User:Cassiopeia/sandbox

---

https://vadoc.virginia.gov/general-public/inmate-locator/

As of April 18, 2023, he is #10 in the UFC men's pound-for-pound rankings.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ARTao&diff=671612230&oldid=671464125

Hi Cb162, July 11, 2022. clarification of MMA SSN]

Removed flagicons in record table per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing#RfC on flagicons in boxing record tables

UFC 258 https://www.bloodyelbow.com/2022/2/27/22952092/nascimento-cleared-from-usada-violation-trying-to-get-tko-win-put-back-on-his-record Ronnie Lawrence Jeremiah Wells Josiane Nunes

Regular

|Win -

|Loss -

2601:5CE:4400:76A0:C73:4A9B:CC0B:6D68 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ciryl_Gane&type=revision&diff=1037694974&oldid=1037694884&diffmode=source

2401:d800:95d8:5d8d:952c:8c6d:3fd:4f1f https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ciryl_Gane&type=revision&diff=1037696147&oldid=1037695921&diffmode=source

Damndudefacts https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ciryl_Gane&type=revision&diff=1037697681&oldid=1037697431&diffmode=source

updating event names

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkdiBNdMSiQeT8aD7gXWgvA

1 1 ^(NR)

User talk:Firestar464 user184.157.16.21

B Hi, this is my test page and it is not meant for submission. Please do not edit or change the content here.  Thank you very much!! UFC 255

|Win - UFC on ESPN 58 (Las Vegas)

|Loss - UFC on ESPN 58 (Las Vegas)

Move

minus

move

Latvian |36 |5 ft 5 in (1.65 m) |The Titan

|{{ntsh|

Original countries Ode fr BW to flyweight USA Vince Morales fr FW to BW USA Jamey Simmons fr FW to BW USA Johnny Muñoz Jr.FW to BW USA Melissa Gatto debut FLW BRA

Debuted Melissa Gatto debut FLW BRA

---

UFC Fight Night 213
Promotion	Ultimate Fighting Championship
Date	September 3, 2022 (2022-09-03)
City	Paris, France
Event chronology
UFC Fight Night 212 UFC Fight Night 213 UFC 277

UFC Fight Night 213 (also known as UFC on ESPN+ 71) is an upcoming mixed martial arts event produced by the Ultimate Fighting Championship that will take place on July 23, 2022, at TBD venue in Paris, France.

Background

This is the first event UFC to hold mixed martial arts event in France after France legalised the sport in Janaury 2022.

While it has yet to be announced by the UFC, it is expected that Ciryl Gane and Tai Tuivasa to headline the event.

Announced bouts

• Heavyweight bout: Ciryl Gane vs. Tai Tuivasa

See also

• List of UFC events
• List of current UFC fighters
• 2022 in UFC

References

Category:UFC Fight Night Category:2022 in mixed martial arts Category:September 2022 sports events in France Category:Scheduled mixed martial arts events

---

Tables

---

|- style="text-align:center;" |rowspan=2|LW |rowspan=2|>145 Ib
>65.8 Kg |rowspan=2|155 Ib
70.3 Kg |rowspan=2 style="background:#BBF;"|M

| style="background:#BBF;" | Khabib Nurmagomedov (C) | | Apr 7, 2018 | | 2429 | 1. def. Conor McGregor at UFC 229 on Oct 6, 2018
|rowspan=2| (TBD) |rowspan=2| |- style="text-align:center;" | style="background:#BBF;" | Dustin Poirier (IC) | | Apr 13, 2019 | | 2058 |0

---

The easiest way is probably to use the parser function, on a page (like your sandbox) put this (even just in preview mode): ; it will show you who the mentor of 'username' is. Example: produces: AssumeGoodWraith Hope that helps? — xaosflux Talk 10:43 pm, Yesterday (UTC+11)

---

VAND EX

SP - [1] VAND - talking on the article [2] VAND - talking on the article [3] VAND - [4]

talking on the article - [5] talking on the article [6]

SPAM - SPAM [7] NPOV - [8]

test edit - [9] test edit - [10] test edit - [11] test edit - [12] keeping on removing sections - [13] test edit - [14] test edit - [15] MOS - [16]

redirect https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boston_Salmon&action=edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=UFC_on_ESPN%2B_10&action=edit

Unsourced and break infobox - [17]

manually sub vand1 - [18]

R2 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=&user=&page=Ernest+Khalimov&wpdate=&tagfilter=&wpfilters%5B%5D=newusers

talking on the article - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&diff=prev&oldid=1108133993&diffmode=source

---

Reusing citaion here's two ways to do this. If you're using the source editor, you can declare your first ref as <ref name="wall-st-journal">blahblah</ref>, and any additional refs as <ref name="wall-st-journal" />. If you are using the visual editor, just click on the cite after you make it, then copy and paste it where you want it to go. Hope that helps.

---

CC BY-SA 3.0 but not CC BY-SA 4.0? Really?

I incorporated some CC BY-SA 4.0 text into an article, and someone just chewed me out saying that CC BY-SA 4.0 wasn't an allowed license for source material. I just read everything I could find, and nearly all of the references say CC BY-SA is the correct license, and a very few mention 3.0 as being ok specifically, but I can't find any mention at all of 4.0. Is there something toxic about 4.0? Is there a reference to that somewhere, so I can understand the issue? Thanks. BurritoTunnelMaintenance (talk) 23:26, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Found it with a bit more searching.BurritoTunnelMaintenance (talk) 23:29, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

This lists the difference between the two, although as far as I can see these are more differences in explicit wording than in intended meaning. The "human readable" versions provided are the same (word for word) for both 3.0 and 4.0. What the differences in the legalese are, and what exactly the ever so transparent WMF legal team thinks makes the newer version is more restrictive than the earlier (although, supposedly, the only thing it does make some more explicit waivers and definitions) is beyond me. Somebody on the legal team) might be able to clarify, although you should probably contact them directly via email and ask them to provide a clarification somewhere on Wiki. Attempt: @AKeton (WMF): in case somebody on the legal team wishes to elucidate here. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:51, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@BurritoTunnelMaintenance, the issue with CC BY-SA 4.0 for Wikipedia is not with the copyright parts. 4.0 adds sui generis database rights, something which Europeans have but Americans don't, to the license. This would affect reusing facts from Wikipedia in some ways. (Facts themselves are not covered by copyright in the US). WMF proposed switching to 4.0 with a waiver of database rights, but Creative Commons said that was not possible. CC BY 4.0 is fine even with database rights because it doesn't have the share-alike clause for downstream use. CC BY-SA 4.0 is fine for images. This is original research on my part. As far as I know there isn't a WMF explanation available to serve as a reference for this. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:37, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

---

Souces	method (doctor stoppage)	Ref.	Sources	method (leg injury)	Ref.
Lowkick MMA (Ireland)	TKO (doctor stoppage)		Hindustan Times (India)	TKO (leg injury)
cbssports (US)	TKO (doctor stoppage)		mmamania (US)	TKO (leg injury)
foxsport (US)	TKO (doctor stoppage)		independent (UK)	TKO (leg injury)
bt (England)	TKO (doctor stoppage)		mmajunkie (US)	TKO (leg injury)
Cageside Press (US)	TKO (doctor stoppage)		mmadna (The Netherlands)	TKO (leg injury)
ABC News (Australia)	TKO (doctor stoppage)		Sherdog (US)	TKO (leg injury)
globo / Combat (Brazil)	TKO (medical interruption)		Tapology (US)	TKO (ankle injury)

Cassiopeia^(talk) 23:22, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

NPPS Cross Dark Blue &Light Blue

This user is NPP SCHOOL graduate

	NPP School Graduate
	On behalf of the New pages patrol School, congratulations! You have successfully completed all assignments and have now graduated from the School. Well done! It's been a real pleasure to work with you and I hope you gained something from this course. All the best and thank you so much for your willingness to help Wikipedia in this role. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 18:05, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

This user is NPP reviewer

This user is NPP SCHOOL graduate

	NPP School Graduate
	On behalf of the New pages patrol School, congratulations! You have successfully completed all assignments and have now graduated from the School. Well done! It's been a real pleasure to work with you and I hope you gained something from this course. All the best and thank you so much for your willingness to help Wikipedia in this role. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 18:05, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

---

This user is NPP SCHOOL graduate

	NPP School Graduate
	On behalf of the New pages patrol School, congratulations! You have successfully completed all assignments and have now graduated from the School. Well done! It's been a real pleasure to work with you and I hope you gained something from this course. All the best and thank you so much for your willingness to help Wikipedia in this role. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 18:05, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

This user is NPP SCHOOL graduate

	NPP School Graduate
	On behalf of the New pages patrol School, congratulations! You have successfully completed all assignments and have now graduated from the School. Well done! It's been a real pleasure to work with you and I hope you gained something from this course. All the best and thank you so much for your willingness to help Wikipedia in this role. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 18:05, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

---

This user is NPP reviewer

This user is NPP reviewer

---

w.wiki/3X9

This user is NPP SCHOOL graduate

This user is NPP SCHOOL graduate

This user is NPP reviewer

HERE

Cass GblobalUser

---

TWA

Pls read - the following links since you cant access to TWA

1. Editor - making an edit 1- Help:Editing
2. Fomatter - making an edit 2 Help:Wikitext
3. Communicator - replying to an editor - Help:Talk pages
4. Copyeditor - fixing typos - Wikipedia:Basic copyediting
5. Neutrality - neutral Point of View - WP:NPOV
6. Collaborator - working with other editors - Wikipedia:Collaborations
7. Researcher - for asking great questions - Wikipedia:Help desk
8. Verifiability - verifiability policy - Wikipedia:Verifiability
9. Sourcer - reliable sources - Wikipedia:Reliable sources
10. Advisor - good advice to other editors - Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia
11. Civility - - staying cool, calm and collected - Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot and Wikipedia:Etiquette
12. Citer - inline citation - Wikipedia:Citing sources
13. Wikilinker - links to other articles - Help:Link#Wikilinks (internal links)
14. Illustrator - adding images - Wikipedia:Images

Images

Hi GRuban, Good day. I have seen you adding a lot of images into the pages and I would like to do so in MMA fighters article and would like to seek you advice. I found out that certain MMA sites - such as MMAnytt do allow their image/videos to be reused. I am not sure how you do that, but would it be the right way if I download the video (interviews video to make sure the videos are produced by them) and capture a short of the video for the image and upload it to WikiCommon. If that is not the method you used, then pls advise. Thanks in advance. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia^(talk) 09:31, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

That's right. There are a few things to watch for:

1. The YouTube video needs to be marked "License Creative Commons Attribution license (reuse allowed)". When that's there, it's often hidden under the SHOW MORE link under the description.
2. The video needs to be actually owned by the YouTube account. For example, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4w58Hax_Hc is marked CC but if you look at it, most or all is actually from TMZ, not MMAnytt, so we can't use those parts, TMZ would have to release it, not MMAnytt. There are a number of YouTube accounts that upload and "release" videos they don't actually own, we want to avoid those.
3. The resolution of the video is under the gear icon in the lower right of the video under Quality, I generally try to resize the video so it's approximately that height in pixels. I set the video speed to the slowest possible, 0.25, to get the best shot: when I try for a picture of a person, I am looking for them to be looking into the camera, and ideally smiling, but that is a matter of taste. Then I take a screenshot (PrtScn on my Windows box, then paste into Microsoft Paint), crop to the part I want, and upload it using the UploadWizard (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:UploadWizard), marking the YouTube link as the source (and adding the time in the video, and "cropped" if it is, and often brightening or otherwise color correcting the image using the Microsoft Photos app). Sometimes I uses a service called http://youtubescreenshot.com which helps get rid of overlays. But that's all extra, the first two steps to verify the license are strictly required.
4. I put {{YouTube}}{{LicenseReview}} in the UploadWizard: "Not my work: Another reason not mentioned above" license field. That last part will ask for a https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:License_review so in case the YouTube account goes away or changes its license, a trusted reviewer will have verified that it was properly licensed at the time. (That's why the timestamp within the video is useful, so the license reviewer can more easily find the exact place in the video you took the screenshot.) If you want, you can ping me after you upload your first few, I am such a license reviewer among other things. --GRuban (talk) 15:33, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Nice! Well done, good work. You do want to use the {{YouTube}} template, though, not {{cc-by-sa-4.0}}, technically YouTube uses CC BY 3.0, there is a difference from BY-SA 4.0. I license reviewed all 3 and corrected that for you. If you want to improve further, you could do these things:

1. Add categories for the images you upload. That'll stop the Uncategorized template from showing up, and in general helps people find your images. For File:Tyson_Pedro_at_UFC_234.jpg those could be Category:Male_fighters_of_the_Ultimate_Fighting_ChampionshipCategory:Mixed_martial_artists_from_Australia. You can also look at what categories the Wikipedia article for the person is in; the Wikimedia Commons categories are often similar. If you really get into it, you can make a category for each person, by taking a look at already existing ones like it, say Category:José Aldo, which is pretty thorough, and following that model. I admit I don't usually do that until I have two or three or so images to put in such a category, but it's useful even if you only have one.
2. Add the images to the Wikipedia articles! That's why you uploaded them, right? You don't have to wait for the LicenseReview, as so many things in this volunteer project, there is a backlog.

But that is extra, just uploading images like those 3 is still useful, thank you!

You can nominate any images for deletion by clicking "Nominate for deletion" in the toolbox at the left side of the page. For images you just uploaded, you can just edit the page and put {{SD|G7}} which is shorthand for Uploader requests deletion and will usually be reacted to faster, often in minutes or hours; a normal deletion discussion can take days or weeks. --GRuban (talk) 11:09, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

video uploading [19]

---

The script should appear in the sidebar under "tools"—see here for an example.

---

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Ping|CASSIOPIEA}}. Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~).

And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

---

MMA related articles

MMA related articles

Greetings. Since you have edited a number of pages of MMA related articles in Wikipedia, pls see the below info so you may understand how things work here.

MMA related articles - info

1. Pls visit Wikipedia:WikiProject Mixed martial arts and read through the MMA Wikipedia guidelines.
2. When a bout is announced which stating "finalizing, in work, rumors, verbally agreed,  in the press, this means the bout is not official yet. Wait until it official before place it under the "Announced bouts" section of the event page.
3. When a bout is announced in the press, editors put the match up in the  "Announced bouts" section (inline citation is needed)
4. When UFC.com / its local web site (pls check the reference beneath the fight card table in the Wikipedia page), the editors would remove the bout in the "Announced bouts" and place it in the "fight card" section.
5. When a fighter pulls from a fight (due to injury/or by UFC/ visa issues and etc), we placed the info in the "Background section" (inline citation needed) and remove the injured fighter name and put "TBD".
6. When a injured fighter has been replaced, editor put the info in the background section (with inline citation). If the new match up has not been shown in the UFC.com fight card, then we will removed the match up from the fight card and place it back to "Announced section". If the match up already shown in the UFC.com then jut put the replacement fighter in the fight card section.
7. When the event named has been announced (such as UFC Fight Night: dos Santos vs. Tuivasa) then we place the info in the background section (with inline citation). If UFC.com has shown the event names (Fight Night events or UFC on ESPN) such as UFC Fight Night: Cowboy vs. Medeiros or UFC on ESPN: Reyes vs. Weidman, then editor would move the article and article talk page name accordingly and not before, except the flagship event such as UFC 187, UFC 242 and etc.
8. No colour box in the fighter's page infobox at event fight card page. No title eliminator in the fight card or body text in fighter page or event page. No (c) - champion on the event fight card unless the fighter is the current champion of the weight division.
9. "method" in the fight table is as per Sherdog.com as per WP:MMA guideline and please do not interpret the method yourself even if the method is incorrect as Wikipedia is all about WP:verification and not the true.
10. Info box as per Sherdog. No other nick names or else we would have many nicknames pop up every time there is a internet meme.
11. Reach as per UFC.com as Sherdog dont have the info. Pls provide inline citation.
12. Stand - need to provide inline citation. IF you can find source to support it, leave it blank
13. Style - "The style parameter should only be used in MMA fighters that have participated professionally or in international competitions in other combat sports (i.e. boxing or kickboxing) and who are notable in said sports and deserve an article for their merits in these other sports (i.e. Antônio Rogério Nogueira, Alistair Overeem). It is suggested to MMA editors that they actively remove the style parameter in infoboxes of MMA fighters that do not meet these criteria." Leave style for modern mma fighter as they have to train several combat disciplines.
14. No Flag icon on info box or fight table.
15. Info could be obtain from Sherdog on Info box - need to support by sources such as teachers, belts, notable relatives, university, occupation outside fighting career and etc.

General info

1. Pls read referencing to understand about referencing and how to provide inline citation.
2. Leave a brief edit summary before saving you edit, so other editors know the nature of your edit for Wikipedia is the collaboration work from many editors.
3. To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Ping|Cassiopeia}}. Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~).

1. I have sent you the welcome message, kindly register and read through links. Thank you.

---

Just follow the steps 1, 2 and 3 as shown and fill in the details

---

Please note that official website, sites associated with the subject, press releases, interviews, user generated sites and etc can NOT be used to contributed to the notability guidelines required. The content of the article need to be supported by significant coverage with independent and reliable for verification where by the sources talk about the subject in length and in dept and not passing mentioned. Sources from newspapers are good sources. Please see referencing for inline citation info and instructions and WP:Your First Article on how to write an article in Wikipedia. Lastly please read the message and click on the blue colour text links on the grey panel a the top of the article for more info.

---

Pls note an article would accepted in the main space if the subject is notable and the content is supported by significant coverage by independent, reliable sources where by the sources talk about the subject "directly" in depth and in length for verification. Official web site, sites associated with the subject, user generated sites, interviews, press releases, sport data bases and etc can NOT be used to demonstrate/contribute to the notability and content policy requirement. We need reliable secondly sources such as from major newspapers and books. Pls note "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution." - see WP:PROVEIT. For how to provide inline citation /source pls read referencing for info and instruction. Pls read WP:Your First Article on the requirements and info on how to write an article in Wikipedia and if anything is unclear pls read Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything. Once you have provided the sources then click submit button for draft article to be reviewed. Thank you.

---

Template:Key press
→

Redirect - Draft - Article

Hi Primefac, Greetings. Is there a way to reserve the editor who writes the article as the original creator (so they name would shown on the article) instead of the editor who did the redirect edit? Also how do we go about accepting a draft which the article name already existed via a redirect - article here - Draft:Expedition 62 and the redirect here [20]? (note I have the page move right - not sure this right is applicable for the question above). Thanks in advance. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 08:40, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

if you've got PGM, then I'd use User:Andy M. Wang/pageswap to simply swap the pages. You'll have to clean up the article manually, but it will preserve the original creator. A second option, if you want to use AFCH to do all the boring work, is to use {{db-move}} on the existing redirect and an admin will delete it. As a note, we almost never do a histmerge on these sorts of pages because there's no point. Primefac (talk) 10:07, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Primefac, Thank you for the info above appreciate. Since I am here, I have another question. When an editor created identical article in mainspace and draft space, what is the normal protocol to remove one the the article? I usually tag histmerge on the mainspace article and Anthony would delete the draft space. Kindly advise. Thanks in advance. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 11:18, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

If Editor A creates Draft:Example and Example, there are four general scenarios

1. Editor A is the only significant editor to both pages. The Draft can be turned into a redirect
2. Editor A is the only one who edited the Draft, but others have edited the Article. The Draft can be turned into a redirect.
3. Multiple editors have edited the Draft before it was copied over to the Article. A histmerge should be requested.
4. Multiple editors have edited the Draft before and after it was copied over to the Article. In this case it's clear there's active editing going on in both places, so they should probably be left as-is. If it's an AFC submission or something, just turn the page into a redirect.

There are other side possibilities but this should deal with most cases; really there are few cases where a draft would need to be deleted or even histmerged. Primefac (talk) 13:06, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

A proper Wikipedia article neutrally summarizes what published reliable, independent sources say about a topic. In this situation, you changed a date of birth but did not provide a citation to a reliable source that verifies the changed date.

This fails the core content policy of verifiability. You also added evaluative critical analysis to the article but did not provide citations to reliable sources.

Your edits are indicative of those made by a person who possibly has a close connection to the subject of the article. If that is the case, please study and comply with our guideline for editors who have a conflict of interest.

Template:uw-copyrightdf

2 factor auth approval

article created via redirect Using Special:NewPages you can filter with the tag of mw-new-redirect to see just pages that were created as redirects, and by selecting "show redirects" you can see pages created as redirects that may or may not still be redirects (but usually are). If you want to tell them apart, I'd recommend User:BrandonXLF/GreenRedirects.js. The pages in yellow are the ones that have not yet been patrolled. From the big notice at the top, Yellow highlights indicate pages that have not yet been patrolled. The ones that are not highlighted have already been patrolled - to hide them, click "hide patrolled edits." The redirects are green links instead of blue, though the contrast isn't the best. Maybe another color would be better for this task, but for me I can tell the difference. from DannyS712

Your article [[:{{{1}}}]] has been deleted as a copyright violation, as you have copied the content from the Wikipedia Draft namespace without providing proper attribution to the original author(s). Wikipedia text is copyrighted, and you are required by Wikipedia's licensing to provide attribution to any and all authors involved in the creation of copied Wikipedia content. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Because this attribution requirement is satisfied by page histories, it is important to only move pages using the technical move function, so that the content is not seperated from its history.

Please also note that the article has not been accepted by Wikipedia's articles for creation review process, and by circumventing this process, you may be subject to blocking or other sanctions for disruptive editing. {{{2}}}

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
http://www.example_source1.com/doc1		The source is a noted book by a well-known author	The source discusses the subject directly and in detail	✔ Yes
http://www.example_source2.com/page1		This is a self-published source, and the expertise of its author has not been established		? Unknown
http://www.example_source3.com/file1		The source is a major newspaper	~ The article mentions the subject briefly, but does not offer much detail	~ Partial
http://www.example_source4.org/doc1	The subject works for this publication	This publication is a highly cited scholarly journal	The article discusses the subject directly and in detail	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

	Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!
	Hi Cassiopeia, Sending you a warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019 and may this new year bring you joy and laughter. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 15:49, 13 December 2018 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

---

Wikipedia: Edit-a-thon

Wikipedia Editathon at Newnham College, Cambridge University, March 2017. A introductory talk from User:RexxS.

Schoolgirls at Wikipedia Editathon, Cambridge University. Having enough helpers on hand to give practical advice is important.

For a long time, I have been thinking of conducting Wikipedia: Edit-a-thon for a group of students (Age group:12-16 years). Finally, I got the time. Can anybody suggest me some Do's and Dont's for the same. Some Wikipedia Policies and Wikipedia Projects to be shared with them for constructive editing and collaboration. Thanks! Peppy Paneer

Hi Peppy Paneer Welcome to the Teahouse, and thank you for your really great question. Running a successful editathon can be really rewarding. We have a few general resources available that might help you plan an event, and I might be able to add a few suggestions of my own. Firstly, we have a basic introduction at Wikipedia:How to run an edit-a-thon, and we even have a training programme you can work through on this topic at https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/training/editathons. I have a few personal notes and planning list available for my own use at User:Nick Moyes/editathon, too. As for policies, guidelines and help - do keep these to a minimum (maybe just mention WP:N, WP:V and WP:RS) I did a printed handout (see User:Nick Moyes/editathon/handout1 which contains shortcuts they can use in order to find some of the really useful pages.

I'll spend a few moments putting a some extra ideas for you to consider, but I thought I'd just post this partial reply first. Would I be right in assuming you're a teacher and this is a school class, or is it an extra-curricular activity for people who might not know one another, or is there a shared interest? How much time will you be making available for the event? i.e. might it be a half-day drop-in, or a 45 minute classroom session? Knowing a little more about your intentions might assist me to offer you suggestions. Please ensure you ping me correctly, by signing your post with four keyboard tildes (like this: ~~~~), and including my username in your reply. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:46, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

@Peppy Paneer: Right, back again. Here are a few random things for you to consider:

INITIAL THINGS/PRE-PLANNING

• What is the groups' current experience of Wikipedia? What do you want to achieve? (e.g. will you focus on using Wikipedia, or actually editing Wikipedia? How much time will they have? What key things do you want them to take away from the event?
• Getting attendees to create a free account each prior to the event is highly advisable. (Lots of time gets wasted trying to create accounts on the day.
• Suggest they try The Wikipedia Adventure beforehand. (Make sure you have actually done it and got all 15 badges, too!)
• Ensure you have enough equipment/wi-fi coverage/helpers on the day
• Might you need to get yourself 'event coordinator' rights so you can create more than the normal limit of six new user accounts per IP address, per day? See WP:EVC.
• Depending on your focus, do you need to prepare example text for students to work with? If so, you could copy a small part an existing article they are likely to be familiar with, and change it off-wiki so that it contains false information, typos, poor formatting and unsubstantiated facts that they need to find and fix. They should never work on real articles until ready - use the user sandboxes!
• Decide whether you're going to introduce them to editing via the normal editing tool, or with Visual Editor. Stick to one, though do mention that the other exists.

ON THE DAY

• Get students to bring their own devices for editing, but provide as many laptops as you can if unknown numbers might attend. (Make the wifi password clearly visible to everyone. Tell all mobile phone users to work in 'desktop' view, not mobile view, or there will be problems in understanding any instructions given.
• Ensure you record the usernames of everyone attending (signing-in book/blackboard?)- this helps you provide support, both during and especially after the event. You or one of your helpers could even post a welcome message to every attendee during the event, or perhaps afterwards.
• If there's not a fixed start time, and students can drop in at any point, consider running a short introductory talk at set times during the event.
• Sound travels - intro talks and individual working areas need to be some distance away from each other to avoid noise disturbance.
• Introduce what Wikipedia is and what Wikipedia is not. Find out who has used it, and for what purpose. Explain the principle of [[WP:V|Verifiability], and how it is essential only to add factual statements if other people can check these Reliable sources for themselves. Ask the group if anyone has anyone has ever edited Wikipedia themselves. (It's OK for them to admit they only did so out of mischief)
• Explain how valuable Wikipedia is to student and schoolchildren around the world, especially in places where books are scarce. Explain how unhelpful it is if articles get damaged through mischief, vandalism, or if wrong 'facts' are included. Explain how they can help to improve content and how cool it is to help others in that way.
• Tell them they can get help/support whilst editing by going to the Teahouse and asking us for assistance. And always listen to advice if another editor posts on their talk page.

PRACTICAL EXERCISES

• If you have the resources, project a live webpage of Wikipedia on a screen and guide them through the basic layout. (Powerpoint screenshots are the next best thing)
• Show them how to log-in (or sign up, if they haven't already), then to add a few lines about their interests. But, ensure they never reveal personal information about themselves or their family - see WP:YOUNG. Demonstrate how to go to their personal sandbox where they can experiment with editing in relative safely.
• Get each student to work through The Wikipedia Adventure (but be aware of the limitations on both browser type, and especially of it not working well on mobile devices - see front page of WP:TWA for details), or:
• Guide them through working through and fixing mistakes in your previously created dummy article. (Get them to add one reference, if at all possible)
• If they're advanced enough by this stage, encourage students to look for articles about their local area/favourite subject and identify things that could be improved. Maybe discuss each suggestion as a group before taking action?

ENDING

• Make sure you reprise your key message(s) of the day
• Can you provide each person with a takeaway handout summarising what they should have covered, and what they can do next
• Do they know how to contact you as event coordinator, or to seek help from us here at the Teahouse.
• Ensure you reiterate the importance of not revealing personal details, or treating Wikipedia like social media.
• Will they leave your Editathon, appreciating that they themselves can now go on to actually contribute to the world's greatest free online encyclopaedia, and perhaps help someone on the other side of the world who needs information? Will they be empowered and have a sense of responsibility in what they can now do? If 'Yes', then you've done a great job!
• Follow up with each user a week or so later. Thank them for coming, ask if they need any assistance from you, and encourage them to continue. A second follow-up can be done a month later to see if they've continued editing.

I hope a few of these rough thoughts might be of some use. (I've had to guess at the type of audience you're aiming at) Feel free to follow up if you have any further specific questions. I did note that you haven't edited here for a couple of years, so it might be sensible to refresh your own editing practice before you dive in at the deep end. Very best of luck, and drop by my talk page with an update if you wish. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:21, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

---

Indexed in search engine.

Hi, If a page is under AfD, will the page can not to be searched in google? CASSIOPEIA^(talk)

It's a confusing situation. If a page under AfD is under 90 days old then it gets noindex in the html which asks external search engines to not index it. Google respects this. The page will be added to Category:Noindexed articles regardless of age but will actually be indexed if it's over 90 days old. "Page information" under "Tools" in the left pane will claim indexing is allowed regardless of the age. So both features are wrong but in opposite directions. None of them know the 90-day rule. See more at Wikipedia:Controlling search engine indexing#Indexing of articles ("mainspace"). The only reliable way to see if indexing is allowed on an article is to search for <meta name="robots" content="noindex,nofollow"/> in the html source of the rendered page. If the html says this then indexing is not allowed. If the html doesn't say it then indexing is allowed – at least for articles. For other namespaces, indexing of some pages is disallowed by our robots.txt file https://en.wikipedia.org/robots.txt without any of our software features registering it. Articles could technically also be disallowed by https://en.wikipedia.org/robots.txt but we never do that – unless somebody screws around with the file but I haven't heard of that. And to make the confusion complete, https://en.wikipedia.org/robots.txt is based on url's so a page disallowed by it may still be indexed with an alternative url (not redirects). Our robots.txt tries to protect against one way this can happen by listing page names with both colon and the percent encoding %3A but this isn't always done, and there are other ways a deviant url may sneak by. Features based on noindex work regardless of the url – as long as the page is here at en.wikipedia.org and not an unofficial mirror. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:15, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

---

#	Topic	NPP	AfC	Note
1	Review	Follow NPP chart	GNG & SSN notability and content policy within what provided in the draft article
2	Source	Not judging by article sources but what is available outside the article	Based on what indicated in the draft article	NPP - sources will only be included by interested editor to support the content claimed which would take years or no sources are added at all NPP - reviewer can moved article to draft page under WP:NPPDRAFT if no source or only dependent/not relaible sources presented in the article AfC - editor who input the info responsible to provide source - inline with WP:PROVEIT or WP:BURDEN verifiability guidelines
3	spam/promo/COPVIO/attacked page/vandalism/nonsense	via CSD	via CSD
4	CSD A7	via CSD - go through admin	reject - reviewer decision
5	Question of meeting notability	via PROP or AfD	decline (but not reject)
6	Merge/redirect	tag on page	inform editor
7	user right min requirement -	at least 90 days, and have made at least 500 not-deleted edits to mainspace. no behavioral blocks or 3RR violations for a span of 6 months experience with moving pages	at least 90 days, and have made at least 500 not-deleted edits to mainspace. requires experience with deletion	both given by admin
8	Process	via page curator	via script
9	Reviewers/Patroller in need of help	via NPPSCHOOL	via AfC talk page	NPPSCHOOL - enroll the program and guided by experience editor (trainer) AfC talk page - New or experienced editors get help from other experienced editors (A robust talk page)
10	Diffs	1.accept upon credible claim of significance even without sources if sources could be found by reviewer - place the responsibility reviewers to look for sources on behalf of the creator 2.accept and tag NPOV 3.No communication or advise by reviewer 4.Only one reviewer but if found unsoundly accepted, other reviewer can unreview the page 5.Page would be indexed by after 3 months in NPP even the page has not been reviewed 6.Reviews do the tagging (unreferenced/stub/improve cat) 7.Review AfC approved article unless the AfC reviewer hold both AfC and NPP user rights 8.Design for autoconfirmed user. Any PAID editors' article need to move to "Draft" space (AfC review) irregardless how many edits or page created by the PAID editors in the past. 9. NPP discussion page - mostly among reviewers	1.accepted if independent, reliable sources present in the article - place responsibility on creator to provide sources so they would comply to Wikipedia content policy 2.decline if NPOV (accordance with WP:Content policy) 3.Automated recline message and reveiwer's comment on draft page to creator on how to improve/what is need 4.Multiple reviewers could review a page if the page is previously decline 5.Could be G13 for stale drafts after 6 months or postponing G13 6.Reviewers do the tagging (cat, Wikiproject, article class assessment) 7.No need to review NPP page. 8.Design for new user who is not familiar with Wikipedia, but autoconfirmed editor would move drat to main at will where AfC review will be replaced by NPP review. 9. AfC help desk for creator seeking help

---

“ what seems dangerous always entices human craving;

what seems taboo always seduces human longing;
and what seems forbidden always arouses human yearning.

” — CASSIOPEIA

---

• First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our general notability guideline (GNG). Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
• Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
• Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
• Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
• Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
• Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draaft when you thimnk it is ready for reviewq. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
• Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request at the Teahouse or the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article.

---

copyright

The draft copied text verbatim and posted that same text here identical to the original source. That's plagiarism, which is the most basic form of copyright violation there is. It's so basic that universities will just kick students out for plagiarism without much of a warning because they're supposed to learn to not do that in high school. If you're affiliated with xxxxxxx, then you would have a conflict of interest and so should not be editing the article to begin.

summarize and (most importantly) paraphrase those sources (and no others). If you do that, other people can take care of stuff like formatting, grammar. Notability is established by showing what other people have recognized this group for. Notability is the only thing that gets articles approved. Praising or condemning a subject or trying to make their vision or message known (aside from being unencyclopedic) are common tactics to hide a lack of notability.

---

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IRC/Tutorial
2. Go through this entire tutorial
3. GEspecially the "Nickname registration" and the "Applying for a host cloak" parts.
4. GRegistration allows for that nick to belong to you and require a password to use when on IRC. Else the person will be automatically changed to a different nick.
5. GThe cloak request has a Freenode Staff user apply a cloak to your information to hide your IP.
6. GRegister first, make sure you have that part down completely - then apply for a cloak. The cloak approval process can take some time, I've heard...
7. GOther than that, just join #wikipedia-en and chat there. Easy peasy.

have received the necessary depth of coverage to be considered notable. sources appear to be either affiliated or press releases, neither of which constitute independent, reliable and significant coverage.

Suspended fighters

The list below is based on fighters suspended either by (1) United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) or World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) for violation of taking prohibited substances or non-analytical incidents, (2) by local commissions on misconduct during the fights or at event venues, or (3) by UFC for reasons stated below.

UFC announced the partnership with USADA on June 3, 2015, as the official, independent anti-doping agency. The UFC USADA testing program effective started on July 1, 2015, included a minimum of 2,750 drug tests per year, with an average of five tests per fighter, and punishments for fighters who fail the tests. Under the UFC Anti-Doping Policy, fighters are subject to random tests at any time and any place, on all in- and out-of-competition blood and urine samples collected by USADA, and fighters must be in the testing pool for six months prior to being allowed to fight under a UFC event.

In February 2017, UFC made changes to the anti-doping policy effective as of April 1, 2017. (1) Fighters who are new to UFC with no previous contract would be subject to the one-month testing rule, and the same applies to returning fighters to who were terminated or weren't renewed at the decision of the UFC, who previously needed to undergo four months of testings prior to competing in a bout. (2) Returning fighters who have chosen to retire, go on hiatus or not renew their contracts would be subject to be in a six-month testing pool prior to competition. (3) No doping violation is handed down to newly jointed fighters who voluntarily disclose use of a prohibited substance prior to testing. (4) "In-competition" testing begins at noon on the weigh-in day and ends one hour after fighters clear the post-fight medical for non-selected post-fight testing. For fighters who are subjected to post-fight testing, the in-competition testing ends after any post-fight testing is done. In September 2018, UFC and USADA indicated no announcements would be made on fighters who have been flagged for a potential doping violation until the entire adjudication processes are conducted with the results of the potential doping violation.

In 2015, USADA conducted 353 tests, and 2291 tests in 2016, on 586 UFC fighters, with Anderson Silva tested the most, a total of 15 times. In 2017 and 2018 a total of 2818 and 2888 tests were conducted by USADA respectively.

As of May 16, 2019, a total of 76 UFC fighters have been sanctioned by USADA since the UFC USADA testing program started.

• 
  Andrei Arlovski
• 
  Ilir Latifi
• 
  Derrick Lewis
• 
  Todd Duffee
• 
  Stefan Struve
• 
  Ben Rothwell
• 
  Junior dos Santos
• 
  Stipe Miočić
• 
  Alistair Overeem
• 
  Aleksei Oleinik
• 
  Marcos Rogério de Lima
• 
  Alexander Volkov
• 
  Francis Ngannou
• 
  Grey Hardy
• 
  Tai Tuivasa
• 
  Juan Francisco Espino Dieppa
• 
  Jairzinho Rozenstruik

• 
  Andrei Arlovski
• 
  Ilir Latifi
• 
  Derrick Lewis
• 
  Todd Duffee
• 
  Stefan Struve
• 
  Ben Rothwell
• 
  Junior dos Santos
• 
  Stipe Miočić
• 
  Alistair Overeem
• 
  Aleksei Oleinik
• 
  Marcos Rogério de Lima
• 
  Alexander Volkov
• 
  Francis Ngannou
• 
  Grey Hardy
• 
  Tai Tuivasa
• 
  Juan Francisco Espino Dieppa
• 
  Jairzinho Rozenstruik

• 
  Ronaldo Jacaré Souza
• 
  Jon Jones
• 
  Ovince Saint Preux
• 
  Luke Rockhold
• 
  Maurício Rua
• 
  Sam Alvey
• 
  Jan Błachowicz
• 
  Glover Teixeira
• 
  Misha Cirkunov
• 
  Gökhan Saki
• 
  Khalil Rountree
• 
  Jiří Procházka
• 
  Volkan Oezdemir
• 
  Magomed Ankalaev
• 
  Michał Oleksiejczuk
• 
  Dominick Reyes
• 
  Tyson Pedro
• 
  Alonzo Menifield
• 
  Jimmy Crute

• 
  Brad Tavares
• 
  Anderson Silva
• 
  Kelvin Gastelum
• 
  Chris Weidman
• 
  Robert Whittaker
• 
  Yoel Romero
• 
  Uriah Hall
• 
  Krzysztof Jotko
• 
  Jack Hermansson
• 
  Jack Marshman
• 
  Jared Cannonier
• 
  Paulo Costa
• 
  Israel Adesanya
• 
  Khalid Murtazaliev
• 
  Oskar Piechota
• 
  Darren Stewart
• 
  Edmen Shahbazyan
• 
  Rodolfo Vieira
• 
  Darren Till
• 
  Karl Roberson
• 
  John Phillips
• 
  Makhmud Muradov
• 
  Wellington Turman

• 
  Nate Diaz
• 
  Robbie Lawler
• 
  Diego Sanchez
• 
  Donald Cerrone
• 
  Carlos Condit
• 
  Matt Brown
• 
  Anthony Pettis
• 
  Demian Maia
• 
  Michael Chiesa
• 
  Dong Hyun Kim
• 
  Lyman Good
• 
  Tyron Woodley
• 
  Stephen Thompson
• 
  Gunnar Nelson
• 
  Alberto Mina
• 
  Jake Matthews
• 
  Nicolas Dalby
• 
  Mike Perry
• 
  Emil Weber Meek
• 
  CM Punk
• 
  Geoff Neal
• 
  Alexey Kunchenko
• 
  Rhys McKee

• 
  Matt Wiman
• 
  Clay Guida
• 
  Joe Lauzon
• 
  Jim Miller
• 
  Michael Johnson
• 
  Charles Oliveira
• 
  Dustin Poirier
• 
  Tony Ferguson
• 
  Erik Koch
• 
  Joaquim Silva
• 
  Mairbek Taisumov
• 
  Paul Felder
• UFC Lightweight Beneil Dariush
  Beneil Dariush
• 
  Al Iaquinta
• 
  Christos Giagos
• 
  Gregor Gillespie
• 
  Arnold Allen
• 
  Kevin Lee
• 
  Justin Gaethje
• 
  Damir Hadžović
• 
  Don Madge
• 
  Alexander Hernandez
• 
  Devonte Smith
• 
  Jalin Turner
• 
  Matt Frevola
• 
  Mark Madsen
• 
  Giga Chikadze

• 
  Jeremy Stephens
• 
  Cub Swanson
• 
  Darren Elkins
• 
  Chan Sung Jung
• 
  Max Holloway
• 
  Nik Lentz
• 
  Brian Ortega
• 
  Yair Rodríguez
• 
  Jimmie Rivera
• 
  Ryan Hall
• 
  Alexander Volkanovski
• 
  Dan Ige
• 
  Shane Young
• 
  Zabit Magomedsharipov
• 
  Shane Burgos
• 
  Daniel Teymur
• 
  Mike Grundy
• 
  Hakeem Dawodu

• 
  Urijah Faber
• 
  Eddie Wineland
• 
  Frankie Edgar
• 
  José Aldo
• 
  Dominick Cruz
• 
  TJ Dillashaw
• 
  Alijamain Sterling
• 
  Cody Garbrandt
• 
  Kyung Ho Kang
• 
  José Alberto Quiñónez
• 
  Petr Yan
• 
  Enrique Barzola
• 
  :Cory Sandhagen
• 
  Rob Font
• 
  Sean O'Malley
• 
  Nathaniel Wood
• 
  Montel Jackson
• 
  Jonathan Martinez
• 
  Jack Shore

• 
  Joseph Benavidez
• 
  Jussier Formiga

• 
  Amanda Nunes
• 
  Megan Anderson

• 
  Germaine de Randamie
• 
  Raquel Pennington
• 
  Holly Holm
• 
  Aspen Ladd
• 
  Sijara Eubanks
• 
  Julianna Pena
• 
  Sara McMann
• 
  Lina Länsberg
• 
  Pannie Kianzad

• 
  Jessica Andrade
• 
  Jessica Eye
• 
  Valentina Shevchenko
• 
  Katlyn Chookagian
• 
  Roxanne Modafferi
• 
  Joanne Calderwood
• 
  Nicco Montano
• 
  Rachael Ostovich
• 
  Jennifer Maia
• 
  Ariane Lipski
• 
  Montana De La Rosa

• 
  Cláudia Gadelha
• 
  Karolina Kowalkiewicz
• 
  Felice Herrig
• 
  Joanna Jędrzejczyk
• 
  Michelle Waterson
• 
  Tatiana Suarez
• 
  Lívia Renata Souza

notability ppll - links

---

Random stuff 1

AGF vs disruptive vs advice Talking in the article

Random stuff 2

1. African elephant
2. not curly

---

Source	Significant?	Independent?	Reliable?	Secondary?	Pass/Fail	Notes
The New York Times	N	Y	Y	Y	N	A single-sentence mention in an article about another company.
Profile in Forbes	Y	N	N	Y	N	Most such posts are company-sponsored or based on company's marketing materials.
Tech blog post	Y	?	N	Y	N	Blog posts are often sponsored and self-published sources are generally not reliable unless written by a subject-matter expert.
Court filing	Y	N	Y	N	N	Court filings are primary sources. While we hope they will be truthful, court filings are written by the company (or its opponents in court), so they are not independent.
Total qualifying sources					0	There must be multiple qualifying sources to meet the notability requirements

---