User talk:Mgasparin/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 → Archive 5

January 2019

Information icon Hello, I'm Babymissfortune. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Jimmy Kimmel Live! have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Babymissfortune 04:41, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


Today's GA nominations

Mgasparin, you are a relatively new editor, and as best I can tell you have little or no experience with Good Articles or their criteria. You are also probably not aware that the Good Article nomination instructions say that people who are not significant contributors to articles they wish to nominate should consult with those who are significant contributors to get their assessment as to whether the article is ready to be a GA, since you failed to do this. (Consultation on Wikipedia generally takes about seven days, to allow people who edit less frequently to respond; a note on the article's Talk page saying that you wanted to check with the major contributors because you wish to nominate the article to be a GA is considered sufficient.)

One of your nominations, Times Square–42nd Street/Port Authority Bus Terminal (New York City Subway), has already been reverted by one of the significant contributors; a list of issues with the article that would prevent passage is at Talk:Times Square–42nd Street/Port Authority Bus Terminal (New York City Subway)#Boldly removing GAN. A quick glance at a few others of your nominations this morning reveal significant problems with the articles that anyone would have spotted who truly knew the GA criteria and how they should be applied, including a sourcing template in the Gordon Ramsey article and at least one "citation needed" template elsewhere.

Because all six of these were out-of-process nominations, I'm reverting the remaining five. If you're interested in pursuing these further, I'd like to suggest that you do the consult, and also start editing the articles to address any deficiencies such as inadequate sourcing, prose and grammar issues, and the like. Thanks, and I hope you continue editing and improving articles. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:18, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of REMEMBER

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, REMEMBER, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

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. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 18:31, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

REMEMBER

Your personal page REMEMBER has been moved to User:Mgasparin/REMEMBER. Personal pages like this do not belong in main space; the copy there will be deleted soon. —teb728 t c 19:18, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: being an awesome wikipedian!! 162.245.253.184 (talk) 18:06, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Mgasparin/Archive 1. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Ariconte (talk) 20:58, 12 February 2019 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Modifying section heading level

Re this, please do not modify section heading level unless you know what you're doing. You clearly don't at this time. I have cleaned up the mess you made, which required reversing an archival. ―Mandruss ☎ 09:21, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Teahouse logo

Hi Mgasparin! You created a thread called Appropriate References at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 16 February 2019 (UTC)


Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Mgasparin/Archive 1. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Nick Moyes (talk) 16:53, 25 February 2019 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Your GA nomination of Renewable energy

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Renewable energy you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Femkemilene -- Femkemilene (talk) 14:40, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

April 2019

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to 2019 United States Border closure, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.

The "show preview" button is right next to the "publish changes" button and below the edit summary field.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:34, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Renewable energy

The article Renewable energy you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Renewable energy for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Femkemilene -- Femkemilene (talk) 18:22, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

DAB

Disambiguation pages do not need references; they just need to link to existing articles. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 03:27, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Tiger Woods receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tiger Woods receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 02:39, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tiger Woods receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Tiger Woods receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:07, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Working together to GA

Hiya,

You mentioned you were willing to improve the renewable article further. As you can see, I've started the cleanup process already. What kind of things do you like doing in improving this article? I'll focus on other parts of the article first then. Maybe we can involve a few other editors by posting on their talk pages as well. I think it's quite important that we have a good article on renewables on wikipedia :). Femke Nijsse (talk) 15:30, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Femke Nijsse, I would like to first remove all the unsourced and NPOV tags, as well as the citation needed tags. I am a little busy right now, but I plan to start within a week. Thanks! Mgasparin (talk) 18:06, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
I should be focussing on other this this week as well. This is definitely a long-term plan. Looking forward to working with you :). Femke Nijsse (talk) 07:47, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Just letting you know that I'm listening to some podcasts on renewable energy to get more familiar with the topic. A quick heads-up: do keep in mind the Wikipedia: summary style. Renewable energy is one of these umbrella topics, so it is vital that we don't focus too much on the details. You added the sentence "Many Latin American and African countries increased their investments significantly as well, with Argentina, Mexico, and Rwanda increasing investments by 777%, 810%, and 8665%, respectively." which in my opinion is too detailed for the kind of article we are writing. The fluctuations from one year to the next should probably not be mentioned at all, or only for global figures. Femke Nijsse (talk) 08:50, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:51, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Pending changes question

Hi. Forgive my intrusion and blunt questions. How much time do you spend before approving a pending change? I don't know how many of you there are with reviewer rights or how many edits/pages are constantly getting submitted. Is it overwhelming? I ask because of this edit which you approved. I am not going to mince words, I am a bit irritated that you did so. This is in the lede paragraph of a BLP of a recent political candidate who is under a police investigation regarding these comments. In my opinion, it does not reflect well on us Wikipedians if we keep approving unsourced claims to the lede paragraphs of (admittedly minor in this case) politicians. If you want to glance over changes deep in the body of the articles without reading the talk page or sources, I don't blame you. I am sure the backlog is a million miles long. But in the WP:BIOLEAD, I think there ought to be a higher standard. If you have ideas about how we can fix the system, I am all ears. Cheers, --SVTCobra (talk) 03:12, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

@SVTCobra: My apologies, I looked at the edit and thought that it might simply be someone adding to a sentence as I saw that there was a citation in the next sentence. The reference was not added of course by that IP, but I thought it plausible that the change was simply an add-on by the same editor after the original citation was added. IP addresses can and do change frequently you know.
I just looked over what you were saying for a 2nd time, and I completely see how I goofed up. Thanks for correcting me.
No, I did not look at the talk page. It just never occurred to me. I do not consider this "overwhelming", but in the 2 or 3 days that I have had this right I have found it challenging at times deciding which edits are appropriate as I often know absolutely nothing about the article I am reviewing. That is likely what happened here.
How much time do you spend before approving a pending change? Right then, I was a bit rushed as I had to get home from where I was and I wanted to just finish a few more reviews before I left. Usually, I spend more time. Also, given that I literally just got this right, you could cut a little slack.
Thanks for your comments. I will continue to try to improve on this in the future. Mgasparin (talk) 07:22, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Teahouse logo

Hi Mgasparin! You created a thread called Died vs. Passed Away at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 14 June 2019 (UTC)


Manually archiving at Talk:Donald Trump

Hello. Re this use of OneClickArchiver, we don't manually archive on that talk page unless a discussion has been closed, and stayed closed for 24 hours. Otherwise we let the bot handle it. This is part of current consensus item 13, and it has worked well for quite some time, the page size or TOC size never becoming excessive.

Provided nobody cares about the thread anymore, I'm not feeling inclined to restore it. So this is just FYI for future reference. Thanks. ―Mandruss ☎ 08:23, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

User:Mandruss Thanks for that information. Will take note of that. Mgasparin (talk) 21:20, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Ruhollah Khomeini

What is your actual objection to this bold edit? El_C 21:32, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

I thought that what was originally there was better written. Mgasparin (talk) 21:34, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
Fair enough. That's taken straight from the lead sentence, though. El_C 21:37, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
True, true. If you really want to change it, discuss it first. I won't object to that. Mgasparin (talk) 21:40, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
Okay, maybe I'll do that. Thanks for taking the time. El_C 21:41, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
On further thought: I think I was able to get the best of both worlds. Please let me know what you think. El_C 21:49, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, that's fine. Mgasparin (talk) 21:52, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Timeline of the Donald Trump presidency (2019 Q2), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Patrick Shanahan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 14:01, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

The Reviewer's Barnstar
This is for your valuable efforts for reviewing articles under pending changes protection. Thank you PATH SLOPU 14:28, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Plate

Re [1], 'plate' is a mass noun for "Dishes, bowls, cups, and other utensils made of gold, silver, or other metal" (source: [2]) Firebrace (talk) 18:03, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Oh, okay thanks. Mgasparin (talk) 19:07, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

The June 2019 Signpost is out!

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Manually archiving at Talk:Donald Trump, redux

Please refer to User talk:Mgasparin/Archive 1#Manually archiving at Talk:Donald Trump. Again, ...and stayed closed for 24 hours. Not 18:48.

And in any case the word in the consensus is "allowed", not "required". Perhaps you should refrain from manually archiving on that page? There are others who can do it, and consistently do it correctly. ―Mandruss ☎ 03:43, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

@Mandruss: I know the current consensus regarding archiving discussions manually. and I did look at it, by the way. Scjessey had requested that the thread be closed and archived. But seriously, is a few hours worth arguing over? It will be 24 hours since it was closed in about 5ish hours. Is it that much of a deal that you had to tell me? Mgasparin (talk) 04:01, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
Scjessey's comment was: "Can we get a close on this and let it be archived?" Not "Can we get a close on this and let it be archived as soon as possible, even if earlier than specified by consensus #13?" Even if he had meant that, you were not bound to comply.
Please consider the slippery slope. If we refrained from saying something about doing it 5 hours early because it's not "that much of a deal", then where would it become enough of a deal to say something? Certainly not 6 hours early, that's only one hour more than 5. If not 6, then certainly not 7, that's only one hour more than 6. And so on. What's not "that much of a deal" is actually adhering to the 24-hour minimum in the consensus. ―Mandruss ☎ 04:15, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
Mandruss True, you do have a good point. You have to draw the line somewhere. All right. Thanks. Mgasparin (talk) 04:23, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Please do not accept spam

Hello. When you accept edits, you should not accept clear vandalism and spam. Doing so defeats the purpose of the page protection. This edit was textbook spam.—J. M. (talk) 12:35, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

User:J. M. My apologies, sorry about that. Thank you for pointing that out. Mgasparin (talk) 20:13, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Geoff Emerick’s claims

Geoff Emerick said in his book that George Harrison played bass on “Rock and Roll Music” while Paul McCartney played piano, but that is impossible since there are two guitars (George and John obviously) - if you go on YouTube and see mattiboo’s channel, he demonstrates guitar parts to The Beatles’ songs.

I’ve read that according to George Martin’s production notes, George played his Gibson J-160E, and Geoff admitted in a 1979 interview that he had next to no memories of his work with The Beatles. 220.240.17.113 (talk) 07:14, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I understand. But can you provide an appropriate source? I'm not just going to let you add anything. Mgasparin (talk) 07:16, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

My edits were not vandalism, I explained what was wrong with the text below the image

I removed inaccurate material below an image of Stalin with Lenin that claimed the photo was doctored. There were several photos taken of Lenin with Stalin in those clothes they are not doctored. Stalin was General Secretary of the Communist Party at the time of this photo, an important position and like other officials he met with Lenin and photos were taken of him with Lenin.

Your edit removed quite a lot of information without any consensus. If you want to do this, discuss it first on the talk page. Mgasparin (talk) 00:26, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:18, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
  • The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.

    Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:24, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Wrongly accused of vandalism

Hi I just found out that I was wrongly accused of vandalizing the "Attack on Titan" page on 18 June 2019. My edit in question was derived directly from the manga, not the anime-version, that supported the change (See Ch. 99, pp. 36-40). I'm aware the anime has yet to catch up with this plot point, but my change was to better represent the FULL CANON story. Read the cited chapter if you don't believe me.--66.8.150.109 (talk) 20:04, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

You changed the wording and meaning of a sentence quite a bit without any reference or edit summary (reason for your edit). I am not going to read the book. Next time, make sure you provide reasons or references for your edits. What else was I supposed to think? Thanks. Mgasparin (talk) 03:44, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi Mgasparin. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback should never be used to edit war.
  • If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
  • Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! – Juliancolton | Talk 15:17, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Sources needed for Days of the Year pages

I see you recently accepted a pending change to May 10 that did not include a direct source.

You're probably not aware of this change, but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the content guideline and the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. I've gone ahead and un-accepted this edit and backed it out.

All the pages in the Days of the Year project have had pending changes protection turned on to prevent vandalism and further addition of entries without direct sources. As a pending changes patroller, please do not accept additions to day of year pages where no direct source has been provided on that day of year page. The burden to provide sources for additions to these pages is on the editor who adds or restores material to these pages. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 19:10, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Toddst1 Thank you for that. I was not aware of the change. Mgasparin (talk) 21:04, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Rollback at article "Firmament"

You reverted my edit (a deletion also) on the article Firmament in rather less than a second. I can only assume you either disagree with my reasons for reverting or you felt it was vandalism. It wasn't vandalism. The reason I gave was that the deleted section was silly; admittedly that's a rather vague reason, but the space for edit-comments is limited and there's a long, long discussion about this on the article's talk page. The content of the section is, indeed, silly - it's an attempt to reconcile the first chapter of the Book of Genesis with Christian fundamentalism/biblical inerrancy. (You might like to see the article Genesis creation narrative to see how far from the academic consensus it is).

I'm sorry but I don't have an account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.217.141 (talk • contribs) 09:54, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

I wrote the above before seeing your comment on my "talk" page. I was reverting to the long-standing text of the article before a user inserted the new section. It was previously reverted by TGeorgescu, a long-standing editor whom I respect, then re-added; I'm sure TGeorgescu would have re-reverted in due course if I hadn't got there first (purely by chance, I should add - I don't patrol these pages). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.217.141 (talk • contribs) 09:56, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Hello IP, having read the discussion on the talk page thoroughly, and looked at the previous reverts you mentioned, I see that your edits were in fact well within consensus. I probably should have looked at the talk page for discussion on the matter before reverting. If you want to remove the paragraph, go ahead. Mgasparin (talk) 09:02, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm pretty confident the user who wants that section will put it back in anyway, and that TGeorge will remove it again, and so on ad infinitum - which is why I left off Wikipedia. How tedious are the days.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.217.141 (talk • contribs) 10:16, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Revert

Excuse me, but why precisely did you undo my edit at New Rome? I was fixing grammar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Namhansanseong (talk • contribs) 08:13, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Read my message at your talk page. Mgasparin (talk) 08:13, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:41, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I would like to thank you for your contributions! Angus1986 (talk) 20:27, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you!!!! Mgasparin (talk) 20:28, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Early archival

Re: [3]

Archived 20.5 hours early, per #13. After only 3.5 hours, the OP likely hasn't seen both of the replies and maybe hasn't seen either of them. If you're not going to observe #13, might as well boldly cancel it and see if that flies. Have an awesome Spring day. ―Mandruss ☎ 13:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Mandruss right, sorry I forgot about that. Thanks for the reminder. Also, it's good to see you back editing. I thought you were gone for good, no? Mgasparin (talk) 22:00, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
About 99% retired. You may see my name pop up from time to time, not doing anything particularly substantive. ―Mandruss ☎ 22:56, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Handling Trump bias complaints

I wonder why you haven't joined that discussion, considering that you're currently the primary talk page cleanup guy (PTPCG). ―Mandruss ☎ 01:14, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Mandruss Thanks, I'll add my input. Mgasparin (talk) 05:20, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mgasparin/Archive_1&oldid=1159102801"