Jump to content

User talk:UtherSRG

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Email this user
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from User talk:Utherbot)


zOMG

[edit]
zOMG
I, Hojimachong, hereby award UtherSRG A completely gratuitous zOMG barnstar, for being 110% awesome. Plus 1. --Hojimachongtalk

WikiProject Mammals Notice Board

[edit]

Happy holidays!

[edit]


— mw (talk) (contribs) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Reverted edits Eocene mammals: WHY?

[edit]

Hello UtherSRG, you reverted my category edits without giving a reason. Please let me know why. ExoticExclet (talk) 14:40, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I provided the reason on your talk page when I did the reverts. Please understand what you did wrong and correct your behavior. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:35, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article ready for main space?

[edit]

I believe the article is ready for the main space now. I have added many new sources, new content and other details. I'd like next add a non-free image for the infobox, but I cannot do that by rule until the article is in the main space. I believe normally I would just push an article to the main space if I felt it was ready, but in this case since it was in draft and was previously deleted, I wanted to check first before I accidentally do something that annoys somebody by inadvertently violating some policy or guideline. Iljhgtn (talk) 20:59, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Iljhgtn: Best move would be to submit it for review. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:16, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I don't think I have ever done that, or if so, it has been a very long time... Normally I just ensure that the articles I write (for the most part) are sufficiently sourced and notable and push them to the main space myself. Let me go look for the link now on how to submit a draft for review.. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:19, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I was just about to submit the tag at the top of the article when I noticed you did so for me, so then all I needed to do was hit submit. Your help is appreciated. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:22, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Now I remember why I normally just go directly to the main space (as long as the article is very well sourced, the backlog seems to only be growing there)... "This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order." Interesting that, "...drafts are reviewed in no specific order..." I would have though that they would have been reviewed in the order they were submitted. I wonder why that is not the case? Iljhgtn (talk) 21:24, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I meant to put it there when I restored it as a draft. Anything that's been restored from a "hard delete" at AFD must go through review before going back into article space. Restored "soft deletes" and PRODs should as well, but it isn't a must. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:26, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:28, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I was also interested in Where's George dollar tracking back in the very early 2000s. I don't think I've seen one in quite some time now though. Years even.. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:30, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ha! I just Georged some bills this morning. :) - UtherSRG (talk) 21:31, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was today day's old when I learned that "Georged" is a verb! Iljhgtn (talk) 21:35, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I enjoy verbing nouns and nouning verbs. :) - UtherSRG (talk) 21:49, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A toast sandwich for you!

[edit]
Well maybe you will also enjoy a Toast sandwich. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:51, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delicious! - UtherSRG (talk) 21:55, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question from "Pono Phiri" (17:26, 20 April 2025)

[edit]

Hello.. just want clarity on the program .. for whose resources we will be dealing with and exackly what i will be expected to contribute in my journey with this program --"Pono Phiri" (talk) 17:26, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what you are asking. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:30, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

revdel request

[edit]

Editors keep adding a name for the perpetrator to Barcelona school killing without a source. I have also looked for sources on my own and the name was left unreported because of their age. Its my understanding that attributing a name to the killer without a source is a revdel (RD2?) worthy blp violation.

By my count 6 different editors have added the name to the page, semi-protection would probably help alleviate future issues, but I can take that up with rfpp if you'd rather.

This is my first time requesting revdel outside of the copyvio space; so if there's other information you need from me, I've misunderstood policy, or if there's something I can do better for the future please let me know, thank you! fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 12:51, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four:  Done UtherSRG (talk) 14:37, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @UtherSRG but it seems like the oldest range wasn't revdel'd
is this because its too wide a span or too old? fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 15:11, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've got it now. That's actually two ranges, unless I missed something more?- UtherSRG (talk) 15:16, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see some more, if you look at 12:04, 20 April 2020, you can see the last name as the first word of the middle lede paragraph, and the first word of the "Attack" section. I went diff by diff and confirmed that their name is in the article, in some form, all the way up until its removed in 18:40, 13 August 2024. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 15:28, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Roger that. Updated. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:32, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The change may not have populated for me yet, but I still am able to see versions with their name from 00:16, 3 April 2024, where it was re-reverted in by an ip, up to and including 00:10, 31 July 2024, before it is finally removed by AgentPlastic at 18:40, 13 August 2024. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 15:46, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Should be gone now. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:55, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question from JaipurEditorR (09:36, 22 April 2025)

[edit]

Hello Ixtal,

I am JaipurEditorR, a new editor on Wikipedia. I’m excited to start contributing and learning how to edit articles effectively.

As you have been assigned as my mentor, I wanted to introduce myself. I'm currently interested in learning how to add references, make small edits, and gradually take on more advanced editing tasks.

If you have any tips for beginners or if there are specific areas where I can start practicing, I would really appreciate your guidance.

Thank you for supporting new editors like me! 🙏

Looking forward to learning with your help.

— JaipurEditorR --JaipurEditorR (talk) 09:36, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alstonia scholaris

[edit]

Hi, you recently added several Excessive citations inline templates on the work I had done on this article. I believe this is an error, because

  • The template documentation says it is to be used if the citations "make the article unreadable or may lead to confusion about what exactly each citation is used in support of." The content I provided is perfectly readable and each paragraph is deliberately 'bite-size', so the citations do not cause any readability issues.
  • If one clicks on the phrase excessive citations which is produced by the template, it takes them to a help page which talks about putting all citations at the end of a passage for readability, exactly as I have done.
  • If you have ever read more than one botanical description of a plant, especially a plant that has a vast distribution and varying forms in the regions like this one, you will see that every one of them is slightly different. This is why I have cited, and always do cite, multiple descriptions.

If your issue with my work is something else, please clarify that in your reply, and kindly remove the templates. Cheers, Steve. Junglenut ☼ Talk 04:33, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Junglenut: My issue is that 5 citations are excessive for a single sentence, that multiple sentences each with 5 citations is excessive. Which is why, for each of the spots that you put 5 citations, I put the tag. I will restore the tags. Please pare down the citations such that only the citations needed to support the assertions are used. - UtherSRG (talk) 10:20, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@UtherSRG: I agree that 5 citations are, in most cases, excessive for a single sentence. But that's not the case here as none of the citations I've presented apply to a single sentence, instead they apply to the paragraph to which they are appended. To paraphrase what I have already said, a plant that has a vast range will undoubtedly have slightly different characteristics across that range. Even a plant that occupies a small area will be described differently by two different botanists because of their subjective dispositions, so if the article is based on one source, then it is inaccurate. I have used five sources and averaged their statements to produce my descriptions. If you care to look at those sources you will see the differences. I am not willing to remove any of them. Junglenut ☼ Talk 13:04, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you've averaged data from multiple sources, you've performed original research and that is even worse. Please only report what is in the references. Do not use that data to create your own data. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:20, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Papilio laglaizei

[edit]

Reworded as you suggest. Many thanks Notafly (talk) 19:32, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:UtherSRG&oldid=1287531774"