User talk:WeaponizingArchitecture/2024

JOJO CHINO SADAME! WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 01:37, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, your current signature includes images which isn't allowed per WP:SIGIMAGE. Elli (talk | contribs) 00:21, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I cant have images in my signature at all? Damn, alr. Sorry File:WaRei.png WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me File:WaRei.png 01:01, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Elli: alr fixed it 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 01:04, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to 1996 Chukotka gubernatorial election. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:10, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

yeah alr, ill get the sources from ru.wiki later 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 03:11, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the map you added to this election is wrong. Berdimuhamedow only received 89% of the vote, so not sure how he apparently received over 90% of the vote in every region? Number 57 21:57, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, regarding the 1990 Turkmenistan presidential election map – I don't think the regions existed as displayed at the time. There was a reorganisation of administrative areas in 1988, which resulted in two of the regions being disbanded (see this source, which states there were only three oblasts at the start of 1990. From other sources, it seems the current arrangements were introduced in 1991).

On the same theme, are you sure the districts in the maps for Tajikistan were the same for the entire period? For example, your 1991 Tajik presidential election map includes Jaloliddin Balkhi District, but according to ru.wiki, that district was abolished in 1990 and only restored in 1992.

Where did you get the district-level election results from? Cheers, Number 57 22:44, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Number 57: The maps are from several result maps that were already on commons but in PNG/JPG format; in effect theyre all just vectorized versions of already existing maps. Hope that clears things up. You can find said maps on the same category. 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 15:24, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Unfortunately it seems the maps you based yours on are not right either. Plus a couple of additional issues:

1. You have not correctly duplicated the maps in some cases (e.g. the 1991 Tajik election there are at least two districts with different colours in your map to the original)
2. The vote strength key that you added to the articles is not in the original maps, which have no vote strength shading.

I'll remove the ones with issues for now, as well as the keys. Number 57 16:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

sure 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 03:45, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the Ukrainian independence referendum article, I'm confused by your statement that I standardized the map to be consistent with all other Ukrainian election maps that primarily use Oblasts, as the original map also uses oblasts. Number 57 14:46, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Im confused what you mean by "you standardized it" when i was just changing it to be the same format as the maps on, say 1994 Ukrainian presidential election 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 14:47, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused by your response. I am quoting your edit summary, which seemed to be suggesting you thought the original map didn't use oblasts.

There doesn't seem to be a standard for Ukrainian elections (several of the presidential elections have the same format, but then the 2019 one has a different one, while the parliamentary elections are a bit of a mix.

Specifically regarding your map, I don't think the colour scheme is right – the original map having very pale green for the areas that were only marginally yes seems to be a better way of displaying it than the bright green in your one. Your map also has a incorrectly capitalised heading ("Independence Referendum" doesn't need capitalising) – and I don't think a heading is necessary at all given the map will only be used in contexts where it has a caption.

Something else to watch is that you left the key of the original map in the caption section, so the key didn't match the map after you changed it. In general I think it's better to have the key in the caption rather than on the map, where is is generally too small to read (even with your map open full screen, the key is still too small to read – I actually had to open the svg and scroll down to make it a legible size). Cheers, Number 57 14:56, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You know i can fix that stuff pretty quickly right. Ill do it later 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 14:57, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Yar Chally has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 18 § Yar Chally until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Khampat, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 08:51, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the source is right here... im not some foreign agent for Chinland, look at my contributions. 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 12:24, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:SYNTHESIS (a form of WP:OR). -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:34, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't count as "Original Research"... if you have a problem with the town being marked as under Chinland, take it up with the multiple people who amend that map daily. Then again you seem to believe im being paid by the State of Chinland... for some reason. 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 15:24, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Re this map added at 2019 Lithuanian presidential election, could you also add the key? It might be a good idea to put the key in the description on commons so that editors from other language wikis can take it from there, otherwise they may have no idea what the shading represents. Cheers, Number 57 16:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I had to rush it before class (also have a tournament) so ill get that done in a bit. 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 17:29, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WeaponizingArchitecture, would you mind using a different color than red for links to pages that do exist? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But why... Its not the same shade as red. Ive had it as red for years. No one has bugged me about it. 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 18:08, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It genuinely confused me on my mobile screen today. Perhaps sunlight, whatever, but the shade was close enough to make me think I was seeing a red userpage and talk page link at WP:AN. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok i can change the shade if you want 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 19:39, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Seal of Wichita, Kansas.svg. 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) 17:41, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WeaponizingArchitecture. Thank you for your work on Brotherton, Pennsylvania. Another editor, Noorullah21, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for being a net positive to adding geographic locations!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Noorullah21}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Noorullah (talk) 04:32, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sup pal, Thanks :) 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 04:49, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, WeaponizingArchitecture. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:1996 Chukotka gubernatorial election, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:05, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Mellk. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Donetsk Republic (movement), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mellk (talk) 15:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the source for "SENTIMENT" is dubious as fuck anyways so im gonna go ahead and remove it alltogether

also... referencing for beginners? Is this a joke? I've been editing the site for nearly 4 years. Don't try that. 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 15:05, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, feel free to remove this altogether. Mellk (talk) 15:10, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Nuwaubian Nation, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 00:16, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@WeaponizingArchitecture ok, pinged Doug Weller talk 13:27, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to your Smithsonian source. And we don't use Facebook as a source except perhaps in exceptional sources, which this was not. Doug Weller talk 08:49, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are news reels of it's existence, Ill snag them later today. 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 14:09, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's better, thanks. Doug Weller talk 15:57, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

addendum: The news reel is [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3jTvb8NiVQ&t=203s here (timestamp 3:10) from FOX 5, it's on youtube so I won't insert it right now. But I did add sources from the cult's website to prove that it is a flag

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

-- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 18:46, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

which page was it just so i know 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 20:10, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You've made edits concerning Zionism and anti-Zionism. As stated above, this is not to say you did anything wrong while editing about that topic (nor to say you didn't).

Also, unrelatedly, you really should remove those emojis from your sig. Or at least the one at the start of the sig. It comes off as mocking. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 20:12, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i'd assume it was related to the Islamic Action Front? If so im glad to know it's marked as such; It previously wasn't iirc.

Also sure ill remove the emojis, I never had anyone ask me about them for a while until recently. 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 20:15, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe it's marked as such. This notice may be issued for any page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, regardless of what editnotices or restrictions are in place. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 20:18, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

alr, well thanks for letting me know. 🤓 WeaponizingArchitecture | scream at me 🤓 20:19, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WeaponizingArchitecture The source you re-added for monarchism doesn't say that at all. Please actually read the source and see for yourself. Welfarism and anti-corruption are also both not cited on either of their respective pages as political ideologies. Please discuss the matter on its relevant talk page - here where its most appropriate and to leave a record for future editors of that page. Helper201 (talk) 03:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay ⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 03:13, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WeaponizingArchitecture, I pinged you on the discord, but you should revert your undiscussed moves of German occupation of Belarus during World War II and Belarus in World War II (and any other similar moves I've missed) and initiate move requests per WP:RM. These are potentially controversial moves and can't be made without discussion. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 16:31, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Were already undone by other people i have midterms be patient please ⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 17:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those were not undone. If you don't have time to make RMs, just revert the moves and RM later. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 18:26, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have permission to revert them, unless you don't have moving permissions (ive told you on the discord that my move perms were supposed to be on commons, not enwiki. ⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 18:53, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've done so. You probably should refrain from performing undiscussed moves with permissions that you were granted by accident. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 18:56, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. ⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 18:56, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Syrian opposition is united under one flag, the original flag of the Syrian Republic^[1] Firecat93 (talk) 06:02, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That article is from 2011. I was a stupid baby when it was published. Please use more recent sources. ⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 06:03, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe that flags of individual rebel groups should be used. Should the flag of ISIS be used? They still control insignificant parts of Syria. The flag used by the opposition is the original flag of the Syrian Republic. If you look at footage in Damascus, Latakia, Aleppo, etc. today, that is the flag that is being used. Firecat93 (talk) 06:06, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are the significant factions. While most of them use the 3 star flag, the SSG controls many of the major cities, and Rojava is... you know. ⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 06:07, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that's fine. Firecat93 (talk) 06:12, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in the Syrian Civil War and ISIL. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

As a note, per these community-authorized general sanctions, there is a one-revert rule in place for all articles related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, broadly construed. This means that an editor in this area may make no more than one revert per article per 24 hour period, unless an obvious exception applies. Please let me know if you have any questions about this. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 21:29, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts were done to remove unsourced claims. I didn't proceed after that. ⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 21:48, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As always with these sorts of notices, receiving one does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 21:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @WeaponizingArchitecture: I noticed that you reverted the flag of Uzbekistan to the previous colors. The reason you said you did this was that I didn't provide a source and was vaguely pointing to talk pages off commons. This is despite my comment specifically pointing to the talk page on commons. Indeed, File talk:Flag of Uzbekistan.svg, has the sources I provided for the change I made. This change with the sources I included was allowed by User:Abzeronow. Please tell me, are you supposed to include citations in the comment of change you made? I will do this. The rules of this website are incredibly dense and hard to follow so I do apologize if I messed up protocol. The flag of Uzbekistan has been wrong on this website for nearly 2 decades now and I just want it to be accurate.

Also, this isn't directly related to you, but I need some place to vent. It is endlessly shocking to me that 20 year old edits made by people not using valid sources are fought tooth and nail to uphold while a legitimate sourced edit can be reversed with little to no instruction.

I mean no harm at all, I will make the edit again and copy what I said on the talk page into the comment.

Once again I would appreciate if you could tell me what I should've done. Thanks. Oscopo (talk) 03:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok i did not realize there was a character limit. pls help Oscopo (talk) 03:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Could you made a green version of the logo, with the green from here and here (sister channel)? Panam2014 (talk) 01:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

uh sure ⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 01:58, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Panam2014 (talk) 18:44, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe. This is a standard message to inform you that the Balkans or Eastern Europe is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. TylerBurden (talk) 18:45, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i've been editing these topics for ages now - what dinged it now. ⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 21:44, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1993 Yemeni parliamentary election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Party of Truth.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]