User talk:Vanderwaalforces

Guild of Copy Editors April 2025 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the April 2025 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since December. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. We extend a warm welcome to all of our new members. We wish you all happy copy-editing. Election results: In our December 2025 coordinator election, Wracking stepped down as coordinator; we thank them for their service. Incumbents Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, and Mox Eden were reelected coordinators, and IQR and WikiEditor5678910 were newly elected coordinator, to serve through 30 June. Nominations for our mid-year Election of Coordinators will open on 1 June (UTC). Drive: 55 editors signed up for our January Backlog Elimination Drive 33 claimed at least one copy-edit and copy-edited 611,404 words in 237 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. Blitz: 14 editors signed up for our February Copy Editing Blitz. 10 claimed at least one copy-edit and copy-edited 46,749 words in 18 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. Drive: 47 editors signed up for our March Backlog Elimination Drive. 28 claimed at least one copy-edit and copy-edited 479,172 words in 207 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. Blitz: Sign up for our April Copy Editing Blitz, which runs from 13 to 19 April. Barnstars will be awarded here. Progress report: As of 9:45, 12 April 2024 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 89 requests since 1 January 2024, and the backlog stands at 2,264 articles. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, IQR, Miniapolis, Mox Eden and WikiEditor5678910. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:55, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

dcw2003 want to let you know: I know the weekend is over and you will have less time. But for what its worth...

I also recently completed and uploaded Clark Yeager (swim coach), a good detailed article if you have time to review it, or certainly if you prefer better to pass it along to someone else who might be interested in reviewing it, as I know you have been very busy. Thanks for all your kind words in your last few messages. Dcw2003 (talk)

@Dcw2003: Thank you for writing! I will check it out when I have time, you're doing a great job :) --Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:11, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dcw2003 Hi there. I got to this today, I think it looks great, assuming good faith on the offline sources, since I do not have access to them. Great job! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:38, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The offline articles are newspapers which are a bit detailed. Thanks for your kind words, and hard work. I use a lot of newspapers having an online archive, but I might be better off reducing my level of detail such as quoting times from newspapers for swimmers. I do double check to verify my source information.

Thanks again for your hard work!! Dcw2003 (talk) 15:47, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Still unable to access Clark Yeager (swimmer) from outside wiki. Enjoy your edit, hes an interesting coach, and let me know when you complete your edit. I'm available for any questions. You must be a very thorough editor, and I must admit I always worry when my work is being edited. Thanks again for your hard work!!! Dcw2003 (talk) 15:56, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I mean Clark Yeager, not Clark Yeager (swimmer) Dcw2003 (talk) 15:57, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dcw2003 You did a good job too by coming up with that article, it is a detailed biography, and I love it. Thank you for your kind words too :) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:50, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dcw2003 Hello there today, I hope you're doing well. Try rewriting the third and fourth paragraphs of the section "Simon Fraser swim coach" in Liam Donnelly (swim coach) as it is turning up close paraphrasing and direct copy-paste. Let me know when you're able to do it. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:16, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just deleted those sections. Try them again. I left one sentence. Dcw2003 (talk) 21:51, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer not to delete secions. I never do direct copy-paste, but paraphrasing to my knowledge is not pledgarism. I was writing about his employment history. A title Director of Athletics is Director of Athetics for example. You can't change the wording and still retain the actual title.

But I've tried anyway. I've changed the name of some of his titles. I don't really think this is a good idea. Anyway I made major changes or deletions. Dcw2003 (talk) 22:57, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dcw2003 You didn't have to delete the sections, I specifically suggested you rewrite them (and not delete) them, because I thought they contained important details about the subject. Also, yeah, definitely, there are titles that cannot be changed. Before you deleted it, for example, the following paragraph was a close paraphrasing/direct copy of this source: Donnelly guided SFU teams to 374 national individual titles and 62 NAIA national championship records. He mentored three NCAA individual champions, 42 All-Americans, 12 Scholar All-Americans and had several swimmers represent Canada at the world championships, World University Games and the Pan American Games. Three of his swimmers have set Canadian records.

In a situation like this, I would something like the below as I think it would suffice and not be close paraphrasing and copyvio; During Donnelly's tenure, athletes from Simon Fraser University won 374 national individual titles and established 62 records at NAIA national championships. His coaching tenure coincided with the emergence of three NCAA individual champions, 42 All-American honorees, and 12 Scholar All-Americans. His record also includes swimmers who represented Canada at international competitions such as the World Aquatics Championships, Universiade, and Pan American Games, with three swimmers setting new Canadian records.

I have gone ahead and fixed the article, I hope you like what you see. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:48, 2 May 2025 (UTC) I like what I see, but please complete your edits, so the article can be accessed externally from wiki. Thank you!!!![reply]

OK, I am pleased you rewrote this. I personally don't mind rewriting, but I felt I had paraphrased pretty extensively. Thanks for going to the trouble of rewriting the section yourself. If you can be more specific (AND I KNOW THIS ISN"T EASY) I'll rewrite paragraphs, but since I use multiple sources, its difficult to know which source document I plagarizing from. THank-you Thank-you Thank-you for going to the trouble of rewriting yourself. If you can be more specific about which sections to rewrite and what source document is being (Plagarized) that would help. I was just tired that day. I never cut and paste, without paraphrasing to begin with. I'll study your re-write more thoroughly. Thanks again!!!!

Also, please try rewriting the "Coaching and teaching" and "Honors" sections of Dick Smith (diver) as that have pretty much the same problem. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:29, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted most of these sections. They are significantly reworded from the source documents. I don't know how else you can say where someone worked and when they worked there without come copying from the source document. And honors are honors. I could reorder them I geuss. But I just deleted them. Perhaps you can suggest changes. Its been along time since I wrote them. I've made significant changes to the Coaching and teaching section, but mostly deleted about 1/4 of it. Perhaps you could suggest a way to list honors. You can't reword an honor. Whey delete them? I'll reorder them I geuss. Dcw2003 (talk) 22:00, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I worked some more on Dick Smith. Its a long article, and he had an extensive work history. I've changed the name of many of his work and titles. Its hard to compare the text to the source document when you have 10 source documents. But I've done this and hope you're not happy with it. Sorry I deleted it originally. I've reworked the sections you added back. David Dcw2003 (talk) 16:27, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you've completed your edits on Liam Donnelly since I can access it except if I'm already on wikipedia. Let me know if youre're satisfied with it now.

I can reword Dick Smith some more. I deleted the sections because I wasn't entirely sure what the source documents said, since I used as many as 15 source documents with some articles. I'll look at Dick Smith again. Dcw2003 (talk) 15:48, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrote Dick Smith, and changed slightly the names of the titles he held, but I think it Diminishes the accuracy of the detail some, but thats ok. A Manager is not a director, but OK, I changed Director to Manager. Nonetheless, I'm thrilled you rewrote some of Liam Donelly. Please reply. Please reply. I feel badly I haven't pleased you with my changes. I deleted earlier because I just think its easier than changing the name of titles. A President can be changed to Executive, but its not the same. But thats what I did. Or Chief Executive. I normally paraphrase, but this can be tricky. Thanks for your patience. I'd be pleased if you'd respond. Dcw2003 (talk) 16:22, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dcw2003 Hi today. Do not bother any longer, I have already fixed these pages myself, and yes, I am done editing them now :)

Happy editing! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:33, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank-you so much. I already went ahead and made some minor changes to Dick Smith reflected in position titles and descriptions only. I greatly appreciate your hard work, and feel badly I've not met your standard. You're welcome to make changes yourself, of course, but considering there was a list of job titles, I was reluctant to change his titles and the names of his functions. (Dick Smith) I'll try to be more careful in the future. You did an exceptional job changing Dick Smith yourself, I was just a bit exhausted on the day I deleted some of the text. I may try to include less detail for topics where it is difficult to change text such as job descriptions or names of honors. If you're satisfied with a page after you edit it, let me know, or I may return and re-edit it.

Thank you so much!!!!!! You're an exceptionally hard worker! Dcw2003 (talk) 17:20, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dcw2003 I think I enjoyed fixing these articles, really; thank you so much for the extraordinary compliments. Don’t hesitate to reach out whenever you have any questions regarding situations like this ;) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:12, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you enjoyed fixing them. You've truly been a great aid. I'm working on another Hall of Fame Coach and will let you know when I finish him, but do worry about re-writing. I'll try harder. I get so flustered, I've been changing vice president to Vice Chief Executive to avoid too much copying. I'm also changing order frequently. I can write well, but its tougher when your're writing a very long article and get exhausted. Thanks again!!! You've truly been kind and helpful. Dcw2003 (talk) 19:17, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dcw2003 you’re doing an enviable job. Just by the way, if it’s vice-president, then please also say vice-president, as I do not consider that as copying. In fact, I also do not consider nouns and pronouns to be copying, for example, you cannot change the name of a club or an entity generally, so that doesn’t count as violating copyright. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:50, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 May 2025, a one-month backlog drive for New Pages Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:26, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Vanderwaalforces. I'm just posting to let you know that List of governors of Edo State – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for May 9. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 00:31, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Udagbedo you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article needs changes or clarifications to meet the good article criteria. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Udagbedo and Talk:Udagbedo/GA2 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 01:04, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article Udagbedo you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Udagbedo for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 13:26, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

duh, I guess I cannot take all articles to GA. Jens Lallensack, thank you for your feedback, nonetheless. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:27, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that this is frustrating. If secondary/scholarly sources are really not available, the only way to get this to GA that I see is to provide the discussion on sources, and then use author attribution when you cite the primary source, as I explained in my closing note. You could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History if this would be a valid approach in this particular case, or if they have any other ideas, or if they think that this article cannot be a GA with this sourcing situation; I would be interested to read that discussion myself, too. Thanks, and all the best. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 14:00, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jens Lallensack It is indeed frustrating, lmao. I just checked the WP History talk page you linked, it does not look like one that is actively participated in. This article is pretty short enough to not really be too stressful for me to fix, if you don't mind, can you please give an example of how the discussion of sources should be like encyclopaedically or not? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:06, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See Punic Wars, which is currently at FAC, as an example for a "primary sources" section. Since I'm not an historian, I wonder if UndercoverClassicist has an opinion here. UndercoverClassicist, if you have a moment to take a look at my closing note at Talk:Udagbedo/GA2, do you think it is, in principle, possible to bring this article to GA even when considering the absence of secondary sources, or is that impossible in this case? Thanks! --Jens Lallensack (talk) 14:33, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I am anticipating UC's comment. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:53, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's two separate issues here: pace Jens, I don't think A Short History of Benin is a primary source within the meaning of WP:PRIMARY, since it's a person writing about time periods long before his own, using primary sources (even if some of those were non-written) to do so. The primary sources in question would be the narratives Egharevba consulted to write his book. In principle, a book written by a person from Benin about Benin can be a secondary source, just as a history of Britain by a British historian can be perfectly secondary and reliable.

However, as a separate issue, Jens has identified other issues of reliability in the source, particularly the apparent mixing of facts with legends in that source, which means that an article which relies on it as evidence for material would fail GACR 2b. As Jens alludes, one way around this would be to cut through it and use the stories in it directly, treating them as primary sources, but we would then need to be able to cite reliable sources to show how scholars engage with these narratives.

It's a bit of a difficult one: WP:DUEWEIGHT would be a showstopper at FAC or ACR, because to meet that, you have to be able to show that the balance of material in the article reflects the balance of relevant material in secondary sources, but DUEWEIGHT isn't part of the GA criteria. There's perhaps a more fundamental problem here the notability standards: if a subject simply hasn't been written about in secondary sources, it probably shouldn't have a stand-alone article in the first place. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 17:23, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, UC, that is interesting and I fully agree with your thoughts. I just looked around if I can find more sources – and I did: For example, there is this article in German [1] which has a paragraph about Udagbedo, and also provides alternative spellings that maybe can lead to new sources if searched for: Udagbedo (Udagbedo = Olagbeno). So I wouldn't be worried about notability; sufficient sources seem to exist.

Still, A Short History of Benin would probably remain the main source, and it seems to be the most important source for Benin studies. Therefore, there are some papers discussing that very source (e.g., those cited in the Wikipedia article on the book) – those could perhaps form the basis of a "Sources" section.

So yes, considering UC's comments and all, I would suggest to 1) do a deep dive into the literature, trying to get hold of as many sources as possible; 2) write a paragraph about the main source A Short History of Benin, focusing on its reliability and how historians use and interpret it; and 3) use author attribution whenever you cite that book, so that those statements do not come across as universally accepted facts. That should be sufficient to reach GA level. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 18:55, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks UC, I just wanted to hear this from someone else. Like I said in the nomination page, @Jens Lallensack, the books are from reliable authors that people (not just me or Wikipedia) rely on for historical facts about the Benin Kingdom, especially Egharevba’s kingship work which is highly cited by fellow historians. I do not think that looks like a source that is unusable on Wikipedia, especially since I have already been citing it in other GAs I’ve written relating to the Benin Kingdom. I think the issue of “facts” and “legends” mixup can easily be fixed though, do you think you can undo your closure of the nomination while we fix that?

UC, thank you for your comments, I do not think notability is anywhere near the problems this article is facing; a King of Benin Kingdom is definitely presumptively notable, by all means the same way a King of England is, or at least, by virtue of their position, at least by popular OUTCOMES particularly WP:MONARCH, and with this, they do not have to meet the requirements for WP:GNG.

Over all, I think we were both thinking the same way regarding the source. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:57, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't undo it (because the GAN system is complex and involves a bot), but I am happy to review if you re-nominate it after implementing the steps I pointed out above. I see that the book is important, but that does not necessarily mean that it is reliable for Wikipedia's purposes and we need to use it very carefully (also since reviews did criticize its accuracy); I therefore still think that the mentioned steps are absolutely necessary. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:07, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jens Lallensack Thank you so much for your guidance, I will work on it and let you know when I renominate it :)

@UndercoverClassicist I'm very grateful for your guidance above, thank you again! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:50, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I translated the Tokyolite article from the Indonesian Wikipedia as a part of blue-ing wikilinks on pop kreatif (in short: the Indonesian version of city pop), in preparation for pop kreatif GA nom. Recently, the Tokyolite article was marked as non-notable; I've removed self-published and user-generated sources, and focused more on citing online articles from the Indonesian National Radio (Radio Republik Indonesia) website, as well as the Indonesian music news website Pophariini. These articles cover the band's releases, and I believe they fulfill "multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble" criteria on WP:MUSICBIO. Do you think the revisions are sufficient for notability measures? D (talk?) 04:58, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dhiosk Hi there. I don't think coverages of a band's releases are considered "non-trivial", I think they're rather trivial which means they cannot be used to substantiate notability for the band, this is the reason I placed the notability tag on the article, so that more sources (with substantial coverage of the band [and not their releases]) can possibly be added to the article. I think if maybe one or two more sources can be found and added, then we'd have a very clear MUSICBIO pass. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:48, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The second round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 28 April at 23:59 UTC. To reiterate what we said in the previous newsletter, we are no longer disqualifying contestants based on how many points (now known as round points) they received. Instead, the contestants with the highest round-point totals now receive tournament points at the end of each round. These tournament points are carried over between rounds, and can only be earned if a competitor is among the top 16 round-point scorers at the end of each round. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far. Everyone who competed in round 2 will advance to round 3 unless they have withdrawn or been banned.

Round 2 was quite competitive. Four contestants scored more than 1,000 round points, and eight scored more than 500 points (including one who has withdrawn). The following competitors scored at least 800 points:

• BeanieFan11 (submissions) with 1,233 round points from 24 good articles, 28 Did you know articles, and one In the news nomination, mainly about athletes and politicians
• Thebiguglyalien (submissions) with 1,127 round points, almost entirely from two high-multiplier featured articles on Black Widow (Natasha Romanova) and Grace Coolidge, in addition to two GAs and two reviews
• History6042 (submissions) with 1,088 round points from four featured lists about Michelin-starred restaurants, nine good articles and a good topic mostly on Olympic-related subjects, seven ITN articles, and dozens of reviews
• Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1,085 round points from three FAs, one GA, and four DYKs on military history, as well as 18 reviews
• Arconning (submissions) with 887 round points, mostly from four FLs, six GAs, and seven DYKs on Olympic topics, along with more than two dozen reviews

In addition, we would like to recognize Generalissima (submissions) for her efforts; she scored 801 round points but withdrew before the end of the round.

The full scores for round 2 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 13 featured articles, 20 featured lists, 4 featured-topic articles, 138 good articles, 7 good-topic articles, and more than 100 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 19 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 300 reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after 28 April but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed in Round 3. 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) 01:03, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Vanderwaalforces, I hope you're doing well. I have the script installed already, but I don't know how it works actually. I need your assistance with an unattributed translation from chinese wiki. Thanks C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 07:43, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@C1K98V Hello there, thank you for using the script and your contributions generally, I am doing well and I trust you are too. The unattributed translations checker only notifies you of a possible unattributed translation, but CFA’s script can help you perform that unattributed translation fix; the script is User:CFA/scripts/attributetranslation.js. You’ll usually see the function in the tools section of any article after installing the script. I hope this helps. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:04, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it worked. I appreciate your suggestions. Keep up the good work with scripts. Have a great day ahead! C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 04:09, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]