Jump to content

User talk:Perfect4th

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Signpost: 1 May 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:18, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 May 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:59, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question from JoshBeat Benin (07:26, 19 May 2025)

[edit]

How to edit --JoshBeat Benin (talk) 07:27, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JoshBeat Benin, and welcome to Wikipedia! You can visit Help:Introduction to get started, and I’ll put a few other helpful links on your talk page as well. Feel free to drop by here with any more questions, and happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 19:31, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question from SirPenguin25 (09:46, 20 May 2025)

[edit]

Is english.radio.cz considered a reliable source?

Thanks! --SirPenguin25 (talk) 09:46, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, SirPenguin25! Welcome to Wikipedia! Sorry for my delayed response; I've been travelling and forgot to set my status to away while I was gone. The general idea of evaluating source reliability involves looking at each component of whether it is an independent, published source... with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. When you're looking at a source, what does it tell you about its independence or its processes for ensuring accuracy? It's important to remember reliability is a scale, too, not just a black-and-white categorization. You can also ask about a source on the reliable sources noticeboard if you ever have any questions.
For this specific source, I also looked through previous discussions on Wikipedia and what I saw seemed to indicate it was generally accepted as reliable; the news organizations section of the reliable sources guideline says well-established news outlets is generally considered to be reliable for statements of fact – I'm not personally familiar with that source, so I can't speak to how well-established it is, but those signs are generally good.
Hope this helps, and let me know if you have any more questions! Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 22:12, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question from LanternTail (17:13, 21 May 2025)

[edit]

Hello there! I would like to ask, when can or should sic be used?

I've found a spelling mistake on page Gregory_Kelly_(actor), but the error is in a quotebox template - When it's in a quotebox does it still need sic or is it obvious that it's taken from elsewhere and sic is not needed? --LanternTail (talk) 17:13, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LanternTail, and welcome! So sorry for the delay in responding – I was travelling and forgot to set myself away until I could log back in. Wikipedia has a template for adding sic to quotes, but according to the Manual of Style minor spelling errors don't have to be replicated and can be simply fixed. You can see the full guideline at the original wording section of the Manual of Style. Hope this helps, and happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 22:12, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Mindfold24 (22:08, 23 May 2025)

[edit]

Hello! I see that you are my mentor. I wanted to ask you how specific I should be in the explanation of my edits? --Mindfold24 (talk) 22:08, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Mindfold24, and welcome! Sorry for the delay – I was travelling. I'm assuming you are referring to edit summaries. The answer is that it depends – what are you doing in the edit? If you're fixing a typo or a grammar mistake, very little explanation is usually expected. "Typo" or "grammar" is usually sufficient (and some editors just use abbreviations like "sp" or "ce". Here's a list of some common edit summary abbreviations in case it helps). For more substantial changes, though, a sentence or two explanation is helpful, especially for controversial changes, as this helps other editors understand your thought process. One issue you may unfortunately run into is that some editors don't always realize edits from new accounts are trying to help if they don't contain an edit summary because vandals often don't use edit summaries. In summary, the more substantial your changes, the better it is to have a more thorough summary, though a couple sentences is usually enough. I'm outing myself as more of a "gnomish" (editor that tend to make more maintenance/minor edits instead of more major edits) editor, but here's some edits I've made, from less to more substance, in case that helps:
  • fixing a link & punctuation: "ce"
  • removing a section: "long list of locations is not necessary to understand the material, removing and condensing remaining single-sentence paragraphs into one"
  • changing a fact that had been in an article for a while: "ce & update: ref says [fact which was incorrect in the article], add Dallas Seavey breaking record to end of lead (which described only Mitch Seavey's record in 2017) to match infobox, adding the same to records & awards" (the fact wasn't supported by the source behind it)
This was probably more information than you were wanting, but let me know if you have any more questions, and happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 22:12, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Thank you very much for the detailed response. This helps a lot. Mindfold24 (talk) 18:22, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mindfold24, I'm glad! Feel free to stop by if you have any more questions! Perfect4th (talk) 03:14, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Allanwjanssen (20:18, 31 May 2025)

[edit]

I wrote an article on biopanentheism in the sandbox, now, how do I publish it? --Allanwjanssen (talk) 20:18, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Allanwjanssen, and welcome! Articles on Wikipedia should demonstrate notability as Wikipedia defines it – they need to have multiple published, reliable sources discussing the subject. Just to prepare you: that is not always possible for some article subjects. Articles also need to be written neutrally. If you are connected to the subject, you might have a conflict of interest that should be disclosed, as it makes writing neutrally difficult. If notability can be and is established and once other content policies such as neutrality are followed, you can submit your article through the Articles for Creation draft process (as I see you have already tried a hand at), where it can then become a published article. This is a pretty high-level overview, so feel free to ask about any questions you may have, and happy editing ~ Perfect4th (talk) 03:14, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Virsagisces (00:58, 1 June 2025)

[edit]

If I remove trolling from a page, how can I make sure an admin can see that I did that so said person doesn’t do it again? --Virsagisces (talk) 00:58, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Virsagisces, and welcome! You can report especially bad vandalism at the administrators' intervention against vandalism board, but the most common practice is to warn trolls for vandalism edits with escalating User warning templates so that they have a chance to stop and a warning before being reported to that board (often abbreviated "AIV". This usually takes the form of escalating through warning template 1, then 2, 3, 4, and then reporting to AIV, where an admin can take further action as necessary. You can use Twinkle to make warning easier, and if you want to get further involved in antivandalism, feel free to check out the Counter-Vandalism Academy for more tips and opportunities to learn best practices. Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 03:14, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question from SURFLINER GIO (01:51, 4 June 2025)

[edit]

hello how do you make a wiki page --SURFLINER GIO (talk) 01:51, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User indefinitely blocked for vandalism. Perfect4th (talk) 03:14, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Iamyoyramha (08:08, 5 June 2025)

[edit]

Where should I discuss changing the photo or changing something? --Iamyoyramha (talk) 08:08, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Iamyoyramha, and welcome! The best place to discuss changes to an article is usually its talk page. Let me know if you have any more questions, and happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 03:14, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Wikilover30 (12:56, 8 June 2025)

[edit]

Where is the button to create Wiki --Wikilover30 (talk) 12:56, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Wikilover30, and welcome! I'm afraid I'm a bit confused – could you clarify your question? If you're asking about editing in general, you can check out Help:Editing for some tips. Let me know if you have any more questions! Perfect4th (talk) 02:45, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question from 99cd (19:29, 12 June 2025)

[edit]

Hello GreyStorm! Where do you get your info from? --99cd (talk) 19:29, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 99cd, and welcome to Wikipedia! Your mentor GrayStorm is away for a while, so you've got me in the meantime. I'm Perfect4th (you can check out my user page for a little more about me if you'd like). I'll try and help with your questions. Can you clarify what information you're asking about? Are you referring to articles GrayStorm has been editing, or something else? Feel free to drop by with any other questions too! Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 16:31, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Growth News #34

[edit]
Extended content

A quarterly update from the Growth team on our work to improve the new editor experience.

Mentoring new editors

[edit]

In February, Mentorship was successfully rolled out to 100% of newcomers on English Wikipedia. Following this milestone, we collaborated with Spanish Wikipedia to expand Mentorship coverage to 70% of new accounts, with plans to reach 85% soon unless concerns are raised by mentors. (T394867)

“Add a Link” Task – Iteration and Experimentation

[edit]

Our efforts to improve and scale the “Add a Link” structured task continued across multiple fronts:

  • Community Feedback & Model Improvements: We’ve responded to community concerns with targeted changes:
    • Restricting access to newer accounts (T393688)
    • Some links types were removed to align with recommendations written in the English Wikipedia Manual of Style (T390683)
    • Allowing communities to limit “Add a Link” to newcomers (T393771)
    • The model used to suggest the links was improved to ease its training (T388258)
  • English Wikipedia rollout and A/B test: We increased the rollout to 20% of newcomers, with analysis underway. Preliminary data suggests this feature makes new account holders more likely to complete an unreverted edit. (T386029, T382603)
  • Surfacing Structured Tasks: An experiment where we show “add a link” suggestions to newly registered users while they are reading an article is running on pilot wikis (French, Persian, Indonesian, Portuguese, Egyptian Arabic). Initial results are under analysis. (T386029)

Newcomer Engagement Features

[edit]
  • “Get Started” notification: Engineering is in progress for a new notification (Echo/email) to encourage editing among newcomers with zero edits. Early research shows this type of nudge is effective. (T392256)
  • Confirmation email: We are exploring ways to simplify and improve the initial account confirmation email newly registered users receive. (T215665)

Community Configuration Enhancements

[edit]

Communities can now manage which namespaces are eligible for Event Registration via Community Configuration. (T385341)

Annual Planning

[edit]

The Wikimedia Foundation’s 2025–2026 Annual Plan is taking shape. The Growth and Editing teams will focus on the Contributor Experiences (WE1) objective, with a focus on increasing constructive edits by editors with fewer than 100 cumulative contributions.

Get Involved

[edit]

We value your insights and ideas! If you would like to participate in a discussion, share feedback, or pilot new features, please reach out on the relevant Phabricator tasks or at our talk page, in any language.

Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:51, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 June 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:29, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Perfect4th&oldid=1297085921"