User talk:Belbury

This is Belbury's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 60 days

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

Please, to not start a edition war. Please revert the light pollution article to my version and read the refences before making any aditional changes. I recomend you to read about it before make any coments. Pmisson (talk) 09:01, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pmisson: Thank you for opening a discussion! The best place to explain why your Light pollution is the presence of any artificial lighting. definition is a better one would be Talk:Light pollution. I'd be very happy to talk about it there. Belbury (talk) 09:03, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing—Soot—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:21, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Dog fashion".The discussion is about the topic Dog fashion.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

--RteeeeKed💬📖 22:27, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Belbury! I wanted to let you know that I declined your G3 speedy deletion nomination of the Le métro de Tony Hawk redirect to Tony Hawk's Underground as the former appears to be the French title of the latter. As such, it is a plausible redirect. If you disagree, you may bring the redirect to redirects for discussion for further input from the community. Thank you! Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 20:43, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Only add names here if the organization has their own article on Wikipedia" 8 from 11 in the list have no own article. Pleas google Lido DAO. reference is following, stop to delete. Amber hurt (talk) 11:01, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Amber hurt: The full quote is Only add names here if the organization has their own article on Wikipedia, or if you can provide an independent, reliable source that establishes its membership in this list's group, please. You need to provide the source rather than telling another Wikipedia editor to use Google.

If you've checked and you think some other entries don't meet that, by the terms of WP:RS, by all means remove them. Belbury (talk) 11:07, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About to add references for Lido: https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2024/06/11/lido-introduces-restaking-vaults-in-collaboration-with-symbiotic-mellow-finance/

https://cointelegraph.com/learn/what-is-lido-liquidity-for-staked-assets

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomerniv/2023/08/21/4-liquid-staking-startups-that-are-unlocking-ethereums-potential/

https://www.forbes.com/digital-assets/assets/lido-dao-ldo/ Amber hurt (talk) 11:15, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Amber hurt: Thanks but I'm afraid Wikipedia doesn't consider WP:COINDESK, Coin Telegraph or WP:FORBESCON sources to be reliable, and the fourth link there is not strong enough for WP:RS, being a simple price listing. Belbury (talk) 11:18, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Reliable sources/Perennial sources is not the only source for reliable sources, its about context, here you have more: https://www.thecoinrepublic.com/2024/10/12/whales-offloading-lido-dao-as-prices-struggle/ https://www.securities.io/investing-in-lido-dao/ https://crypto.news/lido-dao-price-gains-amid-market-wide-dips/ https://cryptoslate.com/aave-dao-evaluates-joining-lido-alliance-to-boost-staked-ethereum-market/ https://ambcrypto.com/lido-dao-ldo-dips-after-sec-goes-after-consensys-for-metamask-services/ https://www.cryptotimes.io/2024/08/12/lido-community-approves-steth-integration-with-bnb-chain/ https://dailyhodl.com/2024/06/14/crypto-analyst-says-large-cap-layer-1-altcoin-primed-for-a-breakout-maps-path-forward-for-bitcoin-and-lido-dao/ The point is, there are more then 10 000 articles about Lido DAO, not just a few. Amber hurt (talk) 11:31, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Amber hurt: It's about quality rather than quantity, one reliable source is preferable to 10,000 unreliable ones. Wikipedia:Notability (cryptocurrencies) gives a view on crypto news sites. Belbury (talk) 11:46, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lido DAO, valued at over $1B with a top 70 utility token, should be added to the list as one of the largest existing DAOs—do you agree? Amber hurt (talk) 11:55, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Amber hurt: Not without a reliable source that's written about it, no, I wouldn't agree.

Perhaps raise this at Talk:Decentralized autonomous organization for a wider discussion. Belbury (talk) 11:59, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You wouldn’t agree even if the information I provided is backed by CoinMarketCap and CoinGecko, the two biggest crypto project trackers?

https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/lido-dao/

https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/lido-dao Amber hurt (talk) 12:05, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Amber hurt: I would not agree that showing an entry on those trackers met has their own article on Wikipedia, or if you can provide an independent, reliable source.

If you think the criteria for inclusion on the list should be expanded to include "is backed by CoinMarketCap and CoinGecko", you're welcome to suggest that on the article talk page. Belbury (talk) 12:07, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Decentralized autonomous organization Amber hurt (talk) 12:43, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good afternoon @Belbury, just to let you know, I found a source that states about shawarma generally being Middle Eastern and not just an Arabic dish. As I found one source, please don't report me for edit warring. Thank you. ShawarmaFan07 (talk) 12:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ShawarmaFan07: These are unrelated concepts. If you don't want to be reported for edit warring, don't edit war. Belbury (talk) 09:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Belbury But I found a source that supports the statement that Shawarma is associated with the whole Middle Eastern cuisine, not Arab. Hopefully you won't mind adding it on that article. Plus, I asked for a discussion on the talk page for you guys to explain why it should just be called an "Arab" cuisine, but there had been no response for several days. ShawarmaFan07 (talk) 09:15, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you reverting my minor edit on this topic, my simply adding a reference? Michael.greenacre (talk) 18:12, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael.greenacre: Hi Michael, it's because you're adding references to papers that you wrote yourself, across many articles. I've been posting messages to your talk page at User talk:Michael.greenacre about this issue but maybe you haven't been able to see them. Belbury (talk) 18:19, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did write a note on Talk:Principal Component Analysis justifying my referencing our (6 co-authors) review of Principal Component Analysis published in 2022 by Nature Reviews. Can the reference now be reinstated? Michael.greenacre (talk) 08:02, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael.greenacre: Thanks. Whether it gets added is up to the editors who read that talk page. If you add the {{edit coi}} template and write a specific edit request (eg. saying exactly where in the article you want the link added), the request will be put in a queue that other editors will check in on. Belbury (talk) 08:13, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think a period directly after an image tag is necessary or intentional, as it leaves a blank line right after a section heading. --Gert7 (talk · contribs) 16:20, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gert7: Quite right, my mistake! From the edit diff I misread it as being after a wikilink rather than an image tag. I've reverted myself. Belbury (talk) 16:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I’m a starter editor. I understand what a reliable source is but the game I write on my article does not have an official website. The only way I can get references is through user generated content like a fandom wiki article. How can I get a reliable source without an official website. Nanb500001 (talk) 08:13, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You asked this same, strange question at the Teahouse, so I'll leave it to them to answer. Belbury (talk) 08:59, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On 7 November 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Conspiracy theories about the 2024 Atlantic hurricane season, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that several major U.S. politicians have spread conspiracy theories about the 2024 Atlantic hurricane season? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Conspiracy theories about the 2024 Atlantic hurricane season. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Conspiracy theories about the 2024 Atlantic hurricane season), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:04, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:YouTube front page.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Borderline G4, see Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion/2023_September_3#File:YouTube_homepage.png

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Matrix(!) _{ping one}^{when replying} {u - t? - _uselessc} 19:38, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]