Hi 138! I'm sorry about the early closure, I was looking forward to reading the discussion on the matter. But only as a matter of idle curiousity, I don't have any real interest in the subject or the article. I asked Remsense about it because the initial close statement was insufficient, however that matter was quickly rectified. Any editor can remove posts from their own talk page. It's assumed that they read the posts, but deleting doesn't mean anything else necessarily.The talk page discussions you link to above would have been useful background for the afd, except that you started both of those discussions. There was some mild agreement from Halbared, but otherwise no support for your viewpoint. Honestly? I'd recommend dropping it. I don't think your arguments are strong enough to outweigh the considerable resistance to your proposal. Sorry, I'm sure that isn't what you want to hear but I'm fairly certain that pursuing this matter will just lead to frustration for you.Schazjmd(talk)16:12, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your thoughtful response and uninvolved perspective. I appreciate your advice and understand the resistance to my nomination. My frustration is less about the article's retention and more about the abrupt speedy keep closure by a non-admin after roughly an hour, based on a pretext I believe was inaccurate, given the prior discussions' context. I was fully prepared to accept a KEEP consensus after a full AfD debate. Thanks again for your input.87.116.181.138 (talk)16:35, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I get that. I think a community discussion on the question would have been useful, but only if a wider group of editors had involved themselves in evaluating the afd, and there's no telling whether that would have happened. Anyway, I hope you find other areas of the project to involve yourself with. Cheers!Schazjmd(talk)16:41, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome, @Tiarah123! It is, but it isn't easy. I recommend that you learn to edit first, and about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. With a little experience, you'll have a better grasp of what wikipedia considersan acceptable topic for an article, how to provide sources for it, how to format it, and how to write it. "Wikipedia:Your first article" is helpful. I've also added some links to your talk page to help you get started. Hope you enjoy the project!Schazjmd(talk)20:55, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Bonjour, je souhaiterais contribuer à un article sur Wikipedia mais dans les suggestions on ne me propose que des articles en anglais. J'ai un bon niveau d'anglais mais je ne me sens pas assez à l'aise pour corriger un article. Comment pourrais-je avoir des articles en français dans mes suggestions? --LouiseKo (talk)12:32, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Schazjmd, please tell me if I did the right thing by moving the updated article to a draft space. Is it where it will be reviewed and given feedback? --Robbydillallo (talk)15:04, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there, what's the best way to edit? I have written a lot about the LGBTQIA+ Community in Dallas, TX and have so many things I'm surprised don't exist. I've been uploading some but what do you think about it? Should I just use what I wrote before or change it up? --MEOW0xFF (talk)01:00, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome, @MEOW0xFF. Your first article has already been accepted so congratulations for that. I see that you have several drafts in progress. I looked atDraft:The Throckmorton Mining Company (TMC Dallas). I'm concerned that you added a number of claims that you yourself tagged ascitation needed. Articles should summarize what reliable sources have written about a subject. When you write articles (or add information to existing articles), you're getting that information fromsomewhere, so the citation should state where you got the information from. If you're adding information based on your personal knowledge, don't. Just don't put that information in the article until you have a reliable source for it.Schazjmd(talk)13:07, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I think the geography contest is a great idea and good way to get people engaged with Wikipedia. I am living proof. Anyway how do I participate in the contest? --Bclarke83 (talk)15:28, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome, @Bclarke83! I've put some links on your user talk page to help you get started. Sorry, but I don't know anything about a geography contest. Where did you see it mentioned?Schazjmd(talk)16:01, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Schazjmd,Thank you for volunteering as my mentor. I’m reaching out for some initial guidance regarding the Wikipedia article about me. As a living person, I’m concerned that the article currently lacks sufficient citations from reliable sources, and I would like to ensure that the content is accurate, well-sourced, and in line with Wikipedia’s standards.
I understand the importance of neutrality and conflict-of-interest policies, so I plan to propose suggested edits on the article’s Talk page. Before I proceed, I’d appreciate any advice or direction you might have on how best to approach this.
Subject: Request for Update to Wikipedia Profile – Confirmation of Decorations from the Order pro Merito Melitensi
Dear Schazjmd
Following prior correspondence regarding the documentation of distinctions listed in my Wikipedia article, I would like to provide formal verification regarding two awards I received from the Sovereign Military Order of Malta under the Order pro Merito Melitensi.
In response to requests for verifiability, I contacted the Order directly and received written confirmation that both distinctions are officially registered in their archives:
Cross of the Order pro Merito Melitensi – awarded May 24, 2008, no 846.
Cross of Officer of the Order pro Merito Melitensi – awarded May 26, 2011, under reference no. 452/11/eb, signed by then Grand Chancellor H.E. Jean-Pierre Mazery
Below is the relevant correspondence, with personal email addresses redacted in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines:
Confirmation of Honors – Order pro Merito Melitensi
Dr. Dan Roman
1. Request for Confirmation
Sent on May 5, 2025
From: Dr. Dan Roman
To: Sovereign Military Order of Malta
Subject: Request for Confirmation of Honors – Order pro Merito Melitensi
Dear Sir,
I am writing to respectfully request your assistance in confirming two decorations I have received under the Order pro Merito Melitensi, for the purpose of accurate documentation:
Cross of Officer of the Order pro Merito Melitensi – awarded May 26, 2011, ref. 452/11/eb, signed by H.E. Jean-Pierre Mazery
Cross of the Order pro Merito Melitensi – awarded earlier; official diploma retained
I would be grateful if you could confirm registration of these honors in your archives or direct me to a publicly available source.
With kind regards,
Dr. Dan Roman
[Personal contact redacted]
2. Official Response
Received on May 6, 2025
From: Lucia Gentile – Internal Affairs Department
Sovereign Military Order of Malta
Subject: Re: Request for Confirmation of Honors – Order pro Merito Melitensi
Dear Mr. Roman,
I am pleased to confirm you that your awards of the Order pro Merito Melitensi are officially registered in our archives.
With my best regards,
Lucia Gentile
Internal Affairs Department
Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of St. John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and of Malta
I hope this documentation meets the standards for reliable sourcing under Wikipedia's verifiability guidelines. I would sincerely appreciate your feedback on whether the relevant honors might be restored or clarified in the article.
I also understand that some other honors in the article currently lack independent confirmation. I have only photographic evidence of Diplomas. I am actively working to provide documentation for those as well and will follow up as appropriate.
If you need need more clarification, I am happy to assist.
@Dan Nicolae Roman, sources for wikipedia articles need to bepublished. Private emails don't suffice.I was assuming that the reason for the "sources needed" tag at the top of the article was because of the awards section, but I could be wrong. You could askthe editor who tagged the article about their specific sourcing concerns.Schazjmd(talk)17:04, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your quick replay. What I must do in order to fully comply with the rules. I will very much appreciate if you can guide me. Best regards, Dan RomanDan Nicolae Roman (talk)17:18, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I cited two authoritative and reliable sources in the contribution I added. If you have changed your mind, you can revert it. Thank youCryptic3179 (talk)16:44, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Cryptic3179, I guess you mean that you were the IP adding content to the article? The content that you added is still there, I moved it to the "disadvantages" section because it made more sense there. You then duplicated the same content, so I removed the duplication only. You also added some other content that lacked a source, and I tagged that paragraph.Schazjmd(talk)16:47, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you :)
"Since the 2010s, scholars have observed that dating applications have reshaped romantic interaction by translating established courtship practices into quantified, algorithmic processes. Bandinelli and Cossu how how apps such as Tinder emerged by datafying U.S. college hookup culture, most notably through the now‑ubiquitous “swipe” interface, which reduces courtship decisions to binary signals of interest and embeds them in a gamified environment that conceals rejection and amplifies reputational feedback."
This part comes from the same paper "Bye bye romance, welcome reputation: An analysis of the digital enclosure of dating"
When you are using a source in multiple locations of an article (such as separate paragraphs), add a name when you first define the source; for example,<ref name=bye>. Then for other uses of the same source, you just put<ref name=bye /> to cite that same source. I've done that in the article for you.Schazjmd(talk)17:08, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome,@4loveofbios:. I've added the template to your sandbox so that you can submit the article for review. After a quick look, I suggest that you hold off on submitting it until you have enough independent reliable sources to supportnotability. It doesn't look like there is significant coverage of that individual by sources not associated with him. Hope that helps. (I removed your duplicate post here on my talk page.)Schazjmd(talk)21:19, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome, @Howard Blevins. I've added some links to your talk page to help you get started. For your specific question: place your cursor at the end of the sentence that you think needs a source. On the Visual Editor menu, clickInsert, and thenTemplate. In the template search box, type "citation" and then selectCitation needed.Schazjmd(talk)13:36, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there! I am not sure if this is the correct place to ask this, but I'll shoot anyways. I am considering doing a Checkuser request on the meta wiki, as the main wiki I edit (greek) has no local Checkusers. Once such a check is performed, if a sock puppet is in fact found, what will happen? Will the admins of the wiki the sock puppet belongs to be notified? Thanks! --Amateur Truther (talk)15:15, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome, @AmateurTruther. I'm sorry, I don't know the answers to those questions. Each wikipedia has independent governance. I don't know if global (across wiki projects) checkuser is possible, or how it works, and I don't know enough about the other projects to even recommend where to ask. You could try asking at the Teahouse (I've put links on your talk page) for suggestions on where to get your questions answered.Schazjmd(talk)17:14, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Schazjimd I hope I spelled it right!I would like to know what are the best webites for information for edits thank you and good afternoon. --Asiya Cole (talk)19:25, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome, @Asiya Cole! A good place to start learning about sources isWikipedia:Reliable sources. Which are the most useful sources depends on the type of information you're adding to an article. From your user page, it looks like you might be interested in editing about the Aleut people. On a topic like that, academic books and journals are a good place to start. Hope that helps!Schazjmd(talk)19:29, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome @Dammydammy. I've put some links on your talk page to help you get started learning to edit. I recommend that you gain some experience learning to edit before you try to create an article. When you're ready,WP:Your first article gives you some guidance. However, it's unlikely that high test scores will be enough tojustify an article.Schazjmd(talk)13:27, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome, @Borishalikov. I've added the submission template to the draft so that you can submit it for review when you're ready. However, I think the draft needs more independent sources about the studio to supportnotability. Also, the draft reads to me like it was written by a chatbot.You could use the Polygon and LATimes sources to improve the articleShe Sees Red, which is currently a stub.Schazjmd(talk)13:01, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the edit. By the way, "bringing into line" is also a cited definition on that page. However, "coordination" appears many more times in the academic literature, so it is indeed the correct change. Oddly enough, I think that is the one that we had there in bold some time back but with Wikipedia, too many chefs in the kitchen. Mach's gut and happy editing.Obenritter (talk)17:13, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, @Obenritter, I only checked the sources cited in that sentence and made the change to match, then later I saw further down in the body that "bringing into line" was mentioned (and cited). So I guess it wasn'twrong before, but I agree that "coordination" seems to be a more widely used translation. Cheers!Schazjmd(talk)17:17, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
hello Thiers a pont I need to make the nepolonic wars are a world war here's my proof
Asia= Russia
Africa= British french and Spanish territories north America= war of 1812 British vs us during nepoloinic wars South america=Spanish colonies from the Spanish empire Oceania= British Australia and new Zealand --Crime Uproot Ministry (talk)21:41, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome, @Crime Uproot Ministry. The preponderance of reliable sources on the topic do not refer to theNapoleonic Wars as a "world war". The wikipedia article reflects the sources. If you find sources thatdo refer to them as a "world war", you can post those sources atTalk:Napoleonic Wars to discuss the question with interested editors. I've placed some useful links on your talk page to help you get started editing. Hope that helps!Schazjmd(talk)21:48, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Neogoodwriter, I looked into those sources more closely and neither are acceptable for abiography of a living person. One Patch column was a nomination written by a fellow 8th-grader, the other was written by a neighbor. These are not acceptable. You need reliable, independent sources for article content. Hope that helps.Schazjmd(talk)22:47, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please revert your last edit. It is not written by Patch staff; they published it. Read how it says:This submission comes from Mariam Uz who nominated John Ogbonnaya of Virginia. Mariam Uz filled out their form and provided that content, includingHow do you know the star student? He is my best friend.Schazjmd(talk)22:49, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, @LillaRis87, and welcome. When you're in edit mode on an article, using Visual Editor, click thePage options menu (the three horizontal lines on the right side of the top bar), and then selectCategories.Wikipedia:Categorization#Categorizing_articles gives some guidance on the types of categories to apply. What I find useful is to see what categories an article on a similar or related topic has been added to, and use that as a guideline. Hope that helps!Schazjmd(talk)13:09, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, sorry for disturbing you. I just had a quick question about theWikipedia:Plagiarism and was wondering if you had any advice. I've been copyeditingBuddhism in the Netherlands recently and realised that the whole article is pretty much paraphrased from 'Janssen, R. H. C., "Buddhism in the Netherlands: History and Present Status", in: Buddhism into the Year 2.000. International Conference Proceedings (First International Conference 'Buddhism into the Year 2000', hosted by the Dhammakaaya Foundation, Bangkok (Thailand), February 8, 1990), Bangkok: Dhammakaya Foundation 1995, pp. 151–156'
The article is listed in the 'further reading' section and I started to add citations to it in different areas of the article until I realised that the whole article was essentially lifted from Janssen's paper. I was a little confused about what to do because even the structure of the article copies Janssen's article. Would the entire structure of the article need to be changed in order to prevent plagiarism? There's also a lot of information on the page that I cannot seem to verify other than the fact that it's noted in Janssen's paper. My gut feeling is that if this was happening on a smaller scale, say perhaps a paragraph or two, I'd be comfortable leaving in the information and simply adding a citation to Janssen's paper. Since this pertains to a substantial amount of the whole article, however, I was confused about what to do.
Hi @Katiedevi! You're asking a tricky question. I'm comfortable removing and tagging clearcut copyright violations, but this is a more subtle case and I just don't have the expertise to address it. Rather than give you bad advice, I suggest you ask at theWikipedia:Copyright problems board. The editors who watch that board have experience that I lack and can advise you better. Sorry, I feel like I'm "passing the buck".Schazjmd(talk)14:55, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not apologise at all, this is helpful to know! I am glad to know that I wasn't overthinking the fact that this matter needed greater attention. Thank you for your time!Katiedevi (talk)19:25, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tous les modifications ne jamais vue sur le page la ministère de technologie de contact Tunisie vols tous mes mode passe et faites supprimer tous les systèmes Google et Microsoft et wiki Web et jusqu'à présent là je ne récupère pas répondre à a c'est sijet --Moncef Dhkouri (talk)18:29, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Maurice Magnus,WP:ELNO #5 is"Individual web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services. The link is to a drawing for sale. It doesn't meet any of the criteria forWP:ELYES orWP:ELMAYBE. Even if the sketch wasn't for sale, it doesn't add any encyclopedic value to the reader.Schazjmd(talk)21:37, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't paid attention to the fact that it was for sale, because it was created to accompany McGinn's articles in the publication. It may not add encyclopedic value, but it is a picture of him and serves the same purpose as a photo, except that it is intended to be clever and to convey something about him (i.e. the light bulb). (Maybe that is encyclopedic value of a sort.) If I find a link to an article by McGinn that contains the sketch, would you object? If you say yes, I'll drop the matter, because it's not important.Maurice Magnus (talk)21:47, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think a sketch is of much value; they can just as easily find tons of actual photos of him online. (Now, if an independent source remarked on Levine's drawing of McGinn so that it could be mentioned in the body, that would be a different story...)Schazjmd(talk)22:00, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We've previously discussed whether the lede sentence of articles on cities should state the long name or not. The conclusion was no, but I still feel they're important. Would you be willing to compromise by allowing me to include them in{{efn}} footnotes instead?⇒Aerrapcthey/them,00:28, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
hi, i want to edit a article but found out on my other account that i couldn't edit well so i got blocked! can u help me edit the article? i'll give name below. --Beeniemanftblue2344 (talk)17:30, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How do you go about adding an image of a person to their page? I found a picture for an article I'm working on (Phaedon Avouris) and he doesn't have the usual info box. --AndromedaMoth (talk)06:29, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I have a question. Since I plan to mostly edit articles about music, I'm wondering if YouTube videos can be used as references?Thank you in advance for your response. --Lukasmeier88 (talk)14:58, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi and welcome, @Lukasmeier88. YouTube is just a platform. Whether a video can be areliable source depends on who created and published the video. For example, a video of a CBS news report published on YouTube would presume CBS's reliability. A music video might be a source that a performance took place, but then there's also the question of whether that information isWP:DUE — just because something exists/existed doesn't mean it's necessarily significant enough to mention in an encyclopedia article. Sorry that it isn't a simple yes/no answer, but hope that helps.Schazjmd(talk)15:05, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want you to feel bad I just feel the way I said it in the edit note was a little sturn so I want apologize, but I do want to remind you that those are two counties not countries. (County Example: El Paso County, Colorado) (Country Example: United States or North Korea preferably🇰🇵)@Schazjmd thank youTokeamour (talk)20:00, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I had just read this discussion[3] when you thanked me. I didn't find any matches of the current pic elsewhere, so I'm accepting "own work" for now. IMO, it's not that bad.Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk)20:05, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gråbergs Gråa Sång, I thought your reply to him was thoughtful and informative. Maybe if we'd been as helpful as that when it first came up years ago, he would have made a better photo available to us then. I do think the current one is pretty awful, the hair is fuzzed over with some weird filter or eraser, and there are two different backgrounds.Schazjmd(talk)20:15, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You're so fortunate! I've emailed article subjects a few times asking for photos and they probably went straight to their Spam folders because I've never gotten a response. Good job. :)Schazjmd(talk)20:28, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey. I periodically check my Wiki bio, and I’ve noticed that my Duke Law (LLM) degree has been added, deleted, added, and then deleted again. I am not sure why this is being done, but I did graduate this past May with an LLM degree in Judicial Studies from the Duke University School of Law. This is noted on my Court biography and on Ballotpedia, as well as other sources available on the Internet. Just fyi. Thank you.
This is probably better suited for the talk page of the article but it was last edited in 2008, and I saw you edit on it so your thoughts on the idea for theSea Cadet article, because generally speaking most international sea cadet organizations are identified by the term Sea Cadet Corps, and also Sea Cadets. A great example of this is the United States Naval Sea Cadet Corps, the Royal Belgium Sea Cadet Corps, Sea Cadet Corps India etc.Tokeamour (talk)21:22, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is the paintings located inside ofSea Cadets formatted correctly and is any of them unnecessary, therefore deeming it necessary to be deleted by an editor?
I have not seen any feedback yet, so that may be a good thing (no speedy deletion). I assume that I just wait until an editor comments or accepts it. Thanks, Charlie --Chaz Piano (talk)13:22, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi and welcome, @Chaz Piano. Your draft hasn't been submitted for review yet. I will add the functionality to the draft so you can submit it, after I do a quick copy-edit pass to fix the references and formatting. After it's submitted, it will go in the queue for a reviewer. Hope that helps.Schazjmd(talk)13:30, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I assumed that clicking "PUBLISH" was enough. What do I dop besides "PUBLISH" and where do I find it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bG4zpYpL9KA&t=2081s He states here about the App that he never created the thing. I even posted in the reasoning for this. The site was done by a company that he didn't have much to do with just was a user and had no control over moderation, money, etc. that they did. It's all on that video.I don't think having something that ended up being scammish as part of his wikipedia is reasonable.Just my opinion.Ariyen (talk)23:49, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ariyen, the main article for the app,Jeremy Renner Official, is pretty well-sourced, and no, you didn't mention your reason for the deletion when you removed the text. We can clarify his view of his role with the app in the article. What is the timestamp in the video where he discusses it? The timestamp in your link doesn't match it and I'm not going to sit through a 46 minute interview.Schazjmd(talk)12:25, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll watch it in a bit and tell you the timestamp of when it's mentioned. Have another one of his newest interviews to watch as well.Ariyen (talk)00:55, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ariyen, thanks for the timestamp. The audience member asks if there'll be a return of the app, and Renner replies that he doesn't really have time. That's it. Nothing about him not creating it, not having anything to do with it, no control, etc.Schazjmd(talk)12:39, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
he said he didn't create it after saying he doesn't have the time. watch a little bit more, you'll hear that . The entire answer that is.Ariyen (talk)00:04, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! How do I get my article published? I thought I did everything right, but anyway, they rejected it even without a proper explanation. I saw numerous wiki pages with 1 sentence only with bad sources. Could you please help me with this? --Robbydillallo (talk)11:28, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Robbydillallo. I assume that you're referring toDraft:Plagiarismcheck.org? Three reviewers have declined the article because it lacks sufficient independent sources to support notability. The first reviewer provided more details:
The first source is fine to use to state the institution uses the tool but nothing more as there no indication it meets the reliable source criteria. The second source is fine for the results of the study but not for the statement is being used to support ("The platform was established in 2011. The estimated number of users as of 2025 is 77,000 customers across 72 countries") because that is attributed to the company so not an independent fact-checked statement by the authors. Also, one source meeting the above criteria is not enough to establish notability.
Wikipedia has a number of inadequate articles, many from the early days of the project before requirements became stricter. One of the methods for addressing that problem is to not add new articles that are not adequate.Schazjmd(talk)12:34, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! thank you for your extensive answer, but it was the comment for the first draft. for the last draft I added sources that have much stronger academic background, please, have a look. The people who reviewed this article at first, found these articles and gave them here in wikipedia comments (I believe in the sandbox). So the third decline was without any comments. So it still should be okay for now, but still declined. Is it still that bad? #
@Robbydillallo, the first source is by a customer (not independent). The second source is questionable as the site sometimes publishes AI-generated articles, which are not trustworthy. The other two are academic papers that included plagiarismcheck.org among the tools studied, which would be fine for supporting factual statements about it and its performance as found by the studies, but don't do much for notability as plagiarismcheck is just one among many.Please readWP:ORGCRIT for the criteria used to evaluate articles on organizations.Schazjmd(talk)13:55, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reverted good faith edits by Ceplm on Mexican standoff
I don’t know about any other source than the film itself, e.g., YouTube 6IHO1LzLgIg, but I don’t know how to cite a film in Wikipedia.Ceplm (talk)15:24, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ceplm, what you added is your personal analysis of the movie. What that content needs is an independent source that identifies the movie as an example of a Mexican standoff. If there isn't one, we just don't add that content.Schazjmd(talk)15:27, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Schazjmd - I don't want to use up one of my scratch codes to log in to my admin account. Can you blockMiddlemanSchemer? They're adding/restoring blatant hoax content (with falsified refs) to BLPs and evading my block ofthis range. There's either a kitten or a beer in it for you - your choice :)AlsoPonyo (talk)20:32, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, you reverted my edit onSara L. Doyle that put her into the category for business college alumni on the basis that the category is not supported by the article. However, the article specifically mentions that she received a bachelor's degree in business administration. A quick check on the school's website confirms that the program in business administration is indeed part of the College of Business ([5])Old Man Consequences (talk)20:10, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Readers aren't going to understand a category applied to an article that isn't mentioned anywhere in the article. It's the basis ofWP:CATVER. If you want to change the category on Doyle's article from Univ. of FL to Warrington, then the text in the article needs to support it.Schazjmd(talk)20:20, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome, @Pomophagist44. Your edits toCubilia cubili were reverted by a bot. I've restored the images, but formatted them as a gallery for a better layout. I did remove the text you added because it was formatted improperly and you didn't include a citation to the source for the content. You can add it back with a reliable source. Also, I've added some links toyour talk page to help you get started editing. Hope that helps!Schazjmd(talk)02:01, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
why did you reverted the information on the 2025 Oklahoma State University shooting?
So you are Greenpark79, editing logged out?I disagree. The excessive use of gratuitous quotes made it more like a personal website page than an encyclopedia article. Please discuss any specific changes to the article onTalk:Joanne McNally.Schazjmd(talk)17:52, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am curious how we can be able to create a hood plot summary for the book. My one is above but I have to admit it is too long but with some suggestions, we can be able to accept a good plot summary. I also took this to the 11/22/63 talk page.82.132.234.238 (talk)19:44, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Piñanana, I removed it from that article as well. Whether you create and add a citation yourself or copy it from another article, you are still responsible for verifying that it's a reliable citation and that it supports the content that you are adding.Schazjmd(talk)13:30, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, I had edited the article assuming Wiktionary is a reliable source, yet Divinorum in Latin doesn't mean ghosts as the quote in question suggests, so what are reliable sources on Latin grammar and vocabulary, would The Oxford Latin Dictionary count as one?Arc1210 (talk)14:59, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You said theScam Junkie podcast was edited intoSteve Comisar and it was there for there for a day and then somebody removed it. Why would anyone do that. The podcast is on Spotify, very popular, and all over the internet. (Google: Scam Junkie podcast). Can you please put it back in the article? Why would anyone want to hide the fact the guy is a criminal/con manbut also a podcaster with a popular podcast. The guy turned his life around. That's important to include in the article. Newbies are blocked from editing this article so can someone with experience please help out here. This all seems kind of unfair.Carlspackler75 (talk)20:23, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I told you on your talk page that I'm not discussing that article with you anymore. Read the article. The podcast is mentioned. Please don't post on my talk page again.Schazjmd(talk)20:39, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How can I sugguest a wikipedia article for deletion? I found a page about a band that has almost no coverage and literally no citations, I looked into the band and cannot find any article covering it, only their spotify page. --LillaRis87 (talk)12:46, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @LillaRis87. First, read the instructions atWP:BEFORE. I'd also suggest checking out a few openarticle for deletion discussions for familiarity.For the actual mechanics, I recommend that you first enableWP:TWINKLE in your preferences. That tool adds aTW menu to your top bar. Go to the page that you want to nominate for deletion. Click theTW menu, then clickXFD. It will open a popup dialog box. Fill in theReason box with your justification for the deletion discussion. Last, clickSubmit. The tool creates the discussion page, enters it in the log, and sends a notification to the article creator.Let me know if you have more questions.Schazjmd(talk)13:40, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Schazjmd (talk)00:54, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Schazjmd (talk)16:51, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
