User talk:Wikipedialuva

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

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Wikipedialuva. Thank you for your work on McLean Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder. Another editor, Klbrain, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

An appropriate page for a screening test, supported by sources independent of the group creating it, and having survived in use for more than 20 years (sustained coverage).

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Klbrain}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Klbrain (talk) 15:35, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled granted

Hi Wikipedialuva, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled user right to your account. This means that pages you create will automatically be marked as 'reviewed', and no longer appear in the new pages feed. Autopatrolled is assigned to prolific creators of articles, where those articles do not require further review, and may have been requested on your behalf by someone else. It doesn't affect how you edit; it is used only to manage the workload of new page patrollers.

Since the articles you create will no longer be systematically reviewed by other editors, it is important that you maintain the high standard you have achieved so far in all your future creations. Please also try to remember to add relevant WikiProject templates, stub tags, categories, and incoming links to them, if you aren't already in the habit; user scripts such as Rater and StubSorter can help with this. As you have already shown that you have a strong grasp of Wikipedia's core content policies, you might also consider volunteering to become a new page patroller yourself, helping to uphold the project's standards and encourage other good faith article writers.

Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 22:55, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Wikipedialuva. Thank you for your work on Zanarini Rating Scale for Borderline Personality Disorder. Another editor, Klbrain, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Similar notability to similar screening tests at List of diagnostic classification and rating scales used in psychiatry#Personality and personality disorders. Concisely-written and sufficiently referenced for a start. Of course, an omnibus merge to combine the many small articles on such scales might be warranted in the future.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Klbrain}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Klbrain (talk) 16:44, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Wikipedialuva. Thank you for your work on Lakeland Regional Health Medical Center. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:42, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I'm just wondering how you find vandalism to revert. I saw it done on a page and you fixed it, and I wondered if you just scrolled through pages looking for it or something else? Vemocleus (talk) 07:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vemocleus: Hi! Its great to hear you want to get involved in fixing vandalism! There are a few ways to find vandalism on Wikipedia. Wikipedia has a good overview of the topic here: Wikipedia:SPOTVAN. Personally, I think a great place to find vandalism is the Special:RecentChanges board with filters like "May be bad faith" added. The Special:AbuseLog is another good place to find vandalism.

If you are interested in learning about gaining skills to revert vandalism, I would recommend reading the page "Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism". I would also consider enrolling in the "Counter Vandalism Academy", where experienced editors will work with you to teach you how to address vandalism.

Once you gain some experience, you can begin using tools like "RedWarn", a tool that helps automate some of the vandalism actions, which making addressing vandalism faster and easier. Once you have more significant experience (at least 200 edits and a month of experience with handling vandalism) with anti-vandalism, you can apply for the "Rollback" permission. This permission allows the use of tools like "Huggle" and "AntiVandal", which will show your possible vandalism and allow you to revert it with a single keystroke.

If you have any questions, feel free to message me or post them on the Counter-Vandalism Unit talk page. Thanks! Wikipedialuva (talk) 08:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! Vemocleus (talk) 08:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AWB request

Hi Wikipedialuva, hope all is well Would you be able to run AWB on Ed Flemke to clean up duplicate references? Thanks! Wracking ^talk! 22:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wracking::

Done. I also did some light fixes and manual copy editing on the second edit to the article. Thanks for the suggestion! Wikipedialuva (talk) 01:05, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated! Wracking ^talk! 01:20, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BBL Drizzy

Hi Mr. Luva. Why you keep on removing BBL Drizzy???? That's how his albums are credited now on Apple Music! Stereoyum (talk) 11:11, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you're a real Wiki Luva you shouldn't edit this way in my opinion Stereoyum (talk) 11:12, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He's credited as BBL Drizzy. Everybody knows. I just wanted to follow WP: MOS Stereoyum (talk) 11:13, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Stereoyum. I am not aware of any policy in WP:MOS that would support the change of names you have been performing. If you feel that the artist "Drake" should be changed to "Drizzy BBL" across Wikipedia, such a change would need to first need to gain WP:consensus. One place to start such a discussion might be on a Wikiproject like the talk page of WikiProject Hip hop. Thanks. Wikipedialuva (talk) 11:19, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I will start such discussion then. Thank you! Stereoyum (talk) 11:23, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 15:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tinnitus edit

Hello - On my talk page, you said:

Hi Zefr. I noticed you reverted[1] my addition of information regarding a device created by Susan Shore at the Unviersity of Michgan to the Tinnitus article with the edit summary "more news than a suitable review - WP:NOTNEWS; also WP:NOTCV for lab research". My edit stated "A device using a related technology was developed at the Susan Shore Lab at the University of Michigan. A private company, Auricle, has sought FDA approval to market the device as a treatment for somatic tinnitus." and contained several references to support it, including Washington Post, and New Scientist.

I disagree with your characterization of my edit for several reasons. First, the addition of a medical device that has been developed at a public university for over a decade by a notable person (Susan Shore) using neuromodulation, the subtopic, widely covered by various WP:RS to treat the topic of the article, tinnitus, is well within the scope of the section where it was added. Further, this section contains information about another company's product (Nuromod's Lenire), yet you failed to remove this.

To the topic of WP:NOTNEWS, the addition clearly does not contain original reporting, Who's Who, nor does it contain celebrity gossip. The addition did use news coverage as a source material for an ecylopedic topic (as explicitly allowed by WP:NOTNEWS) however, the addition did not contain "routine news coverage of announcements, events, sports, or celebrities". What the addition did was to "include current and up-to-date information within its coverage." A neuromodulation device to treat tinnitus that has been in development over decades and whose development has been widely covered by numerous WP:RS being included in a neuromodulation treatment section in the tinnitus article is clearly relevant.

WP:NOTCV is also not a valid reason for removal. I fail to see how the addition qualifies as a personal webpage, a file storage area, a dating service, a memorial, or content projects. I merely mentioned the lab at the University of Michigan where the device was created and added a Wikilink to the page. I do not see how this could be interpreted under WP:NOTCV.

If you would like me to add peer-reviewed research as a reference to this edit (such as https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2805515) or even a WP:MEDRS source (such as https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-35647-6_50), I am happy to do so, or if you would prefer a different phrasing I am open to that.

Keeping it brief, the Nuromod device is not approved and remains under preliminary research (JAMA) without FDA approval, and is reported only by news sources. The potential success of the device is a future determination, WP:CRYSTAL. Secondly, in a medical encyclopedia article on a candidate device not yet having FDA approval or a MEDRS review, there is no value to the general user that the device was developed in a U of M lab - this is a topic included under WP:MEDSAY, and its use in your edit impressed as a non-neutral way of highlighting Susan Shore - WP:NOTCV.

Rather than having the discussion on your or my talk page, this discussion is about the content of the article. If you wish to debate it further, it should go on the article talk page for other editors to review. Zefr (talk) 14:30, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zefr: I will move the discussion to the Tinnitus article talk page. Wikipedialuva (talk) 23:49, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]