User talk:Luganchanka

Welcome!

I keep this page clean, once it's been dealt with, it's deleted :) Luganchanka (talk) 18:17, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Luganchanka. Thank you for your work on Fred Perry (clothing label). Bastun, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Reviewed, copyright violations identified, revdel requested.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Bastun}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 21:10, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@Bastun: Thank you for this, let me get to work putting that right!! Luganchanka (talk) 06:07, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Fred Perry into Fred Perry (Clothing label). While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 14:53, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know, Diana!!! Luganchanka (talk) 15:00, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Recent edit reversion

In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:53, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Phil, ok, let me have a look into this, and work on! Luganchanka (talk) 19:19, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

CS1 error on United Kingdom sanctions

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page United Kingdom sanctions, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 07:41, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, fixed!! Luganchanka (talk) 07:51, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Oleg Zubkov

Hello, Luganchanka. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Oleg Zubkov, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:06, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I've probably done all I can with this article.... Luganchanka (talk) 07:28, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Copyright problem on Superdry

Please don't add copyright content to Wikipedia, not even temporarily for editing. Please do your amendments before you save the page, or use an external editor such as Microsoft Word or Google Docs and work on it there until you are sure it's completely original. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 16:00, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Will do that in future Diana, thank you for pointing this out to me!! Luganchanka (talk) 17:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Oleg Zubkov

Hello, Luganchanka. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Oleg Zubkov".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Ok, thank you, I did my best with this, probably took it as far as I could! Luganchanka (talk) 07:11, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Rumble (company)

Hi Luganchanka. Regarding your edits at Rumble (company) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views): Please use edit summaries so other editors can review your work and more easily work with you. I've reverted your edits to before you started removing authors. I tried to remove just the problematic edits, but there were edit conflicts with your subsequent edits. Why did you remove them? --Hipal (talk) 19:59, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

My apologies, I thought I'd done enough here by putting an description in an edit that I was working on the formatting of references, to standardise them all, and then making the following edits 'minor edits'. None of the body of the article was changed at all, only formatting of references to standardise them. However, will add edit summaries in future!Luganchanka (talk) 07:04, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Why did you remove the authors' names? Accidental? --Hipal (talk) 16:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

That was a matter of standardisation - at the moment the references are an absolute mess, some cite author names, many don't. To my understanding, the gold standard of reference for Wikipedia is it should start with the title, then link, then publication, as for authors' names, is there a Wikipedia directive which says that we need that on all references? Thanks in advance Luganchanka (talk) 17:26, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

So you are removing authors' names on purpose. That's a problem. Please stop. --Hipal (talk) 18:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Your reply has deliberately misinterpreted my position, and response, and once again you are being aggressive, hostile, and bullying. Are you only aggressive, and bullying with me, or is this your standard pattern of behaviour, and if so, should we raise the matter with other Wikipedia editors for arbitration / mediation?Luganchanka (talk) 18:39, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Your reply has deliberately misinterpreted my position Howso? I'm happy to retract anything that I wrote that is problematic. From what you've written, you're removing authors names on purpose as matter of standardisation. --Hipal (talk) 23:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Instead of your ongoing aggression, and hostility, let's instead work constructively, positively, to improve Wikipedia. Are we including first and last names of authors in references on Rumble or not? And if so, what position are we putting them in - my proposal is Title-URL-Work- and then last name first name, if so.Luganchanka (talk) 05:07, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Please stop attacking me. If you want to work constructively, that's a first step.

You understand that you should not be removing any proper citation information, like authors' names, correct? Will you stop doing so? Would you consider restoring all that you have removed? [1][2] --Hipal (talk) 17:00, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

My work is on the standardisation of Wikipedia references. Do you agree that all references in an article should be formatted in the same way? And can you please point me to the guidance which says that authors names are absolutely necessary. Luganchanka (talk) 06:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

I do agree that until there is clarification on the matter, I will not remove any more author names.Luganchanka (talk) 06:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarifications and more cooperative approach.

Cleaning up references is fine. I do it myself. There are bots and tools that do it as well. I currently use WP:REFILL, but haven't looked into the various bots.

Are you aware of anything written in Wikipedia's policies or guidelines that even suggests authors' names are not as important as other reference information? I'm not aware of anything. I don't understand why anyone would think author information would be of so little importance. --Hipal (talk) 23:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

I also thank you for your more cooperative, positive approach Hipal!

The issue with authors' names is that sometimes articles have multiple authors, leading to a very messy reference, sometimes articles have no authors, as in written by 'editorial', etc. So it is impossible to standardise. And also, it pretty much amounts to 'orphan' information - most of the authors do not have wikipedia pages, even if they do they're not linked in the reference, so what does this information add? Anyone who is interested clicks on the link, sees the author/s name there on the article.

Also, generally, wikipedia editors do not add authors' names into references, so standardisation would more incline towards removing authors' names there, rather than adding then. However, as per our discussion on the Rumble page, and others, I have stopped removing author names until there is definitive clarification on this point. Thank you HipalLuganchanka (talk) 06:16, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. If there's something that I can do to help clarify the importance of author information, please let me know.

Among other things, the author name is used to determine if and how a reference can be used, and for finding online copies. When there is no author, the reference requires a closer look and it's more likely that it is of poor quality.

How references look is relatively unimportant, which is why we don't have one standard for all articles. Having a consistent standard within an article is helpful and appreciated. --Hipal (talk) 17:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for this clarification and explanation Hipal, I really do appreciate it!!!!Luganchanka (talk) 20:20, 14 May 2024 (UTC)