User talk:Cromium/Archive 8

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

January 2013

Regions in Ghana

Please see Talk:Northern Region, Ghana#Requested move. Someone has proposed a new move which would undo the one you performed in December, 2012. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:04, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

April 2013

Rename

I commented at User talk:Anthony Appleyard#Rename. Trackinfo (talk) 17:22, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

I did not play any part in the move. I reversed several edits by Special:Contributions/92.40.174.33 because there is more than one Howard Davis/Davies article, so it is essential to have a hatnote to help uninformed readers. Green Giant (talk) 14:45, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Talkback

Hello, Cromium. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 00:38, 2 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Vienna Philharmonic

Hi. i would like to explain why i have reverted your edit. First the name changes (of the Berlin Philharmonic and Vienna Philharmonic were not set up properly. (At the moment neither article page is actually tagged.) Second they need to be considered separately as the cases differ somewhat. I'll explain further or please ask me if this is not clear. Thanks. --Klein zach 12:39, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I understand your opposition to the move request, but it won't help matters to have separate discussions. Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Requesting_multiple_page_moves makes it clear that "discussion for all affected articles is held on the talk page of the article at current1", which in this case means the Berlin talkpage. I have removed the second move request and I recommend that you add your comments to the Berlin talkpage, otherwise your opinion might be overlooked. I would add your comments from Vienna to Berlin but I believe it is better for the user to do this themselves. Thanks. Green Giant (talk) 12:33, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Ok, can we keep this here? Klein zach 12:42, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I am opposed to have separate discussions because the original move request was not set up properly, also because the issues are not identical. I think it would be better to complete the documentation on the separate pages. Klein zach 12:46, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for replying, but firstly this is not an appropriate use of reversion, because the established procedure is that all discussion takes place on one talkpage. So, please undo your revert because it really doesn't help things at all and I am not one for edit wars. Secondly I am not sure what youmean by the name changes not being set up properly because move requests don't involve tagging the actual article page. Your point about the cases being different really needs to go on the original move request. Finally, I can't say for sure but Michael Bednarek's comment that "there is no valid rationale for this move" suggests that maybe that user has not seen the extensive rationale the nominator used at Talk:Berlin. All-in-all it is not a do-or-die matter, if you really believe this article should not be renamed, then put together a convincing argument with as much evidence as possible, for example is just "Vienna Philharmonic" the most commonly used English name in reliable sources especially the media, books etc, what are the pageview statistics for the current name and the proposed name (thus giving an idea of what readers might have been searching for, what are the google hits for each name (with things like -wiki added in the search bar to exclude wikipedia-related links), other arguments like what name is predominant on any English language website (or portion of website) run by the orchestra, and so on. Especially important is that you should look through existing wikipedia guidelines and see if there is a case for keeping the current title, such as WP:Common or WP:KISS. Have a look at the names of other similar articles and see if there is a prevailing style. Collate this information and present it to the move-request discussion and if it is convincing it will prevent a move. Really the balance of judgement that the closing admin will make is whether the nominator has presented a good argument and whether there have been supporting nods from other editors. The onus is on the proposers to prove there is a case for moving the article. Hope that helps. Green Giant (talk) 13:06, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

No it doesn't. I observe a 1RR — which you obviously do not — so I won't revert you again. I am disappointed as I think you have confused the procedural aspect with the fact that I opposed the move (as indicated by your comments about the name issues which should go on the article talk pages not here). The procedural problem from my side is that it would be illogical to propose a name change that I oppose. When I said the proposed move had not set up properly, I was referring to the fact that the proposed move was not notified on either article page, so readers of these pages will not know about the proposed changes. This is a really important point. I think it should be easy to understand. Klein zach 22:44, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

WP:RM doesn't involve putting notes on the actual article pages, it has always been on the talkpages. If you want it to be changed so that a note is left on the article then this can be taken up at Talk:WP:RM. I had to revert your revert because it wasn't clear if you were going to do it. It just isn't acceptable that other editors might not realise that the nominator actually presented a rationale in the original move request. Green Giant (talk) 14:13, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi Cromium! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 17:43, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Haripur District, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ayub Khan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:23, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

why did you revert my changes

The changes i made were accurate, though very detailed, i can narrow it down. I think instead of reverting the whole information i have put into the page you should of at least kept the main details. The sources i provided were the sources i used while studying Anthropology. I don't understand why it would be considered controversial? you need to give me time to look for the sources i have used for years and to narrow it all down to one or two sentences, but its just as incorrect to delete all the work. For the Jammu and Kashmir page, one of the events includes the 1990 Islamic extremist of the Kashmir state.Nursingxmajor (talk) 00:47, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

You added a potentially controversial paragraph to an article that has been plagued by people making all sorts of claims. Essentially you are advocating a personal viewpoint based on - "It is relevant to point out...during no present borders or recorded records. Followed by years of tension including 1984 anti-Sikh riots, Hindu land disputes and much more forced Hindus and Sikhs as well as Buddhist to continue fleeing to more populated neighboring states and cities leaving Muslim minorities to now be the majority. The population...though to fill in the gaps...during ancient times..." That suggests to me that you are treating this as a sort of discussion and not an encyclopaedic article. It also appears that you are contravening our policy of neutrality WP:NPOV by focusing on how people have been "forced" despite the section already covering this issue.

Your text dump also separated an existing citation from the associated text, although you fixed that, but you should have been more careful.

The problem is also that you provided one source for your text, which is only available if someone pays $5 to view it electronically, something that runs contrary to Wikipedia policies onWP:Reliable sources. It wouldn't be so bad if you had other sources but basically you are expecting us to take your word for it that your source says exactly these things. As for whether I should give you a chance to find sources, sure knock yourself out but please note that WP:BURDEN states that "the burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material". Green Giant (talk) 01:28, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

i was in the process of finishing my edit on the information and adding sources, maybe only words need to be rephrased and i gave the source i used during my teaching, right when you reverted my edit i was in the process of adding my second source, i wasn't done, and the paragraph below it states similar things, except that information was more narrowed down about the topic, so i thought a paragraph above should be added to provide a quick summary of the information (which is very broad) about the paragraph located below. I'm sorry it takes time to find all the sources iv used in the past and iv been preparing since 9:00am for this one paragraph and i had done research in this field and all my edits are based on my teaching, so i didn't add it out of no where Nursingxmajor (talk) 01:52, 3 June 2013 (UTC) If you open up any book of Asia its obviously the first religion and majority were first Hindu or Buddhist of that region, and the numbers declined over the years and increased in other parts of India, that's all i mentioned and i think its important to take note of that and i didn't blame anyone or included biased sentences. If you think it still needs to be changed let me know or if you want another source, and for some reason i don't get all your messages. I also think it now blends in better with the preceding paragraph. I am still looking for this other book i once looked at long ago.Nursingxmajor (talk) 03:20, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

BracketBot #1

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Buldhana may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

time, Malkapur, Jalgaon, Badner Bholji Pimpalgaon Raja, Jepur and Rajur were important parganas (administrative units of the Delhi Sultanate.[8]
* Sailani Baba Dargah ({{Convert|18km|abbr=on}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:34, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

IP block exemption

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Cromium (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am unable to edit, from certain wifi locations in my home city, with an IP of 92.40.254.0/24, which is blocked at the moment. Admin Nawlinwiki blocked the range but it isn't clear which accounts were the cause of the block. I would like to request IP-block exemption so I can edit from free wifi locations. Thank you. Green Giant (talk) 09:25, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Accept reason:

IP block exemption granted, CheckUser verified. WilliamH (talk) 09:44, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I have granted your account an exemption from IP blocking. This will allow you to edit through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in.

Please read the page Wikipedia:IP block exemption carefully, especially the section on IP block exemption conditions.

Note in particular that you are not permitted to use this newly-granted right to edit Wikipedia via anonymous proxies, or disruptively. If you do, or there is a serious concern of abuse, then the right may be removed by any administrator.

Appropriate usage and compliance with the policy may be checked periodically, due to the nature of block exemption, and block exemption will be removed when no longer needed (for example, when the block it is related to expires).

I hope this will enhance your editing, and allow you to edit successfully and without disruption. WilliamH (talk) 09:44, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Former administrative units of Pakistan

Template:Former administrative units of Pakistan has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. eh bien mon prince (talk) 17:19, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to join a discussion

Through this way, I inform there is a discussion about partially disambiguated titles, known as "PDABs". This subguide of WP:D was approved at VPP. I notify you about this because you has participated in at least one RM discussion in which PDAB is cited (in any form). You are welcome to give ideas about the future of this guideline at WT:D or to ignore this message. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:49, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Talkback

Hello, Cromium. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dope (Lady Gaga song).
Message added 13:38, 8 November 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I rest my case. — ₳aron 13:38, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Maharashtra's second capital

Hi Green Giant, I've looked through your edit in the article and I have a few queries. The refs you provided for that unsourced claim do not seem to support it properly, for example the TOI one, only has a passing mention in a quote from a MP (last para right?) and the second one mentions the winter session part. Also in Nagpur Pact, reference 3 just mentions the winter session part again, couldn't find anything else there.

When it was added, I tried searching the government website but couldn't find any mention of this...that's why I reverted it. Surely we can use a more concrete single source which supports this entire claim and shouldn't it be there in the government website? Perhaps you would have better luck at finding it there as the website was not loading properly on my browser but I did look through pages concerning Nagpur, Maharashtra introduction, and found no mention of this. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 11:01, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

No problem, I will look into it later today. Green Giant (talk) 14:33, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

BracketBot #2

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Transformation of the United States Army may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

** 4th Air Assault Infantry Brigade Combat Team, [[Fort Campbell

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:06, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

List of unrelegated association football clubs

I noticed your List of unrelegated association football clubs. Interesting idea but don't forget about clubs that have recently been promoted to a top league for the first time, like FC Augsburg or 1899 Hoffenheim in Germany. Their run of non-relegation is unlikely to become as long as the other clubs but, for a while at least, they would belong to this list, too. Calistemon (talk) 22:09, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree, the list should be much longer but I have only had time to find a few sources to support the few clubs listed there. Green Giant (talk) 22:16, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

No worries! I was just wondering whether you were aware. Calistemon (talk) 04:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I have seen that you have delisted Maribor, Celje and Gorica from the List of unrelegated association football clubs. Please note that in all three cases reliable sources to support the inclusion of the three clubs in that category were provided, however, they were in Slovene. All three clubs were among the founding members of the Slovenian PrvaLiga in 1991 and have never been relegated. If you do not understand any of the languages of sources in articles that you are editing, I recommend the use of Google translator. Furthermore, Olimpija Ljubljana and Zavrč have also never been relegated from Slovenian top division. Olimpija first entered the top flight, Slovenian PrvaLiga, in the 2009–10 and currently plays their 5th season in the top flight, while Zavrč currently plays their first ever season in the top division.Ratipok (talk) 17:52, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Galicia (Eastern Europe)

Hi, Green Giant. I'm not certain as to whether Galicia (Eastern Europe) actually meets the criterion/criteria for a divided region as it is an historical region, not a contemporary one. Rather than revert you additional category, I'll leave it to your discretion as I don't know whether you've added it in relation to particular project or not. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:57, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Iryna, and thank you for not reverting. I added the category based on the listing at Divided regions#Divided regions of Europe and because I felt that it fitted the definition in the lead of that article. I also believe the File:Map Galicia central Europe.png is reliable because it was uploaded by User:Gryffindor who I regard as very reliable editor. Green Giant (talk) 23:22, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I am aware of Gryffindor. I have no problem with your addition of the category. I'm just feeling a little jittery at the moment as there's still a bit mop-up underway due to the dastardly category hijack of November 2013. Back to cleaning up the mess. Thanks for your quick response! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:32, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Vandalism in Bangladesh by Dr Prashanna Jain Gotani

I'm surprised you found this person's edits to be in "good faith", when they were clearly Islamophobic and deserving of strong condemnation. The whole world knows how Islam was rooted in Bengal through Sufism (more so than any other part of the Muslim world), and the sections vandalized by this user includes numerous references to books published on the matter.--31.205.56.85 (talk) 19:56, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but its not my job nor any other editors job to condemn anybody in the way you suggest. My only concern is that the user is adding content without sources, and all I can say is that s/he added it in good faith. I know I sound harsh when I say its not my job but I find that nothing productive comes out of getting emotionally involved with Internet Crusaders. We all have enough real life issues to deal with without picking fights on an online engyclopaedia. Green Giant (talk) 03:04, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Tinypics in Telangana

I used the tinypics for only few sources which are rare to find. Sometimes tinypic is better than no source. For eg: I know eenadu.net keeps news articles only 90days. For eg Telugu articles are not archived on archive.org, even if they are archived, I always had fonts issue. Hope this explains why used tinypics. If you further want to discuss this topic lets open section on talk page of the Telangana article. Thanks. Ramcrk (talk) 00:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

WP:USERGENERATED does not talk about screen shots. Dont you think screen shots of reliable sources is better than no sources at all? I started a new section in talk page. Ramcrk (talk) 02:21, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Page move

See User:Green Giant/Judiciary of Uruguay & Judiciary of Uruguay. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:24, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Speedy of Judiciary of Iraq

Hello Green Giant. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Judiciary of Iraq, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: not yet, needs a history merge. Thank you. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 11:40, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

To expand a little on the shouty templated message above (sorry for that), the problem is that Federal_government_of_Iraq#Judicial_branch contains partially duplicated content from User:Green Giant/Judiciary of Iraq, so its history has to be cobbled together before it should be moved. I can look in to it and fix it up tonight, or you could list it at WP:HISTMERGE. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 11:44, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Since some material had been there since the beginning of the article, and it's impossible in the software to "replay" older edits on a newer revision, I just used a {{copied}}. In the future, if you want to spin out articles, it's best to start with a straight copy first, which can then be referred to in the copied template, and do normal edits after, so that it is clear from the articles history what the original text was, and what your additions were. No real harm done though. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 09:23, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Judiciary of Gibraltar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Magistrates' court (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Y Noted. Deliberate link until new article is created. Green Giant (talk) 13:15, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Amb Map.gif or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:43, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Human Rights of Minority Religions in Bangladesh

Human Rights Of Minority religions like Hindu, Christians, Sikh etc in Bangladesh and Pakistan should also be included as a part of wiki impartiality and neutral point.

Kindly provide complete picture of Bangladesh without fear. There should be no hiding of the truth. The onslaught of Hindus by majority of Muslims and inhuman crimes must be discussed openly to bring the truth instead of hiding it . The world knows the truth in either way via human rights commission, Amnesty International etc..Dr Prashanna Jain Gotani (talk) 11:42, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

References

Now I ask every genuine person to debate on this issue of truth! Dr Prashanna Jain Gotani (talk) 11:52, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Y answer posted at User talk:Dr Prashanna Jain Gotani. Green Giant (talk) 13:11, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Judiciary of Malawi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Magistrates' Courts (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Y Noted. Deliberate link until new article is created. Green Giant (talk) 13:14, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

Feed on this burger till you get the rollback privilege. Cheers. Ethically ^(Yours) 16:35, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

This permission does not give you any special status or authority
Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it

If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:47, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello, this is just to let you know that I've granted you Rollback rights. Just remember:

Rollback gives you access to certain scripts, including Huggle and Igloo, some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
Rollback is only for blatant vandalism
Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
Please read Help:Reverting and Wikipedia:Rollback feature to get to know the workings of the feature
You can test Rollback at Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback
You may wish to display the {{User wikipedia/rollback}} userbox and/or the {{Rollback}} top icon on your user page

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:34, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the warm welcome and the links to find stuff that makes editing easier! SteamWiki (talk) 02:21, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

UN Russian Language Day

спасибо. :) Safehaven86 (talk) 02:33, 30 December 2013 (UTC)4

Thanks

I hope you are doing great. I just want to take a moment to thank you for your edits on Judiciary of Pakistan. I have done some work on the article. Seriously the article was a mess before you edited it. It's in much better shape now. I will add more information to the article one of these days - it's in my list of things-to-do. I gather you are an expert for this law and judiciary related articles. I just want your opinion on this: The first section of constitutional authority in this article seems really pointless to me. The list of articles is not really that important or informative. Should it be removed?Muhammad Ali Khalid (talk) 08:19, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Thanks for the great work! Muhammad Ali Khalid (talk) 08:19, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi,

I cannot figure out how to respond to the AfD template you posted on my talk page here[1]. The article seems to me a clear delete per WP:Creative. Please, let me know. Thank you, Bisswajit (talk) 19:07, 31 December 2013 (UTC)