User talk:Perryprog

This is Perryprog's talk page, where you can send them 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.

Archives (index): 1, 2: 15 days

Eumesosoma roeweri draft declined

I was curious why my article was declined. I also wanted to add my own image, yet having a new account prevented me from doing that.

Thanks in advance. This is my first Wikipedia attempt. Leif Cash (talk) 01:45, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Leif Cash! It just needs like one or two reliable sources that talk about the species. It looks like ^[1] talks a bit about it under the name Mesosoma roeweri. Species articles are a really good pick for first articles as they're pretty much all guaranteed to be accepted as "notable", which is usually the issue with other topics that people often first try drafting articles about. The criteria for a species being notable is... "it's a species". (With some asterisks, see WP:NSPECIES for the nitty gritty.)

Regardless, it's looking really good if this is really your first time editing Wikipedia! Hope the decline wasn't too discouraging (it's not meant to be!), and feel free to follow-up with any more questions. Perryprog (talk) 02:02, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The decline was discouraging, especially being it's my first attempt, but your quick notes and communication is very relieving and reassuring. Appreciate you specifying what I can do to improve.

I'll do my best to find new sources and resubmit it, leaving a note when I do! Thanks Leif Cash (talk) 02:16, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I'm sorry then—I'll admit it's hard to avoid the intimidating aspect of the giant "red box of doom" filled with eighty million links that you're all (seemingly) expected to read. You were really 80% or 90% there. Also keep in mind that in terms of "first things to do on Wikipedia", writing an article is far and away one of the hardest. If there's one bit of advice though it's that there is literally no pressure on you here. No deadline, no obligation. Just do what you enjoy. :) Perryprog (talk) 02:21, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just happy about the opportunity to contribute more to the bug and science community. Taking up the reins because no one has yet written about any one species in the Genus.

I guess I did just bite the bullet and make a vast attempt to take on an article with 0 Wikipedia experience, haha. Should've assumed there'd be some flaws.

Again, appreciate your support!

Leif Cash (talk) 02:26, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Goodnight, Clarence J.; Goodnight, Marie L. (1943). "New and Little Known Phalangids from the United States". The American Midland Naturalist. 29 (3): 643–656. doi:10.2307/2421154. ISSN 0003-0031.

Update on John Ross draft citation added

Thanks for the review, Perryprog. Ross is explicitly named on page 63 of SL-06: Adam’s Light Brigade Netherlands 1813–15 and Waterloo (Summerfield & Law, 2020) as commanding two companies of the III Battalion, 95th Rifles at Waterloo. Also in Charles Dalton's The Waterloo Rollcall on page 204. It’s brief, but confirms his battlefield role in a historically significant engagement. If a redirect or merge into a broader article would be more appropriate given the current sourcing, I’m happy to adjust accordingly. Let me know what you think. Tanush Sharma (talk) 03:49, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tanush Sharma, thanks for clarifying! If there aren't further sources that discuss him in-depth, then yeah, just including this in an existing article might be best. I will say I know next to nothing about anything military history related, so I'll leave it up to you where best to include it. Thanks for understanding! Perryprog (talk) 15:27, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some questions on creating a CSD log.

Hello if you don’t mind I would like to ask a couple of questions about creating one as I saw your one while looking through AFC requests. Fist I wanted to ask these logs can include just nominations right? Secondly,I wanted to ask how you managed to find the deleted revision section to find your past ones? I haven’t been able to find that. GothicGolem29 (talk) 12:01, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GothicGolem29—I don't mind at all! For a log of CSD nominations you can create it by going to Wikipedia:Twinkle/Preferences § speedy and checking "Keep a log in userspace of all CSD nominations". If by "just nominations" you mean just anything you tag with Twinkle (regardless of if it ends up getting actually deleted), then yes that's what this does. You might also be interested in the other logs that Twinkle can keep. ("Keep a log in userspace of all pages you tag for PROD" and "Keep a log in userspace of all pages you nominate for a deletion discussion (XfD)" being the relevant settings.)

To get a retroactive list of things I nominated for CSD I had to cheat a bit—I reached out to a (technically inclined) admin to run an API call that got me my deleted contributions' edit summaries which I then formatted into a list in the style of Twinkle's log. I'm not sure that there's a good place to ask for help doing that, though. Maybe WP:VP/T. Perryprog (talk) 13:11, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answer I really appreciate it! That is really helpful Another question if you don't mind is how do you csd with twinkle? I have Twinkle but I have not seen a button for it so I do it manually usually.

Ah ok fair enough. Thanks appreciate the suggestion of where to ask. GothicGolem29 (talk) 03:15, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GothicGolem29, if you're using the default skin (Vector-2022) it's labeled "CSD" in the "TW" dropdown menu at the top right of the page. Perryprog (talk) 16:44, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I found it. GothicGolem29 (talk) 13:06, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the dhawahir al nahyan conflict page

both of the sources i have put contain the conflict in detail, i dont know why u cant find any related to the conflict in the second source even tho its there, and the first book is old i just put the new years version the book is older then 2025, please get back to me

B39sna (talk) 13:44, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

B39sna, super possible that I just totally missed it—it's hard to put in the time to give an in-depth look through every source, and it's easy to miss stuff especially when it's an area that one might not be otherwise familiar with (which is true in this case). I'll see if I can take another peek sometime today. Regarding the first book, that's weird—I was having a lot of trouble finding many mentions of it online, but I'll give another look around. It's not inherently an issue if a source isn't easy to access, or only has physical copies, though—it just tends to mean it'll take a bit longer to review. Perryprog (talk) 16:49, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh this is hilarious—I was again looking for Children of the Seven Sands (which does seem to be only just published in 2025, unless I'm missing something?) and just realized that its author is literally a Wikipedian! Hi Alexandermcnabb! Could you offer any insight into what your book covers regarding this draft?

B39sna, you were right, I had (surprisingly) missed the portion of Heard-Bey (1982) that discussed this conflict, however I have two concerns. The first, and more important issue, is that I feel like your use of its text constitutes close paraphrasing, so I've removed that portion. Please read this section on how to avoid doing so in the future. Secondly, I am still not sure that one page of coverage about this conflict is enough for significant coverage to be met, but hopefully Alexandermcnabb can offer some insight there since he's much, much, much, much more familiar with this area than I am. :P Perryprog (talk) 17:55, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! Hi and thanks, @Perryprog for the ping. COTSS is available from all good UAE booksellers and Amazon.com et al if you fancy making my publisher even richer!! And, yes, I'd concur that this 'conflict' (in the sweep of history more of a 'spat'!) doesn't really stand up an independent article. The Dhawahir were generally loyal to Zayed (in 1848 he'd used them as part of a confederation to beat up the Saudi agent and throw him out of Buraimi), but they had a falling out in 1887-91 and Zayed brought them back 'onside' - he created a great tribal confederation and was generally a man not to be trifled with - if you elevated the Dhawahir incident to 'a conflict' you'd have to create an awful lot of articles about Zayed and they'd all be two-line stubs! Frauke Heard-Bey's 'From Trucial States' still stands as the most influential book on the UAE's recent history, FWIW.

From COTSS: "There was little peace in the interior, however. The alliance between Dubai and Abu Dhabi bolstered Zayed’s ambitions in Buraimi and he expanded his influence in the oasis, buying up date groves and water rights, eventually alienating his long-standing allies, the Dhawahir. Although the Dhawahir had previously sold land to Zayed, they eventually realised that bit by bit the pattern of land ownership had changed and they had effectively ceded control of the oasis. They rebelled. Having been prevented from acting by an intercession by Dubai in 1875, Zayed laid his plans and effected a reconciliation with the Na’im, long a thorn in the side of the Bani Yas. Bolstered by his new alliance, Zayed marched against the oasis in May 1887. The Sultan of Muscat supported the Dhawahir, sending them money and ammunition, but his aid arrived too late. Zayed claimed a fast and decisive victory of arms and took the two Dhawahir Sheikhs hostage against the tribe’s future good behaviour. They can’t have been much use as hostages, because Zayed marched against the Dhawahir once again in 1891, this time with the support of thirty horsemen and 300 camel riders from Dubai. Zayed took the main Dhawahir settlement, ‘Ain Dhawahir and built a fort there to ensure his dominance over the oasis. Appointing a Dhawahir Wali, Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Hilal Al Dhahiri, over the oasis, Zayed brought the Na’im fully onside by marrying the daughter of the Nuaimi headman of Buraimi. By now, Zayed not only dominated the oases of Buraimi and Ain Dhawahir, he also commanded the loyalty of the powerful Bani Ka’ab and Bani Qitab, who dominated the area to the north of Buraimi and who had been generally considered to be dependents of Sharjah. Saqr bin Khalid Al Qasimi saw Sharjah’s influence diminished – and not for the first time – at the hands of Zayed bin Khalifa. Ain Dhawahir is known today simply as Al Ain, the inland oasis city of Abu Dhabi."

This is already covered in the Zayed bin Khalifa article, BTW. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 05:41, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey alexandermcnabb, i could edit it into like a "rebellion" instead of a "conflict", by the way i actually am from the Dhawahir, my friend is also from the Naim, this sort of "conflict" or rebellion was seen more of as some war according to our elders, i was surprised to find sources so i decided to make a page because not much of uae's history gets covered and its best to preserve it as much as possible for the future generations. B39sna (talk) 06:50, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yea the dhawahir were loyal but that was more of after the whole "war", ive also read some other books where Sheikh Shakhboot said "dawlatul dhawahir" which means state of the dhawahir, dont really know where to find much more im just trying to cover things as much as possible. B39sna (talk) 06:51, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly I believe that it deserves a article or some sort of "battle page" so I made one, the Naim were also loyalists to the dhawahir at the time during the conflict maybe some omani forces as well from what I hear from elders B39sna (talk) 06:59, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The info's already in Zayed's page, though. I honestly don't think it's worth a whole article. There's also a page for Dhawahir - which you could always add to whenever you can spirit up the sourced info - the issue is, as always, that you need published sources and can't use verbal tradition from the tribe/family. And I guess the Al Ain page could also use some more attention! Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:25, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandermcnabb and B39sna—thanks for both of your replies! With the added context from COTSS I do agree that this isn't suitable for a standalone article, but it's definitely worth covering, either by expanding its mention in Zayed's page. B39sna, keep in mind that we can create a redirect from a title such as "Dhawahir–Al Nahyan Conflict" to go to the relevant section of whatever page ends up having the most relevant info regarding that topic. (Most likely Zayed's article.) Again, I do think that we should be covering as much of this history as appears in published, reliable sources—it's just a question of whether this information is in its own article or an existing one. We aren't trying to dismiss your work. Perryprog (talk) 14:50, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

by the way u accidentally deleted large portions of the page on my article B39sna (talk) 16:32, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it intentionally—I explained why in the second paragraph of my reply here. You're welcome to add it back if you state the facts of what happened in your own words, rather than relying on the source's original sentence structures and, in some parts, tone. Perryprog (talk) 16:35, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There would you mind please checking everything now, i think my page is fully valid at this point. B39sna (talk) 18:17, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you were to view the current situation of the emirates as Emaratis do you would honestly want to create whole pages too, not many know any sort of history of themselves anymore especially my generation and I really want to make it easily accessible for all, its not really something small either, the Dhawahir during those periods were also with and both against Nai'm from what I read in a book, 2000 Nuaimi loyalists stayed in Al ain while 400 went and reached Ajman at some point, part of the reason why they are a royal family now. B39sna (talk) 16:25, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Well, I was trying to find it in a US library so I could at least try to get it through an inter-library loan, but that excerpt works too!) Perryprog (talk) 14:51, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I could republish it and add more things to the page if u think it isnt rlly worth a entire article. B39sna (talk) 16:28, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He replied back to you by the way feel free to read whenever. B39sna (talk) 06:52, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pradabagshawty declined.

Hey Perryprog hope you are doing well, I see that you have declined my submission for Pradabagshawty, I was just wondering why you may have came to the decision to deny it, hope to hear from you soon, Goodbye 2600:1700:27B0:1BF0:1A23:F0EA:7F01:AA6A (talk) 05:24, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi—I'm good; I hope you are too! I declined it because currently you don't have any reliable sources supporting any of the claims made, which is essential when writing about a living person. The sources you choose will also need to demonstrate that this person meets the criteria needed to have an article about them—these are listed at Wikipedia:Notability (people), but there's a simpler stating of the rule at WP:42 to get you started. Note that if such sources don't exist, then this person is likely not suitable for a page on Wikipedia at this point in time.

That all being said, though, I'm concerned that you created the current draft using an LLM (like a chat bot) such as ChatGPT—if this was the case, please do not do this. They will not create articles suitable for Wikipedia.

I hope this helps—let me know if you have any questions. Perryprog (talk) 14:36, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Goodnight, Clarence J.; Goodnight, Marie L. (1943). "New and Little Known Phalangids from the United States". The American Midland Naturalist. 29 (3): 643–656. doi:10.2307/2421154. ISSN 0003-0031.

[1]