Wikipedia talk:Noticeboards

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Noticeboards page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

I respectfully ask my fellow editors to review a dispute with another editor about the Tom Hamilton(broadcaster) page and the definition of “signature calls”. I thank you and I await your questions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smokiewight (talk • contribs) 22:04, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Project directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 14:05, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 19:04, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noticeboard guidelines

Is there any guideline about noticeboard etiquette? I notice that a couple of noticeboards say abut informing other editors if they are mentioned. However the content noticeboards don't seem to mention about putting a note onto an article page if the article is brought to the attention of noticeboard, plus that any projects which might be related if the problem isn't purely local. If things are brought to a noticeboard without informing on the article talk page it can easily amount to lobbying and getting a mob to descend on the article who haven't seen both sides of the argument. Dmcq (talk) 17:16, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This info page could use a bit of beefing up like that, especially for newbies. Noobies often see postings on even the most innocuous boards as a "threat" or "complaint" when one is just trying to impress on them the seriousness of an issue they don't get. And others are afraid to post a question on policy that really does seem to be confusing to all editors, because they don't want to be seen as "taking someone to a noticeboard." So it needs tweaking to make them more useful. Plus more advertising info page exists. Another thing for my list!! Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 17:00, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Things for Returning

I need help with sum about some one returning to Total Divas for da first half of season 4. And I already things. Valleryking (talk) 05:34, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're barely making any sense. Are you saying you need help finding the correct noticeboard for a certain issue? — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 10:38, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Noticeboards - topic for November 2 Tip-Of-The-Day

Greetings! On November 2, the Tip-Of-The-Day is about Noticeboards. The tip is Report problems on noticeboards and includes a list of Wikipedia noticeboards.

This November 2 tip was recently added at the TOTD Schedule Queue and is also posted at the Tips library. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 21:54, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Help

I was wondering adding plot for a summaries. Does it have to long or short? Or it can be written how it is? A different user is giving me a hard time.--Funnycoolman (talk) 23:50, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Editor modifying closed discussion, when clearly states not to.

On this talk page on the second closed discussion - http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film#Billion_vs_1.2C000_million - an editor is making a comment in a clearly closed discussion.

I have had to revert it three times, and clearly stated modifying a closed discussion is not allowed. But the editor keeps insisting they are responding to the question. Having replied that I understood and for them to reply elsewhere, or on the person's talk page they wish to respond to, they instead give a personal attack to me which you will see in the edit history of page. Then on my talk page say I am not being helpful, which is untrue, as I am simply following what it states and deleting the new comment in a closed thread, which is not allowed to be modified.

Charlr6 (talk) 00:28, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:COMMONSENSE: "Wikipedia has many policies or what many consider "rules". Instead of following every rule, it is acceptable to use common sense as you go about editing. Being too wrapped up in rules can cause loss of perspective, so there are times when it is better to ignore a rule." See FORUMSHOPPING too, for opening two threads on the same topic in different forums. –SchroCat (talk) 00:54, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Using rules to hide behind, and then breaking others when convenient for you is not a good thing to do. 3RR edit warring states to go onto "appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution". I did both, as you seem like somebody highly difficult to deal with. Surely it is also common sense not to forum shop yourself, when you've posted this response in three places now. Charlr6 (talk) 09:53, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

? You're accusing me of forum shopping for having to answer you in three places? That's just plumb ridiculous, I'm afraid. I am not difficult to deal with, just don't delete my comments in a talk page thread when I'm answering a question that's been asked directly to me. – SchroCat (talk) 11:14, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I never asked you or you never needed to respond to me here. But once again, you commented in a closed thread where it explicitly says not to modify. If you wanted to answer the question you should have before it was closed and your final response being one non-helpful word. Also, for another record you still deleted my comment I made on that closed discussion before it was closed and then when I re-added you deleted again. Surely it must seem we are as bad as each other possibly then? Although I know I don't have anger issues and wouldn't tell an editor to "fuck off" in a edit comment. Charlr6 (talk) 12:17, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what issues you do or do not have, but trying to have a piecemeal conversation with you on the same topic over three threads is as pointless and time wasting as trying to show you the COMMONSENSE idea. I'm off as I really don't want to waste any more time on this or you any further, but if you remove my talk page comments again. I'll revert and drop you into ANI. – SchroCat (talk) 12:23, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

a threat for such a simple website. Perhaps it is recommended to not modify closed discussions and response elsewhere or on talk page. There would not have been any hassle then. Charlr6 (talk) 12:29, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting my research in the page Gowda Saraswat Brahmin page

Hi , I has spent 2 months on gathering research content to the page Gowda Saraswath Brahmin but sitush reverted it with one shot without discussing with me.I have clearly Said to him about no void of rule,still it has not been reverted nor allowed me to revert.Please do watch the citation and information and give me semi protection if possible.While doing PhD also I didn't spent this much time,instead of having all content with rightly cited as per rules sitush is targeting me isn't this void of behaviour in international plateform like wiki ??Hope you will resolve this situation and appreciate one researcher to edit some more page of wiki. Thanks and regards, Dr.Narasimha Prabhu (talk) 04:53, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dr.Narasimha Prabhu (talk) 04:53, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Saint/St/St./James/James'/James's...... - Standards for church names

Is there please a standard on church names for article titles? See Talk:Basilica of St. James, Levoča, which lists at least seven ways of dealing with this which are currently used on WP. And that's not including the place name of the church location which is sometimes in brackets, sometimes not, sometimes preceded by a comma, sometimes not. If there is no standard, ought we not to create one?Smerus (talk) 12:36, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How to improve my text?

My text is not agreed by Wikipedia, is it possible for you to review it and correct it in order that fits for the website?

Thank you in advance, (unsigned comment by Special:Contributions/185.46.214.85)

Try explaining what changes you want to make at Talk:Ulysse Nardin. DexDor^(talk) 05:39, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy Page - Edit war warning

Hi. I have been trying to add content to UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy Page to make the content parallel other school of pharmacy pages. My edits, which were all cited to non-unc websites, were taken down and marked as "PROMO BOOSTER content" by Jytdog. In the history, it appears that other attempts to enhance the content of the cite were also taken down by Jytdog, perhaps with better justification, perhaps not. It is unclear how informing people of the divisions and centers of the school becomes promotion, when it is informing and substantiated by referenced links. I would like an additional opinion on the editing which is being performed. SithLordSparklePants (talk) 02:02, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Current events noticeboard

WP:CEN is now open!

To all interested parties: Now that it has a proper shortcut, the current events noticeboard has now officially opened for discussion!

WP:CEN came about as an idea I explored through a request for comment that closed last March. Recent research has re-opened the debate on Wikipedia's role in a changing faster-paced internet. Questions of WP:NOTNEWS and WP:Recentism are still floating around. That being said, there are still plenty of articles to write and hopefully this noticeboard can positively contribute to that critical process.

Thank you for your participation in the RFC, and I hope to see you at WP:CEN soon! –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 19:06, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for notices on relevant articles

I've started a discussion at WP:VPR#Discussions about articles on Noticeboards should leave a note on the relevant talk page about having guidance to put a notice on an articles talk page if it is the subject of a discussion on a noticeboard. Dmcq (talk) 13:33, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Underage

I want to report Jack Upland (talk · contribs) for being underage. He stated that he was born in 1998. I am very skeptical about his info about himself because I don't think he was born in 1998. This could be a COOPA violation. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 13:49, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request for closure

Could this discussion please be closed, it was wrongly posted anonymously because I had an error logging in and did not notice. Thanks in advance. Discussion: https://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Talk:AC_Nagano_Parceiro#What_is_the_flower_on_the_team's_logo%3F Yaya24YoungForever (talk) 07:21, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I've found the right way to contact a moderator and the situation has been resolved (information was suppressed). I apologise for my misuse of this discussion page and misunderstanding of discussion closures. Yaya24YoungForever (talk) 16:53, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Album Bestsellers by year (US) in 1991

I recently made changes to the “List of bestselling albums by year in the United States” page and I’m currently at an edit war. One person claims that Garth Brooks had the bestselling album of the year from Nielsen-counted sales. However Nielsen had only been introduced midyear and it does not take into account the sales for the first five months of 1991. Carey’s album had the bestseller for that year including pre SoundScan sales, I’ve provide multiple sources that list her as so such as Business Insider. Unfortunately, I couldn’t find those pre SoundScan sales to come up with an aggregate so I listed the sales column as NA. The other person seems to believe that MRC Data is the definitive factor in determine the bestseller for that year, but I disregards almost half a year’s worth of sales. The page even says that Nielsen should only be taken in account for albums from 1992 and onward. What should I do in the mean time? Ironman1p (talk) 15:57, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request to ban this User

Wikipedia User Khurramrajput.rs completely vandalized article Li Xiting. He even inserted a picture (probably of himself) in the infobox. This is insane, please ban him immediately. Thank you.

Evidence: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Special:Contributions/Khurramrajput.rs

2001:8003:9008:1301:991B:72F0:BBD7:2F40 (talk) 12:04, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Plz look forward to the page Lata Mangeshkar where the guy named Varoon2452 has been involved in continuous edit warring for more than a week. He continues reverting even though the cited sources do not verify any of his claim. I left a message on his talk page but got no reply. I partially agreed with some of his points, but it seems he wants his own narrative to be published and read by the millions of people who visit Wikipedia. Plz look to his talk page. http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User_talk:Varoon2542 Despite warnings by other users, he continues doing so. Its sad. I request to plz block the guy. Arorapriyansh333 (talk) 08:24, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Does this fall under sockpuppetry?

I used to have an autoconfirmed account of which I made several edits. I forgot the username and password to said account, with the computer it has been logged into broken, so I cannot access it to add any appropriate tags to show a connection. Is this case safe under WP:COMPSOCK? Edit: I was dumb and forgot that I'm logged in as that acc here but idk how to delete this. 2abc3 (talk) 00:22, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]