Jump to content

User talk:ToksooplasmaG

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from User talk:DuskyMickey)

Welcome Mirko Kardivskiy!

Now that you've joined Wikipedia, there are 48,430,623 registered editors!
Hello Mirko Kardivskiy. Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions!

I'm Rasnaboy, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.

Some pages of helpful information to get you started:
  Introduction to Wikipedia
  The five pillars of Wikipedia
  Editing tutorial
  How to edit a page
  Simplified Manual of Style
  The basics of Wikicode
  How to develop an article
  How to create an article
  Help pages
  What Wikipedia is not
Some common sense Dos and Don'ts:
  Do be bold
  Do assume good faith
  Do be civil
  Do keep cool!
  Do maintain a neutral point of view
  Don't spam
  Don't infringe copyright
  Don't edit where you have a conflict of interest
  Don't commit vandalism
  Don't get blocked
If you need further help, you can:
  Ask a question
or you can:
  Get help at the Teahouse
or even:
  Ask an experienced editor to "adopt" you

Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{helpme}} here on your talk page and someone will try to help.

There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:
  Fight vandalism
  Be a WikiFairy or a WikiGnome
  Help contribute to articles
  Perform maintenance tasks
           
  Become a member of a project that interests you
  Help design new templates
  Subscribe and contribute to The Signpost

To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own personal sandbox for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}} on your userpage.

Please remember to:

  • Always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~ at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to your talk page, and a timestamp.
  • Leave descriptive edit summaries for your edits. Doing so helps other editors understand what changes you have made and why you made them.
The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to have some fun!

Sincerely, Rasnaboy (talk) 14:30, 3 January 2020 (UTC)   (Leave me a message)[reply]

Flags

[edit]

Why are you adding flags to infoboxes? Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:12, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I’m adding the US flag and the Kansas flag to Kansas cities infoboxes because these flags are present in infoboxes of many US states cities (I didn’t check all of them, but I’m quite sure most of them do have them) but they were absent for cities of Kansas for some reason. Check Minneapolis, NYC, Los Angeles, Kansas City (Missouri). These are some examples of cities infoboxes which have flags. I can tell almost for sure that the majority of these US cities infoboxes have flags. Kansas doesn’t for some reason, that’s why I’m adding them, to "conform" the Kansas cities infoboxes to other states’ cities infoboxes. I added a couple of flags for Kansas cities infoboxes today, I will progressively add them to every city of Kansas. Of course people are free to help me in the process. Kind regards TheGameJerker (talk) 23:22, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What is your opinion of the following from MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE: "The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance". Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:28, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Of course I know the purpose of infoboxes, I didn’t add any additional field in fact, I just modified two existing fields to add the flags, and I didn’t do this for no reason, but because I noticed that in most pages about US cities there were almost always the flag of US and the flag of the state in the infoboxes. Kansas for some reason didn’t have the flags like most of the other cities. So I’m "conforming" the Kansas cities infoboxes to all the other US states’ cities infoboxes (I didn’t check all of them as I mentioned before but I’m quite sure all of them have flags). Kind regards TheGameJerker (talk) 23:37, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have 2 concerns with recent edits of cities in Kansas:

1) Flags. I thought was decided in past years to remove flags from USA city articles, which is why they were removed from all Kansas community articles.

2) Automated reformating of infobox fields with subpar results. This is my biggest complaint!

BEFORE: https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Axtell,_Kansas&action=edit&oldid=954010845

AFTER: https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Axtell,_Kansas&action=edit&oldid=960786209

COMPARISON: https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Axtell%2C_Kansas&type=revision&diff=960786209&oldid=954010845

SbmeirowTalk03:47, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, 1) I don’t think that’s the reason, because why would it be just Kansas? The thing that triggered my edits was that I saw that almost every other city infobox of other states had flags. If they would’ve begun to remove flags from infoboxes in past years, why would they start from Kansas and not from, let’s say, Alabama, which is the first state automatically? I actually checked other cities of other states again and it’s pretty confusing because it looks that in the same state, some cities don’t have flags i.e. Hartford, Connecticut and others do have flags i.e. Bridgeport, Connecticut. 2) Yes, in fact I noticed that it said I added like +500 when I actually added only like +5/+6. That’s maybe because since my laptop was downloading some movies I was doing these edits from my iPhone and in visual editing and not from my laptop in source editing like I usually do. I’ll be more careful next time. TheGameJerker (talk) 05:16, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sbmeirow I noticed you reverted my edits anyway, that’s ok, but I think we must do something about this situation. Some cities have flags, some cities don’t, others even have county flags and others don’t. I know it’s just a tiny detail but it’s very confusing overall. Personally I think that adding the US flag and the state flag to a city infobox doesn’t add unnecessary info or space but, on the contrary, it could help a reader to understand immediately in which state a city is just by looking at a flag. I don’t think it’s unnecessary length or information. You heard my opinion.

As I mentioned before anyway, I think we should do something about this confusing situation. I think we should "conform" ever US city infobox with one another. In Layman’s terms: we should either REMOVE all the US, state and county flags from EVERY US city of every state, or we should ADD the flags to every US city infobox of every state. I know it would be a long and ambitious project, but I will give my support and cooperation eventually to make it happen. What do you guys think about that? TheGameJerker (talk) 05:29, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the place to decide. I posted a question over at WP:USCITIES, because more people need to comment about this subject matter. --> https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cities/US_Guideline#Was_there_any_consensus_on_flag_icons_in_city_infoboxes? • SbmeirowTalk14:13, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for addressing this issue. I hope we find a resolution. I will help in this project whether if the final decision is to remove all the flags to every US city or add them to every US city, even if my opinion is a little bit driven towards the latter option. TheGameJerker (talk) 16:50, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Be patient, just a reminder that it could take days or a week to get comments on these types of discussions. • SbmeirowTalk15:31, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It’s ok :) TheGameJerker (talk) 15:46, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:02, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021

[edit]

Information icon Hello. Some of your recent genre changes, such as the one you made to Cornish Americans, και τα λοιπά, have conflicted with our neutral point of view and/or verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you seek consensus for certain edits by discussing the matter on the article's talk page. Please stop your unnecessary additions to many articles. WP is an encyclopedia, not a game site. The rules to follow are WP policies and guidelines, not what happens in other WP articles. I note that you have been told before about your inappropriate use of flags in infoboxes. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 21:08, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. I see your point and I concur, however it is kind of difficult to reach a general consensus and make every user contented when the userboxes are very cluttered and unstandardized already, like there are flags for the Italian-Americans page, but not for the Russian-Americans', you have flags for the Spanish-Americans page but not for the Dutch-Americans one, all of this just makes everything more messy and cluttered (and I'm talking about BEFORE I made my edits), what I was trying to do was to make order and standardize all of those related articles, like either inserting every flag in the userboxes or have the flags or removing every flag from all of them. Flags go against the Wikipedia npv policy? Fine. Then remove all of them. But don't just leave some of them off and some of them on. It just makes everything more confusing. Same problem of the previous discussion on my talk page. I hope we can maybe reach a consensus on what do to and create a wikiproject to tackle and progressively fix those userboxes and flags problems which seem to be widespread in the English Wikipedia but, however, underaddressed. I would be glad to collaborate with other editors in case. Thank you. DuskyMickey (talk) 21:34, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there are many inappropiate flags in some infoboxes. The solution is quite simple - remove them, not add more to the flag free articles which is what you are doing. The same goes for foreign language translations and other annoying bitties some editors love adding. Please note that some flags are appropriate but only some and only in specific places. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 11:39, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you're referring to in regards to the foreign language translations thing. The solution does not seem to be as simple, since for the previous flags discussion in my talk page, a separate talk page was created to specifically address the issue. Yeah exactly, in some cases flags would be adequate, in some others not. It depends from case to case. That's why it is not as simple and we can't just remove them all, but analyze case by case and reach a general consensus in regards to adding them, removing them, or keeping the status quo. Again, I'm open to discussion, dialogue and collaboration, so I'd be more than happy to partecipate and help other users. All I want is to improve the quality of Wikipedia articles, and seeing that related articles are not standardized and conforming to each other, each have their own rules and norms and contradict each other, is not a sign of quality. DuskyMickey (talk) 11:56, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The guidelines are quite simple. I am not talking specifically about flags in USA places but in a more general sense. You are adding flags randomly to articles where they are not appropriate. For example Welsh Americans and Cornish Americans. Also you have added the "native names", ie foreign languages, to those articles. That is pointless doodling. Cornish has been extinct for 200 years and the native language for most Welsh speakers in Wales is English, meaning you need a better explanation of the situation of Welsh in Wales and specifically in the USA before adding the native name. That is beyond the scope of the infobox. I suggest you look at adding productive information to WP, which I am sure you can do, instead of getting of playing around with a button pushing count exercise with 'flags'. Consistency is important but it is often inappropriate and eah article should be viewed on its own merits. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 20:59, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry Roger, but I didn't add any flag randomly, all of this was done for a reason. I added flags because I noticed that in some articles they were present and in some articles they were not, of course if they wouldn't have been in any article in the first place, I wouldn't have added any flag. Also, for the Cornish-Americans article, I didn't add any native name, all I did was simply moving the native name (which was present already) in the correct category in the userbox, from the English name category to the native name category, you can check the article's edit history. However I did in the Welsh-Americans page, but it was present already in the article, I just added it to the userbox. Yeah, exactly. Cornish is an extinct language, yet the Cornish name WAS present in the userbox already, so it doesn't make much sense that the Welsh one (which is spoken by 29.1% of Welsh people) was not. DuskyMickey (talk) 21:17, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Because something is done in another article does not make it correct - remove it if required. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 20:20, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 2021

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Donald Albury. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Miami Beach, Florida, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. You cannot just replace information about one nationality with information about another nationality in front of a citation to a source. Not only was the new information unsourced, it falsely appeared to be sourced from the existing citation. Donald Albury 16:33, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My source was taken from the English Wikipedia "Argentine-Americans" page, I tried to insert it in the Miami Beach page, it didn't let me to for some reason and said the website of the source was from a "blacklist", even if that same source was literally used in the Argentine-Americans English Wikipedia page. Since for some reason I cannot cite the source here too, I invite you to read it from the Argentine-Americans article. Thank you. Karkolju (talk) 12:27, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please understand that, as a user generated content project, Wikipedia (of any language) is not a reliable source for Wikipedia. If you find something in another Wikipedia article that has a source cited, first check the cited source to determine if it is a reliable source, and whether it actually supports the statement(s) in the article. Only if both conditions are met may you consider adding the information to a new article, citing the reliable source. - Donald Albury 19:53, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming expiry of your ipblock-exempt right

[edit]

Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your WP:IPBE right which gave you the ability to bypass IP address blocks will expire on 01:26, 14 December 2024 (UTC). If your IP is still blocked (which you can test by trying to edit when logged-out), please renew by following the instructions at the IPBE page; otherwise, you do not need to do anything. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion. Leaderbot (talk) 19:44, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]