User talk:Relativity

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic. Archives 1, 2, 3

SCAM WARNING! If you have been contacted or solicited by anyone asking for payment to get a draft into article space, improve a draft, or restore a deleted article, such offers are not legitimate and you should contact paid-en-wpwikipedia.org immediately. Legitimate editors/reviewers will never offer money. Please see WP:SCAM for more details.

Relativity is busy and is going to be on Wikipedia in off-and-on doses, and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Hello, I'm trying to make a wikipedia article about my uncle who is an innovator and an academic. When I try posting his photo it keeps getting taken down with the explanation it lacks exif data and does not contribute to wikipedia. I would like to know how i can keep it uploaded so that I can finish the draft and submit it for review. I also wanted to ask if diplomas and information about schooling needs to have a reference, as well as what else has to have a reference. Thank you in advance --Boskovicdd (talk) 13:53, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Boskovicdd: Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! The issue you're describing is currently taking place on Wikimedia Commons, which is technically not Wikipedia but one of our sister projects, so you may get a more accurate answer at their help desk. That being said, your picture was deleted for the first and time because it appeared to be for personal use and not for any educational reason (see here for more details), and was deleted for the second time because it was a copyright violation (see here for more details). I don't know too much about EXIF data, and after I read this page, I'm not sure why it's a problem, but I'm not that experienced in Commons. However, if you want to make sure that your picture is able to be uploaded, you should create the article about your uncle first by going through the steps at your first article carefully, and you will have to declare a conflict-of-interest, which you haven't done yet. Then, only if the article is accepted, can you upload a picture you took yourself (not a picture already online) to Wikimedia Commons. Any further questions about Wikimedia Commons should probably go to their help desk, as I'm not that experienced there and might not be able to help you perfectly, but if you need any help with anything else on Wikipedia, such as working on your draft, I'll be happy to help! Cheers ‍Relativity ⚡️ 16:42, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response, I'll ask about the picture on Commons. I could also use some help with editing my draft, and was wondering if you can view on my sandbox or do I just ask general questions. For example, I wanted to know if Google Scholar and Google patents are a reliable source. Boskovicdd (talk) 12:20, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Boskovicdd: I'm fine with whichever way you want. I could do an in-depth review, or you could just ask me general questions, or both. As for your question, you can't just cite your search in Google Scholar or Google Patents, because they're not sources in themselves. All their information comes from somewhere. You'll have to use the individual results as a source. For example, this citation to Boscovic's profile in Google Scholar would not work, but this article of his would. For GPatents, the same thing applies, but also, take a look at WP:PATENTS for examples of when and how you can use them as sources. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 17:56, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I also noticed you still haven't disclosed your conflict-of-interest. Please take a look at that page there and do so as soon as possible. I know it's annoying, but take a look at number two in this list to see why it's better for you and the community if you declare your COI. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 18:05, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've disclosed it in the edit summary of my contribution to my sandbox. I would like to know if I have to disclose it every time I make an edit to my sandbox? I'll also write the same message here.

I wanted to disclose a potential conflict of interest regarding the article I am drafting about my uncle, Dragan Boscovic. I am writing this purely out of admiration and have no financial or professional connection to the topic. However, since I have a personal relationship with him, I want to ensure full transparency and follow Wikipedia’s guidelines. The draft is currently in my sandbox here: User:Boskovicdd/sandbox. I would appreciate any feedback to make sure it meets Wikipedia's neutrality standards. Please let me know if there are any additional steps I should take. Thanks! Boskovicdd (talk) 19:35, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Boskovicdd: This is a long response, so get ready.

Yes, generally, you should disclose your COI in every edit you make to your sandbox, as per WP:DCOI (although I imagine that can be tedious). Though I don't think I see your edit summary with the declaration in the sandbox history? But anyways, here's some feedback that might help:

• Lead— "an academic, innovator, and entrepreneur."— The word innovator is a bit too promotional-sounding. You might want to read WP:PEACOCK to learn about which words you should and shouldn't use. That applies for any other sentences in the article.
• Academic Career— "at several prestigious universities"— again, prestigious wouldn't really work here. I would remove it.
• Key Research Contributions—"prestigious journals and conferences"— same point as above
• Entrepreneurial Ventures— "a company focusing on advanced internet technology, research, and innovation"— taking the feedback from above, how about rewording this to "a company focused on internet technology and research"?
• Innovations and Technological Contributions—"Dr. Bošković is an innovator in various fields, including digital mobile communication systems, cognitive radio networks, and distributed ledger technologies."— You're going to probably need a citation here. That said, "innovator", again, is not the best word for Wikipedia's purposes. My suggestion is to reword this to "Dr. Bošković works in various fields, including digital mobile communication systems, cognitive radio networks, and distributed ledger technologies."
• Some of your headings (i.e. "Innovations and Technological Contributions", "Key Research Contributions", "Major Collaborations") are also a bit promotional-sounding. How do you think you could reword these?

But the biggest thing above all these, is notability. I'm sure your uncle did great things, but you've got to prove that to us. How? By making sure that your draft is supported by multiple reliable, secondary sources independent of the subject to show that Mr. Bošković meets the Wikipedia criteria for academics.

I hope this helps, and let me know if you have any further questions. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:58, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How to not be a lil goofball like not making useless changes --Johdoeee2 (talk) 00:51, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 26 February. As a reminder, we are no longer disqualifying the lowest-scoring contestants; everyone who competed in round 1 will advance to round 2 unless they have withdrawn or been banned from Wikipedia. Instead, the contestants with the highest round-point totals now receive tournament points at the end of each round. Unlike the round points in the main WikiCup table, which are reset at the end of each round, tournament points are carried over between rounds and can only be earned if a competitor is among the top 16 round-point scorers. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far.

Round 1 was very competitive compared with previous years; two contestants scored more than 1,000 round points, and the top 16 contestants all scored more than 500 round points. The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:

• Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,168 round points, mainly from 4 featured articles and 4 good articles on old military history, in addition to an assortment of GA and FA reviews.
• Generalissima (submissions) with 1,095 round points, mainly from 2 FAs, 2 featured lists, 8 GAs, and 16 Did You Know articles mainly on historical topics.
• BeanieFan11 (submissions), with 866 round points from 20 GAs, 23 DYKs, and 2 In the News articles primarily about athletes.
• Sammi Brie (submissions), with 846 round points from 16 GAs about radio and TV stations, 45 GA reviews, and 3 DYKs.
• Hey man im josh (submissions), with 816 round points from 5 FLs about sports and Olympic topics, 46 FL reviews, 3 ITN articles, and a large number of bonus points.
• MaranoFan (submissions), with 815 round points primarily from 3 FAs and 1 GA about music, in addition to 9 article reviews.

The full scores for round 1 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 18 featured articles, 26 featured lists, 1 featured-topic article, 197 good articles, 38 good-topic articles and more than 100 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 23 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 550 reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after 26 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2, which begins on 1 March. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:13, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

good day; i'm rather new, and would really like to try something new; the problem is that because of how complex some tools are, i have struggled deeply. how do i add different languages to a page? --SSCITYOFMIDLAND41 (talk) 15:21, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SSCITYOFMIDLAND41: Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Here is a primer that might help you. I know how complicated it is to start editing Wikipedia—heck, even after years of editing, I'm still learning as well. There are some tasks at the Wikipedia:Task Center that you might find easy enough to start out with, and they really help improve the encyclopedia. I think what you're referring to is translating articles from one language to another. The first step is to make sure you know the language, since a machine translation is worse than nothing, and then you can take a look at Help:Translation. That being said, translating articles is a pretty hard task that I wouldn't recommend for newcomers, because you have to learn some of the basics of what articles are formatted like to be able to translate articles, which can be only really be learned with time. Try some of the tasks at the Task Center, learn, make some mistakes, and then it would be awesome if you can help translate articles. Cheers, and let me know if you have any further questions! ‍Relativity ⚡️ 02:06, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]