User talk:PotatoKugel

Welcome!

Hello, PotatoKugel!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, paul2520 💬 21:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

revert at Esoteric programming language

Hi, I wanted to let you know that I reverted your edit at Esoteric programming language. In my opinion based on some cursory Google searches, the language Chicken is likely not notable enough for inclusion in the article. Please let me know if you disagree or you find some different citations to independent, reliable sources. Thanks! Caleb Stanford (talk) 19:07, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey how are you? Thank you for messaging me about the revert! I really appreciate the fact you read what I wrote, thought about it, and then even decided to send me a polite message.

I hear what you are saying about its lack notability. I did a little research and it seems that it is mentioned a bit as a more famous esolang. Here are some links:

https://frontendhouse.com/experts-zone/all-about-esolangs-chicken-shakespeare-and-more-experts-zone-8

https://www.hongkiat.com/blog/bizarre-insane-programming-languages/

https://dev.to/jbc7ag/hello-world-in-esoteric-programming-languages-esolangs-5122

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-chicken-programming-language (obviously Quora isn't reliable. I'm just pointing out that it is something that people heard of and are curious about and that there are at least a few respondents who have heard of the language as well).

https://esolangs.org/wiki/E (To show that chicken is "big" enough to even have languages modeled after it)

https://tutorialzine.com/2013/12/the-10-weirdest-programming-languages

https://content.techgig.com/technology/10-weirdest-programming-languages-likely-to-be-used-in-2022/articleshow/93028856.cms

https://www.thecodingspace.com/blog/2022-04-27-8-goofy-programming-languages/

https://www.analyticsinsight.net/top-10-weirdest-programming-languages-in-use-in-2022/ (This article calls it a "leading" esolang, whatever that means ;))

https://www.omnesgroup.com/weirdest-programming/

In addition I would like to mention that even if chicken is less famous that some of the other languages, it seems to be particularly weird and funny, which is kind of what this page is for I thought: showing the most ridiculous esolangs and a language with the only token being chicken seems to fit that bill perfectly.

A last point: It appears to me that chicken, while less notable than Brainf... and LOLCODE, seems to be more notable than some of the other languages on the page, such as Golfscript and Binary Lambda Calculus (neither of which appeared in any of the links I sent you, I don't believe).

I think if you search for "weirdest programming languages" (which is what I did) then you get a decent amount of articles with Chicken being mentioned.

Once again, thanks for the message and the time!

Cheers! PK PotatoKugel (talk) 20:27, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the additional references. Okay, that seems reasonable, and if you want to re-add with some of these citations, please do! A few of them are definitely usable, others are probably not reliable sources, hard to tell which so maybe just include several. Avoid using wiki- or blog-like references (e.g. esolangs and quora), the more news-like ones are higher quality. As to Golfscript and Binary Lambda Calculus, I would say those are both notable though less heard-of. Caleb Stanford (talk) 07:09, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I hear ya. Thanks for the feedback! PotatoKugel (talk) 07:13, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Welcome!

Hi PotatoKugel! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

I've noticed that you've expressed an interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Unfortunately, due to a history of conflict and disruptive editing it has been designated a contentious topic and is subject to some strict rules.

The rule that affects you most as a new or IP editor is the prohibition on making any edit related to the Arab–Israel conflict unless you are logged into an account and that account is at least 30 days old and has made at least 500 edits.

This prohibition is broadly construed, so it includes edits such as adding the reaction of a public figure concerning the conflict to their article or noting the position of a company or organization as it relates to the conflict.

The exception to this rule is that you may request a specific change to an article on the talk page of that article or at this page. Please ensure that your requested edit complies with our neutral point of view and reliable sourcing policies, and if the edit is about a living person our policies on biographies of living people as well.

Any edits you make contrary to these rules are likely to be reverted, and repeated violations can lead to you being blocked from editing.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Selfstudier (talk) 19:10, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please notice that per WP:ARBECR, you may only make edit requests in the topic area. Thanks. Selfstudier (talk) 19:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't write arguments against the rules on my talk page. If you have any questions about the above, write them here instead. Thank you.

To reiterate, straightforward edit requests only, that's it. Selfstudier (talk) 10:11, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sorry about that. I am trying to argue that what I am doing is not against the rules.

I would like to know why my argument is against the rules as it seems to me to be rather straightforward. However, if it is a "judgement call" on a sliding scale of "straightforward" to "not straightforward", and you and Sean.hoyland think that it falls too close to the "not straightforward" side of the request, I can accept that. I am just wondering if there is a more specific explanation that can be discussed. Once again, if it is a "judgement call", I am perfectly willing to accept that.

Have a nice day and sorry about that. PotatoKugel (talk) 13:13, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:EDITXY It's not absolutely necessary to use the template but if it won't fit, it's likely not allowed.

As for the contributions I reverted, those were essentially you responding to yourself and making arguments, so obviously not within bounds. Selfstudier (talk) 13:19, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, gotcha. Thank you very much! PotatoKugel (talk) 14:55, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re this, I suggest you resubmit only the first two paras as an edit request. The subsequent paras are not an edit request, they are argument_/discussion/blah. Selfstudier (talk) 21:00, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain why the following points are not edit requests: "If this is not something that others agree to, I would suggest to add into the opening paragraph the fact that Gaza Health Ministry data from the time says that 52% of verified fatalities were women and children."?

And: "If this second suggestion is accepted, I would further suggest to remove the pie chart or add a second one for the ratios reported by the Gaza Health Ministry." PotatoKugel (talk) 21:11, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, can you explain the rule to me a bit. I did read the WP:EDITXY article.

The example I was given was changing Isreal to Israel. Is the idea that this is extremely obvious and doesn't not require any sort of explanation for the rational behind wanting to make this change? If that is so, then is that the bar? I can't make an edit request that needs any sort of rational or citation of sources (or I at least can't mention said rational or sources)? PotatoKugel (talk) 21:14, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained it. Read what you have written for yourself, it begins with a conditional. If...is not an edit request.

Edit requests are not difficult, although I said the template was not strictly necessary, I suggest that you use it and make one simple edit request at a time, sourced appropriately if necessary.

Explanations, speeches, qualifications, etcetera not needed. Selfstudier (talk) 23:02, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]