User talk:GoldRomean: Difference between revisions

Line 284: Line 284:

so i have a couple of questions about wikipedia hierarchy, how do you become a mentor and what happens when you do and how do you do the job, how is a template published and is there anything that happens when you become a experienced user and is there any other titles i need to know about like a title more experienced than experienced user etc and who gets chosen to accept and deny articles, also is Wikipedia hierarchy a real term, how do you create a help page and do you need to have certain specifications to make one or can anyone make one as long as it’s a good article and do any of the notability rules apply to them since it’s about Wikipedia so providing notability without referencing itself is impossible. –[[User:Misterpotatoman|Misterpotatoman]] ([[User talk:Misterpotatoman|talk]]) 01:44, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

so i have a couple of questions about wikipedia hierarchy, how do you become a mentor and what happens when you do and how do you do the job, how is a template published and is there anything that happens when you become a experienced user and is there any other titles i need to know about like a title more experienced than experienced user etc and who gets chosen to accept and deny articles, also is Wikipedia hierarchy a real term, how do you create a help page and do you need to have certain specifications to make one or can anyone make one as long as it’s a good article and do any of the notability rules apply to them since it’s about Wikipedia so providing notability without referencing itself is impossible. –[[User:Misterpotatoman|Misterpotatoman]] ([[User talk:Misterpotatoman|talk]]) 01:44, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

:Here we go—hopefully this answers everything: Users that meet the requirements (500 edits/90 days) can sign up to become a mentor. There’s not really much to it—new users like you come to my talk page to ask questions, and I try to answer them :). “Experienced user” can be defined in many different ways. It usually just means somebody who is generally, well, an experienced Wikipedia editor; it is not a special right or title that someone really gets. We have lots of user rights, but no titles! User rights are something that helps folks do their jobs better, not a symbol of status—it is absolutely possible for someone with no extra rights to be an extremely experienced editor and know more about editing than someone who does have a couple. Regarding “accepting” and “denying” articles, if you mean at [[WP:AFC|Articles for Creation]], [[WP:NPR|New Page Reviewers]] or those who successfully apply at [[WT:AFCP]] can review drafts. Is “Wikipedia hierarchy” a real term? Depends on how you’d define a “real term”. [[WP:POWER]] may interest you.

:Templates and help pages can be created by all autoconfirmed users—though before doing so you should think about whether it is really necessary to create a new one—we have a lot of templates, and our vast array of help/informational pages, both in the Help: namespace and others, cover a lot of information. Notability is only relevant to mainspace articles (and drafts, I suppose)—not project pages like Wikipedia: or Help:. Best, [[User:GoldRomean|GoldRomean]] ([[User talk:GoldRomean#top|talk]]) 04:57, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

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

Hi GoldRomean! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! JarrahTree 13:55, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again,

Hope you’re doing well, GoldRomean.

I come to you today with another inane question. The TV show Sherlock’s awards page was one of the featured articles a few days ago, and that led me down a rabbit hole reading through the show’s wiki, and noticed its less-than-positive reception amongst YouTube video essayists is not referenced. And it made me think: can a YouTube channel/video be used as a source of reference for a wiki page?

I sought clarity in the Teahouse but I still don’t have it. Apparently a YouTube video critique of the show was not notable enough (despite its reach) but its opinions being mentioned in other publications on similar topics was. Now, it is possible that I might be missing what is immediately apparent to the more experienced editors, but what makes an art critique in print different from an art critique in long-form video? Is it the difference between self-publishing vs. editorial oversight, where video essays can essentially be considered as blogs? Both mediums are channels for subjective opinions, so that is the only point of difference that I can think of.

On a related note, many publications and media houses now operate a host of video-based channels and internet-only podcast/video shows. Can those be used as a notable reference for wiki articles?

In short, I’m looking for guidelines/policies/discussions/rulings around the topic but haven’t been able to find any yet. Anything referencing video essays – or the arguments for/against – that you can direct me to would be supremely helpful.

Another question that I had during: if a publication is known to take editorial responsibility for all content published by it, including contributor/freelance content, and is generally considered a reliable source in a domain by Wikipedia, does that mean the reliability can be taken to also extend to a related field?

I apologise for foisting all these queries unto you. I’m sure there are clear, obvious answers to these that I might feel like a fool for asking sometime later, but I don’t want ignorance to be basis for presumption and my own search for them has come up short.

Thanks! Srambled089 (talk) 22:48, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Srambled089!

Seems like you’ve got the gist of it. Essentially, anyone can create and post anything on YouTube. On the other hand, I’d hope that something published in, say, The New York Times is by someone who is more knowledgeable in the field and has undergone editing and editorial oversight. (This however does not mean that everything on YouTube is unreliable and everything on a website is; for example, a WordPress blog is no good (WP:SPS), whist a NYT video may be considered reliable.) This ties into your related note—the short answer is yes, generally (WP:YOUTUBE-EL).

See also WP:RSPYT, which also links to about three dozen discussions about the topic (which you certainly do not need to read!). If you have not found it already, WP:RSP also has a ton of information about the reliability of some commonly discussed sources; WP:RSPN is a noticeboard where editors try to determine the reliability of various sources. I’ll throw WP:VIDEOLINK in here as well as an essay that may be of interest.

Re. related fields: Honestly, I’m not sure. My gut says that if it was needed to specifically say something was reliable for just that specific topic, I’d be careful about using it for others. I’ll do some digging and see if I can get back to you. I’ll say that generally things tend to be clearer at the list of sources (e.g. “Foo is reliable/unreliable”, or “Foo is reliable/unreliable, except in areas relating to Bar”). As an aside, freelancer content is often not considered the same way! The first example that comes to mind is WP:FORBES (generally reliable) vs WP:FORBESCONTRIBUTORS sources (generally not).

Ultimately, there are really no hard rules. There are always exceptions, and we do not have a clear-cut “yes” or “no” for every source in existence. Thus things are left to your best judgement, and WP:RSN if you’re having trouble :). Again, apologies for dumping a whole ton of information and links (they are for reference only—don’t feel like you need to read everything!); let me know if you need clarification. And there’s no such thing as a stupid question—these were certainly great ones. You’d be surprised at how many answers are simply “use your best judgement” or “maybe” or “it depends”.

All the best, GoldRomean (talk) 15:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the ‘contributors’ referencing trap was something I was aware of from my time working as a content writer. I once wrote a media-facing story for a client using a data point that, prima facie, had been recently referenced and only later realised that information was almost half-a-decade old. No new research along similar lines had come out in the intervening time, so everyone else was using the same datapoint and almost everyone else using it was either a blog post for a business or someone with a specific message to sell as a contributing writer to prominent publications. Though this mistake was never caught, that was the day I learnt the value of digging to primary sources.

Also, don’t apologise for the infodumping – I was asssssssssssking for it, I was dying for it, and honestly I am thankful for it. They will be helpful reading during commutes. Reading Wiki policies has become an adequate replacement for social media for me. I do not yet know if that is a good or bad thing.

Will I be asking more questions? Maybe. It depends.

Should you respond? Use your best judgement.

Cheers! Srambled089 (talk) 16:06, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, that got a smile out of me. Ask away, and happy editing! As for good or bad? Um, it depends. Bit of both, though mostly good, I’d say ;). Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 18:16, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I come back to the website after a hectic workweek and a half – and I come with a related query. Is something posted by a notable publication on their social media page considered a useable source for edits/articles, if they’ve not published it in print/online?

This is in reference to a post that PinkVilla recently made on Facebook, about the first documented queer representation in cinema (a 1927 Soviet movie called Bed and Sofa, apparently). I don’t think that bit is mentioned in Wikipedia so it could be a cool addition if this is allowed to be referenced. Srambled089 (talk) 03:16, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi how are you hope ur well thanks for this opportunity I’ll take it to educate the world about the true nature of Tswana people . Its is not right the information we have other there . I want to write an article . —Tumiiey7k (talk) 18:25, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. There’s a nice guide at WP:YFA. Let me know if you have any questions. Please note that articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic (WP:42). Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 15:10, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ok im now significantly more knowledged on Wikipedia, im thinking about editing the wiki page “unit of time” and adding a section to the wikitable of list of units of time called “pronunciation” where theres pronunciations for each unit of time written in the ipa alphabet, is this notable and a good edit? —Misterpotatoman (talk) 09:18, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Misterpotatoman, that’s a good question! Unfortunately, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Pronunciation#Appropriate use does say that pronunciation should be added sparingly, and usually only be added to the lead section of articles. Best, GoldRomean (talk) 15:14, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

who is monkeysmashingkeyboards? i keep hearing about him and he was my first user message and i thought he was a bot, who is he? is he important? does getting a thank from him mean in successful? —Misterpotatoman (talk) 01:14, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Courtesy ping @Monkeysmashingkeyboards, haha.)

As for who they are, I think they can probably answer that best. I’ve sent them a ping, so they’re free to introduce themselves if they’d like, but I’ll give my answers to your questions in the meantime: Monkeysmashingkeyboards is not a bot! (Bots usually have their bot status clearly mentioned on their user pages.) They are a real person and editor, just like you and I. “Thanks” is just a quick way for someone to say, well, thanks. Getting one from any specific user isn’t really a way to define success (though I guess if you wanted to think of it as such, no one’s stopping you). And finally, I believe that all constructive Wikipedians are incredibly important :). Cheers, @Misterpotatoman. GoldRomean (talk) 01:50, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I’m 2 days late, but hi! I’m Monkeysmashingkeyboards, and no, I’m not a bot. You got a “thanks” because I saw your edits and thought they were a welcome addition to Wikipedia. I’m not anybody important, I’m just yet another Wikipedia editor. Cheers! monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 15:05, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) He’s important to us RCP members =D – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 23:59, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I would argue getting a thanks from Jimbo Wales makes you pretty important. —pro–anti–air ––>(talk)<–– 00:10, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do have mixed opinions on that, although it is interesting that his thanks log is only one entry long. On another note, since it looks like it so happens that the entire dev team is here right now, I’ve been meaning to thank you all for your work on WikiShield! I haven’t had as much time for anti-vandalism lately, but I’ve heard lots of positive feedback about it and the UI looks awesome :). Best, GoldRomean (talk) 00:42, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@GoldRomean Thanks! =) – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 00:44, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MSK summoned us with their monkey stuff I don’t know —pro–anti–air ––>(talk)<–– 01:41, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Issue 6, 21 November 2025

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:16, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

not super important, but is my userpage funny? —Misterpotatoman (talk) 05:27, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ll say it’s interesting, sure. Do keep in mind the purpose of a user page and what a user page is not. GoldRomean (talk) 15:07, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I want to edit a page, but it has a paddle lock on it. Does that mean I am unable to edit it and make a suggestion for a change? The page in question is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Age_of_Disclosure —DrDougB (talk) 14:10, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @DrDougB, and welcome to Wikipedia! Yes, the gray lock means that it is semiprotected; your account needs to be autoconfirmed before you can edit it. You are however allowed to make a suggestion for a change (an edit request) on the article’s talk page (Talk:The Age of Disclosure). The Edit Request Wizard is helpful for this purpose. Best, GoldRomean (talk) 15:06, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Man, 5K now?! It was much a team effort :). And of course, many thanks are owed to you, @LR.127, for spreading the wikilove to those otherwise-unrecognized gnomes in the corners of Wikipedia :D. Thank you very much, and look out for some barnyard animals coming your way. Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 19:25, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that effort and other support in November! – On St. Cecilia’s Day – patron saint of music – I remember a composition by Benjamin Britten, and have a woman on the main page who illustrated songs, with a sense of humour. My places take you to Milan, my first visit to La Scala, and music features our latest choral Abendlob, with English music. —- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerda Arendt (talk • contribs) 19:29, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Gerda! Interesting articles; I shall give the music a listen when I get a chance :). GoldRomean (talk) 19:06, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

// hekatlys [talk] 18:30, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Hekatlys! Just signed up :). Out of curiosity, are you doing all of these notifications manually? GoldRomean (talk) 19:09, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There was a mass message sent earlier, but I’m going through and manually sending some to those who I have seen active but didn’t receive one. // hekatlys [talk] 19:17, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, gotcha, thank you for doing that :). I just added myself to the mailing list, which should hopefully fix things for next time. Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 19:29, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hello I’ve been keep declined for 6months.
I dont understand what is the problem —Gcdgbg (talk) 00:42, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, @Gcdgbg. Do you have any personal connection to KB Securities? You’ve resubmitted the draft, so a reviewer will come by eventually and give you feedback. Don’t worry about the notice you got; old drafts that have not been edited for 6 months are deleted (as you have since edited the article, that 6 month timer is “reset” and you don’t need to worry about it till 2026).

Regarding your article, at a quick glance, it looks like a lot of your statements are uncited, including the entire “Business” section. A good rule of thumb is that basically every piece of information should have a source. Additionally, note WP:42; could you provide your three best sources that show the article meets this criterion? WP:YFA is also a helpful general resource; feel free to ask questions to me or at the Teahouse or Articles for creation help desk as well. Best, GoldRomean (talk) 17:50, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: TheCuriousPen‘s mentor Shushugah is away.

Hi guys, thank you for being my mentors on Wikipedia! I look forward to working with y’all on Wikipedia edits and I look forward to learning from your experience. —TheCuriousPen (talk) 22:49, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @TheCuriousPen, and welcome! Glad to have you here :). GoldRomean (talk) 23:13, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Does removing biased or value-claim phrasing fulfill Wikipedia’s neutrality standard, or does the determination that such language is biased constitute a bias itself? My second question: Is the removal of unfounded speculation considered standard practice in Wikipedia editing? For example, if an article contains a parenthetical claim such as “(likely planted by Z)’” and there is no empirical basis for the claim and no notable advocate for it, is the correct action simply to delete it… specifically when it really doesn’t add to the context or point of the paragraph or section in any way? —Simplyggs (talk) 23:31, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Simplyggs, welcome to Wikipedia! Great questions. It’s true that your first question presents a bit of a dilemma, but yes, you should generally remove biased content, generally (see WP:NPOV for more info). If someone objects to your removal (perhaps, as you mentioned, they thought you were biased in determining what was biased), you can discuss and work things out on the article talk page (that’s WP:BRD and WP:DR, for reference).

To answer your second question, yes, you should remove unfounded speculation! This is especially important if it relates to a living person or a contentious topic, which should be edited about with more care, but even if not, such claims should be deleted (though it’s worth seeing if you can find a source first, especially if it’s about something relatively boring that probably wasn’t added with malicious / POV-pushing intent. I’d argue that if it really doesn’t add to the context or point […] in any way, you should probably remove founded speculation too. Hope that helps. Again, welcome and cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 00:29, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:49, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

im considering making a article about a 2.5 million subscriber animation youtuber called mikan, how do i write this? do i include the animation software they use like (mikan is a animation channel using algodoo) or some in universe lore like (mikan is a youtube channel featuring commonly multiple multicolored…) or some general information like, (mikan is a 2.5 miliion subscriber channel…) or maybe all of them (mikan is a 2.5 million subscriber physics simulation animation videos commonly featuring multiple multicolored marbles, humanoids or worms surviving a challenge…) personally, I’d do all and the all example is basically how the article will sound like but shortened and should i include links to the they’re youtube channel like (mikan|/̲̅^̲̅|̲̅) —Misterpotatoman (talk) 04:05, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Misterpotatoman! First thing you have to do before even starting to write a new article is see if this topic meets our inclusion criterion; what sources can you provide that show this meets WP:42? GoldRomean (talk) 04:09, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lekhpal Singh Chandrawat is a famous Indian Tech YouTuber, singer, musician, actor and internet celebrity born in India. Lekhpal Singh Chandrawat was born in Bhatkheda Madhya Pradesh. His father’s name is Balwant Singh Chandrawat and his mother’s name is Seema Kunwar Rajput. Lekhpal Singh Chandrawat has been interested in singing, acting, technology, mobile, computer since childhood, as well as he is very interested in all these. He studied till class 8th from Gurukul School Kalukheda, Lekhpal Singh has a younger brother named Tejpal Singh Chandrawat.

At the age of 16, he created his own identity on YouTube as a tech YouTuber “Technical Bharat” in Bhatkheda village, where Lekhpal used to make technical videos, but in the year 2018, due to YouTube’s community guidelines, Lekhpal’s channel was suspended by YouTube. Overnight, more than 60,000 subscribers were lost, meaning Lekhpal Singh’s channel was suspended by YouTube

Career – He started his career as a music video editor in 2018 and is currently active in the music industry. He is also known as an actor and music director.

IMDB Mini Biography Author: Lekhpal Singh Chandrawat

Has released music projects on many different music platforms like Spotify, Google Play Music, YouTube Music, Apple Music, iTunes, Amazon Music and many other international platforms like Deezer and Tidal. And also you can find his music on Tik Tok library or Instagram and Facebook posts he has been verified on all these music platforms and if you have interest in his art then it’s easy to search him and you can easily find his real profile.

His name became even more famous when he won the dream11 of IPL 2024 and won the amount of 3 crores. The net worth of Lekhpal Singh Chandrawat is 5 crores

Lekhpal Singh Chandrawat was born on 21 April 2004 in Bhatkheda, Ratlam district, Madhya Pradesh —Lekhpalsingh7697 (talk) 09:45, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Lekhpalsingh7697 – I am not sure what you are trying to do by sending me this, but if it is to create an article for yourself, please see WP:AUTOBIO, and, more importantly, our inclusion criterion. Best, GoldRomean (talk) 17:34, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:GoldRomean: In early October, you were kind enough to review and approve an edit suggestion I had for the article about Daily Harvest. I have another request pending that I posted on October 17th. I was wondering if you might have time to review that content? I appreciate your time and assistance. Best, Marksherr16 (talk) 16:58, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message! I’ll try to take a look, but no guarantees – the backlog is long and we reviewers are all just volunteers. Best, GoldRomean (talk) 17:36, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, DaniloDaysOfOurLives! This has certainly made my day better :). Have a wonderful Thanksgiving. GoldRomean (talk) 17:38, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whenever someone replies to me in a talkpage without ping, there just isn’t a notification showing that they replied. How do I make these notifs appear? — in the club bumping that 15:47, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! WP:SUBSCRIBE is probably what you’re looking for. I believe you are automatically subscribed to conversations that you are a part of (see if this reply, which I won’t ping you in, sends you a notification?). Alternatively, you can watchlist the talk page or use a template like {{ppor}}. Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 17:37, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

oh i did receive notifs for this one. ty ! — in the club bumping that 17:39, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I just wanted to say thanks for taking care of the Seattle Kraken GA review when I wasn’t there. Just wanted to let you know I really appreciate it, and I hope to get back o editing soon. XR228 (talk) 22:51, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

so i have a couple of questions about wikipedia hierarchy, how do you become a mentor and what happens when you do and how do you do the job, how is a template published and is there anything that happens when you become a experienced user and is there any other titles i need to know about like a title more experienced than experienced user etc and who gets chosen to accept and deny articles, also is Wikipedia hierarchy a real term, how do you create a help page and do you need to have certain specifications to make one or can anyone make one as long as it’s a good article and do any of the notability rules apply to them since it’s about Wikipedia so providing notability without referencing itself is impossible. —Misterpotatoman (talk) 01:44, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here we go—hopefully this answers everything: Users that meet the requirements (500 edits/90 days) can sign up to become a mentor. There’s not really much to it—new users like you come to my talk page to ask questions, and I try to answer them :). “Experienced user” can be defined in many different ways. It usually just means somebody who is generally, well, an experienced Wikipedia editor; it is not a special right or title that someone really gets. We have lots of user rights, but no titles! User rights are something that helps folks do their jobs better, not a symbol of status—it is absolutely possible for someone with no extra rights to be an extremely experienced editor and know more about editing than someone who does have a couple. Regarding “accepting” and “denying” articles, if you mean at Articles for Creation, New Page Reviewers or those who successfully apply at WT:AFCP can review drafts. Is “Wikipedia hierarchy” a real term? Depends on how you’d define a “real term”. WP:POWER may interest you.

Templates and help pages can be created by all autoconfirmed users—though before doing so you should think about whether it is really necessary to create a new one—we have a lot of templates, and our vast array of help/informational pages, both in the Help: namespace and others, cover a lot of information. Notability is only relevant to mainspace articles (and drafts, I suppose)—not project pages like Wikipedia: or Help:. Best, GoldRomean (talk) 04:57, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]