User talk:Cassiopeia/Archive 59

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 55 ← Archive 57 Archive 58 Archive 59 Archive 60 Archive 61 → Archive 65

New Fighters

Hey Hey, just one person this week

All the best! And hope the weather isn't too bad over there. HeinzMaster (talk) 17:18, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

HeinzMaster  Done. Thank you. Stay safe. Cassiopeia(talk) 02:29, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

New Fighters

Hey Hey, I got new fighters that are notable now because of the new criteria.

All the best HeinzMaster (talk) 03:27, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

HeinzMaster  Done and thank you for your contribution. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 01:59, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Counter-Vandalism Student Application

Hi! I have contributed more than 200 edits to Mainspace and would like to participate in the counter-vandalism training program. Thanks. Twotwofourtysix (talk) 00:57, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Twotwofourtysix Good day. Thank you for interested in CUVA program. Pls note that there are a lot of reading material and assignment which you need to prepare to spend some time on. Many participants have abandon the program due to lack of anticipation the amount of time need to to work on the program. If you are still interest to participate in the program, then pls complete WP:TWA program for you to familiar with some of the basic Wikipedia guidelines since you are new to Wikipedia. Once you have finished the TWA, then pls let me know and I will set up the CUVA program for you. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 01:04, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Cassiopeia I've completed the WP:TWA program and I should be prepared to pour my time and effort to these reading materials and assignments. Twotwofourtysix (talk) 10:40, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Twotwofourtysix, I have set up the CUVA program for you. Pls read the links provided (reading material) and the communication section (at the bottom of the assignment) prior answering the assignment questions. Welcome to CUVA. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 01:01, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

AIV report

Hi. Just a quick flypast to say I saw your report about Hodko10 at WP:AIV. I felt it sensible to leave this to another admin, as my total and utter lack of sporting knowledge left me quite unable to decide whether or not you were right in claiming this is a "vandalism and disruptive-only account." Really sorry about that, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:05, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Nick Moyes thank you for letting me know. I am a regular mma editor and update the mma fighters and event pages. The editor vandalize the page by adding info from their twitter page (in the edit hist diffs) which the bout is not scheduled/ no report from any news media and change the fight method not as per source and WP:MMA guidelines but according to how they see fit. They have been warn multiple times before, but continuing to do so. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 01:33, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

It’s not a vandalism account my friend I’ve been updating fighter pages with factual information, I don’t understand the report myself. Hodko10 (talk) 01:29, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Excuse me friend

Why are you reporting me dude? I’ve done nothing wrong Hodko10 (talk) 01:23, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Hodko10 see comments above and your talk page warning messages. Cassiopeia(talk) 01:34, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Aleksandar Rakić

Hello Cassiopeia, since Aleksandar Rakić is an ethnic Serb, it only makes sense for his name in the title of his Wikipedia article be displayed accordingly in his native language, which is Serbian. So I am not sure why you reverted my edit, as this should not be an issue at all. His name Aleksandar Rakić is just the romanised or latinised version of his native name which is Александар Ракић, see Romanization of Serbo-Croatian. 10:47, 18 March 2021 (EST)— Preceding unsigned comment added by an unknown user 01:47, March 19, 2021

The Slavic Serf Goo day. Thank you for the message above. First of all, content added/changed needs to support by [[WP:IS|independent], reliable sources and it is the burden of the editor who changes/addds the content should provide the source - see WP:PROVEIT. Secondly Rakic was born in Austria and he is an Austria and in Austria Aleksandar Rakić is his name and he is a native of Austria inregradless where his parents were/are from. Just as Alexander Volkanovski and Aljamain Sterling, their parents are from Greek/Macedonia and Jamaica respectively, but in the native country (Australia and United States) that would be their name legally. Thank you and stay safe. Cassiopeia(talk) 00:05, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
"By the design of Wikipedia's software, an article can only have one title. When this title is a name, significant alternative names for the topic should be mentioned in the article, usually in the first sentence or paragraph."-per MOS. Also didnt Rakic switch to fighting under the serbian flag? SerVasi (talk) 08:50, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
The Slavic Serf Wikipedia is a online free encyclopedia. The article name is under the WP:COMMON NAME which means the subject is most commonly known by independent, reliable sources. Some subject is known by the nick/stage name instead of their real name, such as Magic Johnson, CM Punk and Mirko Cro Cop which their real names are Earvin Johnson Jr. Phillip Jack Brooks, Mirko Filipović respectively. Under WP:Ethnicity, the subject ethnicity or heritage should not be listed in the WP:LEAD section, by can be mentioned in the body texts supported by sauces. Many fighters represent other countries besides their birth countries due to migration, training and living in other countries for many years or wants lift the spirit of their parents' birth countries, or represent the whole world (one world concept), however, the lead section should mention the most significant info of the subject which usually is where their born (American, Nigerian, Japanese etc) their profession (what they are notable of basketballer, serial killer, astronaut etc) and other notable info such as killing 20 ppl, achievements and etc. As mentioned in your page, this is English Wikipedia, Rakic was born in Austria and not Serbia. So he is an Austrian and his name is Aleksandar Rakic and that is the WP:COMMON NAME for the article page and we could put the full name (with middle if he has one) with supported by source on the lead section (see Dustin Poirier, Max Holloway, Khabib Nurmagomedov, Angela Hill (fighter) for examples), but not the Slav name for that is not his name unless he was born in Serbia. Thank you. Cassiopeia(talk) 09:13, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
No Rakić is exclusively Rakić everything else being ignorant. Ask him to write his name he will write Rakić. SerVasi (talk) 15:10, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
The Slavic Serf I understand your sentimental as I believe it has something to tie your your user name. However, the thing is that we are talking about Wikipedia here and we adhere to Wikipedia guidelines and no one else's. There are certain guidelines I would like to see the changes, however, since it is the guidelines and not for me to like it or not, I will adhere and enforce it as a Wikipedia. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 23:59, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

<hi Cassiopeia,

After going through your archives I am extremely concerned. Multiple users have expressed their desire for Rakic to be correctly represented. I simply do not understand why you are going against the fighters personal choice. I attached a source where Rakic explicitly states he is SERBIAN and wants to be portrayed as such. Why are you constantly going against the fighter himself? I would kindly ask you to counter these countless statements where his wishes are clearly stated. I do not understand how your subjective opinion trumps an athletes own view of himself. I think it's time to let individuals choose for themselves.

New Fighters

Two people this week, all the best!

Stay safe and healthy. HeinzMaster (talk) 21:28, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Hey also, would like your input on the deletion discussion on Justin Tafa. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Justin_Tafa HeinzMaster (talk) 01:31, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
HeinzMaster  Done review and comment on AfD. Thank you for your contribution. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 04:44, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

About the Dohori page

I am the person who edited the Dohori page. I didn't provide any references because I couldn't find one. What I added was, in my opinions, a really important development of Dohori in Nepal. It was just a few lines. Plus, I made a external link that links to the dohori (folk song) that I had added to the page. I think you should revert your change. AbhigyaDahal (talk) 04:28, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

AbhigyaDahal Good day and thank you for the message above. Pls note that any changes of the article need to provide independent, reliable source which should be provided by the editor who adds/changes the article - see WP:PROVEIT and WP:V guidelines. Until you could find independent, reliable source such as from newspapers or books then you are welcome to add them back. You can use horizontal Template:Cite web if your source is from the web. Sources can be in any languages as long as they are independent and reliable. Pls read WP:ELMIN for the use of external link section in the article and for it is not for source and btw Utube is not a reliable source. Pls do not add them back. Thank you. Cassiopeia(talk) 04:41, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Why weren't the Christian pacifism edits constructive?

How can a man be master of another's life, if he is not even master of his own? Hence he ought to be poor in spirit, and look at Him who for our sake became poor of His own will; let him consider that we are all equal by nature, and not exalt himself impertinently against his own race[...] — Gregory of Nyssa, Homilies on the Beatitudes

How does that relate to non-violence? Why shouldn't that be replaced by the Origen quotation?

[N]either Celsus nor they who think with him are able to point out any act on the part of Christians which savours of rebellion. And yet, if a revolt had led to the formation of the Christian commonwealth, so that it derived its existence in this way from that of the Jews, who were permitted to take up arms in defence of the members of their families, and to slay their enemies, the Christian Lawgiver would not have altogether forbidden the putting of men to death; and yet He nowhere teaches that it is right for His own disciples to offer violence to any one, however wicked.

— Origen, Contra Celsum Book 3, Chapter 7[1]

The rest of the edit was adding citations, and adding paraphrased content, as there is a note asking for exactly that. The other two quotes I removed (again, as the note requests) appear less relevant that Origen's quote directly addressing the matter with context.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.38.49.133 (talk) 18:30, March 22, 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Origen, Origen Against Celsus, 3, Chapter 7
2021‎ 98.38.49.133 Good day. HERE-1 you removed sourced content without explanation. Secondly HERE-2 you use Wiki as the source. We need independent, reliable source, such as from books or newspapers and Wiki can not be the source for the reason of WP:CIRCULAR and also since anyone can edit Wikipedia, it is considered not reliable. Thank you. Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). Cassiopeia(talk) 07:58, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-12

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

Problems

  • You will be able to read but not edit twelve wikis for a short period of time on 23 March at 06:00 (UTC). This can also affect password changes, logging in to new wikis, global renames and changing or confirming emails. This could take 30 minutes but will probably be much faster.

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 23 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 24 March. It will be on all wikis from 25 March (calendar).
  • Syntax highlighting colours will change to be easier to read. This will soon come to the first wikis. [1]

Future changes

  • Flagged revisions will no longer have multiple tags like "tone" or "depth". It will also only have one tier. This was changed because very few wikis used these features and they make the tool difficult to maintain. [2][3]
  • Advanced item Gadgets and user scripts can access variables about the current page in JavaScript. In 2015 this was moved from wg* to mw.config. wg* will soon no longer work. [4]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:51, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #460

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Events
    • Ongoing: 30 Lexic-o-days, events and projects around lexicographical data, continues until April 14th. (full schedule, details and links here)
      • March 22: Bug triage hour about Lexemes with Lydia Pintscher
      • March 23: SPARQL querying for Lexemes with Vigneron
      • March 24: Open discussion in French about Lexemes
      • March 25: Documentation Q&A with Dan Shick
      • March 27: Lingua Libre, how you can record words in your language and use them on Wikidata, with Poslovitch
    • Upcoming: The next Wikibase live session is 16:00 UTC on Thursday 25 March 2021 (Add to calendar). This month we will have a team member from Enslaved.org talk to us briefly about how they are using Linked Open Data (LOD) with the help of Wikibase (due of technical challenges they couldn't join us last time). Everyone is welcome to attend the call.
    • Upcoming: The Arctic Knot Wikimedia Language Conference is taking place remotely on June 24-25, and focusing on indigenous and underrepresented languages on the Wikimedia projects. The call for submissions is now open until April 15th, if you want to present something related to Wikidata and languages, feel free to apply.
    • Upcoming: Next Linked Data for Libraries LD4 Wikidata Affinity Group call: Members of the EthicsLD Group will be leading a discussion on ethics in linked data, Tuesday, March 23rd.[5]
    • Upcoming: LIVE Wikidata editing #37 - YouTube, Facebook, March 27
    • Upcoming: Online Wikidata meetup in Swedish #55, March 28
  • Tool of the week
    • Sparql_rc is a recent changes feed that only shows you changes in an area of Wikidata you care about. It now also supports Lexemes.
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
    • Wikidata Lexeme Forms now supports Portuguese nouns
    • erinnerungshort.de/kap/ is a data and photo research project and map visualization tool with federated license query from Structured Commons, by Raymond and Elya.
    • ~7500 person items have been enriched with the new property GEPRIS person ID (P4872), imported from a high quality dataset from the Q707283.
  • Development
    • Work on the first version of the Query Builder is nearing its end. Doing remaining work on querying for quantities, dates and ranges as well as polishing and bug fixing.
    • Made Cognate work correctly for redirects on Wiktionary (phab:T165061)
    • Fixed an issue where the termbox on Item pages used the wrong list of languages on the mobile version (phab:T275611)
    • Cleaned up deleted Items from the term store database table (phab:T263730)
    • Got feedback on the initial click-dummies for checking Wikidata's data against other databases to find mismatches

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) 18:16, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

April editathons from Women in Red

Women in Red | April 2021, Volume 7, Issue 4, Numbers 184, 188, 194, 195, 196


Online events:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter


--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:15, 22 March 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

based.

very SerVasi (talk) 10:21, 24 March 2021 (UTC)


Stambridge Page

Hi

Please see the following website which backs up the statement I made on the Stambridge page. https://fulltime.thefa.com/ff/ClubDetails?clubid=09449e29-1980-e311-8b4d-001e4f28882a&tab=grounds .

Happy if you have any more questions or would like more info.

Thanks

Dan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djmann24 (talk • contribs) 22:40, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Djmann24 You can use horizontal Template:Cite web to add the source (inline citation) to support your claim. Thank you. Cassiopeia(talk) 02:11, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

I just like peopl like you.

Norges Adelstand (talk) 14:25, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Norges Adelstand Thank you and it is kind of you. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 01:29, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

New Fighters

Hey Hey, got new fighters for tomm's event

All the best wishes, HeinzMaster (talk) 00:59, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

HeinzMaster Reviewed. Thank you and enjoy the fights. Cassiopeia(talk) 02:38, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Here is a well earned barnstar to Cassiopeia.

Thank you for your welcoming, your advice and over-all exccellent attitude. Your work makes the rest of us aspire to perform our best. Thank you for the advice, aid publication. Norges Adelstand (talk) 02:03, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Nunes

Hello Cassiopeia, the discussion in the Amanda Nunes talk page has been already going on for a week and there was no progress made whatsoever. I tried to ask some other editors to weigh in on the issue, but nobody reacted. What should be done about this ? This has already been going on for so long, I feel like some conclusion should be finally made but the discussion just isn't moving at all (or more specifically, I'm getting straight up ignored by the other editor in question). Again sorry for always bothering you with this. 2A02:AB04:2F43:5000:2411:2405:D99B:84B (talk) 13:36, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

I am asking you again, what am supposed to to do when the discussion is not getting anywhere, no consensus was reached, I am getting ignored and and I didn't succeed in getting a third opinion ? I have no problem in discussing the issue in the talk page, but what discussion am I supposed to continue in when there's none and I'm the only one typing up paragraphs about it and trying to solve the dispute ? I didn't edit the page for (more than) a week since starting the original discussion, all of my messages in the talk page got ignored, I then tried to ask for a third opinion from other editors, got ignored, I tried to ask you about the next steps I should take and I got ignored. But when I decided to edit the page it was reverted immediately and locked. Like I'm really confused, what else should I do here ? Tag the the other user in more messages on the talk page he won't react to ? 188.167.253.176 (talk) 07:39, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
@2A02:AB04:2F43:5000:2411:2405:D99B:84B: You have only 3 edits including the above edit - see here -1 for such it is hard for me to know who is who. Pls provide your other IP address. I will look at the discussion this weekend when I have a little more time if you can wait and will comment accordingly but I need to know your other IP address so I could make sense of who is who in the talk page. Cassiopeia(talk) 08:02, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
@188.167.253.176: You contribution log inidcates you have only 3 edits including the edit/message above - see here-2. So, I dont know which article you are talking about. You need to provide you your other IPS address, the page/talk page you refereed to, so I might able to assist you. Thank you. Cassiopeia(talk) 08:02, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Both of the users above (2A02:AB04:2F43:5000:2411:2405:D99B:84B and 188.167.253.176) is me and I'm talking about the Amanda Nunes article. I don't know why my IP keeps changing like this, but I went through the article talk page and my IPs there are: 2A02:AB04:2F43:5000:598A:9E9B:7D48:9631, 2A02:AB04:2F43:5000:CA3D:DCFF:FE71:E371 and 2A02:AB04:2F43:5000:68E8:C3E6:32D2:CFD5. You can easily recognise who am I in the discussion since I'm the only user whose IP always starts with 2A02. Thanks. 2A02:AB04:2F43:5000:2411:2405:D99B:84B (talk) 08:41, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
@2A02:AB04:2F43:5000:2411:2405:D99B:84B: Thank you for the info above. I would suggest you to create an Wikipedia account and then commented on Nunes talk page all the IP account which are your edits (under your Wikipedia editor user name), so it clears up all the confusion of who is who then I will comment on the talk page. To create an account, pls go to [[6]] and read up the username policy and you could check if the username has been used in English Wikipedia - HERE first. Note: Usernames are case sensitive and do not forget your password for you will not be able to log back in for Wikipedia do not store the users passwords. Read here - Wikipedia:Why create an account?. Once you have set up your account then go to "Email Option" under "Preference" on the top menu and provide you email address if you want to receive notifications. Thank you. Cassiopeia(talk) 02:56, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
I've done that just now. Diana056 (talk) 23:15, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I don't want to bug you, but just in case you didn't notice it, I've made an account and did as you suggested in Amanda's talk page. I'd appreciate if you could look at it, and thank you for your help. Diana056 (talk) 08:53, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Diana056 Thank you for creating an account. I need have a slot of free time to look at all the discussions and also the source provide. There isa few things I also need to check prior I can give my 2cent. Will do it this weekend. Stay safe. Cassiopeia(talk) 08:58, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Diana056 Commented on Nunes talk page. Cassiopeia(talk) 07:04, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thank you for notifying we concerning the 1st draft of House of Nobility (Norway). The litterature list had somehow fallen out but is fixed now.

There are virtually endless reliable eksternal sources on this topic, if you would like more let me know.

Either way I presume the now included litterature list sufficiently documents a sufficient coverage and interest in the topic. I do understand that citizens from countries which are republics may not know much or care much about the topic at hand. But for citizens of countries which are kingdoms and has been for more than thousand years the subjects of sociatal development as they relate to royal-powerstructures such as the aristocracy is of far greater interest than e.g the american constitution. This is a consequence of that that the Scandinavian nations have been kingdoms for more than milleniums and the power sructures of the kings and the extended arm of the the nobility as deveoping factors of Scandinavian kingdoms are basically all the history kingdoms have. But thank you so much for noticing the litterature list had falle out, and do let me know if I should add some more publications to the litterature list. I have just mentioned a few.. How many do publications do you usually add to your articles? I can easily add 50 to 199 more off the top of my head if need be, but then again ; I feel the whole point of Wikipedia is somewhat undermined if we ask people to read 200 books instead of a page of dry facts.

Either way, your feedback was appreciated and your issues corrected, and thanks for noticing! Norges Adelstand (talk) 21:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Norges Adelstand Good day. What you could do is to add on the inline citation into the body text. Use the horizontal format of Template:Cite web if the sources are from the internet and WP:Cite book if the sources are taken from books. Pls do include book page number so the reviewer can check the content against the source. Let me know if you have any question. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 00:04, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Cassiopeia Good evening, and thank you once again for you excellent sollutions concerning the House of Nobility-article, so thank you Cassiopeia!
I am as you understand not a teenager, but closer to a dinosaur so although I know the history down to a t, I am not good with computers and hope I managed to hyper-link your name correct 8+). But I will do as you said and "1: add on the inline citation into the body text. 2: Use the horizontal format of Template:Cite web if the sources are from the internet and WP:Cite book 3: if the sources are taken from books include book page number so the reviewer can check the content against the source".
However just to make sure concerning how Wikipedia likes things to be done: : As the litterature and books are written in Norwegian, and have Norwegian titles, I presume we all agree that it is illegal to "translate" the real Norwegian titles of the books into "english titles" ??? < Because that would be unethical as the reviewer would not be able to find the actual books, if the actual titles had been translated to a language they are not published in. Agreed?
Thank you again for taking the time to advice an old History-buff in this new digital age. Norges Adelstand (talk) 03:42, 25 March 2021 (UTC)


Cassiopeia
Good morning: I have now:
"1: Norges Adelstand (talk) 08:06, 25 March 2021 (UTC)added on the inline citation into the body text.
2: Norges Adelstand (talk) 08:06, 25 March 2021 (UTC)Used the horizontal format of Template:Cite web if the sources are from the internet and WP:Cite book 3: included book page number so the reviewer can check the content against the source".
Thank you for your help & take care.
Kind regards.Norges Adelstand (talk) 08:06, 25 March 2021 (UTC)


DearCassiopeia : The changes you advised for the HOUSE of NOBILITY (Norway) article has now been duly performed.Will you kindly publish the article, as it has been edited according to your specifications given by you.
The changes I have performed is in addition to providing detailed specifics is furthermore as follows and exactly as you requested I have: "1: )added on the inline citation into the body text. 2: Used the horizontal format of Template:Cite web if the sources are from the internet and WP:Cite book 3: included book page number so the reviewer can check the content against the source".
This has now been done as you asked. Thank you! I thus ask you to publish the article accordingly.
Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.8.31.69 (talk) 06:53, March 28, 2021 (UTC)


@Norges Adelstand and 89.8.31.69: Hi Sorry for taking a little longer to reply. I have reviewed the article and it is published - you can find it on google search here. Kindly add more inline citation on the page where "citation needed" sentences. Pls see what I done where you could see from the article history page "edit summary brief comment".
Norges Adelstand, I applaud you for doing such a good job who are not familiar with computer languages. Well-done. Let me know if you need further help. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 01:29, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
to Cassiopeia(talk)
I thank you wholehartedly Cassiopeia and applaud you both as an editor and as a person AND the inline citation has been added as pr your request.
Respect and love from the Artic North. Pleasure learning from you and making your aquintance! [User:Norges Adelstand|Norges Adelstand]] (talk) 02:11, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Norges Adelstand You are welcome. Btw, you dont need to ping the editor on their talk page (note: when we dont know the editor gender, we use "they/their/them" in Wikipedia); however, you need to ping them in all other talk pages, including yours). You can achive your talk page instead of removing the info - see Help:Archiving a talk page for instruction. Also, we add additional " : " (colon) from the previous message thread for one indentation to the right for this is the Wikipedia communication talk page protocol. For more Wikipedia mark up - pls see Help:Wikitext. Lastly I have sent a welcome message to you where there are many links for you to familiar with some fundamental Wikipedia guidelines. Welcome to Wikipedia. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 02:22, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

MIOCIC I

I LEGIT CHECKED SHERDOG BEFORE I DID ANYTHING IT SAID KO PUNCH NOT PUNCHES REMOVE MY WARNING — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.227.33.228 (talk) 05:19, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

68.227.33.228 You changed it from punch to punches - see [7] on your second edit and that was the time I placed the warning message. Cassiopeia(talk) 05:30, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Ahh I understand now thank you for telling me — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.227.33.228 (talk) 17:09, March 28, 2021 (UTC)


68.227.33.228 No worries. If you do edit Wikipedia regularly then I would like suggest you to create an Wikipedia account. To create an account, pls go to [[8]] and read up the username policy and you could check if the username has been used in English Wikipedia - HERE first. Note: Usernames are case sensitive and do not forget your password for you will not be able to log back in for Wikipedia do not store the users passwords. Read here - Wikipedia:Why create an account?. Once you have set up your account then go to "Email Option" under "Preference" on the top menu and provide you email address if you want to receive notifications. Thank you. Cassiopeia(talk) 07:00, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Abubakar Nurmagomedov

Here is the original text: Soon after, McGregor and Abubakar attempted to exit the octagon, but a scuffle broke out between them after McGregor punched Abubakar.

Here is the revision I made: Amid the madness, McGregor tried to follow 'The Eagle' over the top of the cage. He was prevented from exiting by Abubakar Nurmagomedov, cousin of the champion, and the pair swung for each other.

The original text is hard to understand. It makes it seem like they were trying to exit through the same door and in doing so bumped into each other. Also, it implies that McGregor started the scuffle by punching Abubaker when it was Abubaker who initiated the confrontation by trying to prevent McGregor from leaving. If McGregor was the initiator then it wouldn't make any sense for Abubaker to have received the suspension.

Also, my edit is much more accurate based on the article that was cited by the source since I copied the article text almost word for word. This is my first edit since I was so confused by the original wording that I had to go to the article to understand what happened. 2001:4451:72E:3100:29C0:E220:AE08:A2FC (talk) 05:42, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

2001:4451:72E:3100:29C0:E220:AE08:A2FC First of all you should not copy from source that would be violated copyright guidlines. Secondly, you provide no source. Thirdly, the current texts is correct as per event. Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~).. Cassiopeia(talk) 05:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I hope you don't take my edits personally, I just find the original wording to be biased against McGregor. It basically states that Abubaker was on the way out of the Octagon when McGregor started a scuffle by punching him. My source is the same source as the one by the original wording which is https://www.joe.co.uk/sport/khabib-nurmagomedov-cousin-conor-mcgregor-punch-203121. I'll submit another edit but this time change the wording to adhere to the copyright guidelines would that be okay?2001:4451:72E:3100:29C0:E220:AE08:A2FC (talk) 06:06, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
2001:4451:72E:3100:29C0:E220:AE08:A2FC The current text is not biased as that was what happened. Secondly you source might not considered truly reliable source - see WP:RS. Pls do not change the text and leave it as it is. Thank you. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:12, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
I don't want to take up too much of your time and my time. I appreciate all your hard work and I understand that not everything can be resolved to everyone's satisfaction. But may I ask what is the source for the original wording which is the "Scuffle started after McGregor punched Abubaker" is it not the same article that I cited? from Joe.co.uk? Because I just followed the wikipedia link which pointed to that article. Where is the source that states that is what happened which paints Abubakar as basically just trying to get out of the Octagon until punched by Conor? A better phrasing I think would be "Abubaker tried to stop McGregor who was leaving the Octagon and then a scuffle started between" 2001:4451:72E:3100:29C0:E220:AE08:A2FC (talk) 06:21, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
2001:4451:72E:3100:29C0:E220:AE08:A2FC Here is the source said by Conor himself "I saw this take place, I got up off the ground and said 'OK, now I’m back in the mix,' jumped on top of the cage, as I jumped on top of the cage, his brother came sprinting across and jumped up on top of the cage also to climb in and help him and join the fight," McGregor said. "I seen him there and it was like a Christmas present. He was right there, I smacked him right in the eye socket and we started fighting on top of the cage. It got broken up." - here. And on 0:24 this video, Conor struck first. Thank you. Cassiopeia(talk) 06:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the source and I rescind my edit. I created an account to make it simpler to participate. I'd just like to suggest that the existing source of Joe.co.uk be removed and replaced with the bleacher report source to avoid future confusion. Muteall2020 (talk) 07:49, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Muteall2020 good to know you have created an account. As for your message above - you can if you want. You can use horizontal Template:Cite web for inline citation (source). I have placed a welcome message on your talk page. Do read the links provided so you may familiar yourself with some fundamental Wikipedia guiedelines. Do pop by here if you have any question or need any assistance for I am here to help. Welcome to Wikipedia. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 08:10, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 March 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:43, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Article consensus

I am trying to find out if there is consensus among the editors and admins to create a new article, it seems that the previous consensus against an article has now changed but I do not want the article put up for auto deletion so I want to be sure first.

I don’t know how to start a discussion for consensus, nor do I know if that is the place to start. I have commented in the article talk page which is discussing it but so far have has no response.

ChefBear01 (talk) 19:40, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

ChefBear01 Good day and thank you for the message. Subject needs to pass the notability guidelines to have a stand alone page; however, there are more than meeting IRS. I will explain all the necessary criteria but I need know what is the subject matter we are talking bout here as specialty when we dealing with biography. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 03:20, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
It is about the U.K. internal market, the consensus had previously been against an individual page which was partly due to it not meeting WP:NOTE at the time, but there is now lots of coverage and there are lots of individual sources to support article which is why I think the previous consensus has changed.
I have created a Draft:United Kingdom internal market which is awaiting confirmation of consensus, it has been linked to on the talk page of the Internal Market Act article to allow others to edit it in drafts to ensure an open and varied opinion and ensure it meets WP:NPOV.
I need to ensure the consensus has changed before it moves to WP:MAINSPACE, can an rfc be used for consensus? and if so how do to I start a discussion? or can only admins start rfc’s?.
ChefBear01 (talk) 06:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
ChefBear01 Thank you for your additional input.
The subject of the article needs to be notable - notability means "worthy to be noted" - it is defined as a topic is "presumably" notable for stand-alone article or list article. The article needs to meet general notability guidelines and content policy. See below
(1) it the subject has received (i) significant coverage at least 3-7 sources for verification;
(ii) they sources need to be independent (secondary), reliable where by the sources talk about the "directly" about the subject in depth and in length and not only passing mentione such as from books or major newspaper and no Wikipedia:No original research;
(iii) no violation of copyright infringement (write the content in your own words which the content is supported by the sources indicated), unless the content is considered a public domain property;
(iv) the content is to be written in nuetral point of view;
Note:
(a) Reliable soruces - Reliable sources are those that are published, are known for fact-checking and accuracy and are independent of the subject of the article. In reliability the context matters - the age of the source, it's author and publisher all influence the reliability.
(b) Independent sources - No affiliated/connection/associated/ with the subject of an article. -
I have a quick look at your draft article and I noticed you put a lot of effort into this article. Although there are many sources, many of them are not reliable enough. You might want to search for more reliable sources such as from major newspaper such as The Guardian newspaper or reliable magazine such The Economist to support the content of the article. I would say if you have min five of such sources that would be good.
When a draft article (AfC) is accepted by a AfC reviewer/patroller, then the article will be place in the main space. If the article is already move to main space, the article will be review by a new page reviewer. This means the draft article will be reviewed twice if the AfC article reviewer does not have both AfC and new page reviewer right. Once the article is reviewed, then the article can be indexed in Google which means it can be search in Google. However, to say all that, even the article is accepted by the new page reviewer and the article is in the misspace, if any editor think the article does not meet the notability guidelines, then the article can be nominated for deletion (AfD). A discussion in AfD will be opened and interested editors would discussion if the article does actually meet the notability guidelines. The outcomes of the AfD could be a keep, delete, redirect, draftify or merge. If the article voted for a keep, then the article will remain in Wikipdia main space. Do note an article could be re-nominated unlimited amount of times for AfD, if the article is still not meeting the notability guidelines even it survived the previous AfD discussion. In short only articles that are truly meet the notability guidelines remains in Wikipedia for good.
If you have further questions, pls let me know. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia(talk) 09:23, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #461

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Discussions
    • Closed request for adminship: Minorax, welcome onboard!
  • Development
    • The dev team spent the last week prototyping a few things to learn if some things would be feasible/a good idea. Among other things we tried building a small tool to connect Senses to Items, looked into the different types of ontology issues that can be found on Wikidata and checked what using a document store for data storage would look like.
    • Note: from March 29th until April 12th, Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) is not available to answer messages. If you have any requests for the development team, please ask on Contact the development team. For any emergency, you can contact Lea Lacroix (WMDE). Because of Easter holidays in Germany, the upcoming newsletter will be issued one day later, on April 6th.

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Lea Lacroix (WMDE) 13:50, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-13

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • Some very old web browsers don’t work well with the Wikimedia wikis. Some old code for browsers that used to be supported is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. [9]
  • Advanced item IRC recent changes feeds have been moved to a new server. Make sure all tools automatically reconnect to irc.wikimedia.org and not to the name of any specific server. Users should also consider switching to the more modern EventStreams. [10]

Problems

  • When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split. It might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. [11]
  • Some translatable pages on Meta could not be edited. This was because of a bug in the translation tool. The new MediaWiki version was delayed because of problems like this. [12][13]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 30 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 31 March. It will be on all wikis from 1 April (calendar).

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

17:29, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cassiopeia/Archive_59&oldid=1059023573"