload an article?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uday patel 007 (talk • contribs) 18:13, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Uday patel 007, I rejected the draft because it was being repeatedly re-submitted without addressing the previous decline reasons, or, in fact, making any changes at all. If you do go and address the previous decline reasons and believe it's ready to be re-submitted, then you can do so by clicking the blue "Ask for advice" button on the draft's page. Perryprog (talk) 00:06, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

LoopUp

Hi Perryprog. Thank you for your advice - we're fairly inexperienced with Wikipedia - still learning the tools and the rules - so this was invaluable! I have requested the changes as you suggested, and made it clear that it's coming from a potential COI source. Hopefully we can now make those updates stick! Very best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobJardine (talk • contribs) 14:24, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

RobJardine, of course! Thank you for being understanding of the extra rules surrounding this area. I know it can be quite tedious on your end, but I promise it makes the work on our end significantly easier. One thing that is worth noting is, that since it does sound like you are employed by LoopUp, you will need to make a paid-contribution disclosure. While I recommend reading through that entire page, it may be helpful to also read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide § Disclosure for a simplified explanation on how to disclose that you're being paid to edit. Perryprog (talk) 16:59, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:47, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

WP:AFC Helper News

Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.

• AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
• The template {{db-afc-move}} has been created - this template is similar to {{db-move}} when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Edit Request Tool changes

Hello, I just made some significant changes to User:Terasail/Edit Request Tool. Since you have the tool active, I am informing you of this since it may affect you. To open the tool you will now have to click the "respond" button. The tool will load a similar interface as before. There is now a live preview of the response. These changes might have introduced some bugs so if you have any concerns / suggestions or run into problems please leave a note at User talk:Terasail/Edit Request Tool Thanks, Terasail^[✉️] 15:26, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Stradella Bass System

Dear Perryprog,

I am writing to discuss your recent removal of the external links I added to the Wikipedia page about the Stradella bass system. As you may know, according to the External Links page, acceptable external links include those that contain accurate and on-topic further research, information that couldn't be included in the article due to copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content that isn't suitable for inclusion in the article.

I want to emphasize that the links I added fulfill all these criteria. They provide accurate and on-topic information about the Stradella bass system, which couldn't be included in the article due to the amount of detail and the nature of the information. As an expert in this field, I believe that these links are essential for anyone who wants to learn more about the topic.

If you have a different opinion on this matter, I would be happy to have a conversation with you and learn more about your expertise in this field that led you to conclude that the links are not appropriate or of high quality.

I believe that by restoring the links, we can provide valuable information to the readers and uphold the principles of Wikipedia, which encourage the dissemination of accurate and relevant information.

Therefore, I kindly request that you reconsider your decision and restore the links to the Wikipedia page.

Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Best regards,

Giovanni Lucifero GioLuc76 (talk) 23:05, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi GioLuc76—thanks for going to talk with me instead of just adding back in the links. That's super appreciated. I will note though that this isn't any "decision" in a formal sense; I'm just as much an editor as you are.

Regarding the links: Wikipedia has a pretty stringent policy when it comes to references, and an even stricter one when it comes to external links. While I do appreciate that you certainly have plenty of expertise in this area, you do appear to have a conflict of interest with AccordionChords.com, and it appears to be a financial conflict of interest as well, on account of the site having ads. This has some additional, in some cases legal, implications that I'd recommend reading up on (fully!) at WP:PAID.

Besides the financial conflict of interest policies that you need to abide by when editing about that thing you have a conflict of interest with (here this is really just that website, not accordions in general, generally speaking), there's also extra policy considerations besides the normal external link and reference policies that we have. This generally amounts to "don't", though there are some niche exceptions where it's not expressly not allowed. Here's the relevant documentation:

• Paid editing policy stuff (main thing here that you I would really recommend reading): Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § Paid editing
• General guidelines on what external links to avoid: Wikipedia:External links § Links normally to be avoided
• Policy details on what "external link spam" means, as well as "citation spam": Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming
• Conflict of interest guideline on citing yourself: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § Citing yourself

I appreciate that this is a massive dump of links and each one of those has even more pages of links on thinks relevant, but really the only thing you absolutely read is the first one. I included the rest since you might be curious about the nitty-gritty bits, and it can be tough to dig through the pages of policy we have to find the relevant bits. Finally, to bring this around to the actual problem at hand: considering the conflict of interest at play here, as well as the fact that it's really only been this site that you've been adding references or links to, makes me feel like this is more on the intent-to-promote side of things, so I don't feel comfortable adding back the links. If you want, you can make an edit request. The easiest way to do this is just through the Edit Request Wizard, and then an impartial editor will eventually be able to review the additions and go from there.

Hopefully this helps—this answer quickly became a lot longer than I expected (doesn't help that it's fairly late for me), but hopefully it isn't too overwhelming. I can try to summarize it a bit if it is. Perryprog (talk) 02:47, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi Perryprog,

I initially thought that my contribution to the Wikipedia page was helpful, but I understand your concerns about conflicts of interest. While it may appear to be a conflict of interest on paper, I truly have no intention of promoting my links on the Stradella bass system page for any personal gain (especially because there's no gain). My only intention is to provide a valuable resource for users who are seeking information that cannot be found anywhere else.

If you search for accordion charts on Google, you'll see that my charts are unique and have no competition. I created these charts to provide a valuable resource to accordion players who are looking for information on each size of accordion. I initially added my website to the Wikipedia page as a gift to users who were looking for more information on the Stradella system but I don't want to have any problem for something I made in good faith.

I also understand that you are simply following the rules to ensure the quality of the content on Wikipedia. While it is disheartening, I accept it and will focus on my own business.

I will no longer contribute to any Wikipedia page.

Please remove the image I've added here: https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Accordion/Reading_Accordion_Music

Thank you for your time. GioLuc76 (talk) 13:35, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi GioLuc76,

I'm sorry that you no longer wish to contribute to Wikipedia. I hope you do in the future. I do really appreciate what you're trying to do, and I do think you have good intent—it's just sometimes policy can get in the way of good intent due to weird circumstances, like this. Regarding charts, that's actually something you can definitely contribute to Wikimedia Commons in a way that (I think) is way less frustrating policy-wise, as you have already!

Regarding your request about the image—you'll have to go and make a deletion request on Wikimedia Commons for the image to be removed, as it's been uploaded longer than a week ago. You can see instructions on how to do so on Commons:Deletion requests. If you want, I can make it on your behalf, but I can't make any guarantee on its success or failure. Perryprog (talk) 18:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:35, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Temporary account IP viewer granted

Hello, Perryprog. Per your request, your account has been granted temporary-account-viewer rights. You are now able to reveal the IP addresses of individuals using temporary accounts that are not visible to the general public. This is very sensitive information that is only to be used to aid in anti-abuse workflows. Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer for more information on this user right. It is important to remember:

• You must not share IP address data with someone who does not have the same access permissions unless disclosure is permissible as per guidelines listed at Foundation:Policy:Wikimedia Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy.
• Access must not be used for political control, to apply pressure on editors, or as a threat against another editor in a content dispute. There must be a valid reason to investigate a temporary user. Note that using multiple temporary accounts is not forbidden, so long as they are not used in violation of policies (for example, block or ban evasion).

It is also important to note that the following actions are logged for others to see:

• When a user accepts the preference that enables or disables IP reveal for their account.
• Revealing an IP address of a temporary account.
• Listing the temporary accounts that are associated with an IP address or CIDR range.

Remember, even if a user is violating policy, avoid revealing personal information if possible. Use temporary account usernames rather than disclosing IP addresses directly, or give information such as same network/not same network or similar. If you do not want the user right anymore then please ask me or another administrator and it will be removed for you. You may also voluntarily give up access at any time by visiting Special:Preferences. Happy editing! asilvering (talk) 00:52, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

About the Cyrus Tang Foundation Content

Hi Perryprog, I have re-edited my draft content. I have added several secondary sources to improve my content and to achieve the notability requirement. I would like to see if you could review my content? Thank you ! Elesha1188 (talk) 01:22, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Awesome stuff! I haven't looked too closely, but that does seem to be a good improvement, and that you were able to find more material does lend me to thinking that the foundation is notable enough for an article—whether or not that's now demonstrated I can't say without doing a closer look, but failing the first step is usually where people struggle, as that's not a fixable problem. I'll give it a proper review sometime tomorrow. Perryprog (talk) 01:29, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Awesome Thanks ! Elesha1188 (talk) 21:22, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi Perrprog, I just got banned as I sent a long text about the article list. But just sent an email to then to unlock the ban from the libera chat. In the meantime, is there any other ways I can send you the article list? Elesha1188 (talk) 21:45, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Elesha1188, you should be able to rejoin now, but on Draft talk:Cyrus Tang Foundation is probably fine. Perryprog (talk) 21:46, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

No problem. Thank you Perryprog Elesha1188 (talk) 21:51, 12 September 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.

Edits - Reference links

Hi Perryprog! Just edited all external links to internal references, per your suggestion! Please let me know if anything else is needed to suffice. Very much appreciate your assistance and keen eye. Thnx a million!

- Dave DMA021680 (talk) 21:25, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

DMA021680, thanks for that! I'll let someone else handle at least your next review just so you can get some other eyes on it. Cheers! Perryprog (talk) 16:36, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your guidance - Gila Apache

Dear Perryprog: I appreciate your assistance with this important project. It means a lot. I am going to attempt to respond to the point you've raised. You wrote, "I've gone through and done what I can to convert most citations to Wikipedia's styling of citations (see here for more details). However, in doing so I've noticed that many—especially the early sources—didn't seem to support the facts they were listed after. I've marked those with "failed verification". "

Response: The initial citation should be revised as such to reflect the language family:

#1 Young, Robert W. (1983). "Apache Languages". In Ortiz, Alfonso (ed.). Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 10: Southwest. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. p. 393.

#2 Wilson, John P. (1988). "The Southern Apaches as Farmers 1630 to 1870". In Poore, Anne V. (ed.). Reflections: Papers on Southwestern Culture History in Honor of Charles H. Lange. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico. Vol. 14. Albuquerque, N.M.: Archaeological Society of New Mexico. pp. 79–90. OCLC 18496860.

#3 new JSTOR link for verification: Ackerly, N. W. (1997). Mimbreno and Gileno Apache Irrigation Systems, 1853-1859. Kiva, 62(4), 350-351. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30246689

#4 page numbers (53-54) are accurate (section titled 28. The conversion of the Gila Apaches, and the Notable Hieroglyphic of an Apache Captain

#5 corrected page number to 15 to reflect Southern Athabaskans grouped under Western Apache:

Haskell, J. Loring (1987). Southern Athapaskan migration: A.D. 200-1750. Tasile, AZ: Navajo Community College Press. pp. 15. ISBN 978-0-912586-60-1.

#6 you are correct - Irrelevant in that second paragraph

#19 is accurate - the page numbers list speak to the subjects list Bonsee, Frank (Francisco), and Massai. I should have reordered them in my verbiage to correspond with the numbering

#23 is accurate; however pages 14-22 include the sections on "Hunting" and "Gathering" I have referenced.

You wrote, "I also tagged one citations as "verification needed", but really I think that whole paragraph was a bit confusing, and I want to say that Fort Sill and Fort Marion got switched up but I could be wrong.

Response: Fort Marion is the location in Florida where they were taken. Having said that I agree with you (again), it's confusing. I will eliminate "at Fort Marion," all together and rephrase the last two sentences to read, "Individuals like Bonsee, Frank (Francisco), and Massai evaded capture and lived outside of formal reservations following the deportation of Apaches to Florida."

You also wrote, "There's another I tagged as verification needed later on that I just couldn't really find online? ("Warm Spring Apache Subsistence")"

Response: Here is a link to the source from my Google Drive: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Jjjpqe_WEYf4uCt9aT7FRGwxjxa7Ufx_/view?usp=sharing

I look forward to hearing from you. - Apachescholar Apachescholar (talk) 21:43, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Amazing, thank you so much for that fast (and detailed) response!! I've been staring at screens for probably a bit longer than I should be today so I'll be taking a bit of a break, but I'll see about integrating the updated citations into the proper wikisyntax if needed. For the Google Drive link, can you make sure its sharing access is set to allow viewing for anyone with the link? I can't currently access it. Perryprog (talk) 21:49, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

You're correct! I just adjusted my settings. You should be able to see the PDF now. My apologies. - Apachescholar Apachescholar (talk) 22:02, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Hey, Perryprog!

	For thoughtfulness
	Your instructions on the category page of articles without book covers is so thoughtful, not just of my little problem, but of future editors and the quality of Wikipedia itself. You go! Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 21:41, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm a nobody but you made my day, you did.... Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 21:42, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Ah, that's very kind of you! It's much appreciated. Also calling yourself a "nobody" is silly. If you're a nobody then everyone is. :P Perryprog (talk) 23:04, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Fred Kelly

Well, the flamethrower (we will avoid names) took the flames to another attempt of mine to improve an article.....Fred Kelly had a great post-Olympic career and was extremely involved with what became American Airlines. I do not consider that to be trivial. So I include quite a bit about his post Olympic career. As a model I used the article on Frank Kurtz, whose post Olympic career was more interesting than his Olympic performance. It did not matter. And I actually including quite a few footnotes from various newspapers of the era as well as some of his obits. It did not matter, there was simply scorched earth. I would like to think that this administrator will not spend the rest of his life chasing me around Wikipedia on a crusade. This was all so avoidable, if the individual had followed the Wikipedia recommendations and sent me a simple Talk message asking for more information. It seems very time and labor intensive to add a sentence and a reference, one at a time, and then wait for the community to approve or disapprove before adding a second. Its easier to just leave something as a stub and move on. Thanks for your time. 2600:8802:1700:3160:D841:7AF:2697:EB85 (talk) 02:10, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Eumesosoma roeweri draft declined

I was curious why my article was declined. I also wanted to add my own image, yet having a new account prevented me from doing that.

Thanks in advance. This is my first Wikipedia attempt. Leif Cash (talk) 01:45, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Leif Cash! It just needs like one or two reliable sources that talk about the species. It looks like talks a bit about it under the name Mesosoma roeweri. Species articles are a really good pick for first articles as they're pretty much all guaranteed to be accepted as "notable", which is usually the issue with other topics that people often first try drafting articles about. The criteria for a species being notable is... "it's a species". (With some asterisks, see WP:NSPECIES for the nitty gritty.)

Regardless, it's looking really good if this is really your first time editing Wikipedia! Hope the decline wasn't too discouraging (it's not meant to be!), and feel free to follow-up with any more questions. Perryprog (talk) 02:02, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

The decline was discouraging, especially being it's my first attempt, but your quick notes and communication is very relieving and reassuring. Appreciate you specifying what I can do to improve.

I'll do my best to find new sources and resubmit it, leaving a note when I do! Thanks Leif Cash (talk) 02:16, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Ah, I'm sorry then—I'll admit it's hard to avoid the intimidating aspect of the giant "red box of doom" filled with eighty million links that you're all (seemingly) expected to read. You were really 80% or 90% there. Also keep in mind that in terms of "first things to do on Wikipedia", writing an article is far and away one of the hardest. If there's one bit of advice though it's that there is literally no pressure on you here. No deadline, no obligation. Just do what you enjoy. :) Perryprog (talk) 02:21, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm just happy about the opportunity to contribute more to the bug and science community. Taking up the reins because no one has yet written about any one species in the Genus.

I guess I did just bite the bullet and make a vast attempt to take on an article with 0 Wikipedia experience, haha. Should've assumed there'd be some flaws.

Again, appreciate your support!

Leif Cash (talk) 02:26, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

References

Update on John Ross draft citation added

Thanks for the review, Perryprog. Ross is explicitly named on page 63 of SL-06: Adam’s Light Brigade Netherlands 1813–15 and Waterloo (Summerfield & Law, 2020) as commanding two companies of the III Battalion, 95th Rifles at Waterloo. Also in Charles Dalton's The Waterloo Rollcall on page 204. It’s brief, but confirms his battlefield role in a historically significant engagement. If a redirect or merge into a broader article would be more appropriate given the current sourcing, I’m happy to adjust accordingly. Let me know what you think. Tanush Sharma (talk) 03:49, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Tanush Sharma, thanks for clarifying! If there aren't further sources that discuss him in-depth, then yeah, just including this in an existing article might be best. I will say I know next to nothing about anything military history related, so I'll leave it up to you where best to include it. Thanks for understanding! Perryprog (talk) 15:27, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Some questions on creating a CSD log.

Hello if you don’t mind I would like to ask a couple of questions about creating one as I saw your one while looking through AFC requests. Fist I wanted to ask these logs can include just nominations right? Secondly,I wanted to ask how you managed to find the deleted revision section to find your past ones? I haven’t been able to find that. GothicGolem29 (talk) 12:01, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi GothicGolem29—I don't mind at all! For a log of CSD nominations you can create it by going to Wikipedia:Twinkle/Preferences § speedy and checking "Keep a log in userspace of all CSD nominations". If by "just nominations" you mean just anything you tag with Twinkle (regardless of if it ends up getting actually deleted), then yes that's what this does. You might also be interested in the other logs that Twinkle can keep. ("Keep a log in userspace of all pages you tag for PROD" and "Keep a log in userspace of all pages you nominate for a deletion discussion (XfD)" being the relevant settings.)

To get a retroactive list of things I nominated for CSD I had to cheat a bit—I reached out to a (technically inclined) admin to run an API call that got me my deleted contributions' edit summaries which I then formatted into a list in the style of Twinkle's log. I'm not sure that there's a good place to ask for help doing that, though. Maybe WP:VP/T. Perryprog (talk) 13:11, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer I really appreciate it! That is really helpful Another question if you don't mind is how do you csd with twinkle? I have Twinkle but I have not seen a button for it so I do it manually usually.

Ah ok fair enough. Thanks appreciate the suggestion of where to ask. GothicGolem29 (talk) 03:15, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

GothicGolem29, if you're using the default skin (Vector-2022) it's labeled "CSD" in the "TW" dropdown menu at the top right of the page. Perryprog (talk) 16:44, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks I found it. GothicGolem29 (talk) 13:06, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

the dhawahir al nahyan conflict page

both of the sources i have put contain the conflict in detail, i dont know why u cant find any related to the conflict in the second source even tho its there, and the first book is old i just put the new years version the book is older then 2025, please get back to me

B39sna (talk) 13:44, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

B39sna, super possible that I just totally missed it—it's hard to put in the time to give an in-depth look through every source, and it's easy to miss stuff especially when it's an area that one might not be otherwise familiar with (which is true in this case). I'll see if I can take another peek sometime today. Regarding the first book, that's weird—I was having a lot of trouble finding many mentions of it online, but I'll give another look around. It's not inherently an issue if a source isn't easy to access, or only has physical copies, though—it just tends to mean it'll take a bit longer to review. Perryprog (talk) 16:49, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Oh this is hilarious—I was again looking for Children of the Seven Sands (which does seem to be only just published in 2025, unless I'm missing something?) and just realized that its author is literally a Wikipedian! Hi Alexandermcnabb! Could you offer any insight into what your book covers regarding this draft?

B39sna, you were right, I had (surprisingly) missed the portion of Heard-Bey (1982) that discussed this conflict, however I have two concerns. The first, and more important issue, is that I feel like your use of its text constitutes close paraphrasing, so I've removed that portion. Please read this section on how to avoid doing so in the future. Secondly, I am still not sure that one page of coverage about this conflict is enough for significant coverage to be met, but hopefully Alexandermcnabb can offer some insight there since he's much, much, much, much more familiar with this area than I am. :P Perryprog (talk) 17:55, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Wow! Hi and thanks, @Perryprog for the ping. COTSS is available from all good UAE booksellers and Amazon.com et al if you fancy making my publisher even richer!! And, yes, I'd concur that this 'conflict' (in the sweep of history more of a 'spat'!) doesn't really stand up an independent article. The Dhawahir were generally loyal to Zayed (in 1848 he'd used them as part of a confederation to beat up the Saudi agent and throw him out of Buraimi), but they had a falling out in 1887-91 and Zayed brought them back 'onside' - he created a great tribal confederation and was generally a man not to be trifled with - if you elevated the Dhawahir incident to 'a conflict' you'd have to create an awful lot of articles about Zayed and they'd all be two-line stubs! Frauke Heard-Bey's 'From Trucial States' still stands as the most influential book on the UAE's recent history, FWIW.

From COTSS: "There was little peace in the interior, however. The alliance between Dubai and Abu Dhabi bolstered Zayed’s ambitions in Buraimi and he expanded his influence in the oasis, buying up date groves and water rights, eventually alienating his long-standing allies, the Dhawahir. Although the Dhawahir had previously sold land to Zayed, they eventually realised that bit by bit the pattern of land ownership had changed and they had effectively ceded control of the oasis. They rebelled. Having been prevented from acting by an intercession by Dubai in 1875, Zayed laid his plans and effected a reconciliation with the Na’im, long a thorn in the side of the Bani Yas. Bolstered by his new alliance, Zayed marched against the oasis in May 1887. The Sultan of Muscat supported the Dhawahir, sending them money and ammunition, but his aid arrived too late. Zayed claimed a fast and decisive victory of arms and took the two Dhawahir Sheikhs hostage against the tribe’s future good behaviour. They can’t have been much use as hostages, because Zayed marched against the Dhawahir once again in 1891, this time with the support of thirty horsemen and 300 camel riders from Dubai. Zayed took the main Dhawahir settlement, ‘Ain Dhawahir and built a fort there to ensure his dominance over the oasis. Appointing a Dhawahir Wali, Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Hilal Al Dhahiri, over the oasis, Zayed brought the Na’im fully onside by marrying the daughter of the Nuaimi headman of Buraimi. By now, Zayed not only dominated the oases of Buraimi and Ain Dhawahir, he also commanded the loyalty of the powerful Bani Ka’ab and Bani Qitab, who dominated the area to the north of Buraimi and who had been generally considered to be dependents of Sharjah. Saqr bin Khalid Al Qasimi saw Sharjah’s influence diminished – and not for the first time – at the hands of Zayed bin Khalifa. Ain Dhawahir is known today simply as Al Ain, the inland oasis city of Abu Dhabi."

This is already covered in the Zayed bin Khalifa article, BTW. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 05:41, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Hey alexandermcnabb, i could edit it into like a "rebellion" instead of a "conflict", by the way i actually am from the Dhawahir, my friend is also from the Naim, this sort of "conflict" or rebellion was seen more of as some war according to our elders, i was surprised to find sources so i decided to make a page because not much of uae's history gets covered and its best to preserve it as much as possible for the future generations. B39sna (talk) 06:50, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Yea the dhawahir were loyal but that was more of after the whole "war", ive also read some other books where Sheikh Shakhboot said "dawlatul dhawahir" which means state of the dhawahir, dont really know where to find much more im just trying to cover things as much as possible. B39sna (talk) 06:51, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Honestly I believe that it deserves a article or some sort of "battle page" so I made one, the Naim were also loyalists to the dhawahir at the time during the conflict maybe some omani forces as well from what I hear from elders B39sna (talk) 06:59, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

The info's already in Zayed's page, though. I honestly don't think it's worth a whole article. There's also a page for Dhawahir - which you could always add to whenever you can spirit up the sourced info - the issue is, as always, that you need published sources and can't use verbal tradition from the tribe/family. And I guess the Al Ain page could also use some more attention! Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:25, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Alexandermcnabb and B39sna—thanks for both of your replies! With the added context from COTSS I do agree that this isn't suitable for a standalone article, but it's definitely worth covering, either by expanding its mention in Zayed's page. B39sna, keep in mind that we can create a redirect from a title such as "Dhawahir–Al Nahyan Conflict" to go to the relevant section of whatever page ends up having the most relevant info regarding that topic. (Most likely Zayed's article.) Again, I do think that we should be covering as much of this history as appears in published, reliable sources—it's just a question of whether this information is in its own article or an existing one. We aren't trying to dismiss your work. Perryprog (talk) 14:50, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

by the way u accidentally deleted large portions of the page on my article B39sna (talk) 16:32, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

I removed it intentionally—I explained why in the second paragraph of my reply here. You're welcome to add it back if you state the facts of what happened in your own words, rather than relying on the source's original sentence structures and, in some parts, tone. Perryprog (talk) 16:35, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

There would you mind please checking everything now, i think my page is fully valid at this point. B39sna (talk) 18:17, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

If you were to view the current situation of the emirates as Emaratis do you would honestly want to create whole pages too, not many know any sort of history of themselves anymore especially my generation and I really want to make it easily accessible for all, its not really something small either, the Dhawahir during those periods were also with and both against Nai'm from what I read in a book, 2000 Nuaimi loyalists stayed in Al ain while 400 went and reached Ajman at some point, part of the reason why they are a royal family now. B39sna (talk) 16:25, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

(Well, I was trying to find it in a US library so I could at least try to get it through an inter-library loan, but that excerpt works too!) Perryprog (talk) 14:51, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

I could republish it and add more things to the page if u think it isnt rlly worth a entire article. B39sna (talk) 16:28, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

He replied back to you by the way feel free to read whenever. B39sna (talk) 06:52, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Pradabagshawty declined.

Hey Perryprog hope you are doing well, I see that you have declined my submission for Pradabagshawty, I was just wondering why you may have came to the decision to deny it, hope to hear from you soon, Goodbye 2600:1700:27B0:1BF0:1A23:F0EA:7F01:AA6A (talk) 05:24, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi—I'm good; I hope you are too! I declined it because currently you don't have any reliable sources supporting any of the claims made, which is essential when writing about a living person. The sources you choose will also need to demonstrate that this person meets the criteria needed to have an article about them—these are listed at Wikipedia:Notability (people), but there's a simpler stating of the rule at WP:42 to get you started. Note that if such sources don't exist, then this person is likely not suitable for a page on Wikipedia at this point in time.

That all being said, though, I'm concerned that you created the current draft using an LLM (like a chat bot) such as ChatGPT—if this was the case, please do not do this. They will not create articles suitable for Wikipedia.

I hope this helps—let me know if you have any questions. Perryprog (talk) 14:36, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Guide to temporary accounts

Hello, Perryprog. 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)

Email

Hi Perryprog , I've emailed you, apropos that RX request you were kind enough to fulfil. Yes, it is a begging letter  :) —Fortuna, imperatrix 16:28, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

Pfft; excuses to go searching for things in my library's stacks are always welcome. Perryprog (talk) 17:16, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

Fortuna imperatrix mundi, I did send you a reply asking for some clarification by the way, if you're still looking for those details. Perryprog (talk) 16:01, 21 November 2025 (UTC)