User talk:Pineapple Storage

This is Pineapple Storage'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. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives

Mantelpiece (3) 2022 October (1) 2025 April (1), May (5), June (9), July (9), August (11), September

Question from Tanjacorrs (12:30, 10 September 2025)

Hi, I noticed a broken link on a "Millennials" page. How can I notify someone/edit it? --Tanjacorrs (talk) 12:30, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Tanjacorrs, welcome to Wikipedia! It looks like the Millennials article is semi-protected at the moment, which means that only autoconfirmed users can edit it (ie. user accounts that are at least 4 days old and have made at least 10 edits). As you're not yet autoconfirmed, you are more than welcome to make an edit request on the article's talk page! Just click here to begin writing your edit request. I hope this helps! Please let me know if you have any questions or there's anything else I can help with! :) Pineapple Storage (talk) 15:03, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just added some names here: Category:Estonian lesbians

Did I do it correctly? Thanks Tanjacorrs (talk) 12:56, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Tanjacorrs, good question! Links to articles shouldn't be added directly to the category page; to add an article to a category, just add a wikilink to the category at the bottom of the article. From your contributions, I can see you're using VisualEditor mode; after clicking 'Edit' on an article, you should be able to scroll down to the bottom of the article and see a box containing all the categories the article is in. Clicking this box will then open a window that will allow you to search for categories and easily add them to the article. For further information, I would recommend checking out Wikipedia:FAQ/Categorization which answers some common questions about categorisation on Wikipedia. I hope this helps! Please let me know if you have any other questions. :) Pineapple Storage (talk) 20:18, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Dodenaren (13:03, 11 September 2025)

tjena! hur kan jag börja med att skapa olika artiklar?

Mvh-Faren --Dodenaren (talk) 13:03, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Jag översatte detta meddelande från engelska med Google Translate, eftersom jag tyvärr inte talar svenska. Ber om ursäkt om det finns misstag i denna maskinöversättning!)

@Dodenaren Hej! Välkommen till Wikipedia! Detta är den engelskspråkiga Wikipedia. Instruktioner om hur man redigerar finns tillgängliga på engelska på Help:Introduction; om du föredrar att bidra till den svenskspråkiga Wikipedia finns instruktioner om redigering tillgängliga på svenska på sv:Wikipedia:Introduktion. Om du behöver ytterligare hjälp kan du besöka den engelskspråkiga Wikipedia:Teahouse eller den svenskspråkiga Wikipedias sv:Wikipedia:Fikarummet. Jag hoppas att detta hjälper! :) Pineapple Storage (talk) 13:23, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question from ALIBHATTI98 (12:09, 15 September 2025)

hy how are you --ALIBHATTI98 (talk) 12:09, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @ALIBHATTI98, I'm good thanks, how are you? :) Welcome to Wikipedia! Pineapple Storage (talk) 22:24, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trinidadian French Creole page

Thank you for sending the resources, I went through a few and added one to the page, the one ones were either short snippets I couldn’t access and one was on the English creole (a reasonable mistake to make as they both are called “Creoles”). I think it is a pretty general statement to say it is a “dialect” of St Lucian French Creole, it would be more correct to call them siblings or all dialects from the same root. I do know for a fact the language hasn’t entirely died out, many elders speak it and there are groups teaching and doing courses in the language (one of these groups being called the “Trinidadian Patois Speakers” which is on Facebook and YouTube. Trinidadian French Creole is the last major French Creole to not have an article on it (apart from Venezuelan which is a sub-branch of Trinidadian French Creole) so I do believe it warrants a page.

Thanks for your help KeyolTranslater (talk) 10:01, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @KeyolTranslater, thanks for getting in touch! No problem at all, happy to help. Yes, unfortunately a lot of the sources available seem to be behind paywalls—but this doesn't stop them from indicating the notability of Trinidadian French Creole, which (in my opinion) definitely warrants its own article! And yes, I realise that Early Trinidadian Creole: The Spectator Texts (Winer, 1984) is about Trinidadian English Creole, but it does contain this passage on page 182:

... a great influx of French and French-Creole-speaking immigrants from Haiti, Martinique, France and elsewhere ... As these immigrants settled in Trinidad, their numbers increased to such an extent that French Creole (FC) became the lingua franca of Trinidad, and remained such until the early 20th century.

Because of this, it turned up in my Google Scholar search for trinidadian french creole! :) Let me know if there's anything else I can help out with on the draft, or in general. Pineapple Storage (talk) 12:11, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see now I understand about that source. I think the article is pretty polished at the moment, although I will ask you if I need any help on it or anything else. I am also planning to write an article on Venezuelan Creole French, that would complete the Creole pages (every Caribbean French creole has a page except for Trinidadian and Venezuelan at the moment). I am also researching for another page I made on San Miguel (Panamanian) French Creole so if you stumble on any info in that language please inform me. Thanks for the help :) KeyolTranslater (talk) 12:48, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Redirects from titles without logograms has been nominated for deletion

Category:Redirects from titles without logograms has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Beland (talk) 20:16, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Redirects from titles with logograms has been nominated for deletion

Category:Redirects from titles with logograms has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Beland (talk) 20:17, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 70

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 70, July–August 2025

• New collections:
  • Times of Malta
  • Africa Intelligence
  • Intelligence Online
  • La Lettre
  • Glitz
• Spotlight: Wikimania

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team – 13:16, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(This message was sent to User:Pineapple Storage and is being posted here due to a redirect.)

Question from X-RogueLeBeau-X (06:47, 22 September 2025)

Note: X-RogueLeBeau-X's mentor Dudhhr is away.

Hello, Dudhhr (I see you are out until Jan 15) and Pineapple Storage,

I go by Rogue and am a long-time Wiki user, fan, and supporter. I've just started editing officially (have done small updates over the years). I decided to go through some of the suggested updates to get started. The first I was offered was a page on a piano prodigy, Noah Waddell. I have music/keyboard and some knowledge of HTML, XML, and some other coding, so wasn't initially intimidated by this page, but it turned out to be a much deeper dive than I had anticipated. As I read through the article, I found it very outdated and no longer accurate/working. I also found links to what now appeared to be a site with somewhat radical content, for lack of a better term.

I removed all broken and inappropriate links and added a couple new ones that I found that seemed valid and safer, updating the assessdate tags for each current URL I tested and found to still be working and appropriate. There were also confusing timeline inaccuracies that I corrected as best I could.

I found the piano prodigy had also gone pro as a pickleball player and instructor. Wiki does have a Pickleball page and I added info and links to that, but it felt unusual to be updating the site with awards he won for both piano and pickleball. I hadn't written the Philanthropy or Awards sections and didn't update those with the Pickleball pro/awards info.

Since I started with the thought that my first official edit should be something a little simpler and ended up almost completely rewriting the page, I was just hoping you/someone could take a second look at it, when you have a chance. The page should be OK, as is, so no rush. I reread it a couple of times and made additional small updates. I would just appreciate any feedback you might provide, as I'd like to improve my skills, although I intend to also go through more suggested edits and tutorial reading.

Thank you! --X-RogueLeBeau-X (talk) 06:47, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @X-RogueLeBeau-X, thank you so much for getting in touch! It's so great to hear your enthusiasm about Wikipedia. Of course, I'm happy to look over the article.

I've made a couple of edits (diff) to correct some minor formatting points, as well as adding a reference to the 2017 US Open results, as I think the other source listed the wrong year for Waddell's doubles win.

Aside from those minor tweaks, I would say my main concern with the article in its current form is that § Early life doesn't have any citations to support the content. Waddell is a living person, so the article is subject to Wikipedia's policy about Biographies of Living Persons (BLP), and there are stricter sourcing requirements for BLPs than for other articles. Because of this, it would be great if you could add some inline citations to that section, citing reliable sources for the information you already added—basically, you can just cite wherever you got the information to begin with.^[a]

For information and guidance on how to add citations, see Help:Footnotes (and for some more advanced points, see Wikipedia:Citing sources/Further considerations). If you need to cite the same source multiple times, there's information on how to do that here and here. If you haven't already, I would also recommend you have a read of Wikipedia:Reliable sources, just to get a feel for Wikipedia's sourcing requirements and conventions.

I hope this is helpful! Please let me know if you have any questions, or if there's anything else I can help with! :) Pineapple Storage (talk) 10:39, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing the Noah Waddell article and for the very helpful feedback! I've begun reviewing the material, but saw that your main concern was with the Early life intro and asked me to add citations to support the content. Unfortunately, I hadn't written that content. I did update the flow, such as breaking up a run-on sentence and adding Noah's birth date, which I found on WIKI 2 in a very slightly altered copy of the same profile there. https://wiki2.org/en/Noah_Waddell

I cannot really confirm that is his true birthdate and am not 100% sure of the originality or accuracy of the original content in the article. I just formatted it to be a little easier to read. The other content appeared to have been included in the article in its original form circa 2014. Any suggestions? X-RogueLeBeau-X (talk) 18:06, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

1. Just in case it's relevant, I think it's important to bear in mind that original research and personal knowledge can't be used as sources! :)

Learning

Hello. I have a question about an edit that someone erased but i don't know who nor how to ask them whats their opinion as to why the edit was not acceptable. I’m new and would like to learn. It was simply a new patent that was approved and published last month and a link to the U.S. patent office to verify the validity of the patent number and content. It’s the latest update concerning The Bible code as they are directly related. Looking forward to learning and growing. Thank you! LectraMae (talk) 21:13, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @LectraMae, thank you so much for getting in touch!

For my own benefit, let me just recap the chain of events. From your contributions, I can see that you made these edits to the article Bible code, and that these were then reverted in this edit by User:Tgeorgescu. Tgeorgescu has said (in the edit summary for that edit, and at his talk page) that he reverted your addition because patents are primary sources, but he also mentioned "original research".

This may seem a bit confusing! On Wikipedia, original research not only refers to "facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published source exists", but also covers "any analysis or synthesis of published material that reaches or implies a conclusion not stated by the sources" (these quotes are from the first paragraph of Wikipedia:No original research, a Wikipedia policy page). Relying too much on primary sources (such as patents) is actively discouraged on Wikipedia. This because they are "easy to misuse",^[a] for instance because it may be tempting to provide "novel interpretations of primary sources"^[b] which would then constitute original research because no reliable, secondary source has been provided for that "novel interpretation".

@Tgeorgescu: my gut feeling is that WP:DUE is also relevant here; I think it may actually be the main issue, because LectraMae's edits didn't actually introduce any explicit original research. You didn't mention WP:DUE in your rationales for reverting LectraMae's edits (and you haven't posted about this at WP:NPOVN), but would you agree?

@LectraMae: what I mean by "WP:DUE" is the particular section of Wikipedia's policy on Neutral point of view that covers the "weighting" of different topics and viewpoints within an article; the amount of detail and the quantity of text dedicated to a certain topic inherently "weights" the content of the article it's added to, so it's important to give "due weight" (and avoid giving "undue weight") to topics mentioned in an article. This concept also applies when considering whether or not to mention something at all; does the thing carry enough "weight" that a mention of it is "due"? One way of determining this is by looking at how extensively the topic (for instance, news of the publication of this patent) has been covered and discussed in reliable, secondary, independent sources (ie. in this case, sources published in reputable publications, whose authors and publishers have no connections with the individuals/organisation that submitted the patent application). It's impossible to determine the relative significance of a primary source based only on the content of that source itself, so we have to look for secondary sources; if no such sources have discussed the topic in question, then it's unlikely that it warrants a mention on Wikipedia (although this might change, if/when appropriate and usable sources are published in the future). This is especially true for sources that are not even a month old,^[c] so likely haven't been covered or referenced extensively in that short amount of time.

I think it's possible that WP:DUE may have factored in to Tgeorgescu's thinking on this issue (@Tgeorgescu, please correct me if I'm wrong). In any case, as an uninvolved editor, WP:DUE is what first sprang to mind for me.

I realise this is a long explanation—sorry about that!—but I hope it has been helpful and that it has clarified the situation/issues for you. Please let me know if you have any questions! :) Pineapple Storage (talk) 09:21, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LectraMae Your user page mentions that you "volunteer for ... The Original Bible Foundation", which is the organisation that filed the patent (according to their website). I think it's important to point out that Wikipedia has an official guideline regarding conflicts of interest (COI), which can be found at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest; I would recommend you give that guideline a read. Here are the opening paragraphs:

Conflict of interest (COI) editing involves contributing to Wikipedia about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, or your financial and other relationships. Any external relationship can trigger a conflict of interest. Someone having a conflict of interest is a description of a situation, not a judgment about that person's opinions, integrity, or good faith.

COI editing is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. It undermines public confidence and risks causing public embarrassment to the individuals and companies being promoted. Editors with a COI are sometimes unaware of whether or how much it has influenced their editing. If COI editing causes disruption, an administrator may opt to place blocks on the involved accounts.

Editors with a COI, including paid editors, are expected to disclose it whenever they seek to change an affected article's content. Anyone editing for pay must disclose who is paying them, who the client is, and any other relevant affiliation; this is a requirement of the Wikimedia Foundation. COI editors are strongly discouraged from editing affected articles directly, and can propose changes on article talk pages instead. However, our policy on matters relating to living people allows very obvious errors to be fixed quickly, including by the subject.

I think it's possible that your real-world involvement with the Original Bible Foundation places you in a COI (would you agree @Tgeorgescu?) so I just wanted to bring this to your attention as it may be relevant. Pineapple Storage (talk) 09:52, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

She did not edit-war, so occasional mistakes are allowed. The COI concern is real, but she does not seem to be acting in bad faith. tgeorgescu (talk) 09:57, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, mistakes are allowed! Given that @LectraMae showed good faith and clearly expressed their desire and openness to learn, I'm just keen to provide as comprehensive and understandable an explanation as possible to help them with this. Pineapple Storage (talk) 10:04, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for all the information. I’ll throughly go through it. I completely understand the COI concern. If I come across something like this again, in the reason box before publishing edit, do I mention it? I do a lot of academic work and pride myself in the ability to turn out completely 100% unbiased work. If I have an opinion I state it as such but that is irrelevant here. Wikipedia is no place for opinions which I do love. I will study before more edits. Thanks again for your help! LectraMae (talk) 11:32, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, happy to help! And yes, you can mention a COI in the edit summary of related edits; see How to disclose a COI for further info and options. Let me know if there's anything else I can help with! :) Pineapple Storage (talk) 20:01, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok great. I will. Thank you so much for your time, expertise and patience. Have a nice evening/day. LectraMae (talk) 01:49, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, you too ! :) Pineapple Storage (talk) 08:42, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

1. As stated in Wikipedia:No original research § Primary.
2. Quote from WP:PSTS.
3. As you know, Patent US-12400087-B2 was only published on 26 August 2025.

Question from Mwill671 (18:35, 26 September 2025)

Hello, just want to know how to editor, I'm a new commer! --Mwill671 (talk) 18:35, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mwill671, welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for getting in touch! I would recommend starting with Help:Introduction, which provides a really helpful guide for new editors. There's also Help:Editing which also offers guidance. I hope these are helpful! Let me know if you have any other questions or if there's anything else I can help with! :) Pineapple Storage (talk) 20:05, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]