User talk:Chaotic Enby

Hi, it is regarding our discussion here. Should we remove this forumy part? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 21:11, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, go for it. Not really very constructive content. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:14, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thank you for answering those questions on my talk page! qcne (talk) 21:15, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just a happy little update, Kamala (elephant) is a GA now! Thank you for all you did, writing it and tracking down sources when it was new. This article wouldn't have come this far without your work on it!

Also, several months later, and I still feel like I'm on an adrenaline rush after managing to save it during the AfD. Is that normal? Who knows! GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 21:26, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing, congratulations! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:29, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! thanks so much for being a mentor editor.

I've been reading through various wiki pages and can't say that I've come across any direct quotes included in-text. However, I enjoy info that includes short quotes to 'hear' the subject's voice. Would it be acceptable to have a quote in a wiki page? Do you know of any example pages where direct quotes are included?

I am also curious about the use of publicly posted Circum Vitas, verified through a university, as a source for wiki page. These are obviously user-generated, however, they often contain important information that wouldn't be 'found' elsewhere, like job titles timelines.

Thank you. --Featheredphilosopher (talk) 23:51, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Featheredphilosopher! Regarding quotes, short quotes are usually fine, although not always necessary: Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Quotations goes into more detail. The gist of it is that too many quotes make the writing less encyclopedic and might constitute copyright infringement, so it is better to summarize in our own words, although short quotes can be great tools to attribute opinions or for illustrative purposes.

Regarding CVs and the like, while job title timelines can be useful, we have to keep in mind whether they are due context. Subjects can choose to emphasize aspects of their career that might not necessarily be of encyclopedic relevance, and adding every detail they choose to mention can easily fall into promotional writing. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:35, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Your script, User:Chaotic Enby/Unblock wizard.js, is currently categorized in Category:Pages with templates in the wrong namespace due to the nowiki tags not properly ignoring the content. In order to fix it, you could replace the starting "<" characters in the strings in the script (line 470 and 472) with \u003C (the unicode escape for said character).

Thanks! ~ Eejit43 (talk) 22:49, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, I was curious what was causing this error! I'll fix it right now! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:49, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Of course! I realize I didn't specify- it should only be needed for the closing nowiki tags inside the script. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 22:52, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hello I'm trying to set up my Wiki page I'm a multi-platinum music producer --360onDeck (talk) 21:56, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @360onDeck! A Wikipedia article isn't something you should create about yourself – think of them less as profile pages, and more as entries in an encyclopedia. If you are notable enough so that reliable independent sources have written about you, it is likely that someone will end up compiling these sources into a Wikipedia article. But this isn't your responsibility, and there are many reasons why you shouldn't do that yourself. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:07, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is it not allowed to write the native names in the indic scripts of modern day Famous Indian Celebrities, athletes or other personalities? Can you please give me few suggestions as to where I can write indic names in terms of country names or peoples' names whether it be modern day or at any other time. --Harian288 (talk) 18:48, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Harian288! While I'm not the most well-versed in the matter, our guideline on the matter discourages from using Indic scripts to write names, mostly because there can be many scripts competing for lead/infobox space. In terms of country names, it's usually okay for neighboring countries such as Nepal, Bangladesh or Pakistan, which all have only one or two official scripts. I would imagine that the same applies for historical states located outside of India proper, although I am unsure about edge cases like the Bengal Sultanate, with native scripts in the lead but not in the infobox. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:51, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay got it. Thank you Harian288 (talk) 01:50, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for all the work you're doing in the prototype for the unlock request wizard :) Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 19:04, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the idea! Still working on it, and happy to have had so many other users give me advice and feedback, I couldn't have done it all alone! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:42, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Please how can I create a citation to own a villa, a good car and cash for daily expenses? --Bangteh Amascel Gubui (talk) 02:06, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Bangteh Amascel Gubui! Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and by "citations" we mean links to sources where readers can verify our content. If you mean getting a financial quote, that is an entirely different thing and not what Wikipedia is for. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:28, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

185.113.210.246 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) have replaced the images on this page with AI generated ones. Could you do something about this? Trade (talk) 15:42, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like @Skjoldbro already took care of them. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:17, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I made an edit to the "Henry g Friesen page. Did I do it correctly? --Skillonly (talk) 03:28, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Skillonly! Usually, we really prefer edits to be sourced, especially regarding someone's death (as there have been many cases of claiming living people to be dead). However, if you are indeed a close relative and the death is going to be announced in a few days, it should be fine (assuming the rest of the family is okay with you announcing the death now), but you should really remember to link the obituary once it is published. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:59, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How I publish my grandfather's Biography on Wikipedia --Ptdhruvnarayan (talk) 04:34, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Ptdhruvnarayan! The first thing to know is that your grandfather might or might not be "notable", which in Wikipedia terms means that there are independent, reliable sources with enough content to write an encyclopedia article about him. Also, as you have a conflict of interest, it is better to not write the article directly, but work on a draft first, and submit it through Articles for creation. Look for independent sources, write only what can be verified in the sources (instead of writing what you know personally), and submit it for a reviewer to look at it. Good luck! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:37, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, how would you recommend getting a article published? I provided all factual information. --Nelsondacoolest (talk) 15:12, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Nelsondacoolest! @AllCatsAreGrey has declined your draft and provided an overview of what is needed for a successful re-submission. You will need sources that are reliable, independent and talk in-depth about the church. The first source is a blog about HVAC services, which doesn't look very reliable, while the other two are connected to the church itself (an interview and the church website). Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:16, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Nelsondacoolest, I am the reviewer who declined your article. I appreciate the effort you put into the article, but it does need some work before it can be accepted. If you need help, there is no shortage of resources so don't hesitate to reach out! – AllCatsAreGrey ^(talk) 23:18, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the reply, for the sources are books, interviews, historical accounts, etc; can they be used as sources? Nelsondacoolest (talk) 01:41, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Books and historical accounts can be if they are independent, interviews fall under WP:PRIMARY and are often not independent, so usually do not count for notability, although they can be used for matter-of-fact information. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:46, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How do I publish a draft that I translated into English from Spanish? Here is the draft:User:Nelsondacoolest/Fabio Reynaldo Colindres Abarca, but I'm confused how to get it approved or even published. Nelsondacoolest (talk) 11:58, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Translated drafts can also go through Wikipedia:Articles for creation! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 12:24, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, sorry to bother again, I am trying to submit it for creation yet it doesn't let me move it to Draft:Fabio Reynaldo Colindres Abarca, how can I move it? Nelsondacoolest (talk) 12:33, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! I was about to answer, but it looks like you got it! Good luck! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 12:34, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okay thank you then!! Nelsondacoolest (talk) 12:35, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering if I had added inline citations the correct way on my article about Fabio Reynaldo Colindres Abarca --Nelsondacoolest (talk) 17:27, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The syntax is correct, although many of the sources (YouTube, Blogspot, ...) are usually unreliable. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:35, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How can I try to get more reliable sources? I've looked everywhere I would guess that even though he is a Religious figure there hasn't been much written about him. I added what I could even the article in Spanish had less citations since I had translated it. But if you had any tips they would be greatly appreciated! Thanks! Nelsondacoolest (talk) 17:39, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I found a book by an independent author whom has sadly died, yet her book is filled with a multitude of information pertaining a certain topic. She had done extensive research on All Saints, as I am writing the article for it, I was wondering how I could site it? As I can't find any published information online. Many thanks. --Nelsondacoolest (talk) 00:59, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! You don't need information to be published online to cite it, you can use {{cite book}} and cite the book itself. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:21, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mopsea you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of ZKevinTheCat -- ZKevinTheCat (talk) 14:25, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for correcting that error with archiving my talk page in the main space, I really appreciate it. --Plumber (talk) 15:26, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hy are we allowed to copy sources as references --Sphiphilicious (talk) 08:09, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Sphiphilicious! While you are allowed to use sources (including sources you found on other articles), you can't copy the content of the source itself on an article you are writing, as that counts as a copyright violation. Hope that helps! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:02, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

こんにちは、今日はお元気ですか？メンターとは何ですか？ 良い成績が必要です (talk) 23:58, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Indian missile strikes on Pakistan. 85.131.184.138 (talk) 01:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it has already been fixed, thanks! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:59, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On 7 May 2025, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2025 India–Pakistan strikes, which you created and nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Schwede66 01:40, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:59, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source that Pope Leo XIV is the name he has taken? wound theology◈ 17:18, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Associated Press livestream (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odPghP1M7MU), but it seems to be widely reported. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nice job moving the page first Wkjekf (talk) 17:25, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work on 2025 India-Pakistan strikes. Have some cookies!

		Cookies!
		Horse.staple has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Horse.staple (talk) 17:40, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are a remarkable editor in many ways. I think you would be a good administrator, and you appear to be well qualified. You personify an administrator without tools and have gained my support already! Interested in becoming an administrator? Check out some RfA advice, or ask a nominator about next steps!

Thanks for your incredible and diligent work, well, everywhere! You deserve this, and a mop too. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:18, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded! (you should run in the next WP:AELECT elections whenever they happen if you have the time!) Sohom (talk) 20:09, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would support. – DreamRimmer ◆ 03:51, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

+1 I was just considering, if I should give this to you, Chaotic Enby! _saluere, Ɔþʱʏɾɪʊs^⚔ 04:22, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

+1 ToadetteEdit (7M articles) 10:00, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

+1--Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 10:02, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah!!!! Aaron Liu (talk) 13:50, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

+1 Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (they/them) 07:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

+1 per Aaron Liu Polygnotus (talk) 11:28, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

+1 You already know I'd support a run. My email remains open :). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:15, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discord DMs for me, but same! Sohom (talk) 16:18, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Little late seeing this but +1! Sophisticatedevening🍷^(talk) 17:58, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm Secton. What things should I edit for probably? --Starrysecton (talk) 00:25, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Starrysecton! If you want, you can look at Special:Homepage which gives you a few ideas of articles you can look at! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 00:41, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!!! I’ll take a look Starrysecton (talk) 00:57, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Mopsea you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mopsea for comments about the article, and Talk:Mopsea/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of ZKevinTheCat -- ZKevinTheCat (talk) 07:23, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you take a look at my first draft please? --ReclaimEC1 (talk) 12:03, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @ReclaimEC1! Your first draft is good, but relies too much on non-independent and primary sources. For instance, his own guild promoting him isn't necessarily encyclopedic, and we would like to see commentary by independent sources writing about him instead. Same for the database listing every association he is a member of: if independent, secondary sources haven't picked up on it, it is not necessarily due for a mention in the encyclopedia. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:29, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I've ever come across you before. I saw your comments at User talk:Wlaak. You were very helpful! Praise where praise is due, and you deserve it! :) --Hammersoft (talk) 13:24, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! There's also a bit of background context on Asilvering's talk page (where I helped a bit) regarding that specific discussion! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:28, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I saw your recent comments at the messy AfD and the village pump proposal for general sanctions. I'm one of the editors involved in the recent disputes on Assyrian (Chaldean/Syriac/Aramean) topics, and given the recent events, I want to work to resolve the dispute in a way that is non-POV and neutral from the content perspective. So far, I have a few ideas in mind as to how I want to go about this:

• Look at Draft:Aramean people and condense the references into a bibliography section, and then find content to merge into Arameans. I've already done the condensing to a certain degree and once I conclude, I hope to start glossing over both in order to determine the content that should be carried over.
• Finish my current Draft:Assyrian identity crisis, which aims to outline the history of the overall dispute so that future readers/editors/admins can understand why this is contentious to begin with.
• Edit bigger articles such as Assyrian people, Assyrian continuity, Terms for Syriac Christians, etc. to include the new information while simultaneously being non-POV and reliant on secondary, reliable sources

I also want to have peer reviews of the first two (Arameans and Assyrian identity crisis) so that they can be elevated to a status such as GA or FA; that way, I believe this would reduce edit-warring and allow for a consensus to be placed on the content by the community, but I've never done these processes so I don't know if that's how it works.

These are just some of the steps I have outlined, but please let me know what you think and if you have any thoughts. The recent disputes have also been a reflection of my own editing since joining Wikipedia and I hope to take away greater dispute resolution experience so I can continue to positively contribute to the encyclopedia and the topic area. Thank you and I hope to hear from you soon! Surayeproject3 (talk) 15:25, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Chaotic Enby the whole tban thing and draftifying is very confusing still. as recently pointed out at WP:XRV. what is now happening to Draft:Aramean people is the other party starting to edit it in order to incorporate the text into the current Arameans article and other places, basically fragmenting the article which would then lead to it never passing as a article due to being a WP:FORK.

Why is no sanctions placed on the other party, there were some people raising awareness of him gaming ANI and edit-warring as well and was also subject to tban? As seen above (in their talk message), their POV is even showing there when he stated "Assyrian" topics and then all the other in parenthesis; (Chaldean/Syriac/Aramean). His Draft:Assyrian identity crisis is POV by the name, asserting that the Arameans are in reality Assyrians with an identity crisis. Isn't this undermining of other ethnic identities? How is this allowed? It is now a targeted attempt to fragment Draft:Aramean people into other articles due to Asilvering drafing the article.

@Hammersoft Am I allowed to speak about things like this? Wlaak (talk) 17:27, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In short, no with respect to your comments regarding articles and drafts. With respect to the behavior of another editor; if you can do it without mentioning topics covered by the topic ban, then yes. I implemented the topic ban with respect to you because that was the proposal on the table, not a topic ban for anyone else. A number of editors expressed an interest in topic bans for others. I could not and would not apply topic bans to them from that discussion because the topic ban was explicitly set up to seek consensus on whether to apply a topic ban to you, not to anyone else. To interpret further topic bans from it than the one for you would have been out of line. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:54, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But I am sitting here completely silent and I am seeing how the draft is slowly falling into their control, when I say this I am referring to the question above titled "Question from Surayeproject3." Can there be no action to prevent them from ruining it? It was set to be decided at AfD, but they are now disregarding that and starting to plan on how to fragment it and place it in other places, that way a indirect AfD with closure "delete" will be happening since there will be no way for it to pass AfD once it gets brought up to question again (because all information is already available on wiki, just fragmented). Wlaak (talk) 18:27, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wlaak, what you've just said rather proves the necessity of the topic ban. You are not able to let go. Even now, you are not being completely silent about the topic. This continuance is a violation of the topic ban. Walk away. Turn your back. Go do something else. There is no 'winning' or 'losing' on Wikipedia. Some things don't work out the way we want. That's just how it is in a large, collaborative environment. Please, drop the stick and move on. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:41, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to group these two discussions together, as they are intricately related and it is hard to answer one without discussing the other at the same time.

Ideally, changes to the contentious aspects of the topic (incorporating elements of Draft:Aramean people in other articles, pretty much everything on Terms for Syriac Christians) should reflect the consensus of the community, which is not as obvious to assess as it might appear. @Surayeproject3, your goals of improving the articles in a more NPOV way are very commendable. However, as all of you might have seen, it is hardly something that one person can do without controversy (even if you work from historical sources, the weight you give to each and the understanding you have of them might not be the same as someone on "the other side" of the issue). Because of that, I believe that the best thing to do now is to not edit articles directly related to the controversy, as that would only add more fuel to the fire. Working on other topics can also teach you a lot about how consensus-building works on Wikipedia, and give you hindsight as to why diving head-first into a controversy is not advisable.

@Wlaak, I really understand your frustration. It may seem unjust to feel powerless while someone from "the other side" is editing a topic you care a lot about. However, you should also take this as a learning opportunity. Most likely, after you successfully appeal your topic ban in six months, the dispute won't have been resolved yet, and you will have more experience and know how to contribute constructively in the discussion. In the meantime, it is best to not think too much about the issue. I know that is easy to say, but focusing on other topics, and becoming more familiar with consensus-building discussions, will make for a much stronger case when you appeal your topic ban in six months.

You might notice that I gave both of you very similar advice, and that is not a coincidence. While you do come from opposite sides of the issue, it is clearly something that matters a lot to both of you, and that has been in the focus of your Wikipedia editing. Covering a topic which systemic bias would tend to miss is very much helpful, and I really hope you both stay here and become regular editors. However, being too laser-focused on a controversial topic at the very beginning means you might miss on learning a lot of baggage that is essential to navigate these tougher discussions, which is why I strongly invite both of you to work on other topics close to your heart. The dispute has been here for more than a decade – it can certainly wait six months. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:27, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good with me. I've been recommended by Hammersoft to follow the same path, so I'll mostly focus on other topic areas for now. Would it be a problem to edit articles in the topic area that are not contentious or part of the controversy (say for example, cuisine, or something related to the Syriac alphabet)? Surayeproject3 (talk) 20:40, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Surayeproject3! Yes, those edits would be fine. Technically, all articles in the topic can be made part of the controversy (for instance, by disputing the national origin of a dish – happens way more often than you'd think), but I trust you to have common sense and edit responsibly. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:53, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Chaotic Enby, I hope you've been doing well! In the week+ since the dispute has settled down a bit, I've taken up your advice and have worked on articles outside of the topic area (La CQ, for example) while also editing articles within the topic area that are not part of the controversy (ex. Roomrama). I aim to continue this route of article editing primarily, but I just had a quick question I wanted to pass by you.

I mentioned in my first reply that an intention of mine was to finish Draft:Assyrian identity crisis (which aims to explain why the dispute is so contentious in the first place) and eventually publish it with the intent of having it reviewed for GA or FA status. However, your advice was to not work on articles related to the controversy as that could fan its flames before greater experience in Wikipedia is accrued. Since the previous work I've completed is still in draftspace and not yet an article, would it be a problem for me to continue working on it and write it closer to completion? And once I do finish it, should I keep it in draftspace or am I OK to publish it and go ahead with the review? The waters surrounding it are kind of muddy given recent events and I want reassurance on whether it's recommended before I go ahead and do anything.

Let me know what you think, hoping to hear from you soon! Surayeproject3 (talk) 16:49, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Surayeproject3! Thanks a lot for the question, your current editing looks pretty fine.

Regarding your draft, it is fine to work on it in draftspace, and I encourage you to do so! However, it could be better to put off a move to mainspace until we can have a broader discussion on how to address the topic, as otherwise, we might see a similar situation as what happened with Draft:Aramean people.

Happy editing! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:02, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this, I agree with everything here. I just don't want to be back in 6 months just to see that the Draft is fragmented in other articles (as said above) and thus making it impossible getting the article to mainspace again due to it being a WP:FORK.

But for now, I will follow your advice and see other things I find interesting, might be autonomy. I know that I am on a topic-ban so I will step down from discussing this topic more to avoid getting worse sanctions upon me. Thank you for your help. Wlaak (talk) 20:45, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Wlaak, you're welcome. Have fun editing, I believe in you! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:55, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am slowly getting to grips with the styles and how to edit things any chance you can take a look through those i've done work on and ensure they are ok. improve coverage of overlooked but historically relevant civic bodies in the City of London. I acknowledge there may be tone issues, but these can easily be corrected through collaborative editing. I intend to expand documentation on other underrepresented Livery Companies and Common Councillors across Wikipedia. --ReclaimEC1 (talk) 20:25, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @ReclaimEC1! Looking at your last edits, I notice that some rely too much on primary/non-independent sources, which isn't necessarily helpful (especially for neutrality). For example, in this edit (with the summary Re-edited the entry to make it meet the Wiki criteria for notability and neutrality.), you added His leadership has been credited with modernising the Guild’s engagement with young professionals in the City. Following his election in 2025, the Guild acknowledged his civic service as a milestone for younger members rising through the City’s institutions., sourced to the Guild's own website. This isn't ideal, as the Guild is likely to publish material putting its own leader in a positive light. Draft:Financial Services Group of Livery Companies also heavily relies on sources from the Group's members, and would need more secondary and independent sources. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 01:08, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. So, could I just go to a page and edit it if I want to? --Avery Ando (talk) 17:23, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Avery Ando! Yes, you can – be bold! Although, if you want to be a bit more prepared, I've written a short guide to help new users with the basics of editing! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 01:09, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

The other day you rolled back some edits made by an IP to Rouba Mhaissen. Would you be willing to do so again? Another IP editor is going in and removing references and adding unreferenced statements. Since they made multiple edits, I thought a single revert would be easier than reverting all their individual edits. I'm going to go ahead and request protection for the page as well, so hopefully this doesn't continue to happen. Thanks for taking a look at this! ForsythiaJo (talk) 18:18, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like it has been dealt with already, thanks a lot! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 01:18, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there

You don’t know me but I was part of a wikiproject about the Aramean people draft. Thid whole month have been a rollercoaster and I’m not the most experienced guy out there so I need some guidance to what is happening next. I cane across you on Wlaak’s talkpage and you wrote very well answers may I add that’s why I am contacting you.

Since Wlaak now have received a tban I almost feel left alone in the draft. The draft was sent to review way before it was finished. Still it got accepted as a good draft and two seconds later nominated for deletion. The deletion discussion was all a mess and the article is now sent back as a draft, again. It would seem that those who write about Assyrian topics holds a grudge against Aramean related topics (based om my experience on wiki). Those who were against the Aramean draft in the discussion have all been accused of have an POV. My question is what is the next step? Should I continue to work on it and sent it to review if I feel it is now finished. And if I do so I am afraid the same process will take place which would make all of this a waste of time. Those who have an Assyrian POV will nominate the article for deletion and jump in the discussion with their [fragile] arguments.

Sorry for the long text but as you notice I’m as confused as Trump is atm.

Kind Regards Historynerd361 (talk) 12:35, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Historynerd361!

Thank you for asking – that is often the most responsible thing to do when you are unsure. With the recent events, the Aramean/Assyrian situation is in a bit of a truce: Wlaak has been topic-banned, while Surayeproject3 has agreed to move away from the contentious aspects of the topic for the time being.

As you might guess, the dispute goes beyond the existence of a single draft, and extends to how we should label Aramean and Assyrian people in general, and whether or not to treat the two as separate. That is why I do not believe that sending the draft for review once again right now is helpful, although you can certainly work on improving it! Ideally, in a few months, everyone will have familiarized themselves a little bit more with Wikipedia's processes, and we will be able to set up a wider-scale discussion about how to properly describe the topic on Wikipedia (including Wlaak assuming they successfully appeal their topic ban). That will hopefully settle what to do with the draft, and avoid a cycle of repeated submission and deletion.

Drafts usually expire after six months, which is the same timeframe after which Wlaak will be able to appeal. So, for the draft not to disappear just before we can decide what to do with it, I have tagged it with {{Promising draft}} for the time being. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 06:30, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Chaotic Enby:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive in June!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 1 month of outstanding reviews from the current 3+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 June 2025 through 30 June 2025.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 3200 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

		The Bio-star
		For transforming the article Mopsea from a stub to a GA ―Howard • 🌽33 10:52, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Looking to do more genus GAs in the future, love the design of the barnstar! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:00, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]