User talk:Mathglot/Archive 9

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Mathglot. 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.

Hello, Mathglot. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "List of African-American music styles".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:36, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Lady Louise Windsor. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Reminder. Mathglot (talk) 07:18, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

• Talk pages consultation 2019/Communication/Announce/Phase 2
• Wikipedia:Talk pages consultation 2019/Phase

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Leslie Feinberg/pronouns. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – English personal pronouns. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at English personal pronouns. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, 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. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. — Smjg (talk) 11:10, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Smjg, Has nothing to do with English personal pronouns at all. Also, WP:Don't template the regulars. Mathglot (talk) 11:40, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Replied to your comment on Talk:Leslie Feinberg/pronouns. As for your concern about templating the regulars, you'll need to talk to the maintainers of Twinkle. — Smjg (talk) 13:14, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

For the record: this was moved to User talk:Mathglot/Archive 9/Leslie Feinberg/pronouns. Mathglot (talk) 04:50, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tulsi Gabbard. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

The WikiProject Check Wikipedia has defined errors which should be cleaned, e.g. ID 104 Unbalanced quotes in ref name or illegal character. If you don't agree with that definition talk with the responsible people of WP:CHECKWIKI about a change of that definition before reverting edits according to that error lists. --GünniX (talk) 05:37, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

@GünniX: Thanks for raising this here, but the proper venue is the article talk page. I really don’t care what your project has decided; that is not binding on articles over Wikipedia’s policies. When you get reverted, discuss, don’t re-revert. And please use edit summaries to describe the intent of your edits. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 05:46, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the fix made by GünniX at Rapid onset gender dysphoria controversy added a missing opening quotation mark to the reference named "GDA-2018", per the technical explanation of how reference names work given at WP:REFNAME. I'm not sure what policies Mathglot is referring to; the fix was a technical one, not a policy-based or guideline-based fix, as far as I can tell.

It appears that since GünniX was using AWB, some of that tool's "general fixes" were applied at the same time, which can make the actual purpose of the edit more difficult to discern. I recommend a significantly improved edit summary, such as "Fixing WikiProject Check Wikipedia error 104, Unbalanced quotes or illegal character in ref name". – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:09, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm fine with the fix to the unbalanced quote fix, and responded on the article talk page to the rest. Mathglot (talk) 17:51, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi - I was a bit confused by the wording of this sentence, sending a DM since it's under edit-lock currently

"The Equality Act would lead to nationwide anti-LGBT discrimination laws." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_Act_(United_States)#cite_note-hrc-1

For me since "anti-" and "discrimination" are both negation modifiers, it reads a bit like "this would lead to laws discriminating against LGBT people" (I don't think that's the intent)

A more concise description is present later in the article:

"The Equality Act seeks to incorporate protections against LGBT discrimination into federal Civil Rights law."

Maybe removing the first sentence I pointed out would make it clearer? (IMO it currently doesn't add much to the intro besides confusion) 71.198.252.58 (talk) 03:52, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Please see your talk page. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 04:44, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Help talk:Citation Style 1. Legobot (talk) 04:35, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 11 June 2019 (UTC)  Already done Mathglot (talk) 05:06, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I decided to contact you due one of your edits on Dalida where I noticed that you undid some user's work because he just changed some "invisible" thing g in article that left it completely same. As explination you wrote "good faith edit (..) if aint broke, don't fix it). Well, last week one editor just changed Dalida's lead from actress to actor, later explaining me that the genderless noums are more preferable and that actress is oldfashioned etc. I reverted it immediately because the editor didn't discuss it on talk page before the edit, and the actress ic completely fine (why to fix if it aint broke?). Even on my talk page where he started the discussion, the third party view invited by him used example of other actresses and agreed with me. Following that, some other completely editor made the change back to actor, providing simmilar explainations on wiki talk page of Dalida. I got a little bit pissed off but I didn't insult anyone. I am scared that I will again have the same revert problem as on wiki fr. I just don't understand how can even someone report me for reverts, or act like I should first stop reverting, while I just want to keep the article in original shape until the discussion is over. Dalida Editor _{please ping or message me}' 05:28, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

DalidaEditor, Responded at Talk:Dalida#Actor/actress. You were right to revert immediately. I'll respond more at your Talk page, when I get some time.

Yes, I'm not a fan of white space and underscore edits that change nothing for the viewer, and don't make the wikicode cleaner for the editor. Since it doesn't really do any damage, either, one might argue that there's as little point to removing an edit like that, as there is in making it in the first place. But I don't agree, because if it's on my Watchlist, I might spend time checking out the edit, only to find after looking at it that I'm wasting my time. If it seems like a one-off, I'll probably just ignore it; but if it's run through a bot or semi-automated editing assistance program like Twinkle or AWB, then I'm more likely to challenge it, because they can tie up a lot more editors' time, than just mine, when they make useless programmatic edits. Mathglot (talk) 09:31, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Well my watchlist is constantly filling so I haven't even thought about that, you have a point. Your "method" might help me in future to sort what is important and what not. Thank you alot, cordially Dalida Editor _{please ping or message me}' 12:59, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Mathglot, thank you for carrying out the move request on the above article, it's much appreciated. One question though: can the move notification tag now be removed from the top of this article, or will it happen automatically at some point? I don't want to remove a tag that may still be active. Richard3120 (talk) 13:21, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of German supercentenarians. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Sir, please, I hadn't removed any sourced content. I'd just "rearranged it in the right order." Now again the whole article is messed up!!! Please take a look. Also, I made the edit with apt citations. A user is determined to remove it. He seems to think that the page can only contain info that he approves of. Request your urgent attention. Destroyer27 (talk) 17:37, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello @Destroyer27:, Your comment appears to be in response to my revert of this edit of yours, where you removed 2274b of material. At least some of your edit seems to be an appropriate removal of a couple of phrases that are duplicated, such as "The Proceedings of the First Annual Conference of South Indian History Congress also notes: The word Tondai means a creeper", and another brief section. By removing the duplication, and rearranging at the same time, it made it hard for the diff utility to show what had changed. I'd recommend you try your edit again, but in (at least) two separate edits, to separate the removal of duplicate content, which is less likely to have opposition, from the rearrangement edit. Good luck, Mathglot (talk) 18:14, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Could you please help? I already am exhausted. Also please visit my talk page. Despite offering him several explanations behind my recent edits, he's determined to remove them.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Destroyer27 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Now, he's removed them entirely! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Destroyer27 (talk • contribs) 18:26, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (academics). Legobot (talk) 04:34, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done Mathglot (talk) 01:02, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability. Legobot (talk) 04:35, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done Mathglot (talk) 01:06, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Black Hebrew Israelites. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

On the description you provided within this edit, please read Wikipedia:Do not insult the vandals. -- Hoary (talk) 23:33, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

@Hoary: Thanks for your comment. We’re in general agreement about the goals of the (non-binding) essay you linked to about vandals. If you read my comments at the article and at ANI, you will see that I made the same point myself about not feeding the trolls.

The part of the essay that deals with well-meaning newbies and people not aware of the rules, however, is not applicable here. If you looked at my contribs you would notice plenty of Wikipedia Welcome messages left by me to people who have inadvertently vandalized an article, welcoming them and offering them tips. This is not that case.

This editor is a liar and an intimidating bully, who knows precisely what they are doing in issuing legal threats against a new editor trying to improve an article. There is no reason to be nice to an editor like that. Letting them know that you see them for what they are, namely, a lying, bullying troll is not a personal attack because it is true, and is a helpful comment to leave because it benefits the encyclopedia in numerous ways including editor retention of the good editors who we would like to keep around, so they don’t get intimidated and scared off by these malefactors, because it makes other good editors realize that there are people who will have their backs if they do the right thing and try to improve an article in the face of bullying opposition, as well as making the bully realize the jig is up and that they will face opposition if they try that sort of thing again.

In brief: yes, by all means be kind to inadvertent vandals, and welcome them if they are new or don’t know the rules. If you meet up with a bully or a troll or someone issuing legal threats, stop them cold in their tracks, and let them know you see them for exactly what they are. ANI has achieved this by blocking them for three months, which will hopefully make them realize the jig is up. If they try this again, they’ll either get blocked for a year, or more likely indefinitely. Thanks again for helping out at the article. Mathglot (talk)|

Well, OK, maybe. Except that it's not a matter of courtesy (I now notice that I grievously mistitled this thread) but of refusing to take the bait. (Also, blocking is unlikely to work.) ¶ As you may have noticed, I actually found evidence for claims that two people went through this place (decades ago). As for the other listed names I've looked at, they're mostly rather obscure 19th-century worthies whose hazily sourced (or unsourced) articles often fail even to mention the place. -- Hoary (talk) 01:11, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

@Hoary: I agree with you in refusing to take the bait, and when it involves only myself, I don’t. But this case was different, and involved someone else, who was afraid, as a direct result of the troll’s comments. My response was not about “taking the bait” in this case, but of defending the editor under attack and shoring up their resolve, as well as reassuring them that a) they had nothing to worry about, and b) I would come to their aid if they needed it. Yes, you’re right in a sense that the troll might take some pleasure in seeing the brouhaha they stirred up, but I judged it more important to assist this new editor and make them feel welcome, than to worry about any satisfaction the puerile little jerk lying, bullying troll might enjoy from my attempts to assist the new editor. A judgment call, certainly, but I believe I made the right call. If you disagree, I’d like to hear your perspective on it. Mathglot (talk) 01:25, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

I do like your new description ("lying, bullying troll"); it seems accurate. -- Hoary (talk) 01:32, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

But as for courtesy, or biteyness, or whatever, can I invite you to Talk:Foreign policy of the administration of Shinzō Abe? It's clear that I've rubbed up a contributor the wrong way. I regret that, but from my PoV some things are important and have to be said. Your suggestions as an uninvolved third party would be welcome (as would your criticism of me). One thing I can't do is commit myself to checking the veracity of the contents: RL just doesn't leave me enough time. I might assist in a group effort, however. -- Hoary (talk) 02:26, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

@Hoary: I'll have a look, and help if I'm able. Mathglot (talk) 05:07, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Good work! I've moved "Foreign policy of the administration of Shinzō Abe" to Draft:Foreign policy of the administration of Shinzō Abe. Normally when one moves a page one leaves a redirect, but doing this is of course inappropriate for moves from article space to draft space. -- Hoary (talk) 10:38, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing it up at Discusión:Política_externa_del_gobierno_de_Shinzō_Abe, and for pinging me. I understand what you both say pretty well, or perhaps I just delude myself that I do. However, I can't contribute in Spanish, and I don't want to do so in English. I don't know either the policies, guidelines, etc of es:WP or its non-codified customs and etiquette, but it might be good to make a clear proposal. Depending on such factors as how much time and energy you can spend on this, it might be something like "I am about to go through this article, assertion by assertion, [x] every assertion that isn't explicitly backed up by its reference. I invite others to help me with this." (Where x could be "removing the bogus reference from, and marking as 'Cita requerida'", or simply "deleting", or something else again.) Or a proposal to move to draftspace. I'd also ping Usuario:Taichi, as somebody who's already edited the article, who knows the languages involved, and who's an admin. These are all the mildest of suggestions; feel very free to ignore the lot. ¶ Incidentally, the article puzzles me in another way, too. Why is an article for es:WP that's about a rather general matter so dependent on (dodgy) appeals to English-language sources? -- Hoary (talk) 09:31, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of French marquisates. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

I just wanted to tell you that if I sounded rude it wasn't meant to you. I was simply frustrated at idiots who add words which are not supported by sources and really don't feel the need to further edit on that draft which I profusely regret of creating. Kindest regards. --LLcentury (talk) 18:58, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

@LLcentury: thank you for your comment. Don't worry, it's all good; I didn't think you were rude, just frustrated. It's all about improving the encyclopedia, and keeping the articles verifiable and accurate, which is what you were trying to do, so I appreciate your work. I also do translations, you know, from Spanish, and even from Catalan sometimes. The Spanish Abe article on es-wiki needs some attention, too, because of the problematic editing by Jeddah (talk · contribs); I may start a discussion on the Talk page there, and I could use your help in the comments, if you feel like replying there. Mathglot (talk) 20:04, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Ahnentafel. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 25 June 2019 (UTC) ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Mathglot (talk) 06:37, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:POV check. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 27 June 2019 (UTC) ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Mathglot (talk) 06:39, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

I was reverting (manually) a change by a now blocked user. I really really wish people were not so quick and would investigate a bit more. WP:ENGVAR is rather a hot button for me, and I checked that Canadian English was marked, and that 'travelled' is and was correct. Please revert yourself. Shenme (talk) 07:25, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

@Shenme: This really should have been raised at Talk:Feminism, but since you raised it here, I’ll respond here.

I see no evidence that the article actually is in Canadian English, and I see no particular reason it should be, as MOS:TIES does not apply. Given that, MOS:RETAIN applies.

I’m aware that a single editor placed a language variety template in 2016 without discussion, but this carries no particular weight on what editors after him decided to do. There are articles all over Wikipedia with "Use <variety-A> English" templates that are in conflict with the actual variety used in the article, and afaic, it’s the template that should be changed in those cases, not the entire article. I see no reason to follow the mandate of an English variety template that everyone editing the article currently ignores, especially when the rationale for using "Canadian English" for "Feminism" is so weak, and it was never discussed.

If interested, I suggest you open a discussion in the Talk page arguing in favor of the use of Canadian English, and see if you can get consensus for it.

If the main issue here for you is that you reverted an edit of a blocked sock per WP:DENY which I undid appearing to support a sock, then I get that; in that case please use that in your edit summary instead of the engvar guideline and I wouldn’t have reverted; if the change still needed to be made I would do it manually, without reference to anything the blocked user did. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 08:21, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

I have gone way back to before the 'me' epoch (2004) and verified that there were a perfect mishmash of editors contributing to the article, and with no particular English variant. (That was perhaps b/c US-centric to begin with? 2001!)

That said, it seems strange to point out to me that the language variety template was placed wrongly in 2016, without having yourself called this out to others, and previously. Even more strange, is that what drew your attention to the edit was my invocation of the WP:ENGVAR religion. It seems at cross-purposes to good editing.

One of the things I do is spend time trying to prevent wasted editing, e.g. Playing with your food? If we can head off future problems on a page, we should. Don't you agree? Shenme (talk) 09:10, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. And, not strange: I never noticed it was marked "Canadian" until you pointed it out above. I doubt many other editors noticed it, either, but whether they did or didn't doesn’t really change anything. And it isn’t strange your edit drew me there, the article is on my watchlist. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 09:15, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

I did a major c/e of that article. On talk, I've noticed you where one of the most active reviewers of it. I'd like to invite you to take a look at this; I wonder if it would have a chance at WP:GAN. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:06, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Goop (company). Legobot (talk) 04:33, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Catholic Church and homosexuality. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 1 July 2019 (UTC)  Done Mathglot (talk) 04:06, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Theodore Edgar McCarrick. Legobot (talk) 04:34, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Left a canvassing reminder, since there seemed to be some misconception about that; but didn't comment on the issue itself. Mathglot (talk) 08:48, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Hey math ! I understand the rfc problem and I won't add content until it's done. But as I said to PluniaZ, the ordinary reader who is not a contributor cannot know there is a serious and hard and bloody and dreadful and critical and whatever-to-death debate about this section. So there should be a flag (in French : un bandeau) showing this part of the article is controversial.😊

Le Vernaculaire (talk)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Silente. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Mathglot (talk) 07:57, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Waskom, Texas. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 7 July 2019 (UTC)  Done Mathglot (talk) 07:42, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). Legobot (talk) 04:29, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Archived already. Mathglot (talk) 06:28, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:John Stott. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 11 July 2019 (UTC)  Done Mathglot (talk) 06:55, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Christchurch mosque shootings. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 13 July 2019 (UTC)  Done Mathglot (talk) 09:00, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Apostles. Legobot (talk) 04:35, 15 July 2019 (UTC) Cancelled Indeffed sock. Mathglot (talk) 09:04, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 17 July 2019 (UTC)  No comment Mathglot (talk) 09:08, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fabiana Rosales. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 19 July 2019 (UTC)  Done Mathglot (talk) 09:15, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Music. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 21 July 2019 (UTC)  Done Mathglot (talk) 08:06, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

I have no idea of your local knowledge about western australia - but if you cannot glean from the article that in fact the periphery of the south west region - there is no overlap when it comes to IBRA regions, thanks. JarrahTree 01:20, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment. Wasn't claiming overlap of IBRA regions, but of the articles. After all, the ecoregion does contain the savannah, which is (lazily) an 'overlap' but a better word would've been 'contains'. Probably just adding the See also link without comment would've been even better. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 01:37, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

I dont think you get it - regions in western australia are one thing - IBRA regions are quite different. JarrahTree 01:39, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

I think I do get it; they are orthogonal, as one is more political, and the other is more in the purview of ecologists and it would be weird to legislate its boundaries, although there is an overlap in the topic they both seek to address. Is there a problem with the article you'd like to discuss, or are we just quizzing me about IBRAs for fun and giggles? Mathglot (talk) 01:51, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

my misunderstanding - I thought you were another editor, no need for a conversation... JarrahTree 10:03, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Calvin Cheng. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 23 July 2019 (UTC)  Done Mathglot (talk) 09:34, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello. I'm involved in an unpleasant edit war with User:AhmadF.Cheema on the talk page of Alexander the Great in the Quran. In May you were involved in a discussion on the future of thast article and said you saw the consensus as being to merge with Dhul-Qarnayn, presumably taking whatever was worthwhile in the Alexander article and deleting the remainder. (The same should presumably be done with Cyrus the Great in the Quran - both look like pov forks from the Dhul article, of very old standing).

Anyway, to help extricate myself from this situation with Cheema, I've asked User:Doug Weller]] if he would action that recommendation to merge and redirect. I've also suggested that he and you get in contact over it. Cheema will no doubt object, but I think his objections can be overcome - he can pursue his editing on Dhul-Qarnayn if the topic fascinated him so much.

And can I please retire now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.209.79 (talk) 05:14, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

I've seen your message and will help if I can, but I seem to be stretched pretty thin right now. Mathglot (talk) 05:30, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, and thanks also for the invitation to open an account, but I'm trying to quit Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.209.79 (talk) 06:05, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Why does this edit end with a signature by Mathglot? —PaleoNeonate – 06:38, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

@PaleoNeonate:, Failure to quote me properly? I see one, un-paired double quote; I believe IP tried to quote me (IP: use {{talk quote}} next time please), and quoted me including my original sig, didn't end with a double-quote, and failed to add their own sig. Can't look into this further right now, but that's my best guess at first glance. Thanks for bringing this to my attention; I'll add an {{unsigned}} to clarify authorship at least. Mathglot (talk) 07:00, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, fortunately sinebot did sign it in the next edit; it was slightly confusing of course. It seems that the address now has enough edits for sinebot to stop autosigning posts (I had to use {{xsign}} for another, I just issued {{uw-sign}} at their page). —PaleoNeonate – 07:08, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

@PaleoNeonate: Please see latest there; I added {{talk quote}} in a TPO vio that hopefully is justified in this case. I hadn't seen xsign before; I'll have to look into that. Thanks for your assistance. Mathglot (talk) 07:12, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

That edit really improved the situation, thanks. For xsign, it's basically a variant of unsigned which accepts a line from the history as-is such as {{xsign|07:12, 23 July 2019‎ Mathglot}} so copy-pasting from the history is easy. —PaleoNeonate – 07:25, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Niiiice... that goes right into my list of tools... Mathglot (talk) 07:28, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Mariah Carey. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 25 July 2019 (UTC)  Done Mathglot (talk) 07:34, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hessy Levinsons Taft. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 27 July 2019 (UTC)  Done Mathglot (talk) 10:33, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic TERF. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt]} 16:31, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

TERF discussion is here. Mathglot (talk) 23:57, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Guess I missed the TERF DRN, while on vacation or something. Seems to be in Archive 179, now, where it fizzled. Mathglot (talk) 05:11, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Mick Mulvaney. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

 Partly done  Reviewing... Mathglot (talk) 09:24, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Will do!

Rion9009 (talk) 20:12, 29 July 2019 (UTC) Rion9009

@Rion9009:, Hello, back! By the way, that red link with the at-sign and your name at the beginning of this sentence, that's what caused you to get the alert notifying you that you had a message waiting for you somewhere. It's part of Wikipedia's notification system. It's how you let someone know that you have left them a message. You can activate it using the {{reply}} or {{ping}} templates; for example, like this: {{reply|Mathglot}}.

You wouldn't need to do that here—this is my Talk page, so I automatically get notified for every change to it. But if, say, you responded to me on your Talk page (or some article Talk page somewhere), how would I ever know you did, so I could read it? I wouldn't, unless you triggered a notification alert. So, keep the {{reply}} and {{ping}} templates in mind. (Another way to trigger an alert, is by wikilinking someone's user name, like this: [[User:Example one]] that will also cause an alert.)

One other thing: see how I indented my reply to you? That's part of Wikipedia's guideline on Talk page communication; each reply gets indented one more level; we use one colon ( ':' ) for each level of indent. Please read about this at WP:THREAD, when you have the time.

Hope this helps, and once again, welcome! Mathglot (talk) 21:08, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Eid al-Adha. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Missed it. Mathglot (talk) 05:53, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Hey Mathglot! Thanks for the flurry of edits you recently made on Catholic Church and Homosexuality to improve the references, among other things. I learned a couple tricks from seeing your edits and will implement them going forward! --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 19:19, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Dear Mathglot,

could you please be as kind as to tell me why you have undone my remark bout the name #VazaJato that's currently used in Brazil for the leaks of Operation Carwash ?

I live in Brazil, I'm a native speaker of Portuguese (sorry for my poor English), I read the news, and that's really the name that's being used here to describe the operation.

It is a mild and harmless pun, and is in use by people in the left, and in the right of the political spectrum.

So, I fail to understand your removal in any rational way that I can think of. Unfortunately, your possible reason to undo my brief remark uses terse Wikipedia jargon that I'm not familiar with.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,
--Hgfernan (talk) 04:24, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

@Hgfernan:, Thanks for your message. First of all, your English is just fine; wish my Portuguese was half as good. Your edit to Operation Car Wash was this one; my revert is here. As far as the jargon used, it's true; Wikipedia has a lot of it, such as WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE in my revert. You can read the explanation of what they mean by clicking the links I left for you in the edit summary, or the duplicate links here. Let me know if you have any trouble understanding them. In brief, Wikipedia does not record for posterity every hashtag that pops up and becomes popular for a time. Blogs and social media are good for discussing hashtags. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, that records significant information of enduring importance. If #VazaJato ends up being something significant (I mean the tag, not the events it signifies) in the same way that, say, #MeToo is significant, then you could definitely add it to the article.

Additionally, your change had several problems of verifiability and neutral point of view:

• it misquotes the article – Your change to the article said, "The social networks have minted the name VazaJato for this leak", but the article says, that "phenomenon that has been named #VazaJato". (By phenomenon, they mean, leaks filtered through The Intercept). They didn't say who did it.
• you included original research – in two places:
  • You said, "...which is a pun with vazar, the Portuguese verb for "to leak" and Jato, part of the original name for Operation Carwash," but that is you saying that; the article did not say that. That is forbidden at Wikipedia. You cannot put what you think or believe (or know) into an article. Everything must come from reliable sources.
  • You said, "It is usually represented as #VazaJato, a Twitter hashtag" but once again, that's you saying that, not the article itself. (The article did use the hashtag, but didn't mention it; see use–mention distinction. (This is an important concept; if the English is tough going, try this version from es-wiki.)

So, that's about five reasons why I reverted your change. You could probably fix the problems in the bullet points by finding sources to support your claims. But it wouldn't be enough; you'd have to show somehow how it doesn't fall afoul of WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE, and also WP:RECENTISM which I failed to link in my edit summary. Wikipedia operates by consensus, and I'm only one editor. Perhaps you could persuade other editors that you are right, and your addition should be included. The right place to do that, is at the Talk page of the article.

P.S. Don't know if you care, but I don't think "social media" created the tag, I believe Greenwald did himself, in his 9 June tweet, issued the same day he released news about the archive. Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 09:05, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Wikipedia. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Abby Martin. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:SNC-Lavalin affair. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on cleanup, on both those fronts. - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 18:34, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Latinx, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2000s (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:23, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). Legobot (talk) 04:27, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Millennials. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2019 Hong Kong anti-extradition bill protests. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 04:29, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	For taking the time to leave thoughtful and helpful advice, even when it goes unappreciated. – bradv🍁 21:01, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

	Nice to meet you ~
	Thanks for being kind to other editors ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 01:56, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:One Piece. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Mathglot (talk) 00:12, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Signature Bank. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Mathglot. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Albert Cashier".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! CptViraj (📧) 12:14, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Undeleted/userfied. Mathglot (talk) 01:40, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Immigration and crime in Germany. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:U.S. Route 131. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 22 August 2019 (UTC)  Done Mathglot (talk) 23:25, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rainbow Honor Walk. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Apparently withdrawn. Mathglot (talk) 23:33, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Gud catch on Michel Piccoli! WP:PEACOCK annoys the bejasus out of me also, especially when it's full of WP:OR.

I do believe I'm going to steal your idea of putting links to WP activity in other languages on your User Page (I wish I'd thought of it). Up to now, all I've done is leave a link on my User or Talk Page in those languages to my English-language User Page. Narky Blert (talk) 18:02, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Richard B. Spencer. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Confused mess  Declined Mathglot (talk) 23:55, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

I hope I've added enough information on the subject. --77.230.102.45 (talk) 21:25, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

See User talk:77.230.102.45#Romani people and Talk:Romani_people#Exonyms vs endonyms. Mathglot (talk) 22:47, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Central Europe. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

 Done; having created Draft:List of central European countries by development indexes along the way! Mathglot (talk) 22:45, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Montenegrin language. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 30 August 2019 (UTC)  Done Mathglot (talk) 19:17, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Stanley Kubrick. Legobot (talk) 04:35, 1 September 2019 (UTC)