User talk:Goldsztajn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Likud on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:32, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft:2022 Italian general election in Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol[edit]

could you check it? Braganza (talk) 21:46, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Braganza, yes, please give me 24 hours. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 12:25, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
uhm.... Braganza (talk) 05:31, 30 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
i dont wanna hurry you but the election was a week ago Braganza (talk) 20:21, 1 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @Braganza sorry for the delay. I did look at it early on the 26th and there was no results content at that time, and unfortunately I did not get a chance to get back to it, but it's approved now. Thanks for your patience and regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 10:59, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question from Bharathik466 (15:51, 28 September 2022)[edit]

Hello 👋 I wanna know about adding photographs? --Bharathik466 (talk) 15:51, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Bharathik466 thanks for your interest in Wikipedia. Adding photographs to Wikipedia can be quite a complicated issue. The best way to start is can you tell what photographs you want to add? In almost all cases, adding photos to Wikipedia requires that there are no copyright restrictions on the photographs. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 11:02, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Signpost: 30 September 2022[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question from EditorAbhishek1 (17:22, 5 October 2022)[edit]

hello sir what when someone continuously edit wrong edit repeatedly --EditorAbhishek1 (talk) 17:22, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @EditorAbhishek1 - there are different things to do and a lot depends on what is happening exactly. Is it clear that the problem is not a content dispute? If it is a content dispute, the best thing is to try to discuss on the article talk page, if that doesn't work you can ask for a third opinion. However, if this is something happening across many articles, then leaving a message on the editor's talk page is the first thing to do. If there's no response, you could ask for help at the help desk - indicate what precisely is the problem (which articles, which edits). If it is certain the editor is being disruptive, you can report an editor, but in this case it needs to be very clear the problem is not edit warring over content. More information about dispute resolution is available here. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 20:34, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pankaj Vohra[edit]

Hi, please mention on the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sunday_Guardian page that the Managing Editor of The Sunday Guardian is Mr. Pankaj Vohra. You can check the website of itv Networks which clearly mentions that https://www.itvnetwork.com/about-team Thank you (talk) 08:45, 15 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@50FN1 You should discuss this request on the talk page of the article. Given you tried to make this edit a few hours earlier and it was reverted, make sure you include a reliable source. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 10:18, 15 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Let me correct you it was not "few hours", it was "few days ago" and you reverted it without even doing some research. As I have attached many time before, the link of the website of itv Networks, the company which owns The Sunday Guardian Newspaper, which of course you never even cared to open. The reason I updated the name of Mr. Pankaj Vohra as the managing editor of the Sunday Guardian because in the Wikipedia's newspaper page column there is an option for Managing Editor (maneditor). Hope this time you open the link which is the "reliable source"
https://www.itvnetwork.com/about-team (talk) 14:00, 17 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@50FN1: You're correct; my mistake with regard to the time difference. On 9 October 2022 at 05:38:25 (UTC) and 05:39:00 (UTC) you made two edits to the Sunday Guardian page adding unsourced material. This was reverted an hour later at 06:38:00 (UTC) by Tulsi, not me. Six days later you requested I remake your edit that was reverted. However, my mistake in identifying the time frame (a few hours versus some days) doesn't change that the best way to have addressed this issue was to do it via the article's talk page in conversation with the editor who made the reversion. This is what I did with you, when you reverted my edits on Ranjit Singh Chautala. This way of working is known as bold, revert, disucss - I encourage you to read that link. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 22:18, 17 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nobody is replying on the talk page of Draft Pankaj Vohra
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Pankaj_Vohra (talk) 01:41, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you use the {{ping}} template on the Talk:The Sunday Guardian page in the following format: {{ping|Tulsi}}, you can send a notification to the editor who reverted your edit and they will hoepfully respond to you there. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 10:06, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New Page Patrol newsletter October 2022[edit]

Hello Goldsztajn,

New page reviewer of the year cup.svg

Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to MPGuy2824), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to John B123 for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also.

Software news: Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved.

NPP backlog May – October 15, 2022

Suggestions:

  • There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
  • Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
  • Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
  • This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.

Backlog:

Everlasting Fireworks looped.gif

Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!

Reminders
  • Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
  • If you're interested in instant messaging and chat rooms, please join us on the New Page Patrol Discord, where you can ask for help and live chat with other patrollers.
  • Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
  • If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
  • To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:World War II reparations on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 21 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Early end of the backlog drive[edit]

A few days ago, new page patrollers got the backlog to zero. Due to the unprecedented success of the backlog drive, it will be ending early—at the end of 24 October, or in approximately two hours.

Barnstars will be awarded as soon as the coords can tally the results. Streak awards will be allocated based on the first three weeks of the drive, with the last three days being counted as part of week three.

Great work everyone! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:50, 24 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question from Nickh85 (00:14, 25 October 2022)[edit]

I’m looking to create a page for a business that’s almost historical but is still currently running strong. My grandfather started the business with a partner and feel it would be appropriate to create a page --Nickh85 (talk) 00:14, 25 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Nickh85 - welcome to Wikipedia. On the face of it, what you describe is a conflict of interest; in general, it's best not to edit areas of Wikipedia where one has a connection. Nevertheless, you can request articles. I'd also suggest looking for further help at the WP:TEAHOUSE. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 09:57, 28 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NPP Backlog Drive Award[edit]

Invisible Barnstar.png The Invisible Barnstar
This award is given to Goldsztajn for collecting more than 5 points doing reviews and re-reviews, in the October NPP backlog reduction drive. Thank you for your contributions. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 08:42, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question from VintageElectronics (19:46, 30 October 2022)[edit]

Hi, Just starting out here with the intention of creating a brief page on a local company (defunct). It was a significant company but left almost no footprint, digital or otherwise. I worked there for many years and wanted to do this while the people involved are still around. Information from just one of the three founders is still available. That doesn't constitute a published source, of which there are only a handful; can I use that in addition to whatever else I can dig up? Thanks! --VintageElectronics (talk) 19:46, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @VintageElectronics - welcome to Wikipedia. The main issue is whether you can show reliable sources which satisfy the general notability guidelines. It's possible that newspapers.com could be of assistance for you. Oral statements are generally not considered reliable sources. That said, every article is unique. I would suggest using the drafting tool and requesting an editor to review your draft (feel free to ask me). Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 20:00, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! I think I've found enough newspaper articles and write-ups in trade journals to make this work. I'll give the draft a try. VintageElectronics (talk) 20:16, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi,
I've submitted a draft, Burleigh Instruments, if you'd like to take a look. Hopefully that's enough to find it. Even though I worked there for many years I tried to include only what could be verified. In spite of that, you may spot something I didn't. Or, the page just might not be notable.
Thanks VintageElectronics (talk) 14:07, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, Well, page was rejected and I'm thinking there's little more I can do. The company was in business for three decades, was a world leader in its field, had a handful of patents, employed 150 people at its peak and advertised in well known journals. It sold for $275 million dollars. In spite of all that, there is almost nothing about the company proper published by any third party that's still accessible, basically two newspaper articles. Please let me know if you think there's any hope. My current plan is to abandon the page and do my own independent history, but I'll still give it another go if you think there's a way forward. Thanks! VintageElectronics (talk) 00:00, 5 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @VintageElectronics I have had a look at the draft, I think the reviewer was probably correct in rejecting it on the basis that some of the statements were unreferenced or sourced to materials not considered reliable. That said, the two sources "Democrat and Chronicle" and "Rochester Business Journal" appear at first glance to be independent reliable sources with SIGCOV of Burleigh (the others are not). I think if you shorten the article and simply focus on information that appears in the those two sources it would have a better chance of being accepted. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 11:22, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! One more question- the company address and list of representatives only appear in company advertisements in magazines I linked. Would those be considered reliable? There certainly wouldn't be any other source of that info. It was already suggested that the page was too brief, but I can certainly shorten it. VintageElectronics (talk) 13:23, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @VintageElectronics Different editors have different views on what should be an ideal length of an article; however, this will always be informed by the source material available. So, in this case, it is most likely going to be shorter. The main point is to focus on material that can be supported with reliable sources. In the case of the company founders, if this can only be sourced from, for example, a filing, that is acceptable as a piece of factual information (see WP:PRIMARY for more information about this type of sourcing). Advertisements would be less likely to be accepted in such a case. BTW, I also found this item from the Globe and Mail which can be used for the article. I think some of the material in the current draft is not encyclopedic (eg the sections on sales and patents simply indicate what all companies do, there is nothing inherently notable there). The draft also needs a lead (see MOS:LEAD) which is a summary of the article and should incorporate what is notable about the company. Hope all this helps, regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 21:16, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, Sorry for delayed response. Thanks for the link, I didn't find that one. Almost everything I said on the page was supported by the two news articles, but I probably erred because a certain amount of reading between the lines is needed. I'll try to get back to this over the next couple weeks. Best, VintageElectronics (talk) 21:26, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Signpost: 31 October 2022[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:42, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Promotion of Member states of the International Labour Organization[edit]

Cscr-featured.svg
Congratulations, Goldsztajn! The list you nominated, Member states of the International Labour Organization, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
yes i would like nominated, what i have to do Manisha123456 (talk) 15:13, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Manisha123456 I second the nomination and would be happy to support you. If you click on the link above "nominate this list" it will guide you. We can open a discussion on the talk page. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 20:03, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question from Manisha123456 on Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk (02:43, 2 November 2022)[edit]

Hi, i want to change my wiki draft title how can i change --Manisha123456 (talk) 02:43, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Manisha123456 - are you autoconfirmed? Go here to check: WP:AUTOCONFIRM. If so, you can change the title by moving the page. If not, you can ask someone (me, if you want) to move it, although they can refuse if they do not agree the move is appropriate. Are you talking about the draft you created: Draft:Membrane process? If so, a title change will not affect whether or not the article will be approved for mainspace. Please be cautious, it is important you do not give the impression that changing the title is an attempt to get around the review process which indicated your draft should be merged to an existing article. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 04:11, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
i am not autoconfirmed. yes i want to change draft title so my wikiarticle would be written great Manisha123456 (talk) 06:16, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @Manisha123456 - the reviewer indicated that the draft article should be merged, it's not clear why you want to change the title. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 07:05, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard[edit]

Please note that I have set up a section related to the Talk:World War II reparations dispute regarding the two sentences on the 1970 treaty talks and the 2004 declaration by the Council of Ministers on the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard. E-960 (talk) 14:46, 3 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Special Barnstar Hires.png The Special Barnstar
For spending an entire month selflessly helping me polish the brass. For being patient, kind, and teaching me. I appreciate the help you gave me and I am so proud of my first GA article. I wish I knew you in real life to shout you a beverage of your choosing. It would be my honour if I get to review another article with you in future. For sure, you have given me so many lessons that the next one should be much better to start with than the first. Thanks again. MaxnaCarta (talk) 08:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you @MaxnaCarta: for the barnstar and the very kind words. I don't actually think it's a little thing; I do really appreciate when editors reach out. As for imbiding a beverage...by heritage I drink Zubrowka, by land of birth the amber nectar and by marriage a preference for Barbaresco. I have much experience with the antipodes, a drink there is always pleasureable ... some day! Kind regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 22:40, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

TFL notification[edit]

Hi, Goldsztajn. I'm just posting to let you know that Member states of the International Labour Organization – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for December 5. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 02:34, 14 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question from Thortain (23:00, 20 November 2022)[edit]

Hey! there seems to be an error on the Nothing page.

He is not arguing that "nothing" cannot exist, but the opposite. There is nothing that cannot exist. The language is unclear.

"He argued that "nothing" cannot exist by the following line of reasoning: To speak of a thing, one has to speak of a thing that exists. Since we can speak of a thing in the past, this thing must still exist (in some sense) now, and from this he concludes that there is no such thing as change. As a corollary, there can be no such things as coming-into-being, passing-out-of-being, or not-being.[2]" --Thortain (talk) 23:00, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Thortain -welcome to Wikipedia. The best place to raise this question is on the talk page of the article. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 09:03, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Goldsztajn&oldid=1123713260"