User talk:Ca

	; Archives (Index) ;
	2022/December; 2023/January; 2023/February; 2023/April; 2023/July; 2023/August; 2023/September; 2023/October; 2023/November; 2023/December; 2024/January; 2024/February; 2024/March; 2024/April; 2024/May; 2024/June; 2024/July; 2024/August; 2024/September; 2024/October;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

이 사용자는 한국어가 모어입니다.

en-2

This user can contribute with an intermediate level of English.

tok-1

mi sona lili e toki pona.

es-1

Este usuario puede contribuir con un nivel básico de español.

Search user languages

Rejection of the St. Joseph Shrine (Quezon City) Draft

I always knew that primarily using the livestream from the church's Facebook page would result in the rejection of the draft article, but by being a primary source, it was also the most detailed one compared to independent sources I found about the shrine, which unfortunately are few in quantity, have more summarized information, and come from websites deemed generally unreliable (such as this one from WordPress). That being said, thank you for rejecting the draft.

However, in previous versions of the draft, I used a reference from the website Philippine Faith & Heritage Tours, whose site was used as a reference for the history of Cubao Cathedral. However, the website went down, rendering the link dead. I did not know that it was archived in Wayback Machine until today, so could using this archived link be acceptable?

-Chris25689 (talk) 06:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PS: When I created the draft, I selected I'm not connected to the subject in the Article Wizard, but since I regularly attend Sunday masses in that shrine, and I am now an altar server in the shrine months after the draft's creation, I should have selected I'm writing about myself, or a close person/subject instead. Chris25689 (talk) 06:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Primary sources are useful for filling in minor details, especially for a niche subject like the one you are writing right now. However, over-reliance on the subject's own content does not represent a multiple nor disinterested perspective. Use of archived links is perfectly legitimate. There is even an automated bot that adds web archive links when it finds a dead link. Try the guide WP:Advanced source searching to aid you in finding sources. Good luck! Ca ^{talk to me!} 09:54, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much!

-Chris25689 (talk) 12:35, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good day Ca!

I actually know that archived links are legitimate, but when I asked if Philippine Faith and Heritage Tour (not Tours) source was "acceptable," what I meant was that if it, at least in your opinion, met the criteria of reliable sources. Although I stated that it was used in another article, it could just be me committing an argumentum ad populum fallacy if the aforementioned website is unreliable.

Also, is the creation of archive links automatic? I noticed that the archive date was the same date as when I created the draft.

Thank you!

Chris25689 (talk) 05:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

I don't think Philippine Faith and Heritage Tour can be considered reliable. It is a commercial website selling tours, and there is no sign of who wrote the article or whether the author is an expert or not.

As for the second question, yes, there is a handy bot called User:InternetArchiveBot that automatically archives websites linked on Wikipedia. Ca ^{talk to me!} 11:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brain rot

Have you heard of Brain rot? I will tell you that it was a redirect to Alzheimers. Then after the rfd discussion, it was a soft redirect to wiktionary. AND THEN it was a full article. And that's the story of the Wikipedia article. AutorisedUser673 (talk) 17:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to know. I actually edited that page yesterday. 👍 Ca ^{talk to me!} 10:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i am a fweqwent editor of that article and Canada it is a ok article but it is a Stub so its really short and kinda useless. 4.39.220.106 (talk) 14:27, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Unalive

Hello, Ca. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Unalive, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:31, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Leendert1988 (13:09, 19 September 2024)

Why can't I login to the Dutch wikipidia? --Leendert1988 (talk) 13:09, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure, perhaps try reading Help:Logging in? If it does not help, I recommend asking the Wikipedia:Teahouse. Ca ^{talk to me!} 13:13, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Leendert1988 (13:15, 19 September 2024)

I want to edit a Dutch page, but I'm blocked to the Dutch wikipedia (nl.wikipedia.org). Don't know why. --Leendert1988 (talk) 13:15, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Leendert1988 Are you still logged out on Dutch Wikipedia? Ca ^{talk to me!} 09:29, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. It works, thanks 93.95.4.86 (talk) 11:30, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Your block on Dutch Wikipedia might be due to someone else in your IP range doing something to get blocked. Ca ^{talk to me!} 12:05, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Elijahman112 (23:00, 26 September 2024)

Hi, can you review my first edit? I want to make sure I am doing it right! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=KLOK_%28AM%29&oldid=prev&diff=1247961379 --Elijahman112 (talk) 23:00, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am glad to see you edit Wikipedia! I looked through your edit, and I definitely see improved prose. I do see that you have mistakenly removed some of the citations and information about the poll system, so I recommend adding them back. 👍 Ca ^{talk to me!} 01:34, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rejection of Draft:Future_Hunters

Hi Ca, thank you for reviewing my article. I believe that I've done my homework to establish notability of the topic and verifiability now. I've also added some contemporary reviews. Could you have another look at it? Thanks! Lipla (talk) 12:30, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lipla Hi, thank you for adding the new references! I have accepted the draft. The article should appear on Google in a couple of months. You could also try adding an image of the movie poster (if it exists), following the guideline WP:non-free media. Ca ^{talk to me!} 14:03, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IDK

IDK 103.186.247.79 (talk) 02:15, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024 NPP backlog drive – Points award

		The Invisible Barnstar
		This award is given in recognition to Ca for accumulating at least 5 points during the September 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions helped play a part in the 19,000+ articles and 35,000+ redirects reviewed (for a total of 26,884.6 points) completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 15:35, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A bearnstar for you

		The Barnstar EATEN BY A BEAR
		For your paws-itive contributions on improving the Fat Bear Week article

Cmrc23 (talk) 22:13, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar

Hello @Ca

You reviewed a page I was heavily involved in, John Morgan, 6th Baron Tredegar, about 4 months ago.

At the time, it had 28 citations, and you rated it C-Class on the content assessment scale. As it now has 56, would you consider reviewing it again, to see if, in your opinion, it has moved up the scale?

Mac Edmunds (talk) 07:06, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, from a quick look, the article is quite good! It's written well and is comprehensive. I think the rating deserves a change. Article ratings are quite arbitrary, and anyone can change it, even article creators. You may be interested in nominating this article through the WP:Good article process, where it will be formally reviewed by another editors, and it will recieve a green badge in the corner. Ca ^{talk to me!} 14:54, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, very helpful. I have now nominated it for GA assessment. Mac Edmunds (talk) 17:42, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For Article creation of irfan Aslam

hi @Ca i need your help to publish this article. i tried my best to publish it but the some stupid Guy Pakistani Named saqib he rejected it and says i am wasting others time. can you review it more aand also one more thing that he have only these links of his work on internet.... waiting for your reply Faizullah Anwar (talk) 11:10, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Faizullah Anwar I will not be helping you further as you are very rude to other editors. Ca ^{talk to me!} 12:26, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not rude..i was frustrated I was asking that person for help you can see my previous reply to him..but he didn't help me.. 2404:3100:1405:EC7A:1:0:419A:456D (talk) 12:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What has the user's ethnicity got to do with anything? We are on here to create a free encyclopaedia - it's not a place for any type of controversial debate. Mac Edmunds (talk) 17:44, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly... But the guy saying that I am here for wasting others time... If newbie start Wikipedia I think seniors should have to help him out..not saying like this we are not helping you... 2404:3100:1405:EC7A:1:0:419A:456D (talk) 17:52, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Matka (film)

Hi @Ca, I Hope you’re well. Can you review this draft page Draft:Matka (film).Thankyou. MySlack1222 (talk) 16:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]