User talk:Largoplazo/Archives/Archive 33

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 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

My own analysis is not allowed.

I agree with you sir. That my own analysis is not allowed. But my point is also not at all wrong, if one analyse with a little common sense. Well my point is only to let people know the mistake historians made while making the date of proto Turkic as 500bce. Sooner or later it will be considered as 100bce or later.

Infact I'll be happy to myself to first spotted the mistake in dating. The only thing is I'm not a cited or famous scholar. But yes proto Turkic language is not at all older then 100 Bce. It could be later then that.but not older then 100bce.Krishnaloveanish (talk) 19:52, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

But I didn't say you were wrong. The problem is that it's your own conclusion from your premises and reasoning. Largoplazo (talk) 22:39, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

No it is not my own conclusion. It is mentioned analysis from reading Wikipedia and citations there on. Infact I can see the irregularities in chronological of Turkic history. The thing is often those so called historians and scholars they tend to make things complicated. Any by reading Wikipedia itself I can say clearly it is not more then 100 bce. Krishnaloveanish (talk) 17:11, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Everything after your first sentence contradicts your first sentence. Your analysis consisted of pulling together pieces (including pieces from Wikipedia itself, which, as user-generated content, is not considered a reliable source) and drawing your own conclusion. This is called synthesis, a subset of original research. Largoplazo (talk) 17:24, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

That's upto u to play with words. What I know is a simple thing. That by reading, analysing a bit one can make out the mistake. It happened before as well. What I thought, later I've seen there was a change in Wikipedia also. In future u c Turkic will be placed as 100bce it later. I can give us many points regarding to it. By reading old and new books as well as Wikipedia and citations. Very simple Krishnaloveanish (talk) 18:49, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, Wikipedia's guidelines consist of words. What else would they consist of? And all you're doing in your latest note to me is repeating your failure to grasp (or disagreement with, but there's no point debating with me what the guidelines should be) the point that those words convey.

There's no point in your trying to argue this further if it's just going to be more repetition. Largoplazo (talk) 21:34, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank You for editing the article of the Devel Sixteen. I ask you to keep contributing the article and I request you to add pictures as well. Looking for a favourable reply. For fyrther information please contact ගොඩය

page creator Wabbittttt (talk) 13:55, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Kal Penn

That revert not only violates MOS:ETHNICITY, but the BLP policy. Please, don't restore content that is blatantly false under an alleged premise that his parents are from India. He is not Indian. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 17:48, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tbhotch: You're conflating nationality and ethnicity. "Indian-American" doesn't mean "Indian", it means "American of Indian origin or heritage". If his parents are from India and he's American, then he's Indian-American (with or without a hyphen, depending on style), by definition. The same is true for people of any nationality and origin or heritage.

Why do you think his parents aren't from India?

That he is Indian-American is readily ascertainable from reliable sources.[1][2][3][4] and that his parents came from India is from his own mouth[5].

MOS:ETHNICITY says "Ethnicity, religion, or sexuality should generally not be in the lead unless it is relevant to the subject's notability." I addressed this directly in the edit summary I'd left: "... by being relevant the rest of the article: his early chldhood, his choice of professional name, significant connection to roles he's performed".

So it was not blatantly false information that I'd restored contrary to policy, it was blatantly true information that I'd restored because it seemed to conform reasonably well to the specific guideline relevant to it. Largoplazo (talk) 19:58, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

He is not notable for being an American actor acting as an Indian-American; he is notable for being the Harold and Kumar actor, later the House actor, and later the Principal Associate Director of the White House Office of Public Engagement. He is not notable for his ethnicity as is "the first African-American president of the United States" in Barack Obama, for example. In fact, very few actors at Category:American male actors of Indian descent include "Indian" in the lead (excepting for those that were born in the US and moved to India). (CC) Tbhotch^™ 20:07, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tbhotch: So you're taking the route of not acknowledging the 80% of your initial grievance that was invalid while doubling down on the remaining 20%. I will accept your interpretation of that 20% insofar as it isn't important for the "Indian-" to be in there, but I believe there's a difference between something being a reason for someone's notability and being relevant to the person's notability. Largoplazo (talk) 21:46, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

The only person doubling down on anything is you insisting that Indian should be mentioned solely because of his career and early life vacationing in India. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 23:07, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

And stop pinging me. You just want to be right for the seek fo being right, not because the change was correct and valid. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 23:16, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

And you just want to make up fake motivations for me so you don't have to admit your own errors (and, re the factual matter, you were simply wrong). Which is why I'm betting that you've already removed my page from your watchlist—because you don't want to be reminded of it. And if I'm wrong all this, well, I'm only following your example about making up other people's motivations to suit myself. Largoplazo (talk) 23:47, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Kofta

An blocked IP address editor on the IRC channel #wikipedia-en-help asked me to undo recent changes on Kofta, but I declined to make edits by proxy. All I am willing to do is to let you know, since you seem to be familiar with the situation there. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:19, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

@Jmcgnh: Thanks for the info. Hard-core block evader. Largoplazo (talk) 11:00, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Formatting on Spanish Language

I understand what you mean by It seems redundant but personally, I think that aesthetically it looks more appealing and that it corresponds more with similar articles such as Portuguese Language , List of countries by English-speaking population , List of countries and territories where French is an official language and most of the other ones that are along with that. If I am wrong I would genuinely like some criticism as I am fairly new at editing on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by KaseKaiser (talk • contribs)

Hello, KaseKaiser. Welcome to Wikipedia! This isn't something I'm interested in taking a big stand on, and I hope not to dampen your enthusiasm. It's just that my reaction every time I see a table of information related to countries where someone has inserted their flags in front of their names is, for example, "Here are the highest and lowest points in France, and, by the way, this is what its flag looks like. Here are the highest and lowest points in Malawai, and, by the way, this is what its flag looks like." Then, in another article, "Here are the 2019 GNP, unemployment rate, and cost of living increase for France, and, by the way, this is what its flag looks like. Here are the 2019 GNP, unemployment rate, and cost of living increase for Malawi, and, by the way, this is what its flag looks like." To me, it's a digression, a distraction from the data table the table is meant to present and not relevant to the article that contains it. I certainly do understand how, in approaching your editing, you'd go by examples you've already seen elsewhere: it's perfectly reasonable. However, see the essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, which notes that something that's being done elsewhere isn't necessary desirable there either!

Tables of anything other than countries do fine without flags, whether it's a table of languages where each column supplies details of some linguistic feature of the language, or a table of rivers listing their length, maximum width, and annual flow, or a table of the planets of the solar system with data pertinent to each. So, yes, countries do have flags, but it mystifies me that in a table containing data that has nothing to do with flags and that isn't a table of the basic statistics of each country (population, area, capital), some people feel the name isn't sufficient to identify the country, so that we are, again and again, saying "and, by the way, this is what its flag looks like". Just like the name of a language or a river or a planet, the name of a country suffices to identify it, and flags don't help because most readers couldn't possibly identify, say, Malawi or Guatemala or Vanuatu by its flag.

See MOS:FLAG for Wikipedia's existing guidelines on the subject. I note especially the second sentence "In lists or tables, flag icons may be relevant when such representation of different subjects is pertinent to the purpose of the list or table itself." [emphasis mine]

This isn't my exclusive decision to make, so I'm certainly not going to say you can't do it, but I did decide to ask you, following the guidance in WP:BRD, to seek consensus on the article's talk page. Mine could turn out to be a minority opinion.

On another subject: when you write on a talk page, including another user's talk page, please sign your post. You can place four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your post, and they'll automatically be converted to your signature, with the date and time, when you save it. Largoplazo (talk) 10:17, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Dear Largoplazo

Largoplazo, why are you so mean to me, you always say bad stuff about me and always tell lies.

I wrote "Rv unexplained deletions". In other words, I undid your removal of content that other people had taken the time to add to the article, which you hadn't explained and that there was no apparent reason for. Can you explain to me how my restoration of the material or my the comment that I left when doing so is "bad stuff" and how it's a lie? How about your removal of the information? Do you think maybe that's bad? Largoplazo (talk) 17:11, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

I've reverted all your other edits because they appear to be the usual replacements of facts about films and actors and so forth with fake information and, given in addition that you've declared your acquaintance with me, I've concluded that you're AriRichBoyz, the blocked user who is indefinitely barred from contributing to this website. Largoplazo (talk) 17:20, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for mentioning the sockpuppeteer. The pattern of edits at Fazlur Rahman Khan looked familiar; I didn't know who the puppeteer behind them was until now. —C.Fred (talk) 02:18, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Red Bull

Thanks for your recent revert at Red Bull. I've been submitting a series of edit requests on the article's talk page in an attempt to make the entry more about Red Bull, and not the Thai product/company or energy drinks in general, if you're interested in reviewing and updating the article appropriately.

Thanks again! Inkian Jason (talk) 15:02, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

Hello Largoplazo/Archives,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:31, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Link review

Hello Largoplazo,

We know that Wikipedia is a great source of the information. On our page, we have tried to given the same to the users. I want you to please review our page and allow our link on the page.

Hi. Two things:

The link that's there already leads to the syllabus, and it's at an authoritative location, on the website of the sponsoring organization.
External links aren't to be added for the purpose of driving traffic to your website, especially a commercial one.

Largoplazo (talk) 11:08, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

roma people

There is no 100% single origin theory that is accepted by all different Roma groups. Many legends and theories exist in the different countries where Roma live in. It varies from Dasikane Roma (Christian), and Horahane Roma (Muslim) at the Balkans, as well as by the different Roma subgroups arround the World. Do you need to source this? That is common knowledge

--Nalanidil (talk) 11:14, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Namaste

In Google dictionary, you can see the IPA transcription of a word below it's spelling. It's clearly written /ˈnʌməsteɪ/. You can listen to the audio pronunciation also. In Indian English Pronunciation it's showing nuh.muh.stay Nishānt Omm (talk) 11:57, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

@Nishānt Omm:I don't know what you mean by "Google dictionary" other than, I type "define namaste" into Google exactly as you said, and I've told you twice that the definition, with pronunciation, it gives me at the top of the page doesn't agree with what you say you're getting. For me, what it reports is clearly not what you say it does. Therefore, you need a source that will say the same thing no matter who looks at it. Largoplazo (talk) 12:00, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Update your Google app Nishānt Omm (talk) 12:03, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

You can also check the pronunciation in Dictionary.com Nishānt Omm (talk) 12:06, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Also in Macmillan dictionary Nishānt Omm (talk) 12:08, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

@Nishānt Omm:Oh, the Google app. Well, this just demonstrates more strongly that Google will tell you one thing in one place and another thing in another place. An app is not a valid source. Anything from Google certainly isn't a reliable source, and all sources cited on Wikipedia must be reliable ones. Google isn't a reliable source for any of the summary information it scrapes from various websites and regurgitates at the top of a search results page, so I see no reason to assume it's reliable for anything else. For example, some vandal many years ago added a fake spouse to the article on Nick Lazzarini, which was later removed. During the period the false information was there, Google gleaned it. To this day, when I search Google for "nick lazzarini", it claims that she's his spouse. (I don't mean to conclude that the pronunciation you're giving is wrong. My point here is that Google is not a valid source for any information on Wikipedia.)

Dictionary.com is also not inherently a reliable source, as it simply repeats information from elsewhere. In this case, if you look at the bottom of the definition page it gives for "namaste" you'll see it's reproducing the information from Collins. That's the actual source. Macmillan is also a reliable source.

But the Oxford English Dictionary says "Brit. /ˈnaməsteɪ/, /naməˈsteɪ/, U.S. /ˈˌnɑməˈˌsteɪ/". So different reliable sources have different opinions. So if you're taking on the task of "fixing" the existing entry, you should reflect the variation in what sources say. And, unless you want someone else to come along and undo your changes, you ought to cite the sources—they can't be relegated to edit summaries and discussions between you and me. See WP:Citing sources. Largoplazo (talk) 12:16, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Also, Collins puts the primary stress on the final syllable. Largoplazo (talk) 12:21, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I think you are checking out the ‘American Pronunciation’ in Google dictionary. Nishānt Omm (talk) 12:10, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

See? Google shows different pronunciations to people in different places. Largoplazo (talk) 12:18, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Salt

Hi! I saw your helpful comment here before I deleted it – thank you for that! I also saw and considered your salt suggestion, but didn't act on it immediately. My thought is that (a) this nuisance isn't going to go away and (b) it probably saves time to leave it open for the next attempt. But I'm open to correction on that, so if you disagree please let me know. Many thanks for helping with this! Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:49, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: I can understand your point, particularly given that this author has no trouble seeking out the next frontier in title disambiguation. It reminds me of a time that I asked for Protagonist not to be protected because the editor who kept returning to make numerous improper edits on a variety of articles about television stations and programs also had a penchant for making unsuitable edits to Protagonist that were readily identifiable. So, with that article on my watchlist, allowing that editor, in new guises, to edit it enabled it to serve as a bellwether for that miscreant. Largoplazo (talk) 18:20, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

{{snd}} and trailing spaces

Regarding this edit, as far as I know, there is no value in removing a space that follows an {{snd}} template. While it is true that the {{snd}} itself includes a trailing space, Wikipedia's markup interpretation simply ignores the extra space, so there is no difference in the way the text is rendered. I think it is also easier to read the source file if the {{snd}} is also followed by a trailing space. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 19:49, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I just checked what's produced and realized you're correct; I'd assumed there were non-breaking spaces on both sides. Largoplazo (talk) 20:07, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Creation of some page

Hi, I am not created in appropriate page if u have any doubt on this please check once otherwise u don't delete the page ...first who the hell r u delete my creation. Star user4 (talk) 13:47, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

@Star user4: The speedy deletion notice on top of the article and the notice placed on your talk page tell you specifically what the grounds are for deleting it: The article you keep recreating was previously deleted at the end of a formal discussion about whether to keep it. It was found not to meet the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia, specifically Wikipedia:Notability, which have already been brought to your attention on your talk page, and which were raised as a concern in the discussion. Largoplazo (talk) 13:53, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol \| November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. (t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm WaddlesJP13. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Maa Basuli, and have marked it as unreviewed. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Waddles 🗩 🖉 19:58, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Indent

[6] regarding this, I am not sure about the significance and affect of * added between colons. I did not add them manually. The script mw:Special:MyLanguage/Talk_pages_project/Replying adds it automatically for me. Ps. This comment is also made by the same tool. Venkat TL (talk) 12:29, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

@Venkat TL: Ah, interesting. I may go report it at the tool's page. Largoplazo (talk) 12:42, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes please. Because I have no control over how it decides the symbol. So if you believe something needs to be improved, it would be better to alert the tool creater. Venkat TL (talk) 12:44, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

About the article of Yiddish Poets

@Largoplazo: "Transadapter" is someone who rewrites and then makes a translated version of some poetry so that it is a different version but without changing the meaning and musicality of the work. I used the term that the author himself used to define himself and define his writing model (maybe I got the term wrong because my native language is Yiddish and that makes my English very rustic). But I appreciate the warning in the same way.

Futuristic

brooooooooooooooooooo, I took 1-2 total hours on that page instead of doing the homework.

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing Evans Sylvestre, Largoplazo.

Unfortunately Josu4u has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

I think someone needs to review this, whether it meets speedy deletion or not.

To reply, leave a comment on Josu4u's talk page.

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing Grupo paranga, Largoplazo.

Unfortunately Jackmcbarn has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

Article has a lot of issues other than the COI, so it needs further review (and quite possibly tagging for deletion)

To reply, leave a comment on Jackmcbarn's talk page.

Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Disambiguation_pages#How_we_deal_with_entries_that_plausibly_fit_in_multiple_sections

Just replying here so as not to make the main discussion longer and more off topic than it already is: the link wasn't circular when I put it on Widefox's talk page, it just became so when he copied that entire comment to the project-space thread. Cheers. —swpb^{T • go beyond • bad idea} 21:28, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

About Firoz Merchant page.

I read your comment on the edit made by me. I understand your perspective, but since he's been granted the UAE citizenship, doesn't that make him an Indian-Emirati? This would be more accurate and would update the content of this page.

Appreciate your guidance and help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lavenderpeople (talk • contribs) 08:10, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

@Lavenderpeople: But why do you think he's been granted citizenship? He was granted permanent residency. As I said in my edit summary: "citizens don't need a special award to live permanently in their own country." Permanent residency is a status granted specifically to non-citizens. Largoplazo (talk) 08:59, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

By the way, you can see above that a bot signed your comment for you, but that doesn't always happen. Please always sign your contributions to talk pages, whether they're article talk pages, user talk pages like this one, or otherwise. Largoplazo (talk) 09:02, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Guattari

https://es.forvo.com/search/guattari/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hlnodovic (talk • contribs) 14:09, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

@Hlnodovic: There are two audio clips there, one with [w], the other without. The clip in the article has it, so, in the absence of evidence more authoritative than clips by anonymous people, having unknown knowledge of what's actually correct, on the Internet, I think we should either be consistent with what we present or acknowledge that we have no reliable source and remove all of it, the phonetic representation and the clip. Does that seem reasonable? Largoplazo (talk) 14:48, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Two of clips in Forvo say /gataˈʁi/ and two /gwataˈʁi/ (as well as the clip attached to the article). The lastname is Italian in origin /gwatˈtaɾi/, maybe that why the French pronunciation is still unstable (and uses /w/ instead of /ɥ/). However the author is certainly a Frenchman and we should add a French pronunciation (we don't say Nicholas Sarkozy in Hungarian). Since two of them seems excessive, it would rather preserve /gwataˈʁi/ Hlnodovic (talk)

The problem is that you're speculating that an unknown French person actually knows how Guattari pronounced his name. Largoplazo (talk) 02:30, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

If someone gets a Street named after themselves is that something of importance or (trivia) ?

just something which just came to my mind after reading an article. StephenWilliams021 (talk) 17:19, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

@StephenWilliams021: That itself might be considered important—and it impressed me—but you should include that question with the comments you've already contributed to the deletion discussion. Considerations others might raise include

Verifiability: Is the Opera News source a reliable source? The byline reads "LemonMagazine (self media writer)", which gives the impression that this is an unreviewed blog post.
Whether the naming has actually happened or will happen. Though the headline implies it's going to happen, the article says only "So they wanted to show him that his appreciated by having the street he grew up on called "Cornflower Str" legally changed to "B Major Str", having all youth members and home owners in the community to sign a petition to have people agree to the street name change." So all that's been established is that he's a creditable person whose immediate community wants to honor him and that they've collected signatures for a petition. That, by itself, doesn't carry much weight, in my opinion. There's no word on whether the city has looked at the petition, let alone that they've approved it, which is what I would want to see to consider it as a contribution to notability. Without that, all I can do is admired his civic-mindedness.

Of course, the reason Google didn't come up with that article before is that it was, apparently, just published. Google shows it now. Strangely, when I first look at it, it had a posting time of "10 minutes ago", which meant it was published a couple of hours after you'd already noted its existence; but now, only about 15 minutes later, it says "10 hours ago". Largoplazo (talk) 19:32, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Largoplazo i don't understand why the timing of the article is that way, i also noticed that when i found it, it was saying "published 1 hour ago" and from my understanding the news on opera news are all manually reviewed headlines by the Opera News Team, the meaning of (self media writer) in my opinion is that the writers has to present their article idea and hope it don't get rejected, either through mail or their own login portal on the website where they submit their articles for review while the Opera Team does reliable research on it for any copies of the submitted article on the web, Checking for originality and exclusivity as you will see some (articles) have the originality tag on Opera News because the journalist was the first person to get hold of the story approved by Opera News. All media writers on Opera News app (Excluding readers) has the 'verified creator' tag next to their name/username but only for Journalist who were obviously approved as real writers/journalist and is given the reliable resources by the news/magazine company about topics (Basically Head-starts) to write about or what they want on the Opera News site and its also considered a payed journalist gig, Having monthly monetize articles, Which to most writers are considered a (Full Time Job) with more than 2 million readers online everyday. i personally think that article is of importance i will include this question in deletion discussion though. StephenWilliams021 (talk) 21:31, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Should I be worried?

Hi, I’ve been using my IP address to edit now for a couple years but have recently come across my old account that I’d like to edit on from now on. I am however scared I will be accused of sock puppetry as I was once temporarily blocked for using both an account to edit and my IP address. This was mainly because I kept logging out and forgetting the password. What I’m asking is, is there anything I have to do to register that IP address as my previous source of editing or will I be fine if I continue to edit on here from here on out. Much appreciated. Zvig47 (talk) 07:08, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Zvig47: The account you wrote this from has never been blocked. Or were you talking about another account? If so, and if that account was blocked for cause, then you need to follow the procedures at WP:Unblock, or else editing under another account or without logging in is block evasion subject to the sockpuppetry rules.

However, if the only block you've ever had was temporary and it has now expired, then you have no problem. Sockpuppetry is the misuse of multiple accounts (such as for block evasion). Largoplazo (talk) 12:24, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Cape Verde

Thanks for the backcheck. Apparently I wasn't really awake when I did that. Too late of a night having too much fun didn't help. But now I am really confused about the article as the infobox uses "recognised" while the text uses "recognized". I am still not awake enough to deal with this. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 12:28, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

@Khajidha: Aw, I thought I checked for any other uses of "recognise"! I would have made that one consistent too. But, yeah, I scanned for "centre" and found a lot of them, so there should probably be a "Use British English" tag on the article. I'm glad you enjoyed your evening. 🙂 Largoplazo (talk) 12:46, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Georgian verbs

Hi, this is Nisashadu. Firstly, I am a new user, and I appreciate your understanding and support. I hope you are notified about this message considering all the instruction on your page. Secondly, thank you for letting me know that the links have been removed. I do have a question, however. Both articles discuss the conjugation of Georgian verbs and why adding an external link of Georgian verb conjugator was inappropriate? Conjugation is the biggest obstacle for Georgian language learners, and I think this link is beneficial to anyone interested in this language. Nisashadu (talk) 17:33, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

@Nisashadu: Hello, thanks for writing. There's a lot to consider when adding an external link to an article. See WP:External links, in particular the sections that can be reached directly through the shortcuts WP:ELYES and WP:ELMAYBE. See also the section on WP:LINKSTOAVOID, particularly item 13. What a lot of this boils down to is that links should be to external resources that supplement the article's topic at the right level of generality. There's interest in keeping external link lists manageable and to prevent them from going off in too many directions, either scope-wise or topic-wise. See WP:NOTLINKFARM and related information on that same page that may give some additional guidance on appropriate linking.

Since the conjugation site to which you've linked doesn't provide any explanation of the screeve, it isn't applicable, even though it's related through the general topic of verbs". Since the site is specific to Georgian verbs, its scope is too narrow to be useful for the article on the Kartvelian language family. I was on the fence about the Georgian language article, since the link fits most squarely into the Georgian grammar article, and I was feeling iffy about the redundancy.

On a tangential subject, in the screeve article, you'd placed the link into the "see also" section. "See also" sections are only for internal links, "wikilinks", to articles on related topics. When an external link is suitable for an article that doesn't already have an "external links" section, create one, following the examples (with "==" on either side of the heading) of other headings you see on the page. That section should go after the references section (see WP:ORDER). Also, add a heading when you start a new discussion on a talk page, as I did for you above. 😀

Let me know if you have any further questions! Largoplazo (talk) 02:35, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Also, forgive the "inappropriate for an encyclopedia" phrase in the message I left you. I started with a boilerplate message that's designed more for links that are unsuitable (spam, for example). I edited the standard message some but not enough before leaving it on your talk page. Largoplazo (talk) 02:40, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

I just noticed that the website has an entire grammar section, at https://lingua.ge/grammar/. It would make more sense to link to that from Georgian grammar than to the conjugation page. Largoplazo (talk) 02:42, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Deletion guide for {{other uses of}}

Dear Largoplazo, if you are unhappy with {{other uses of}}, I recommend you to read Wikipedia:Guide to deletion and propose its deletion. Otherwise, please, restrain from WP:EW its users.--Geysirhead (talk) 13:23, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

@Geysirhead: I'm not carrying on one discussion in two places, and I have no idea how your brought deletion into this. Your failure to understand the proper use of a tag doesn't imply that I think it should be deleted. Largoplazo (talk) 15:49, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

@Largoplazo: These are two different discussions. The discussion on my talk page is about my reportedly improper usage of {{other uses of}}, although it is stated there: It is used when a term that refers to the subject should be disambiguated, but is not the title (...) or a redirect (...). The discussion here is about your resistance to read the rules of {{other uses of}} and enforced application of other rules from {{otheruses}} e.g. on that template.--Geysirhead (talk) 16:35, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Translation from Russian Wikipedia

Hello. Can you write this article in English on the English Wikipedia? Or write in Wikipedia queries to those who translate from Russian into English. Please answer yes or no. I want this article to be available in other sections of Wikipedia in other languages. The article can be translated into any language using Google or Yandex translator. The "structure" section does not have to be added. I translated this text through Google translator, sorry if there are errors in the text. https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A7%D0%B5%D1%87%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B6%D0%B0%D1%85%D0%B5%D0%B4%D1%8B_%D0%B2_%D0%A1%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B8 Luntik 92 (talk) 16:53, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Greetings. Have you seen WP:TRANSLATETOHERE? It's possible you have and you're following the suggestion to contact a translator on their talk page, and that's why you've written to me. But I have generally translated only articles that somebody had already published here in another language, and only if they're in a language I know. I only know a few words of Russian. So I'm afraid that, even if you've already been there, I'm going to send you back to WP:TRANSLATETOHERE. Largoplazo (talk) 17:30, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Luntik 92: I meant to ping you. Largoplazo (talk) 17:50, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Lorgoplazo. For example, I don't know English, but I translated articles from English into Russian through Google translator and so wrote articles. Luntik 92 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:15, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Luntik 92: Please do not use translation machines to produce articles here. See WP:MACHINETRANSLATION. Largoplazo (talk) 19:06, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Largoplazo. I understand Google doesn't translate well, but I translate the article, but then I correct the errors. Luntik 92 (talk) 19:09, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

If you don't understand the original language, then you don't know what the translation errors are. You can correct the grammar, but you won't know if the translation is correct, and the translation may imply things that are false. Largoplazo (talk) 19:44, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Largoplazo fyi: that's crosswiki spam & lock evasion. I requested a global lock on meta. Johannnes89 (talk) 20:12, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Johannnes89: Ah, interesting. I did detect a sort of evangelistic vibe to the appeal for assistance. Largoplazo (talk) 20:16, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:French blogs

A tag has been placed on Category:French blogs indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:10, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Pact of Cartagena

I believe you may have misunderstood the texts at Pact of Cartagena. The first column is a note from Edward Grey, 1st Viscount Grey of Fallodon, UK Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, to Wenceslao Ramírez de Villa-Urrutia, 1st Marquis of Villa-Urrutia. The second column is a note from Villa-Urutia to Grey. The third column is a note from Fernando León y Castillo, Spanish ambassador to France, to Stephen Pichon, the French Minister of Foreign Affairs. The fourth column is a note from Pichon to León y Castillo. Each of these notes is a communication by one government to another -- UK to Spain, Spain to UK, Spain to France, France to Spain -- expressing their own government's policy. They are not all the same document in four languages; in fact, the middle two documents are both in Spanish but addressed to different respondents. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:39, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Metropolitan90: Hello. I can read all four messages perfectly. They're identical except for the phrases identifying the sender and recipient of each. So while they aren't fully identical, it seems overkill to translate all three of the non-English letters in full, only to achieve almost the same result each time. It would be easier for the reader if we were to comment on them to the effect that you and I just did, that the latter three are the same as the English one except for the swap of senders and recipients. What do you think? Largoplazo (talk) 21:34, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Okay, I see that now. We need to change the article, though, since what we have there now is about as uninformative and tedious as it could possibly be for people who can't read Spanish or French. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:13, 4 March 2022 (UTC)