This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
This is Mathglot's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 |
|
I am aware of these ArbCom contentious topics | |||
|
You may (or may not) be interested in commenting on the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#MILHIST reliable source database. The intent of the proposals seems to be the same as your projects. Note that I mentioned the size of the task of preparing a database of sources just for the American Civil War. This is similar to some of our correspondence. One thing I did not think about is the use of Chicago Manual of Style by many of the editors of American Civil War topics. On the other hand, you noted it would not be necessary to make the conversion for your project. I mentioned World War II in passing. I did not mention your project in part because I rushed my comment, long as it is, and as I thought of it later, I wondered whether you would describe your idea more accurately than I would have done. I made no mention of preparing a list of general sources such as I noted to you. An editor has put up numerous improved articles (well over 100 with more promised) for B class assessment. I have been trying to do a few each day. This unexpectedly adds to my use of time unless others start to make some of the assessments. FWIW. Don't take this as a request to comment if you would rather not do so for any reason, just as information. Donner60 ( talk) 23:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi Mathglot, happy new year. Since you're experienced in gender articles, I believe your opinion is valuable: I recently created a redirect from social construction of sex to the section about it in the article sex–gender distinction. However, I'm thinking it might be a case of creating a separate article for this topic. What do you think? Gmsrubin ( talk) 01:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello, @Mathglot. You reverted my edit at this article and said I should have justified the change at the Edit Summary and preferably also the Talk page. I did justify it at the Talk page, but I didn't point that out at the Edit Summary. My mistake. Could you take a look at the edit again and see if you think the revert should be reverted? Thanks very much for the advice. Charlie Campbell 28 ( talk) 14:43, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
I changed the italics to quotation marks because The Pure Theory of Law uses quotation marks, not italics, around "ought," "may," and "can." I used single quotes around those words because I was quoting them within a quote. See page 5 of The Pure Theory of Law, which is accessible at Google Books. Surely the MOS: Manual of Style doesn't require us to alter quotations, does it? Maurice Magnus ( talk) 02:25, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Mathglot In the following paragraph from Hans Kelsen, I would change all the single quotation marks to double, but I will wait until you approve. Is there a reason that they should remain single?
Maurice Magnus ( talk) 16:32, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Maurice, when you subscribe to a discussion, any replies to that discussion cause a notification to appear, in the same place where you get notifications when someone {{ ping}}s you, or uses your username in brackets, which is to say, in the little square icon at the top of every page of Wikipedia, to the right of your username and the bell icon. You can click that square icon at any time to see a list of your notifications. If there is a superimposed number, it tells you how many there are, and if the number has a blue background , that means that there are some notifications you haven't seen yet.
I've since made some stylistic changes of my own at Basic norm, as well as rationalized the section headings (briefer per MOS:NOBACKREF, and some nesting of subsections). As far as my level of competence or prior knowledge of that subject, it's all new to me; just fyi, I only heard of Kelsen fairly recently, and have no legal training; nevertheless, according to Who Wrote That? I wrote 94.4% of the text at Pure Theory of Law, and I hope it's not too bad. The point being, not that I'm tooting my own horn, rather the contrary: any volunteer editor capable of finding reliable sources and writing a decent summary of the principal views and citing them properly can contribute here. You're certainly more qualified than I am about Kelsen, norms, and legal theory; that's for sure, but you don't need to be an expert in a topic or have formal training in it to write about it here, so you are certainly welcome to contribute there if you wish to.
But we are all volunteers, and everybody gets to contribute where and when they wish, so I won't trouble you further about " Basic norm". I only mean to encourage you, in the sense that if you're interested in some topic you know nothing about (or it's been a long time), by all means, go for it! One of my main satisfactions at Wikipedia is learning about stuff I'm unfamiliar with, by doing the research necessary to write articles about them. In my case, the Liberation of France and War guilt question were two topics like that; Draft:French historiography is another one (in progress; wanna help?), and now I'm excited about Kelsen, H. L. A. Hart and other legal philosophers. Anyway, it's been fun talking with you; so feel free to jump in here anytime (or ping me from any page). Cheers, Mathglot ( talk) 23:00, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Here is another (admittedly trivial) example of a difficulty I have with templates. In the list of References in France and the American Civil War, every item but the first has a comma before "p." or "pp." The first has a period. For the sake of consistency, I tried to change the period to a comma, but I couldn't (or, I should say, don't know how), because the period is hidden in the template. Maurice Magnus ( talk) 18:59, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello @ Mathglot: I noticed you had previously commented regarded possible COI on Revivalistics, a book by Ghil'ad Zuckermann. I am looking into the promotional nature of these articles, as well as material related to this individual on other pages. Sunjaifriþas ( talk) 20:53, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Given the concerns being raised by multiple contributors at Talk:Effects of pornography on young people over The Other Karma's poor grasp of the English language, and what I see as the inadequacy of their response, I have started a thread at WP:ANI. You may wish to comment. [1] AndyTheGrump ( talk) 23:32, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
I've started this as a new section, based on this comment by Elinruby in the section above:
Yes, I think that would be a good idea. I have mused about that privately before, but hadn't gotten anything structured out of it to the point of doing anything about it yet. I think we've informally done stuff like that with Paulo in Portuguese and maybe some other examples, but I think with some thought, something could be developed. My original thought was modeled on the "buddy system" we learned as kids, so that for any given language, we would pair one native English speaker with iffy mastery of Klingon, with one Klingon native speaker with possibly iffy mastery of English, and consult back-and-forth on the Talk page. (The visual model I had for this, was a " three-legged race"; do you remember those? At the beginning, everybody falls flat on their face, until they learn how to coordinate properly, and then it starts to get smoother and smoother.) Although it wouldn't necessarily be just two editors, so maybe "buddy system" isn't a good name for it, but that was my first formulation, and I still think of it that way for now, regardless of how many people are involved. But anything you can bring to bear about how to make something out of your translation idea would be great. Mathglot ( talk) 19:38, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Dear editor, just picking up from your edit summary at Buccellato di Lucca; thank you for taking the time to correct my mistake.
In offer of an excuse, in my experience, the VisualEditor likes to create piped links from minor adjustments in the text. In this instance, my copyedit changed the text from ancient Romans
to ancient Roman
to be grammatically correct, and the result was a piped link. It was by no means intentional, but I wanted to flag it up as something that can easily be done unintentionally, in good faith, by a visual editor with their eye off the ball like me.
If you know any way to avoid this issue without the tediousness of checking through the source code, I would be grateful for your help :)) IgnatiusofLondon ( talk) 00:19, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
Dear Mathglot, thank you very much for talking to me. I lack your experience. I thought your talk page might be a better place. To answer your question (have you ever combined them before?): yes, I have. I often use {{ sfn}} inside {{ efn}}. The only problem seems to be that one cannot list-define such explanatory notes, but that is besides our point here. I still do not see what the difficulties are that justify such a detailed treatment of explanatory notes in Help:Shortened footnotes as interactions seem to be limited to simple nesting. Johannes Schade ( talk) 12:45, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
The edits I checked were constructive gnoming. I asked them nicely to use edit summaries Elinruby ( talk) 08:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
I can comprehend that there's a fear my post was "Forum shopping, admin shopping ..." but let me try to assure you that is not the case. I am looking for other opinions, not necessarily ones that match my opinion. I would reject neither agreement nor disagreement nor would I confirm either at this point. I think there is no consensus.
One can read the diverse opinions that have commented on the original topic, but that diversity is limited to 5 Wikipedia users. Too, it's only the users who comment without request (the "proactive" population) as oppose to those users one would ask for an opinion (the "Silent majority"). Do you know how many users there are on this website? I don't, but I know it's many many more than that. Similarly, there are many many more admins than have expressed an opinion or declared some from the seemingly infinite and redundant) policies that may apply.
5 from all users or admin is nothing like a consensus. It is statistically 0%. Obviously, the semantics to this particular topic don't concern everyone, but it likely concerns more than have offered an opinion by now.
It seems fair to leave a link at Manual of Style/Words to watch. Or, maybe, the entire discussion should be moved. Maybe it should have been posted at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab) in the first place.
ProofCreature ( talk) 13:35, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
I tried to post an WP:RFC to start, but I got disagreement for that because there was no discussion (just page reversions). Maybe that's appropriate now.
ProofCreature ( talk) 13:41, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
ProofCreature (
talk) 22:46, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Maybe next week I'll research accepted statistics to determine consensus. If I do so I'll relay my findings to you and / or some Wikidedia committee or you could update policies.
Thanks for your attempt at mediation here. I've laid out a summary of some of the background to this disagreement in the section beginning "A quick summary". I'm completely at a loss how to proceed. I asked for input from a friendly admin here, but without success. I'm reluctant to escalate a petty disagreement to a full AN/I, but I really don't want to let The Banner play this game with anyone else. Do you have any suggestions? Jean-de-Nivelle ( talk) 22:23, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
I've been meaning to send this for a while, but for kind and well thought-out responses to newcomers at Talk:Lines of amity and a few other places: have a cookie. It's obvious that you take time to consider what you're going to say and that you care about helping those who aren't very familiar with the particulars of Wikipedia. LittlePuppers ( talk) 02:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC) |
They're hard to define is one problem. Removing umpty ump dead links, or links that now go to something else, from the 2023 Brazil Congress attack article. Russian invasion of Ukraine had the same problem. They otherwise fit the RS definition. Usually it's Yahoo; currently seeing it at MSN Brasil. For the Ukraine war it was the BBC though, and and a Ukrainian source whose name escapes me atm but is usually also considered a stellar source. Just musing and thought of you. RfC maybe? Elinruby ( talk) 06:18, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
It appears to me that you mistakenly applied the verifiability requirements for sources, which are cited in support of statements made in the body of an article, to the links to resources in a final section External links. The criteria for extenal links are much more lax. The videos of the RobWords channel cover a variety of topics and the video on Toki Pona is clearly well researched, informative, and not in any way fancruft. The videos are produced and presented by Rob Watts, who is not a professional linguist, but formally a newsreader, reporter and presenter in the UK on BBC radio, now working in Berlin as a reporter for DW-TV (and occasionally BBC World Service). -- Lambiam 12:25, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for the recommendation on Phlsph7's talk page. I think I was introduced to Searle's work "backwards", as it were, initially through the criticisms of his cluster theory in Kripke's Naming and Necessity. While I'm definitely still compelled more by the latter's notions, the lecture absolutely helped me appreciate the formulations of Frege and Searle better. I'm excited that naturally, his next lecture will be on Naming and Necessity. Cheers! Remsense 诉 04:54, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
I was just over there and realized how much you helped that guy out. I really appreciate it. It's a really important article and I was feeling helpless about improving those articles because the French stuff I was finding was so dismissive. A really important article. I just bragged about it at The Place We Do Not Name saying that this is what real inclusion looks like (a swipe at a Signpost article about WikiEdu that got cancelled)
Well freaking done. He and you both deserve barnstars and when I am feeling less tired and scatter-brained I think I may make that happen. Elinruby ( talk) 07:35, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
|last=
field. Can't remember if the corresponding sfn's are working or non-working; the former, I think, but may do weird stuff like {{sfn|John Doe|2025}}
in order to make it work; that should be adjusted to last name only. There weren't a ton of these, iirc, just a handful.Thank you for fixing my incorrect revert over at the Steven Anderson article. Had meant to restore an earlier version. Sorry to make you clean up my mess there! Have a wonderful rest of your week. Phönedinger's jellyfish II ( talk) 19:22, 20 February 2024 (UTC) |
Your feedback is requested at
Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Korean) on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment, and at
Talk:Ram Mandir and
Talk:Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League on "All RFCs" request for comments. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:51, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Your contributions are fantastic, and I honestly didn't realise you weren't an admin until recently - if you ever start a RfA, it'd be an easy support. Suntooooth, it/he ( talk/ contribs) 17:42, 21 February 2024 (UTC) |
Bishonen | tålk 17:46, 21 February 2024 (UTC).
Hello Mathglot!
Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Sultanate of Rum on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
The attempt at ANI to CIR a Portuguese speaker might be urgent. Asked that the brakes be applied while a solution is discussed. Elinruby ( talk) 02:13, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Foreign Secretary on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:31, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Foreign Secretary on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Courtesy link: User talk:Edenaviv5 § Radicalesbians redirected to Lavender Menace
Hey! So I have been considering your feedback and I see the confusion, as the Lavender Menace article misrepresents the topic a bit... the action/protest was called the "Lavender Menace," though, not the group.
Would you mind looking at my sandbox page and letting me know what you think after I clarified some of that? I think, honestly, the Lavender Menace may be better as the redirect since its title isn't helpful. Edenaviv5 ( talk) 20:00, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Pyxis Solitary, can you help unscramble this? Thanks, Mathglot ( talk) 09:19, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
Talk:Radicalesbians, Talk:Lavender Menace, or maybe even at WT:LGBT".
Hi, I just wanted to follow up about a question I asked at the Teahouse, to which you responded. The thread was archived. I wanted to remove an edit notice, and you gave this advice:
"Add the following line to your common.css page, purge your common.css, and refresh the Star Wars page:
body .refideas {display:none} /* Turn off {{Refideas editnotice}} in edit mode */
This will turn off the notice on all pages that have it. See
H:CSS for some help with common.css. Let me know if you have any issues applying it."I did what you suggested, and the edit notice changed, but didn't go away. Now instead of a large box with text, it is a very small box with no text, but it's still annoying and I have to close it every time I edit. Do you have ideas for a next step?
Thanks! Wafflewombat ( talk) 06:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Look, we could - and maybe you want to - have a full debate on how Catalan surnames are used and written, but teaching you that is not the point. We are at the point where I asked you a direct question on a proposed improvement (that is neither long nor inaccurate), and in response you went on a disruptively long rant about why you think your edit was correct. It doesn’t matter if it was or not, the template has an issue and I don’t know how many different times or ways I need to tell you that I want to discuss an improvement - which you can think of as simply further improving on the edit you made if it helps - before you finally realise that nobody wants you to rehash your decision making for the sixth time but actually progress discussion. I don’t know if you have always genuinely thought that I wanted you to convince me of your edit even when I explicitly said otherwise and proposed solutions, or if you just don’t want to progress discussion and maybe learn something in the process, but if it’s the latter, just say so and stop wasting everyone’s time. Kingsif ( talk) 13:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Template:WikiProject talk other/scdecode has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym ( talk) 10:53, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
meta:Requests for comment/Global ban for Slowking4 (2) [2]
Convenience links
Note to self about helpful IPv6 2804:F14:80C6:A301:CF7:6618:2E02:A732 ( talk · contribs), who answered my expensive parser function question at VPT, and even managed to stay on the same IP long enough to converse with at their UTP. They added this helpful tip about finding them:
The best I do to find my own edits is Special:Contribs/2804:F14::/32 (99% edits by me, although every once in a while it's an IPv4)
Mathglot ( talk) 06:40, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
Just checking. Elinruby ( talk) 04:44, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
I recently came across a pretty bad example of proseline at Uber § History and sought to tag it with a maintenance template for cleanup. Seeing that Template:Proseline still redirected to the unsuitable-for-the-situation {{ Prose}}, and that there is no template listed at the essay, led me to the TfD in which you valiantly but ultimately unsuccessfully tried to clean up the mess.
It seems to me that there is probably enough consensus among experienced editors that proseline is bad that it would be possible to create a dedicated proseline tag, which would suggest either turning the content into a list or rewriting it from a broader perspective with more natural language, with parameters that would allow the editor who placed it to optionally indicate a preferred fix approach. What would you think of this, and how would you say it'd affect the handling of the existing redirects? Cheers, Sdkb talk 23:34, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:1977 anti-Tamil pogrom on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Look, I have pinged an admin to what I would call your most recent egregious accusations, but I would like to explain to you that simply referring to, describing, or questioning user conduct is not considered a personal attack. You do not seem to understand this, as in your aforementioned most recent accusations at my talkpage, you have outright said that me saying the fact you edited something causing a dispute is, in your mind, an attack. Civilly and openly discussing user behaviour when that is indeed relevant is not an attack, and I would like you to stop writing paragraphs at me every time this happens. Because unjustifiably accusing someone is an attack. Kingsif ( talk) 21:35, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
if I am unable to point it out on your Talk page, that leaves me little recourse if it keeps happeningis a fundamental misunderstanding that there is nothing to point out, no need for recourse, and your 'pointing out' of perfectly valid references to your behaviour is what is really uncivil; it (the comment here quoted) is also a clear insinuation or threat towards further action, which is explicitly uncivil.
I don't know if this is relevant to other issues, but I am not here for that, these are totally unrelated notes. Based on edit reasons here and here, you seem to be conflating Spanish and Catalan in unhelpful ways. A word and convention in Catalan that does not exist in Spanish, will not necessarily be used in Spanish, so a Spanish search is as irrelevant as English in determining the commonality of something that is Catalan (besides common searches, again, being irrelevant to actual names - nobody is removing middle names because they are not commonly searched for). This message is to warn you of this mistake so that if you handle Catalan names in future it is not repeated.
Of course, in the first of those edit reasons, the prevalence of simply [first name] [first surname] (i.e. Jordi Pujol) has been your explanation to remove the "i", though leaving "Soley" there (i.e. Jordi Pujol Soley). I don't know if this is a misunderstanding or what, but with a mind only to warn of potential mistakes so they are not repeated: one similarity Catalan bears to Spanish, Portuguese, Norwegian even, is that most people are most often generally identified only with their first surname (including Pujol, hence he is referred to only as Pujol throughout the article) - not universal, especially in the case of more common names - and that this also doesn't mean the rest of their surname is any less real or important. The message here is that general news sources, for example, are likely to just use the first surname and that these should not be considered something like "evidence in absentia" to suggest there is no second surname or anything else. Kingsif ( talk) 18:23, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Bassirou Diomaye Faye on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
I found the discussion Help_talk:Citation_Style_1/Archive_92#Best_practices_for_a_full_citation_with_no_author,_when_linked_by_shortened_footnotes and realized I have no clue on the history of {{sfnref}}, and would appreciate your pointing me to a right direction in finding why it came to be.
The automatically generated anchor in the case of having no "|author= " entry in the journal citation template defaults to CITEREFpublicationnameYEAR, so the reason for adding "|ref={{sfnref|anchorname|YEAR}}" may be to enable using a shorter anchorname in place of full publication name. But since the full publication name is automatically used without adding "|ref=", wouldn't it be better to abolish {{sfnref}} and make "|ref=" do what "|ref={{sfnref}}" does now? In other words, isn't "|ref=anchorname(YEAR)" (which does not work now) much better than "|ref={{sfnref|anchorname|YEAR}}" because it's shorter and with one less template to do the same thing?
This may well come from my total lack of knowledge on the history of the sfnref template, and my question may be re-worded as: "when is |ref= used without a {{sfnref}}?" As far as I can tell, the answer to this question may be "when anchorname is in the form CITEREFanchornameYEAR" which, in my mind, is not a good practice (or is it?). Yiba ( talk | contribs) 08:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi Mathglot, thank you again for your support in the discussion on Module talk:Footnotes. Given what we just discussed there, could you re-visit and examine the revert you did on my edit on Template:Cite journal/doc on 24 March? I now realize I worded the description on my edit very badly/wrongly, and that I should have used {{SfnRef}} in the example. But otherwise what I did on the page, I feel, is basically in line with the result of that talk:Footnotes discussion, and hope you'll see that too, if you revert the revert (with or without saving). If you still stand by your revert, we could discuss further here. If not, we could move to its talk page and discuss how to improve the doc further with my edit as the base. Yiba ( talk | contribs) 14:36, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
I believe anal fingering should have its own article split from Fingering (sexual act) as anal fingering comes with its own techniques and risks. Do I have to be patient when it comes to consensus? Autisticeditor 20 ( talk) 20:07, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
In the Quran, Queen Sheba is mentioned in Surah An-Naml (27:22-44). While the Quran does not explicitly state that she was from Yemen, it describes her kingdom as being wealthy and powerful. Scholars have interpreted these descriptions as indicative of the legendary kingdom of Sheba, which was believed to have been located in the region of modern-day Yemen.As for the Bible, Queen Sheba's visit to King Solomon is described in the First Book of Kings (1 Kings 10:1-13) and the Second Book of Chronicles (2 Chronicles 9:1-12). These passages depict Queen Sheba bringing gifts of spices, gold, and precious stones to King Solomon, suggesting the wealth and prosperity of her kingdom. Based on these accounts and historical interpretations, scholars widely associate Queen Sheba with the region of Yemen. KnowledgeSeeker899 ( talk) 15:07, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
This sort of edit is no longer necessary, thank goodness. The syntax highlighter works fine with unclosed br tags now if you add this code to your .js file. The change has been a boon for my gnoming workflows. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 16:55, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
For your reference, there has been extended discussion of the relationship between SNGs and GNG at the WP:N talk page, including the pre-RfC discussion in this archive that led to the well attended RfC here that produced the current text of WP:SNG. Consensus can certainly change (and probably will, at some point), but any such change ought to receive as wide consultation (and preferably as much thought) as the last such revision, I think. Newimpartial ( talk) 18:09, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
The fact is that editors cannot agree about what is actually required to satisfy GNG
With ref to your recent edit to the
History of France..
Oups! .. I misread your edit. Carry on as you were! Scarabocchio ( talk) 10:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:30, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Many members of the Milice were captured during the liberation of france. Some were even executed. Other Vichy French involvement includes the withdrawal to a government in exile and anti partisan actions Salfanto ( talk) 15:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Djong (ship) on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Mukokuseki on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Mathglot. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Brazilian criminal justice, 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) 08:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
I thought I was on your user page and I was crying. I will miss that courtly and unflappable old man, whom I just assumed was immortal. Impeachment of Dilma Rousseff would never have happened without him, not to mention all the rest of it. It is some comfort that the last entry on his memorialized user page is the Teamwork barnstar I gave him. So at least I told him so.
I will fix the draft talk page shortly.
A very fast answer to your question is that there is no lede to speak of. And the topic is huge,
How long do you have?
He died. I am sorry I reacted on the draft talk page. I doubt that it would get through AfD as is. Not that we use them, but as a metric. Possibly in the next month. Elinruby ( talk) 05:51, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:2024 Iranian strikes in Israel on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Just once so far but it's a pretty good, substantive and referenced edit. I have a couple of tabs open and will see what else I can do. I am trying to get Algiers out of my hair, tho. Should I go ahead and write an Agriculture section? Elinruby ( talk) 03:36, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Diamond.xza ( talk · contribs) made a bunch of bad edits. I have reverted the most recent 2. Can you revert the rest (where necessary)? Thanks in advance, Polygnotus ( talk) 06:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your input. I'm immensely grateful. Ian (Wiki Ed) ( talk) 14:23, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Polygnotus, I raised the discussion § CIVIL behavior is policy at your Talk page because of the unacceptable harrassment of another user at their Talk page. Since you chose to leave your reply up for less than a minute before deleting the entire thread ( diff) and banned me from your page, I'll reply here, instead. In your reply ( diff), you said:
You are absolutely right that falsely accusing someone is not allowed. However, it is entirely false that either I or Ian has been uncivil to you, as anyone who follows the discussion will be able to see with their own eyes. Your hypocrisy and gall was clear in your final comment at the discussion, where, after your repeated rudeness and false accusations towards Ian, you signed off with this flourish:
An incredibly disappointing response. If you want to contact me again you should apologize first. Polygnotus (talk) 14:25, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Because you appear to be recalcitrant and as far as I can tell, either unable or unwilling to take on board the requirements of WP:CIVILITY policy, I feel I must quote my last statement from the deleted discussion back to you, so you may consider it:
Your behavior at Ian's page is not okay, it is WP:DISRUPTIVE of good order and smooth functioning of Wikipedia, and it is a violation of core behavioral policy as listed under the Five pillars of Wikipedia. I am here to tell you that if you repeat this pattern of behavior you may be subject to sanctions, including suspension of your editing privileges.
Polygnotus, please take this warning seriously. Because you have banned me from your Talk page, I am unable to give you any further advice or warnings privately, if I observe a further pattern of WP:UNCIVIL behavior on your part. My only recourse at that point will be to raise a discussion about you at the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. There, neutral and uninvolved administrators will take over and sort out the situation. Hopefully, this wake-up call will be enough to forestall that eventuality. I wish you the best of luck. (You are still welcome to respond here at my Talk page if you wish.) Mathglot ( talk) 19:12, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Did I ever point this site out to you? I was skeptical of it at first, but it's been around a while and is quite well-regarded. I first encountered in my Panama Papers period. Focuses on crime in Latin America [4] Elinruby ( talk) 21:11, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
I got on a roll here, will stop now. Copying this to my sandbox; if you want to move this elsewhere that would be fine with me. Elinruby ( talk) 21:33, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Elinruby, Also, there's a new navbox draft:
It's all red links except for one, so if any translations tempt you there, feel free to go for it. (Thirteen of the red links don't exist at pt-wiki either, so nothing to translate for those ones.) Mathglot ( talk) 22:42, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi Mathglot, I reverted you change to the reviewing instructions for a couple reasons. One because of your edit summary stating "Translated drafts lacking required attribution are being approved at AFC contrary to Wikimedia's Terms of Use, and this cannot continue." If this is an issue it needs to be brought to AfC's attention with a couple examples if possible. To be honest, I am sure how to tell a draft is a translation from a sister project other than suspicion so at least for me personally, tips will be helpful and likely for others as well. You don't get in the Interlanguage links in draft like you do with articles. The other is because such an expansive statement is not even in WP:NPP instructions so I think maybe a sentence about it might be due but others might have a different opinion. You are right to point it out but let's have discussion about it at WT:AFC. S0091 ( talk) 19:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:True North Centre for Public Policy on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
This is Mathglot's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 |
|
I am aware of these ArbCom contentious topics | |||
|
You may (or may not) be interested in commenting on the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#MILHIST reliable source database. The intent of the proposals seems to be the same as your projects. Note that I mentioned the size of the task of preparing a database of sources just for the American Civil War. This is similar to some of our correspondence. One thing I did not think about is the use of Chicago Manual of Style by many of the editors of American Civil War topics. On the other hand, you noted it would not be necessary to make the conversion for your project. I mentioned World War II in passing. I did not mention your project in part because I rushed my comment, long as it is, and as I thought of it later, I wondered whether you would describe your idea more accurately than I would have done. I made no mention of preparing a list of general sources such as I noted to you. An editor has put up numerous improved articles (well over 100 with more promised) for B class assessment. I have been trying to do a few each day. This unexpectedly adds to my use of time unless others start to make some of the assessments. FWIW. Don't take this as a request to comment if you would rather not do so for any reason, just as information. Donner60 ( talk) 23:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi Mathglot, happy new year. Since you're experienced in gender articles, I believe your opinion is valuable: I recently created a redirect from social construction of sex to the section about it in the article sex–gender distinction. However, I'm thinking it might be a case of creating a separate article for this topic. What do you think? Gmsrubin ( talk) 01:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello, @Mathglot. You reverted my edit at this article and said I should have justified the change at the Edit Summary and preferably also the Talk page. I did justify it at the Talk page, but I didn't point that out at the Edit Summary. My mistake. Could you take a look at the edit again and see if you think the revert should be reverted? Thanks very much for the advice. Charlie Campbell 28 ( talk) 14:43, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
I changed the italics to quotation marks because The Pure Theory of Law uses quotation marks, not italics, around "ought," "may," and "can." I used single quotes around those words because I was quoting them within a quote. See page 5 of The Pure Theory of Law, which is accessible at Google Books. Surely the MOS: Manual of Style doesn't require us to alter quotations, does it? Maurice Magnus ( talk) 02:25, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Mathglot In the following paragraph from Hans Kelsen, I would change all the single quotation marks to double, but I will wait until you approve. Is there a reason that they should remain single?
Maurice Magnus ( talk) 16:32, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Maurice, when you subscribe to a discussion, any replies to that discussion cause a notification to appear, in the same place where you get notifications when someone {{ ping}}s you, or uses your username in brackets, which is to say, in the little square icon at the top of every page of Wikipedia, to the right of your username and the bell icon. You can click that square icon at any time to see a list of your notifications. If there is a superimposed number, it tells you how many there are, and if the number has a blue background , that means that there are some notifications you haven't seen yet.
I've since made some stylistic changes of my own at Basic norm, as well as rationalized the section headings (briefer per MOS:NOBACKREF, and some nesting of subsections). As far as my level of competence or prior knowledge of that subject, it's all new to me; just fyi, I only heard of Kelsen fairly recently, and have no legal training; nevertheless, according to Who Wrote That? I wrote 94.4% of the text at Pure Theory of Law, and I hope it's not too bad. The point being, not that I'm tooting my own horn, rather the contrary: any volunteer editor capable of finding reliable sources and writing a decent summary of the principal views and citing them properly can contribute here. You're certainly more qualified than I am about Kelsen, norms, and legal theory; that's for sure, but you don't need to be an expert in a topic or have formal training in it to write about it here, so you are certainly welcome to contribute there if you wish to.
But we are all volunteers, and everybody gets to contribute where and when they wish, so I won't trouble you further about " Basic norm". I only mean to encourage you, in the sense that if you're interested in some topic you know nothing about (or it's been a long time), by all means, go for it! One of my main satisfactions at Wikipedia is learning about stuff I'm unfamiliar with, by doing the research necessary to write articles about them. In my case, the Liberation of France and War guilt question were two topics like that; Draft:French historiography is another one (in progress; wanna help?), and now I'm excited about Kelsen, H. L. A. Hart and other legal philosophers. Anyway, it's been fun talking with you; so feel free to jump in here anytime (or ping me from any page). Cheers, Mathglot ( talk) 23:00, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Here is another (admittedly trivial) example of a difficulty I have with templates. In the list of References in France and the American Civil War, every item but the first has a comma before "p." or "pp." The first has a period. For the sake of consistency, I tried to change the period to a comma, but I couldn't (or, I should say, don't know how), because the period is hidden in the template. Maurice Magnus ( talk) 18:59, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello @ Mathglot: I noticed you had previously commented regarded possible COI on Revivalistics, a book by Ghil'ad Zuckermann. I am looking into the promotional nature of these articles, as well as material related to this individual on other pages. Sunjaifriþas ( talk) 20:53, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Given the concerns being raised by multiple contributors at Talk:Effects of pornography on young people over The Other Karma's poor grasp of the English language, and what I see as the inadequacy of their response, I have started a thread at WP:ANI. You may wish to comment. [1] AndyTheGrump ( talk) 23:32, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
I've started this as a new section, based on this comment by Elinruby in the section above:
Yes, I think that would be a good idea. I have mused about that privately before, but hadn't gotten anything structured out of it to the point of doing anything about it yet. I think we've informally done stuff like that with Paulo in Portuguese and maybe some other examples, but I think with some thought, something could be developed. My original thought was modeled on the "buddy system" we learned as kids, so that for any given language, we would pair one native English speaker with iffy mastery of Klingon, with one Klingon native speaker with possibly iffy mastery of English, and consult back-and-forth on the Talk page. (The visual model I had for this, was a " three-legged race"; do you remember those? At the beginning, everybody falls flat on their face, until they learn how to coordinate properly, and then it starts to get smoother and smoother.) Although it wouldn't necessarily be just two editors, so maybe "buddy system" isn't a good name for it, but that was my first formulation, and I still think of it that way for now, regardless of how many people are involved. But anything you can bring to bear about how to make something out of your translation idea would be great. Mathglot ( talk) 19:38, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Dear editor, just picking up from your edit summary at Buccellato di Lucca; thank you for taking the time to correct my mistake.
In offer of an excuse, in my experience, the VisualEditor likes to create piped links from minor adjustments in the text. In this instance, my copyedit changed the text from ancient Romans
to ancient Roman
to be grammatically correct, and the result was a piped link. It was by no means intentional, but I wanted to flag it up as something that can easily be done unintentionally, in good faith, by a visual editor with their eye off the ball like me.
If you know any way to avoid this issue without the tediousness of checking through the source code, I would be grateful for your help :)) IgnatiusofLondon ( talk) 00:19, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
Dear Mathglot, thank you very much for talking to me. I lack your experience. I thought your talk page might be a better place. To answer your question (have you ever combined them before?): yes, I have. I often use {{ sfn}} inside {{ efn}}. The only problem seems to be that one cannot list-define such explanatory notes, but that is besides our point here. I still do not see what the difficulties are that justify such a detailed treatment of explanatory notes in Help:Shortened footnotes as interactions seem to be limited to simple nesting. Johannes Schade ( talk) 12:45, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
The edits I checked were constructive gnoming. I asked them nicely to use edit summaries Elinruby ( talk) 08:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
I can comprehend that there's a fear my post was "Forum shopping, admin shopping ..." but let me try to assure you that is not the case. I am looking for other opinions, not necessarily ones that match my opinion. I would reject neither agreement nor disagreement nor would I confirm either at this point. I think there is no consensus.
One can read the diverse opinions that have commented on the original topic, but that diversity is limited to 5 Wikipedia users. Too, it's only the users who comment without request (the "proactive" population) as oppose to those users one would ask for an opinion (the "Silent majority"). Do you know how many users there are on this website? I don't, but I know it's many many more than that. Similarly, there are many many more admins than have expressed an opinion or declared some from the seemingly infinite and redundant) policies that may apply.
5 from all users or admin is nothing like a consensus. It is statistically 0%. Obviously, the semantics to this particular topic don't concern everyone, but it likely concerns more than have offered an opinion by now.
It seems fair to leave a link at Manual of Style/Words to watch. Or, maybe, the entire discussion should be moved. Maybe it should have been posted at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab) in the first place.
ProofCreature ( talk) 13:35, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
I tried to post an WP:RFC to start, but I got disagreement for that because there was no discussion (just page reversions). Maybe that's appropriate now.
ProofCreature ( talk) 13:41, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
ProofCreature (
talk) 22:46, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Maybe next week I'll research accepted statistics to determine consensus. If I do so I'll relay my findings to you and / or some Wikidedia committee or you could update policies.
Thanks for your attempt at mediation here. I've laid out a summary of some of the background to this disagreement in the section beginning "A quick summary". I'm completely at a loss how to proceed. I asked for input from a friendly admin here, but without success. I'm reluctant to escalate a petty disagreement to a full AN/I, but I really don't want to let The Banner play this game with anyone else. Do you have any suggestions? Jean-de-Nivelle ( talk) 22:23, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
I've been meaning to send this for a while, but for kind and well thought-out responses to newcomers at Talk:Lines of amity and a few other places: have a cookie. It's obvious that you take time to consider what you're going to say and that you care about helping those who aren't very familiar with the particulars of Wikipedia. LittlePuppers ( talk) 02:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC) |
They're hard to define is one problem. Removing umpty ump dead links, or links that now go to something else, from the 2023 Brazil Congress attack article. Russian invasion of Ukraine had the same problem. They otherwise fit the RS definition. Usually it's Yahoo; currently seeing it at MSN Brasil. For the Ukraine war it was the BBC though, and and a Ukrainian source whose name escapes me atm but is usually also considered a stellar source. Just musing and thought of you. RfC maybe? Elinruby ( talk) 06:18, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
It appears to me that you mistakenly applied the verifiability requirements for sources, which are cited in support of statements made in the body of an article, to the links to resources in a final section External links. The criteria for extenal links are much more lax. The videos of the RobWords channel cover a variety of topics and the video on Toki Pona is clearly well researched, informative, and not in any way fancruft. The videos are produced and presented by Rob Watts, who is not a professional linguist, but formally a newsreader, reporter and presenter in the UK on BBC radio, now working in Berlin as a reporter for DW-TV (and occasionally BBC World Service). -- Lambiam 12:25, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for the recommendation on Phlsph7's talk page. I think I was introduced to Searle's work "backwards", as it were, initially through the criticisms of his cluster theory in Kripke's Naming and Necessity. While I'm definitely still compelled more by the latter's notions, the lecture absolutely helped me appreciate the formulations of Frege and Searle better. I'm excited that naturally, his next lecture will be on Naming and Necessity. Cheers! Remsense 诉 04:54, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
I was just over there and realized how much you helped that guy out. I really appreciate it. It's a really important article and I was feeling helpless about improving those articles because the French stuff I was finding was so dismissive. A really important article. I just bragged about it at The Place We Do Not Name saying that this is what real inclusion looks like (a swipe at a Signpost article about WikiEdu that got cancelled)
Well freaking done. He and you both deserve barnstars and when I am feeling less tired and scatter-brained I think I may make that happen. Elinruby ( talk) 07:35, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
|last=
field. Can't remember if the corresponding sfn's are working or non-working; the former, I think, but may do weird stuff like {{sfn|John Doe|2025}}
in order to make it work; that should be adjusted to last name only. There weren't a ton of these, iirc, just a handful.Thank you for fixing my incorrect revert over at the Steven Anderson article. Had meant to restore an earlier version. Sorry to make you clean up my mess there! Have a wonderful rest of your week. Phönedinger's jellyfish II ( talk) 19:22, 20 February 2024 (UTC) |
Your feedback is requested at
Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Korean) on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment, and at
Talk:Ram Mandir and
Talk:Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League on "All RFCs" request for comments. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:51, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Your contributions are fantastic, and I honestly didn't realise you weren't an admin until recently - if you ever start a RfA, it'd be an easy support. Suntooooth, it/he ( talk/ contribs) 17:42, 21 February 2024 (UTC) |
Bishonen | tålk 17:46, 21 February 2024 (UTC).
Hello Mathglot!
Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Sultanate of Rum on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
The attempt at ANI to CIR a Portuguese speaker might be urgent. Asked that the brakes be applied while a solution is discussed. Elinruby ( talk) 02:13, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Foreign Secretary on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:31, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Foreign Secretary on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Courtesy link: User talk:Edenaviv5 § Radicalesbians redirected to Lavender Menace
Hey! So I have been considering your feedback and I see the confusion, as the Lavender Menace article misrepresents the topic a bit... the action/protest was called the "Lavender Menace," though, not the group.
Would you mind looking at my sandbox page and letting me know what you think after I clarified some of that? I think, honestly, the Lavender Menace may be better as the redirect since its title isn't helpful. Edenaviv5 ( talk) 20:00, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Pyxis Solitary, can you help unscramble this? Thanks, Mathglot ( talk) 09:19, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
Talk:Radicalesbians, Talk:Lavender Menace, or maybe even at WT:LGBT".
Hi, I just wanted to follow up about a question I asked at the Teahouse, to which you responded. The thread was archived. I wanted to remove an edit notice, and you gave this advice:
"Add the following line to your common.css page, purge your common.css, and refresh the Star Wars page:
body .refideas {display:none} /* Turn off {{Refideas editnotice}} in edit mode */
This will turn off the notice on all pages that have it. See
H:CSS for some help with common.css. Let me know if you have any issues applying it."I did what you suggested, and the edit notice changed, but didn't go away. Now instead of a large box with text, it is a very small box with no text, but it's still annoying and I have to close it every time I edit. Do you have ideas for a next step?
Thanks! Wafflewombat ( talk) 06:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Look, we could - and maybe you want to - have a full debate on how Catalan surnames are used and written, but teaching you that is not the point. We are at the point where I asked you a direct question on a proposed improvement (that is neither long nor inaccurate), and in response you went on a disruptively long rant about why you think your edit was correct. It doesn’t matter if it was or not, the template has an issue and I don’t know how many different times or ways I need to tell you that I want to discuss an improvement - which you can think of as simply further improving on the edit you made if it helps - before you finally realise that nobody wants you to rehash your decision making for the sixth time but actually progress discussion. I don’t know if you have always genuinely thought that I wanted you to convince me of your edit even when I explicitly said otherwise and proposed solutions, or if you just don’t want to progress discussion and maybe learn something in the process, but if it’s the latter, just say so and stop wasting everyone’s time. Kingsif ( talk) 13:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Template:WikiProject talk other/scdecode has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym ( talk) 10:53, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
meta:Requests for comment/Global ban for Slowking4 (2) [2]
Convenience links
Note to self about helpful IPv6 2804:F14:80C6:A301:CF7:6618:2E02:A732 ( talk · contribs), who answered my expensive parser function question at VPT, and even managed to stay on the same IP long enough to converse with at their UTP. They added this helpful tip about finding them:
The best I do to find my own edits is Special:Contribs/2804:F14::/32 (99% edits by me, although every once in a while it's an IPv4)
Mathglot ( talk) 06:40, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
Just checking. Elinruby ( talk) 04:44, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
I recently came across a pretty bad example of proseline at Uber § History and sought to tag it with a maintenance template for cleanup. Seeing that Template:Proseline still redirected to the unsuitable-for-the-situation {{ Prose}}, and that there is no template listed at the essay, led me to the TfD in which you valiantly but ultimately unsuccessfully tried to clean up the mess.
It seems to me that there is probably enough consensus among experienced editors that proseline is bad that it would be possible to create a dedicated proseline tag, which would suggest either turning the content into a list or rewriting it from a broader perspective with more natural language, with parameters that would allow the editor who placed it to optionally indicate a preferred fix approach. What would you think of this, and how would you say it'd affect the handling of the existing redirects? Cheers, Sdkb talk 23:34, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:1977 anti-Tamil pogrom on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Look, I have pinged an admin to what I would call your most recent egregious accusations, but I would like to explain to you that simply referring to, describing, or questioning user conduct is not considered a personal attack. You do not seem to understand this, as in your aforementioned most recent accusations at my talkpage, you have outright said that me saying the fact you edited something causing a dispute is, in your mind, an attack. Civilly and openly discussing user behaviour when that is indeed relevant is not an attack, and I would like you to stop writing paragraphs at me every time this happens. Because unjustifiably accusing someone is an attack. Kingsif ( talk) 21:35, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
if I am unable to point it out on your Talk page, that leaves me little recourse if it keeps happeningis a fundamental misunderstanding that there is nothing to point out, no need for recourse, and your 'pointing out' of perfectly valid references to your behaviour is what is really uncivil; it (the comment here quoted) is also a clear insinuation or threat towards further action, which is explicitly uncivil.
I don't know if this is relevant to other issues, but I am not here for that, these are totally unrelated notes. Based on edit reasons here and here, you seem to be conflating Spanish and Catalan in unhelpful ways. A word and convention in Catalan that does not exist in Spanish, will not necessarily be used in Spanish, so a Spanish search is as irrelevant as English in determining the commonality of something that is Catalan (besides common searches, again, being irrelevant to actual names - nobody is removing middle names because they are not commonly searched for). This message is to warn you of this mistake so that if you handle Catalan names in future it is not repeated.
Of course, in the first of those edit reasons, the prevalence of simply [first name] [first surname] (i.e. Jordi Pujol) has been your explanation to remove the "i", though leaving "Soley" there (i.e. Jordi Pujol Soley). I don't know if this is a misunderstanding or what, but with a mind only to warn of potential mistakes so they are not repeated: one similarity Catalan bears to Spanish, Portuguese, Norwegian even, is that most people are most often generally identified only with their first surname (including Pujol, hence he is referred to only as Pujol throughout the article) - not universal, especially in the case of more common names - and that this also doesn't mean the rest of their surname is any less real or important. The message here is that general news sources, for example, are likely to just use the first surname and that these should not be considered something like "evidence in absentia" to suggest there is no second surname or anything else. Kingsif ( talk) 18:23, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Bassirou Diomaye Faye on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
I found the discussion Help_talk:Citation_Style_1/Archive_92#Best_practices_for_a_full_citation_with_no_author,_when_linked_by_shortened_footnotes and realized I have no clue on the history of {{sfnref}}, and would appreciate your pointing me to a right direction in finding why it came to be.
The automatically generated anchor in the case of having no "|author= " entry in the journal citation template defaults to CITEREFpublicationnameYEAR, so the reason for adding "|ref={{sfnref|anchorname|YEAR}}" may be to enable using a shorter anchorname in place of full publication name. But since the full publication name is automatically used without adding "|ref=", wouldn't it be better to abolish {{sfnref}} and make "|ref=" do what "|ref={{sfnref}}" does now? In other words, isn't "|ref=anchorname(YEAR)" (which does not work now) much better than "|ref={{sfnref|anchorname|YEAR}}" because it's shorter and with one less template to do the same thing?
This may well come from my total lack of knowledge on the history of the sfnref template, and my question may be re-worded as: "when is |ref= used without a {{sfnref}}?" As far as I can tell, the answer to this question may be "when anchorname is in the form CITEREFanchornameYEAR" which, in my mind, is not a good practice (or is it?). Yiba ( talk | contribs) 08:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi Mathglot, thank you again for your support in the discussion on Module talk:Footnotes. Given what we just discussed there, could you re-visit and examine the revert you did on my edit on Template:Cite journal/doc on 24 March? I now realize I worded the description on my edit very badly/wrongly, and that I should have used {{SfnRef}} in the example. But otherwise what I did on the page, I feel, is basically in line with the result of that talk:Footnotes discussion, and hope you'll see that too, if you revert the revert (with or without saving). If you still stand by your revert, we could discuss further here. If not, we could move to its talk page and discuss how to improve the doc further with my edit as the base. Yiba ( talk | contribs) 14:36, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
I believe anal fingering should have its own article split from Fingering (sexual act) as anal fingering comes with its own techniques and risks. Do I have to be patient when it comes to consensus? Autisticeditor 20 ( talk) 20:07, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
In the Quran, Queen Sheba is mentioned in Surah An-Naml (27:22-44). While the Quran does not explicitly state that she was from Yemen, it describes her kingdom as being wealthy and powerful. Scholars have interpreted these descriptions as indicative of the legendary kingdom of Sheba, which was believed to have been located in the region of modern-day Yemen.As for the Bible, Queen Sheba's visit to King Solomon is described in the First Book of Kings (1 Kings 10:1-13) and the Second Book of Chronicles (2 Chronicles 9:1-12). These passages depict Queen Sheba bringing gifts of spices, gold, and precious stones to King Solomon, suggesting the wealth and prosperity of her kingdom. Based on these accounts and historical interpretations, scholars widely associate Queen Sheba with the region of Yemen. KnowledgeSeeker899 ( talk) 15:07, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
This sort of edit is no longer necessary, thank goodness. The syntax highlighter works fine with unclosed br tags now if you add this code to your .js file. The change has been a boon for my gnoming workflows. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 16:55, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
For your reference, there has been extended discussion of the relationship between SNGs and GNG at the WP:N talk page, including the pre-RfC discussion in this archive that led to the well attended RfC here that produced the current text of WP:SNG. Consensus can certainly change (and probably will, at some point), but any such change ought to receive as wide consultation (and preferably as much thought) as the last such revision, I think. Newimpartial ( talk) 18:09, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
The fact is that editors cannot agree about what is actually required to satisfy GNG
With ref to your recent edit to the
History of France..
Oups! .. I misread your edit. Carry on as you were! Scarabocchio ( talk) 10:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:30, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Many members of the Milice were captured during the liberation of france. Some were even executed. Other Vichy French involvement includes the withdrawal to a government in exile and anti partisan actions Salfanto ( talk) 15:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Djong (ship) on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:Mukokuseki on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Mathglot. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Brazilian criminal justice, 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) 08:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
I thought I was on your user page and I was crying. I will miss that courtly and unflappable old man, whom I just assumed was immortal. Impeachment of Dilma Rousseff would never have happened without him, not to mention all the rest of it. It is some comfort that the last entry on his memorialized user page is the Teamwork barnstar I gave him. So at least I told him so.
I will fix the draft talk page shortly.
A very fast answer to your question is that there is no lede to speak of. And the topic is huge,
How long do you have?
He died. I am sorry I reacted on the draft talk page. I doubt that it would get through AfD as is. Not that we use them, but as a metric. Possibly in the next month. Elinruby ( talk) 05:51, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:2024 Iranian strikes in Israel on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Just once so far but it's a pretty good, substantive and referenced edit. I have a couple of tabs open and will see what else I can do. I am trying to get Algiers out of my hair, tho. Should I go ahead and write an Agriculture section? Elinruby ( talk) 03:36, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Diamond.xza ( talk · contribs) made a bunch of bad edits. I have reverted the most recent 2. Can you revert the rest (where necessary)? Thanks in advance, Polygnotus ( talk) 06:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your input. I'm immensely grateful. Ian (Wiki Ed) ( talk) 14:23, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Polygnotus, I raised the discussion § CIVIL behavior is policy at your Talk page because of the unacceptable harrassment of another user at their Talk page. Since you chose to leave your reply up for less than a minute before deleting the entire thread ( diff) and banned me from your page, I'll reply here, instead. In your reply ( diff), you said:
You are absolutely right that falsely accusing someone is not allowed. However, it is entirely false that either I or Ian has been uncivil to you, as anyone who follows the discussion will be able to see with their own eyes. Your hypocrisy and gall was clear in your final comment at the discussion, where, after your repeated rudeness and false accusations towards Ian, you signed off with this flourish:
An incredibly disappointing response. If you want to contact me again you should apologize first. Polygnotus (talk) 14:25, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Because you appear to be recalcitrant and as far as I can tell, either unable or unwilling to take on board the requirements of WP:CIVILITY policy, I feel I must quote my last statement from the deleted discussion back to you, so you may consider it:
Your behavior at Ian's page is not okay, it is WP:DISRUPTIVE of good order and smooth functioning of Wikipedia, and it is a violation of core behavioral policy as listed under the Five pillars of Wikipedia. I am here to tell you that if you repeat this pattern of behavior you may be subject to sanctions, including suspension of your editing privileges.
Polygnotus, please take this warning seriously. Because you have banned me from your Talk page, I am unable to give you any further advice or warnings privately, if I observe a further pattern of WP:UNCIVIL behavior on your part. My only recourse at that point will be to raise a discussion about you at the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. There, neutral and uninvolved administrators will take over and sort out the situation. Hopefully, this wake-up call will be enough to forestall that eventuality. I wish you the best of luck. (You are still welcome to respond here at my Talk page if you wish.) Mathglot ( talk) 19:12, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Did I ever point this site out to you? I was skeptical of it at first, but it's been around a while and is quite well-regarded. I first encountered in my Panama Papers period. Focuses on crime in Latin America [4] Elinruby ( talk) 21:11, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
I got on a roll here, will stop now. Copying this to my sandbox; if you want to move this elsewhere that would be fine with me. Elinruby ( talk) 21:33, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Elinruby, Also, there's a new navbox draft:
It's all red links except for one, so if any translations tempt you there, feel free to go for it. (Thirteen of the red links don't exist at pt-wiki either, so nothing to translate for those ones.) Mathglot ( talk) 22:42, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi Mathglot, I reverted you change to the reviewing instructions for a couple reasons. One because of your edit summary stating "Translated drafts lacking required attribution are being approved at AFC contrary to Wikimedia's Terms of Use, and this cannot continue." If this is an issue it needs to be brought to AfC's attention with a couple examples if possible. To be honest, I am sure how to tell a draft is a translation from a sister project other than suspicion so at least for me personally, tips will be helpful and likely for others as well. You don't get in the Interlanguage links in draft like you do with articles. The other is because such an expansive statement is not even in WP:NPP instructions so I think maybe a sentence about it might be due but others might have a different opinion. You are right to point it out but let's have discussion about it at WT:AFC. S0091 ( talk) 19:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at
Talk:True North Centre for Public Policy on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of
Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by
removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 27 April 2024 (UTC)