User talk:Kowal2701

Welcome!

Hi Alexanderkowal! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Grnrchst (talk) 09:29, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

September 2023

Hello, I'm Dudhhr. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, American Enterprise Institute, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. – dudhhr ^talk_contribs^she_her 21:43, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Dudhhr, I'm surprised it isn't a reliable source, I've seen discussions about making that integrating that website into wikipedia, regardless I'll go find a different source, thanks for the help Alexanderkowal (talk) 21:46, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Is that an acceptable reference now? Alexanderkowal (talk) 22:16, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Is that an acceptable reference now? Alexanderkowal (talk) 22:18, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on American Enterprise Institute

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page American Enterprise Institute, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 22:14, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Robert McClenon (talk) 04:20, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of kingdoms in Africa throughout history, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heis. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 18:04, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 22

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of kingdoms in Africa throughout history, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Ndebele and Bemba.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:02, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

CS1 error on List of kingdoms in Africa throughout history

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page List of kingdoms in Africa throughout history, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 15:44, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one or more pages into Politics of Germany. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 03:15, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@Diannaa I did attribute it, but only in my first edit. All of it is copied from other pages, I’m going to add more myself at a later date.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Politics_of_Germany&diff=prev&oldid=1215526601&title=Politics_of_Germany&diffonly=1 Alexanderkowal (talk) 07:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I see it now; sorry for not noticing. — Diannaa (talk) 12:00, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@Diannaa no I should’ve put it in each edit that used copied material, I didn’t think about putting it on their talk pages so thanks Alexanderkowal (talk) 12:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@Diannaa I’ll put something on their talk pages now, thank you Alexanderkowal (talk) 07:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Politics of Germany, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Reparations.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:50, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

April 2024

Please do not add or change content, as you did at History of North Africa, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. On a smaller note, please also do not mark your edits as "minor" unless you are making superficial changes such as fixing format or grammar errors; see Help:Minor edit. R Prazeres (talk) 16:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Oh yeah my bad, clicked minor out of habit Alexanderkowal (talk) 16:45, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

It’s all from General History of Africa volume 3, do I put that in the bibliography or cite each page? Alexanderkowal (talk) 16:46, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

I've used emotive language as I was writing for the History of Africa article and I'm trying to use a tone similar to oral tradition. If you don't feel it fits then feel free to change the phrasing. I've got to trim down what I have so I thought the extended version was better for that article. Alexanderkowal (talk) 16:57, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

No worries. But two things:

1) You must add citations inline, not at the end of the page. Read the guidelines, as this is part of the basics of editing Wikipedia. Please fix that in your edits, otherwise I'll revert it again as the problem wasn't addressed properly. (Editors are happy to fix any minor format problems, but it's not up to others to add sources and citations for you.)

1) Do not use emotive language or try to emulate oral tradition. Wikipedia uses an encyclopedic tone; see WP:TONE for what this means.

If you have any other questions about guidelines, feel free to ask, but do also familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policies in general. Thanks, R Prazeres (talk) 17:06, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

PS: Please also remember to include page numbers in your citations, if you haven't already. R Prazeres (talk) 17:10, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll do that now. I have seen a lot of pages just use a bibliography but I guess for history the convention is inline citations and that does make sense. Regarding the tone, please see History of Africa#Colonial period (1878–1951), this is what I'm trying to emulate. I don't think it falls outside of WP:Tone but idk. Alexanderkowal (talk) 17:17, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of List of kingdoms in Africa throughout history

The article List of kingdoms in Africa throughout history you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:List of kingdoms in Africa throughout history for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Phlsph7 -- Phlsph7 (talk) 08:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Selfstudier (talk) 13:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

About your edits

Hi, I'm QwertyForest. I have just seen the dispute going on at Politics of Germany. Although the IP has been edit warring with you, it appears that you have also been edit warring with them. I would suggest going back to TP discussion or perhaps Dispute Resolution. Keep in mind that bringing the matter to an admin noticeboard at this point is probably going to land you with the same sanctions as they give the IP. I hope you and the IP can come to a resolution. QwertyForest (talk) 15:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I did reach out first and we are talking on the TP but we’re still warring. I’ll leave it for now and see whether we can talk it out. Thanks for your comment Alexanderkowal (talk) 15:48, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Edit summaries

There's been a discussion about reverting a lot of your recent additions basically because of no edit summaries based on the belief some contentious material is being added. I suggest you use WP:Edit summaries in the future... to avoid what might be a mass revert. Moxy🍁 22:26, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

On which page? If I've written something, I usually do loads of little edits trying to find the right wording or phrasing. I usually do edit summaries for big changes or contentious ones Alexanderkowal (talk) 22:31, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

I'll use abbreviations in the future Alexanderkowal (talk) 22:33, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Agnosticism and Atheism

Hello, I reverted your 2nd sentence in the agnosticism article, but I also see you are trying to edit the Atheism article. I just want you to know, as someone that has been editing the agnosticism article for over a decade, that the atheists in the atheism article are dogmatic. They've been trying to re-write the Agnosticism article for years to conform to their atheist narrative. You will almost certainly have, no luck getting changes in the Atheism article.They want the broader definition. I agree with the arguments you are making, but they want the broader definition so it can encompass agnosticism and then make agnosticism just a subset of atheism instead of being something distinct. Obviously up to you on what time you invest, but I just wanted to share with you the very, uphill battle you are facing. IIXVXII (talk) 21:21, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, it’s okay, it’s natural for a page to have a bias towards the topic. The broad definition is problematic, however as long as there’s a disambiguation link to agnosticism I think it’s okay, I’m not going to invest anymore time into it Alexanderkowal (talk) 21:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

I do think the agnosticism article needs to be expanded to discuss absolutism vs relativism as this seems to be the dividing line between agnostics and atheists Alexanderkowal (talk) 08:14, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Or rather perspectivism Alexanderkowal (talk) 09:16, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Reviewing the norms

Can we get you to review Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries... Specifically WP:COUNTRYLEAD and Wikipedia:COUNTRYSECTIONS. Country articles are simply not set up like pop culture articles... there's more of an academic approach. Moxy🍁 22:46, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay will do, thanks. At the moment the government section reads neutral and adding criticism in might make it read negatively, and I’m not sure how to fix that Alexanderkowal (talk) 08:24, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Is WP:BRD appropriate for contentious topics? Going by policy it is, but in practice idk Alexanderkowal (talk) 19:14, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

United States

I notice a tendency on your part to insert politically opinionated text into general discussions. You have done this in several articles (with warnings from WP editors and administrators to desist), and now you have added ideological POV commentary to a general section on U.S. foreign policy. This cannot, and will not, stand—not without a full discussion on the Talk page about its appropriateness. Mason.Jones (talk) 15:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

? I have not had warnings to desist? Not everything in the US article has to come from a US perspective, in order to reach WP:NPOV others must be applied and this is an example of that Alexanderkowal (talk) 15:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Editors do not insert sweeping, opposing viewpoints on every U.S. government policy in a general country article. There are sub-articles in Wikipedia that delve into ideological positions (and where several viewpoints are presented). The article "United States" is not the place for ideological asides, and certainly not without discussion on the Talk page. Your editing history is rife with such interventions, and they won't be tolerated. Mason.Jones (talk) 16:04, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

? I don't know what you're getting at. In a section on foreign relations I included a sentence about the US' relations with developing countries, including Africa, with the preceding sweeping clause giving context. This has nothing to do with ideology at all. I honestly didn't feel there was a need for prior discussion since the content is so obviously relevant and extensively cited. I work via WP:BRD, my edits are not made in isolation, they require input from other editors. I think you've overreacted, and I hope we can work constructively Alexanderkowal (talk) 16:58, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I saw your deleted comment, please take a breather and come back to this later Alexanderkowal (talk) 18:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Keep it civil

You can make your point without challenging an editors common sense, as you did here. Also, keep in mind that edit warring is still edit warring even when done in slow motion. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:48, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I don't think we're edit warring although the discussion could be more collaborative Alexanderkowal (talk) 15:50, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Lead fixation

In one of the many Wiki chat rooms people are discussing your lead fixation all over. I suggest you review Wikipedia:How to create and manage a good lead section. Moxy🍁 16:12, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

it's because I know its importance, and it's usually the only thing I read when reading wikipedia. I struggle to process lots of information, so I find it easier to start with the lead as a summary and expand on the summary in the body, in contrary to wikipedia policy. Tbh w you, it is mainly ego that attracts me to highly trafficked articles, however I think I still make positive contributions. I suppose I should always have a cursory overview of an article before editing its lede, it's just not how I intuitively work Alexanderkowal (talk) 16:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I'll read the policy more, I'm British so prefer convention to rules Alexanderkowal (talk) 16:21, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Seriously thinking of taking action against this Mason guy Alexanderkowal (talk) 16:31, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Feel free to join the community Wikipedia:IRC.... Moxy🍁 16:44, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll make sure not to spam or anything Alexanderkowal (talk) 16:47, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

While on this subject, I agree about the lead fixation and the current RFC about the Nakba in my view is a form of disruption, since the only editor at all concerned about this has been yourself. There has been no current dispute and therefore no reason to have an RFC. Selfstudier (talk) 09:15, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

How the rfc a form of disruption? It's trying to correct my mistake in not seeking consensus first on a contentious issue. Alexanderkowal (talk) 09:18, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

There is no evidence that this material is contentious. It is not disputed by anyone. Furthermore, we specifically discussed this issue on the talk page and you agreed that there was no need for an RFC. Selfstudier (talk) 09:38, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't have a strong opinion on whether there should be an rfc, I didn't start it, I just gave reasoning for it. People can predict what is going to be controversial and possibly contentious Alexanderkowal (talk) 09:41, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the criticism I'll work on it, if I seem to be doing it again just link the policy that Moxy has done above Alexanderkowal (talk) 09:19, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

June 2024

An editor has requested that Kerma kingdom be moved to Kingdom of Kerma. Since you had some involvement with 'Kerma kingdom', you are invited to participate in the move discussion. WP:PROD is only for deletion of articles and files, not redirects. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:36, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Alexanderkowal (talk) 07:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Your edit to Mali Empire has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 12:33, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

I haven't copied any material without attribution, that all came from the General History of Africa volume 4, and I gave the pages it was from and properly cited it. How does this infringe copyright? Alexanderkowal (talk) 12:43, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

The book is marked as "© UNESCO 1984". Of course you need to cite your sources, but it's not okay to copy prose from a book and paste it into Wikipedia. That's a violation of our copyright policy. Everything you add to Wikipedia needs to be written in your own words please. — Diannaa (talk) 13:04, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I was just trying not to do OR, I'll reword it Alexanderkowal (talk) 13:21, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

If I put it in the quote box, can I then copy? Like with the excerpt from Tarikh al-Sudan Alexanderkowal (talk) 13:35, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

It's too much for a quotation. 137 words in three different sections — Diannaa (talk) 18:39, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Your edit to Mandinka people has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 23:25, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

That’s my bad I need to read the policy again properly. WP:Copyright. I don’t know how I would reorganise and rewrite that sentence without making it much worse Alexanderkowal (talk) 00:21, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello

Hello, can you help me with something? There is a user (FMSky) who reverted absolutely all the edits I made, without justification, and continues to remove referenced information, such as in Jobbik party, where he removed information that I had not even included. Hidolo (talk) 01:09, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

You're a single purpose account / sockpuppet who mass inserts "far-right" to political parties, often without sources to back it up, and does nothing else --FMSky (talk) 01:11, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm not that. I only want to fix Wikipedia, because of your biases edits. You only eliminate sourced info. That is not well. Hidolo (talk) 01:15, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

I recommend contributing beyond polemical insertions as it’s a good way to gain experience and familiarity w policy, just find something you’re passionate about. Admins will also be more sympathetic with an editor who contributes more widely Alexanderkowal (talk) 09:12, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

WP:BRD is a good policy Alexanderkowal (talk) 09:13, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

I don’t think you should be mass reverting another editor on all their edits. Alexanderkowal (talk) 09:15, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

I recommend doing an WP:RfC with the various options, and do a survey below that where you search “Jobbik ideology” into Google scholar and tally up all the academic sources that discuss Jobbik’s ideology about which labelling they use. Maybe the first 5 pages? Make sure to not be biased when doing it as people will check Alexanderkowal (talk) 09:06, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

You can also start a topic at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard if your issue is with the conduct of another editor Alexanderkowal (talk) 09:09, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

^ I would do this Alexanderkowal (talk) 09:30, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

When doing polemical insertions I try to be really careful with the wording so as not to ruin the flow of the article and avoid loaded words where possible, people’s opposition tends to be around the wording rather than the content , and you’ve always got to be thinking about WP:NPOV and representing the different POVs weighted by their appearance in WP:RSs Alexanderkowal (talk) 10:04, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

1RR violations

Please self-revert your latest edits to comply with 1RR, this is not the first 1RR violation I have brought to your attention.

[1] and [2]. Makeandtoss (talk) 14:01, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm confused, those two diffs you've linked weren't both reverts, the second one was expanding on the first Alexanderkowal (talk) 14:07, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

The second one's edit summary states: "Undid revision 1230563017 by האופה". Makeandtoss (talk) 14:43, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

you're right, I'll revert, I still think that edit is awful though Alexanderkowal (talk) 14:46, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

so if two people revert make the same edit you can't revert both even if it's against consensus? Alexanderkowal (talk) 14:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, 1RR is a very strong restraint on editing. Multiple edits in a series count as only one edit ("an edit or a series of consecutive edits") if no one else has edited between them, but if you make an edit that has the effect of reverting and then someone else makes an edit, you can't rapidly follow that with anything that reverts that edit or any other recent edit (unless one of the exceptions listed in WP:NOT3RR applies). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:43, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. I think there should be some sort of exemption for content deriving from consensus from an RfC (which wasn’t the case here) Alexanderkowal (talk) 16:47, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I hear you, and I've been there, but the rules seem designed to avoid the possibility that any one person will start enforcing what they perceive to be a consensus that others do not see and to enforce a "cooling off" period for editors to try to gain some perspective about what they are doing. The rules also make you more careful about performing reverts of minor aspects, since you know you're using up your ability to do other reverts for a while. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:10, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

That makes sense, I do think there should be an exemption for strong consensus from an RfC as that would’ve received community wide input that don’t have the page watched Alexanderkowal (talk) 17:19, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I've put it at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Another exemption to 3RR and 1RR Alexanderkowal (talk) 17:30, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately here this rule is taken literally instead of the spirit of it, i.e. even if someone on the talk page explicitly tells you that they now agree and you can revert, you still can't revert if you had already reverted once in the past 24 hours. Makeandtoss (talk) 09:29, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Username

I suggest to review WP:REALNAME. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:01, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I feel it’d be dishonest to use anything else Alexanderkowal (talk) 17:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I’ll try and come up w something impersonal Alexanderkowal (talk) 17:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

It's just advice. It's your decision. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:20, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ghana, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gold Coast.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:07, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the DCWC!

See a    "developing" or    "least developed" country? Write about it to earn points!

Welcome to the 2024 Developing Countries WikiContest, Kowal2701! The contest is now open for submissions. List your work at your submissions page to earn points. If you haven't done so already, please review the following:

• Got open nominations? List them at review requests.
• Looking for a topic to work on? Check out suggested articles and eligible reviews.
• Not sure if your article qualifies? See the guidelines for more information or contact a coordinator for verification.
• New to Wikipedia? Many experienced editors are part of this contest and willing to help; feel free to ask questions about the contest on the talk page.
• Know someone else who might be interested? Sign-ups remain open until 15 July, so don't hesitate to invite other editors!

On behalf of the coordinators, we hope you enjoy participating and wish you good luck! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or ask one of the coordinators: Ixtal (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:01, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Reliable sources noticeboard

I believe that there is a reliable sources noticeboard on Wikipedia. Please share the link to the same.-Ganeemath (talk) 14:13, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

At the pump you once asked about search engine for policies

I've made something you may find useful...Template:Editor search boxes

Moxy🍁 23:50, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

That’s brilliant, thank you Kowal2701 (talk) 06:14, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

I do think it’d be beneficial to have a contents page for policy, although it’d be a bit of a nightmare making/organising it Kowal2701 (talk) 06:18, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

• List of all policies and guidelines
  • P: List of policies
  • G: List of guidelines

Moxy🍁 11:57, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikiproject on "Oral traditions"

Hello, Kowal2701.

Yes, I would like to join that Wikiproject that you asked me about.

Best wishes,

O.ominirabluejack (talk) 08:17, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm so sorry I didn't reply, the page is WP:WikiProject Anthropology/Oral tradition taskforce Kowal2701 (talk) 19:13, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Syriac chant, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Syrian Christians. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 20:11, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Oral tradition taskforce articles

A tag has been placed on Category:Oral tradition taskforce articles indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:26, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Oral tradition articles by quality

A tag has been placed on Category:Oral tradition articles by quality indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:26, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

These categories are empty right now, but they won't once I start tagging articles for WP:WikiProject Anthropology/Oral tradition taskforce. The issue is that I'm not entirely sure what I'm doing Kowal2701 (talk) 17:21, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

DCWC August update

The 2024 Developing Countries WikiContest has now been running for a month, and we've already seen some momentous improvement in the quality of many articles about underrepresented subjects! So far, our top-scoring participants are:

• Magentic Manifestations (submissions) – 338 points, mainly from nine good articles. He's a contender for the "most submissions for a single country" specialty award, with nine submissions for India.
• Arconning (submissions) – 305 points, including from six seasonally-appropriate Olympics-related good articles.
• Generalissima (submissions) – 290 points, the bulk from her featured article about Greenlandic interpreter Qalaherriaq and two China-related good articles.
• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions) – 245 points, mostly from the achievement of bringing Genghis Khan to featured status.
• Thebiguglyalien (submissions) – 144 points from three good articles, including two about Kiribati elections, and four reviews of good article nominees.

Looking for ways to climb up the leaderboard yourself? Help out your fellow participants by answering a few review requests, particularly the older entries. Several more nominations needing attention are listed at eligible reviews, and highlighed entries receive a 1.5× multiplier! The coordinators would like to extend a special thanks to Thebiguglyalien (submissions) for his commitment to keeping these review pages up to date.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or ask one of the coordinators: Ixtal (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 14:24, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Re: WikiProject

Hi, thanks for the message... :-) No, I'm sorry, I'm not interested in the project you linked to me: I have generally arranged articles on Italy, including the one on folklore, but I'm not particularly interested in the topic. A greeting. LukeWiller (talk) 19:02, 3 August 2024 (UTC).

No worries Kowal2701 (talk) 19:04, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Re: WikiProject

Hello! Thank you for the invitation! Regrettably, I am not very interested in oral tradition. I'm mostly interested in topics concerning Yugoslav and post-Yugoslav popular music, cinema and comics, and I have only occasionally made contributions to other pages. I was intersted in "Ajde Jano" due to numerous popular music covers of the song. Once again, thank you for the invitation. Ostalocutanje (talk) 13:35, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

No worries Kowal2701 (talk) 13:36, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikiproject Oral Tradition

Thanks very much for your message. Oral tradition sounds fascinating. I suppose it's mostly replaced by Whatsapp, these days! Even here in the DR Congo... I've added my name and will have a look in due course. Francis Hannaway (talk) 12:13, 8 August 2024 (UTC)