User talk:Xrimonciam#c-Iknowyoureadog-20250422214900-AfCs

File:Information.svg Hello, I'm Jtrrs0. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, :Subculture, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jtrrs0 (talk) 17:28, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

:Hello, thank you for raising the concern. I will take a second look at it then add the relevant reference. Xrimonciam (talk) 17:31, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

File:Information orange.svg Please do not add or change content, as you did at :Mejja, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 05:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

:Hello, your concern is well noted. Thank you. Xrimonciam (talk) 05:42, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Your editing pattern is highly suspicious; Wikipedia editing is all about quality over quantity. The fact that you even thought this was a good edit shows extreme incompetence. You are not welcome here. Graham87 (talk) 16:22, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

::Hmmm, I thought you were spamming low-quality graphic design sites but this was actually a good edit. Your editing pattern is still ridiculous for a new user and the fact that you had to be warned *twice* about sources is concerning. Graham87 (talk) 16:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

:::Hello,

:::Concerning the previous warnings, I made sure I included sources to my edits at all times. My edits on graphic design sites were all source-based therefore I do not understand why you thou thought me incompetent. Additionally, am I still blocked? Please clarify your concerns. Xrimonciam (talk) 06:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

:::Hey, {{u|Graham87}}, this looks like it may have been a misunderstanding? Valereee (talk) 15:12, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

::::Not all references are reliable sources by Wikipedia's standards. famousgraphicdesigners.org (which you added to David Carson's article) is just a random website that may well borrow heavily from Wikipedia; it has no reputation for fact-checking that makes it in any way reliable. In contrast, The Guardian, which you added to Colin Forbes's page, is a long-lasting and widely respected newspaper that absolutely is a reliable source. I've unblocked you because my block was largely based on a misunderstanding, but I'm still highly concerned about your editing speed and some of your referencing practices. Graham87 (talk) 15:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hôpital des Enfants-Trouvés, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charity. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ{{*}} Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:56, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello Xrimonciam, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of :Mfundo Vilakazi, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not a test page. You may wish to review the WP:CSD{{!}}Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 14:01, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg Hello. I have noticed that you {{usertalk other|[https://xtools.wmflabs.org/editsummary/en.wikipedia.org/{{urlencode:Xrimonciam|PATH}} often]|often}} edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Iknowyoureadog (talk) 05:37, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

:I noticed you have continued editing without edit summaries around 12% of the time. Once again, make sure you always fill out the summary field.

:I appreciate your cooperation. i know you're a dog (talk) 22:00, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Nuvola apps important.svg Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at :Victor Graeff, you may be blocked from editing. Iknowyoureadog (talk) 05:58, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

:Understood. I’ll be more careful moving forward and make sure everything I add is properly sourced. Thanks for the heads-up. Xrimonciam (talk) 08:17, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

I pinged you here, you may not have gotten it. Could you please share what you did WP:BEFORE nominating The Phoenix Project (San Francisco) at AfD? Iknowyoureadog (talk) 08:54, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

:I have the same question about many AFDs opened by {{u|Xrimonciam}}. Nominations appear to be done recklessly and with copypaste or LLM-generated rationales. MarioGom (talk) 20:12, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi,

I have some of questions regarding your work on AfCs:

1. What languages do you speak? I see you've worked on AfCs withs sources in English, Latin (I think), Swedish, Japanese, Romanian, Persian, German, French and French, Italian, and Spanish. These aren't AfCs, but I see you've also made edits in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Denpasar_City_Regional_House_of_Representatives&diff=next&oldid=1286832533 Balinese] and you deleted external links on Vladivostok uprisings in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vladivostok_uprisings&diff=prev&oldid=1286835802 Russian] as well.
2. I also see you approved AfCs for Essen Cathedral Treasury Hs. 1 and Plaine de la Lys. Please share how you were able to do so given the included sources.
3. I see you've rejected a number of AfCs due to inadequate WP:RS. Could you share what you found inadequate about following drafts specifically as it relates to the sources: Draft:Michel Laurent (photojournalist), Draft:About Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies, Draft:International School of Busan, Draft:Modia Butler Draft:Christian Kuria (this one you draftified rather than reviewed in AfC), Draft:American Riviera Bank, John Swanger, Draft:Raginidevi ITI
4. Could you please explain what about this draft Draft:Novaira Masood led you to call it "promotional/ad" and why you stated there are no sources?

I have more questions, but lets start there. Thank you! i know you're a dog (talk) 21:49, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

:Hi,

:Thanks for reaching out—happy to clarify.

:Languages: I’m fluent in English and proficient in French and Spanish. For other languages (e.g., Latin, German, Persian, etc.), I rely on a mix of translation tools, my basic knowledge, and context from reliable sources. For AfC reviews, I cross-reference sources for reliability and relevance regardless of language.

:Essen Cathedral Treasury Hs. 1 & Plaine de la Lys: For these, the sources were sufficient in reliability and coverage. I verified claims with academic publications and institutional sites (e.g., heritage registries, archaeological reports) even if some weren’t in English.

:Rejected drafts due to WP:RS:

:* Michel Laurent: Mostly user-generated content, little coverage beyond brief mentions.

:* About Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies: Lacked independent secondary sources; mostly self-published material.

:* International School of Busan: Notability not established through significant coverage in independent sources.

:* Modia Butler: Sources were tangential or press release-style with little depth.

:* Christian Kuria: Draftified due to notability concerns and undeveloped sourcing—waiting for better secondary coverage.

:* American Riviera Bank: Heavy on routine coverage; lacked in-depth independent analysis.

:* John Swanger: Historical figure, but sources were sparse or non-independent.

:* Raginidevi ITI: No evidence of notability; sources were either non-independent or trivial.

:Draft:Novaira Masood: It read more like a résumé with peacock language, and the sources cited were mostly primary or promotional— not meeting WP:SIGCOV.

:Let me know if you'd like more detail on any specific draft. Xrimonciam (talk) 08:21, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

::Which translation tools do you use? And how did you use them for the books? i know you're a dog (talk) 09:26, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello! I appreciate that you're a relatively new editor, and adding headings can be useful. However, I'm not sure how helpful they are in this case:

• please read MOS:HEAD
• only the first word in a heading is capitalised
• why add so many sub-headings, in longer articles they would be headings
• for early life, in adding the heading you've removed all the citations to that section, which is not good editing practice
• personal life is usually at the very bottom of the article
• it's not good editing practice to have sections called "controversies" a) readers just skip to them and b) unless a reliable, secondary source has described something as a controversy, then it can be used, otherwise this is editorialising

What I'll do for now is undo the headings, which should return the references to the corrent place. Once you're more familiar with the guidelines, feel free to come back to the article, but please please please ensure the references remain in place Lajmmoore (talk) 17:40, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

:Thanks for your advices Xrimonciam (talk) 08:12, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

::Hello @Xrimonciam - I appreciate your efforts, but I see in the recent headings added to Douce Namwezi N'Ibamba they don't follow either MOS:HEAD or the comments I left above. Please could you kindly follow the advice and edit her article appropriately? Lajmmoore (talk) 17:18, 24 April 2025 (UTC)