HouseBlaster

Hello Can i ask How can create an article based on my culture --Amogelang22 (talk) 10:34, 9 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

So who deleted it and why Amogelang22 (talk) 11:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

I do not see any deleted contributions on this account – did you have a different one? Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 15:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

i heard someone saying that the account contribution has been deleted Amogelang22 (talk) 15:32, 9 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Well, that good news is that has not happened! Nothing has been deleted. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 15:34, 9 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

okaythats good Amogelang22 (talk) 15:35, 9 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

can I ask you a question Amogelang22 (talk) 15:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Of course! HouseBlaster (he/they) 15:45, 9 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

why people are abusive to us as their fellow community members Amogelang22 (talk) 15:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

how did you start being a Wikimedia member Amogelang22 (talk) 15:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

You can read about my start at Wikipedia at User:Clovermoss/Editor reflections/1–100#User:HouseBlaster – December 2, 2023 :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 16:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Was it easy Amogelang22 (talk) 08:47, 12 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Not super easy, but very rewarding! HouseBlaster (he/they) 16:16, 12 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

How Amogelang22 (talk) 07:25, 16 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

I used Help:Getting started, which has lots of helpful information! HouseBlaster (he/they) 15:39, 16 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

then what were the rewards Amogelang22 (talk) 18:14, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

There aren't any tangible rewards (except WP:TWL). You do it because it is fun, which is its own reward :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 23:45, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

okay Amogelang22 (talk) 03:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, HouseBlaster,

There were some speedy category renames yesterday (from U.S. Presidents categories to United States Presidents categories) and User:JJMC89 bot III should have recategorized all of the talk pages on Nov. 8th but it still hasn't and it's almost been 24 hours since the categories were moved. See Category:B-Class U.S. Presidents articles as an example.

Does it usually take this long or did something happen with the bot? Because all of the United States Presidents articles categories are empty right now. In the past, I've brought this question to the bot operator but they say that they created the bot but do not control how it is utilized with CFD requests. Just hoping you can make some magic edit to resolve this or tell me that I should give the bot more time to do its work. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Liz! Those categories are all populated by a template, which the bot cannot fix. (The bot is being updated soon to do this automatically, and I am very excited!) I made some updates to {{WikiProject United States}}, which will automatically fix the issue once the jobqueue catches up. Thank you for pointing this out :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 21:42, 9 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Do you have some magic goggles to know when it's a template responsible for filling categories? Because I see to run into this fairly regularly, categories that suddenly go empty. I have a script installed that allows you to see when someone added or removed a page from a category but when this happens, there is just no information at all. Typically, this is because someone has tinkered with a template, creating an error but it can be hard to trace back what template it was when this happens. Thanks for the information. I came to the right admin! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:26, 10 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

I make creative use of WP:HOTCAT to make the determination. If you go to Australia#footer, you can see "−" and "(±)" symbols next to Geographical articles missing image alternative text, which means that you can edit it with HOTCAT, and therefore is not added by a template. Coordinates on Wikidata does not have those symbols, so you cannot edit it with HOTCAT, thus it is template-generated. To determine what template is the culprit, it is generally just a bit of guess and check, while making sure your guesses smart. In this case, I (correctly) guessed that we wanted {{WikiProject United States}} would have something to do with Category:B-Class U.S. Presidents articles. HouseBlaster (he/they) 00:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

It was also {{WikiProject United States Presidents}}. Gonnym (talk) 02:11, 11 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

On the subject of templates and categories, HouseBlaster and Gonnym, do you know what changes would have caused all of the categories in Category:Native American multilingual support templates and some in Category:Wikipedia multilingual support templates to empty out? Was there a TFD discussion involved here? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:30, 11 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes. Almost all lang-?? templates are being deleted and replaced with {{Langx}}, see Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2024_September_27#Replace_and_delete_lang-??_templates. There really is no need to keep those categories 7 days. Gonnym (talk) 20:32, 11 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have no idea, though perhaps Gonnym does. HouseBlaster (he/they) 20:33, 11 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Well, there's my answer! HouseBlaster (he/they) 20:33, 11 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

MediaWiki message delivery 00:04, 12 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:50, 12 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi HouseBlaster, looks like you did a great job automating Template:Establishment category in country by century – thanks! However, you left Template:Establishment category in country by century/resolve still using the old parameters, and this is not mentioned in the documentation. E.g. [5] for usage.

Perhaps the neatest thing would be a separate version of /core with more resolving, and a switch in the main template to use that core instead if there was a new parameter resolve=yes. Would you care to implement this, please? – Fayenatic London 12:51, 12 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Happy to do that later today :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 14:07, 12 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Update: it is not as easy as I thought it would be; I hope to do this Friday night (when I can dedicate a sustained period of time). Apologies for the delay. HouseBlaster (he/they) 01:51, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Done HouseBlaster (he/they) 02:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC) Reply

hello --Mahrukh zameer (talk) 09:16, 16 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Mahrukh zameer, and welcome to Wikipedia! Let me know if you have any questions about Wikipedia, and I would be more than happy to assist :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 15:40, 16 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

MediaWiki message delivery 01:58, 19 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @HouseBlaster can you tell me what this post is about? This user (and others) have previously cast unsubstantiated accusations like this at me before and that he has been warned of this behaviour before.

As I also mentioned to other admins this sort of bad faith editing behaviour is pushing me away from this site. Galdrack (talk) 01:10, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Galdrack. I am a clerk for ArbCom, and given the brewing arbitration case about Palestine-Israel articles I am steering away from anything "in the weeds". You are, of course, welcome to file a report at WP:ANI or ask a recently active admin for more substantive advice. Sorry I am unable to help further. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 04:25, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

That's ok thanks for the help, I'll try and look into it further when I have more energy. Galdrack (talk) 20:08, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey there!! I am trying to do my first wiki page for a sealion that has a remarkable journey and has recently gained traction on tiktok and local media. Found it odd she didn’t have her own wiki page, so was happy to get the ball rolling. There’s a lot more that goes into it than I initially thought, so really want to the formatting, structure, and information to be as accurate as possible.

I saw the reference page auto fills, I added it myself, also the pictures and the main profile wireframe, where does that come from/how do I add? The photos I just find online, so don’t own them myself, adding pathway to the photos didn’t work. I’ve read all the steps that need to be taken, but feel I am missing a bunch of things.

Thanks for your time! --Pizzzyy (talk) 01:38, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Pizzzyy, and welcome to Wikipedia! So before I can answer your question, we need to make sure that this topic is eligible for inclusion on Wikipedia. We have a lot of articles (almost seven million!), but not everything meets our threshold for inclusion, which is given the unfortunate misnomer "notability", even though it has nothing to do with fame or importance. To be eligible for inclusions, we need to have two or three reliable sources which are independent of the subject and cover it in detail. Reliable sources have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, so social media is out. We have a far from complete list of sources considered reliable, but we are looking for sources like The New York Times. Independent sources means nothing affiliated with the animal itself, such as the zoo. And finally "significant coverage" generally means two or three paragraphs of detail. Once you have those, we can get to the actual writing. I realize that this is a lot of information; creating a new article from scratch is one of the hardest tasks on Wikipedia! But I am here to help, and am more than happy to answer any questions you might have along the way :) Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 04:42, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey @HouseBlaster thanks for your quick reply!!

This can be a little tough because I only found a couple reputable 3rd party news outlets, one being a local NBC affiliated one out of Buffalo, and a mention in a larger article from a CBS publication out of Chicago

https://www.wgrz.com/article/news/local/beloved-sea-lion-returns-to-aquarium-of-niagara/71-43250598-d299-49d9-91e3-372dfe3c165f

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/two-california-sea-lion-pups-make-public-debut-at-brookfield-zoo/

others just cited the cbs article like

https://news.wttw.com/2017/07/21/2-california-sea-lion-pups-debut-brookfield-zoo

https://abc7ny.com/sea-lion-pups-baby-lions-born/2126869/

I did find this in a subscription article by the Niagara Gizette

https://www.niagara-gazette.com/news/local_news/aquarium-of-niagara-celebrates-sea-lion-s-return/article_6987ddf1-91fd-5566-8dda-74e8776b9dce.html

And the Buffalo News, but again subscription needed

https://buffalonews.com/entertainment/return-of-sea-lion-makes-a-splash-at-aquarium-of-niagara/article_2fc03b9a-d71a-5671-9bce-17b1cebeb5d2.html

There is a decent amount of credibility here, mixed with the conservation acts of the aquarium she currently resides, and the Zoo in which she participated in the breeding program. Not sure if that’s enough.

I also wrote the page, but had it edited in chatgpt for flow and grammar, and it was flagged as LLM generated. I am more than happy to rewrite it, but felt it flowed nicely and was very accurate on the information out there regarding her journey. Pizzzyy (talk) 06:06, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Alright! Here is my analysis of those sources:

I can see the conversation you are having at User talk:Pizzzyy#November 2024 – I see the draft was declined. I would put the two sources which have all three tickboxes front and center, and I would revert back to your own writing (rather than ChatGPT). AI can be helpful if you need to rephrase a sentence or two, but otherwise its tone is not appropriate for Wikipedia. It likes to use a flowery, embellished tone, which can compromise our policy on maintaining a neutral point of view. I think this topic is notable, though it is borderline. Please note that there is a real chance this gets deleted for lack of notability. If you are ready to continue working with that possibility in mind, we can do that. But writing an article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, and I would personally advise you to practice improving articles through the task center to gain a deeper understanding of how Wikipedia works beforehand. I realize that this can be disappointing, but I would do you a disservice if I did not mention this up front. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 15:23, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

I literally just spent an hour writing and adding citations, tried to save and publish, and it just reverted back to original copy. Not sure what happened, but do I now have to start all over again? Pizzzyy (talk) 18:42, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Pizzzyy: I see you made some changes to the page; sometimes it takes a minute for them to appear. They look like great edits to me! Did you do anything else? HouseBlaster (he/they) 23:04, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

I added more credible citations, reverted to earlier copy, without 4o fluffing, but now would like to add photos and that like wireframe intro box. I’m sure others would then want to contribute and add more color to the page. Being one of the more viral videos on tiktok this month, I’m sure there will be a lot more organic news coverage and articles written as well that can be mentioned. Pizzzyy (talk) 01:19, 21 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Still flagged for not having credible sources. I guess we will still need to wait. Pretty sure cbs, and local new stations are reliable, but maybe they don’t really mention her full back story. Or I am formatting and adding the citations incorrectly. Also adding citations by Facebook, tiktok, and YouTube might be incorrect? Should I just be providing links or posting the videos instead of referencing them as citations? Pizzzyy (talk) 01:27, 21 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Pizzzyy! The tag for not having credible sources is now out of date – it is left there so the next reviewer can see what the problem was and therefore know what to check when they do the review. Don't worry: It will be removed once the draft is published live! You are formatting the citations correctly, but Facebook, TikTok, and YouTube are not considered reliable sources. Some more substantive advice:

• I have renamed the draft to Draft:Arie (sea lion), which follows the standard title policy convention to use (parenthesis) to "disambiguate" between other uses of the word Arie.
• Draft:Arie the Sealion § Species Overview: California Sea Lion is not really something we include in most Wikipedia articles; this article is about the specific sea lion. We include background all the time, but generally only background essential for understanding the article, and most readers are familiar with sea lions. We rely on the link to sea lion (and California sea lion) to do the rest of the job for us.
• Unlike many publications, Wikipedia uses sentence case for section titles. So, for instance, Social media presence instead of Social Media Presence.
• Using images is quite complicated on Wikipedia. I've been meaning to write a beginner's guide to them, but in a nutshell: We require that images either be licensed under a free content license, in the public domain, or else satisfy all the non-free content criteria. Of the non-free content criteria, the first is that the content be irreplaceable with free content, which does not apply here (anyone can go to the zoo, take a picture, and release it under a free license). And to fall into the public domain, the photographer needs to have died 70 years ago, which is impossible if they took a photograph of Arie. That leaves a photo released free content license. Have you personally taken any photos of Arie? If so, that would make this much easier.
• As for the introduction wireframe, that is called an "infobox". You want to add Template:Infobox animal (click "Insert", then click "Template", and then type Infobox animal).

Sorry this is a lot of information... I told you writing an article is difficult :) Still here to answer questions! Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 01:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sugar av. unhappy 47.185.108.229 (talk) 07:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Not sure what you mean. HouseBlaster (he/they) 15:23, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

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

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 20 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Copied from Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) § Sign up for the language community meeting on November 29th, 16:00 UTC because this page is listed on Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Subscribe.

Hello everyone,

The next language community meeting is coming up next week, on November 29th, at 16:00 UTC (Zonestamp! For your timezone <https://zonestamp.toolforge.org/1732896000>). If you're interested in joining, you can sign up on this wiki page: <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Language_and_Product_Localization/Community_meetings#29_November_2024>.

This participant-driven meeting will be organized by the Wikimedia Foundation’s Language Product Localization team and the Language Diversity Hub. There will be presentations on topics like developing language keyboards, the creation of the Moore Wikipedia, and the language support track at Wiki Indaba. We will also have members from the Wayuunaiki community joining us to share their experiences with the Incubator and as a new community within our movement. This meeting will have a Spanish interpretation.

Looking forward to seeing you at the language community meeting! Cheers, Srishti 19:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, HouseBlaster,

I'm back! I have a question about Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 November 7#Category:Buildings and structures by decade of destruction. Yesterday, User:JJMC89 bot III deleted all of the categories they were supposed to delete but didn't create categories that should have been created or move all of the articles and categories back into the newly created categories. For example, if you look at Category:Buildings and structures by decade of destruction and Category:Buildings and structures destroyed in the 18th century you can see categories that are still present in these deleted categories and that are empty because the bot didn't transfer the associated articles.

Can you look into this? I know it's a massive CFD but I'm not sure how to nudge the bot to finish up its work. Many thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:02, 22 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Liz! You are always welcome on my talk page :)

I forgot to update the templates again... apologies for the confusion. It seems to be all sorted now; there might be a couple stragglers but the jobqueue has been moving fast as of late. Thank you so much for bringing this oversight to my attention! Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 02:17, 22 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I unfortunately have another clarifying question regarding the purging of categories, specifically the level of effort (or due diligence) a purging editor is expected to make to ensure that a page does not belong in the category that is to be purged. Generally, the characteristic that a category is about must be mentioned explicitly in the article, and it's not enough if it's maybe mentioned in some cited source but not stated in the article (random example: let's say, a person's article is in Category:People from Johannesburg, the person is indeed from Johannesburg, and this origin is stated somewhere in one of the cited sources, but the article doesn't mention the location at all), right? If I'm correct in assuming that, I see three possible options/levels of effort:

1. One acts solely based on what's already in the article (without checking the cited sources; so in my previous random example, one would simply remove the article from Category:People from Johannesburg).
2. One acts based on what's already in the article as well as anything in the already cited sources (so in my previous random example, I imagine, it would be considered good practice to not remove the article from Category:People from Johannesburg but to add the information to the article, citing the already cited source).
3. One acts on what's in the article and any of the already cited sources as well as any information one can find in other (reliable, secondary) sources (so assuming for my random example that the information was not already in one of the cited sources, one would check whether a source exists that supports the Johannesburg claim, and if one finds such a source, I imagine, it would be considered good practice to not remove the article from Category:People from Johannesburg but instead add both the information and the new source to the article).

Which one of these is correct or standard practice (or the approach you usually take)?

I'm asking because I recently took on Category:Body horror video games (deletion discussion) and quickly looked at every page in that category (and its subcats), and not a single one mentions the term "body horror" (NB: one says ... the choices made by the player affect the narrative and visual design..., generally along the lines of eldritch or body horror, but the term is not used in the cited sources). This, paired with the fact that afaics, every page in this cat was added to it by the same user (Latiromazzaire, who also created the cat) on the same day (1 June 2024), made me think that the deletion rationale (entirely original research) was accurate, and of course, choosing option 1 above would be equivalent to emptying this category (I have not looked at every cited source in every article but the refs' titles were obv included when searching for the term).
Note: In the deletion discussion, Zxcvbnm gave two examples of sources where games are described using the term. The games covered in those sources are a) Winnie's Hole (article is currently only the parent cat Category:Body horror but does use the term "body horror" supported by other sources [note: this is also the only video game article I found when searching for the term in Wikipedia articles in general]), and b) Zoochosis (video game) (article is currently in the cat but doesn't cite this specific source or use the term). So, the cat could potentially have at least two entries.

I'm usually inclined to choose option 3, but given the history of the user who added the categories, I'm not sure how fruitful this option would be in this case (I'm also not at all familiar with horror-ish video games, so I'm not great at judging for which of the games in the cat a search could be worth it if there are any for which this is the case). Sorry for the long message. Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 14:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Felida97! Again, thank you for helping at CFDWM – it is truly appreciated :) I normally find it best to do a mixture of options 1 and 3. My logic is well-developed articles (roughly B/GA/FA) will not neglect to mention WP:DEFINING characteristics. If the article is less well developed, I generally find it easier to jump straight to google rather than examining each source individually. Again, if it is not showing up consistently, it does not meet WP:DEFINING and should be removed. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 16:46, 24 November 2024 (UTC)Reply