Jump to content

User talk:Remsense

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Origin of Chess

[edit]

I don’t know if you’re aware, but the original article, before I or you ever touched it was using BCE/CE in the first half and BC/AD in the second half. The information you tried to give me to prove your point literally said the entire article had to stick to one or the other. I was choosing one to make it stick to, and you reverted it because you felt you wanted it the other way, and tried to blame me for starting it. I didn’t start it, I was fixing the inconsistencies. I typically don’t get too annoyed, but the stuff you are trying to pull is pissing me off. I hope you simply just didn’t realize your mistake, and it wasn’t malintent. Have a good night. NathanBru (talk) 02:27, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I showed you to the relevant guideline, which explains which should be used. I actually have no idea where you got the "sandbox", but frankly you don't have a reason to be pissed off if you took the first passage that aligned with your personal tastes and ran with it regardless of its provenance. You don't just get to flip everything to your preferred system if use is inconsistent—that's exactly orthogonal to the point of the guideline, which is to avoid needless fighting back and forth. Remsense ‥ 论 02:28, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Quote exactly for me where it says that CE should be preferred. Because what I saw was half CE, half AD. It MUST be consistent throughout, meaning one MUST change. There was no existing style, as both were used, meaning a choice had to be made. I made it, and then you undermined it, thus starting this little issue. It says that it does NOT matter which it is, saying “The default calendar eras are Anno Domini (BC and AD) and Common Era (BCE and CE). Either convention may be appropriate for use in Wikipedia articles depending on the article context. Apply Wikipedia:Manual of Style § Retaining existing styles with regard to changes from one era to the other.
Use either the BC–AD or the BCE–CE notation consistently within the same article. Exception: do not change direct quotations, titles, etc.
An article's established era style should not be changed without reasons specific to its content; seek consensus on the talk page first (applying Wikipedia:Manual of Style § Retaining existing styles) by opening a discussion under a heading using the word era, or another similarly expressive heading, and briefly stating why the style should be changed.” NathanBru (talk) 02:38, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It MUST be consistent throughout, meaning one MUST change.
Please read the linked sections (MOS:ERA; MOS:DATEVAR) in their entirety; they are more elegant than I am in paraphrasing them. That's the point, I promise I didn't assign you some byzantine riddle. Remsense ‥ 论 02:40, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I read both sections, but neither was used predominantly, we do not know which was originally added, and we do not know the first person to insert the date. NathanBru (talk) 02:49, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can peruse the early edit history of an article to determine where an era system was originally added and which it was. If you want me to do that since I'm more experienced with the interface, then I will and adjust the article to fit. Apologies for the confusion so far—like I said, I really hate how poorly I paraphrase guidelines sometimes and prefer to just point to them all else being equal. Remsense ‥ 论 02:51, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can if you would like to. NathanBru (talk) 03:20, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Will do ASAP, thanks for engaging in good faith. Remsense ‥ 论 03:30, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February music

[edit]
story · music · places

Sorry to hear that you are not doing well! - On the main page Edith Mathis, who portrayed young women by Mozart, the video of a 1993 interview has videos of her performances, - yesterday's story. - "places" come with food and flowers, - sharing with you, with best wishes! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:49, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I point at a Japanese composer today, as the main page does, - listen to music for the soul. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:58, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 2025

[edit]

Hello, I think the Monarchy of Thailand and Highest Commander of Royal Thai Armed Forces pages should be combined. It's too complicated. Preime TH (talk) 14:33, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know far less than I should about Thailand (what I do is fascinating) to be able to be of help one way or the other I'm afraid. If you caught me editing Thailand-related articles, it's probably because I'm reverting a banned user who keeps trying to make the same changes over and over. Remsense ‥ 论 14:28, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw something pop up from you

[edit]

But can't see it now and it was too fast to read. Doug Weller talk 11:01, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for notifying first over totally the wrong platform. Remsense ‥ 论 11:02, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Which platform? Doug Weller talk 11:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Discord—I just happened to see your handle in the user list, but I should have assumed you don't necessarily use it so much. Remsense ‥ 论 11:45, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sort of every other day, that's all. Doug Weller talk 12:18, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The mail

[edit]

Hi, Remsense! I had sent you a Mail, but you haven't replied yet. You can tell whether you accept it or not on this talk page only. Remember to ping me! Regards, Xiphoid Vigour ༈Duel༈ 15:46, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did reply to the email! I definitely clicked all the buttons to send a reply anyway. @Xiphoid Vigour: Remsense ‥ 论 15:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Removing videos

[edit]

Hello! I have seen that you have removed some videos from Basque-related articles. Can you explain the rational behind that removal? Thanks. Theklan (talk) 14:42, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've explained it several times by now in edit summaries. Remsense ‥ 论 14:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, you didn't, and that's why I was asking. Now that you have reverted again, I have opened a discussion. Theklan (talk) 17:48, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Puyi

[edit]

What is your problem? It is important to name those who played Puyi in different films and series. Thanks to these interpretations, he is known worldwide, especially that of John Lone in the film The Last Emperor. On the other hand and at the same time, we must not forget that Yuan Shikai was nothing more than an opportunist who only went to the highest bidder; the imperial troops were superior to the revolutionary republicans, Yuan Shikai decided to accept the post of president knowing that the Qing dynasty would get rid of him when the revolution was crushed. JohnnyCastwhite90 (talk) 12:45, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:POPULARCULTURE. These sections are not obligatory on biographies, and they're nearly always full of clutter and original research. That's why we require actual citations in secondary reliable sources (e.g., not the works themselves, and not IMBD) to demonstrate their relevance to the actual subject. Remsense ‥ 论 20:08, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2025 March newsletter

[edit]

The first round of the 2025 WikiCup ended on 26 February. As a reminder, we are no longer disqualifying the lowest-scoring contestants; everyone who competed in round 1 will advance to round 2 unless they have withdrawn or been banned from Wikipedia. Instead, the contestants with the highest round-point totals now receive tournament points at the end of each round. Unlike the round points in the main WikiCup table, which are reset at the end of each round, tournament points are carried over between rounds and can only be earned if a competitor is among the top 16 round-point scorers. This table shows all competitors who have received tournament points so far.

Round 1 was very competitive compared with previous years; two contestants scored more than 1,000 round points, and the top 16 contestants all scored more than 500 round points. The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:

The full scores for round 1 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 18 featured articles, 26 featured lists, 1 featured-topic article, 197 good articles, 38 good-topic articles and more than 100 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 23 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 550 reviews.

Remember that any content promoted after 26 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2, which begins on 1 March. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:13, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wow

[edit]

How did you revert User:Mauricio Carrillo Sánchez1 edits' so quickly? Justjourney (talk) 01:37, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very haphazardly, with hammering Twinkle on their contributions page. My itchy revert finger that gets me into trouble sometimes has valid applications. Remsense ‥ 论 01:38, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination

[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Ostjuden on a "History" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:31, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Temporarily Retiring from Wikipedia

[edit]

Hey there Remsense!

You welcomed me and advised me in the early days of my Wikipedia journey. I would like to thank you for that. I have been on Wikipedia for exactly 10 days now. I created my first article yesterday. But less than 24 hours later, Chanakal suspected me of being a sockpuppet and added me to Wikipedia:sockpuppet investigations/Vidun Nethmira. When I received the notification about this, I couldn't figure out what to do. So I informed Chanakal about this in his talk.

I would like to tell you that I am currently suffering from wikistress . So when I was suspected of being a sockpuppet, I became frustrated with Wikipedia. I edit Wikipedia amidst the scolding and criticism from my family, friends and neighbors. In the early days of Wikipedia, I would edit Wikipedia continuously until about 11:00 at night, reading articles. I was frustrated by the scolding of society, and today, when I was suspected of being a sockpuppet, I became even more frustrated. When I spend my time and effort and contribute to Wikipedia, is this what I get instead of a "Thank You"?

For all these reasons, I decided to temporarily retire from Wikipedia. I was falsely labeled a "sockpuppet" less than a month after joining Wikipedia. This is the reason for many people who retire from Wikipedia. But at least they have been on Wikipedia for a while and have a good experience. But me? I've only been a member for ten days! Maybe I won't be confirmed as a sockpuppet, but I really can't stand all the personal issues. Even though I said this, I might change my mind and come back to edit as usual tomorrow (only if I hadn't been confirmed as a sockpuppet).

So Remsense, I think this is it (FOR NOW) Goodbye and stay safe while editing Wikipedia!

Hope We'll meet again some day! ✌️ XOXO Feroxidan (talk) 15:37, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Philosophy and religion Good Article nomination

[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Religious responses to the problem of evil on a "Philosophy and religion" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service

[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Ivan Ančić and Talk:Lovro Šitović on "Language and literature" Good Article nominations. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 2025

[edit]

I undid your revert on Charles III as I felt that the material which had been added should be treated in good faith, per WP:ASG. I think that the passage had been added to the end of the section which was the closest possible fit for the news update, and it also had two references (which admittely were bare references, but only needed a simple conversion to full references). The edit also reflected a current event that does not really need any explanation. My "undo" may be reverted, if it is, I will not be reinstating. SpookiePuppy (talk) 22:48, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I don't know where people get the good faith thing from. I don't want to assume that you haven't actually read the first sentence of the policy you're pointing to or have failed to understand what it refers to in practice, but I'm otherwise left pretty bereft of replies I can make to you. It is a totally unwarranted conclusion to draw as far as I can tell. Whether intended or not, it's an exhausting cudgel to repeatedly parry, and one that is irrelevant to the actual content dispute. Stick to what editors actually say and don't say please, especially given your concern is about assuming good faith. Remsense ‥ 论 22:52, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service

[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Old Frisian and Talk:Bungay Castle (novel) on "Language and literature" Good Article nominations. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination

[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2006 Yemen prison escape on a "History" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:31, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Language and literature Good Article nomination

[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Unexpected Destinations on a "Language and literature" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:30, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Philosophy and religion Good Article nomination

[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Ashley Null on a "Philosophy and religion" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-10

[edit]

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

Updates for editors

  • All logged-in editors using the mobile view can now edit a full page. The "Edit full page" link is accessible from the "More" menu in the toolbar. This was previously only available to editors using the Advanced mobile contributions setting. [1]
  • Interface administrators can now help to remove the deprecated Cite CSS code matching "mw-ref" from their local MediaWiki:Common.css. The list of wikis in need of cleanup, and the code to remove, can be found with this global search and in this example, and you can learn more about how to help on the CSS migration project page. The Cite footnote markers ("[1]") are now rendered by Parsoid, and the deprecated CSS is no longer needed. The CSS for backlinks ("mw:referencedBy") should remain in place for now. This cleanup is expected to cause no visible changes for readers. Please help to remove this code before March 20, after which the development team will do it for you.
  • When editors embed a file (e.g. [[File:MediaWiki.png]]) on a page that is protected with cascading protection, the software will no longer restrict edits to the file description page, only to new file uploads.[2] In contrast, transcluding a file description page (e.g. {{:File:MediaWiki.png}}) will now restrict edits to the page.[3]
  • When editors revert a file to an earlier version it will now require the same permissions as ordinarily uploading a new version of the file. The software now checks for 'reupload' or 'reupload-own' rights,[4] and respects cascading protection.[5]
  • When administrators are listing pages for deletion with the Nuke tool, they can now also list associated talk pages and redirects for deletion, alongside pages created by the target, rather than needing to manually delete these pages afterwards. [6]
  • The previously noted update to Single User Login, which will accommodate browser restrictions on cross-domain cookies by moving login and account creation to a central domain, will now roll out to all users during March and April. The team plans to enable it for all new account creation on Group0 wikis this week. See the SUL3 project page for more details and an updated timeline.
  • Since last week there has been a bug that shows some interface icons as black squares until the page has fully loaded. It will be fixed this week. [7]
  • One new wiki has been created: a Wikipedia in Sylheti (w:syl:) [8]
  • Recurrent item View all 23 community-submitted tasks that were resolved last week. For example, a bug was fixed with loading images in very old versions of the Firefox browser on mobile. [9]

Updates for technical contributors

  • Recurrent item Detailed code updates later this week: MediaWiki

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

MediaWiki message delivery 02:28, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Zappa

[edit]

Hello! I your edit here your 'edit summary' mentioned "non-pov pushing". Why did you feel that was important to add in this case?
Cheers! Bluevista99 (talk) 05:30, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Refer to Zappa how the majority of sources do, not highlighting aspects you feel are undervalued. Remsense ‥ 论 07:15, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. As for referring to Zappa how the majority of sources do, I assumed that's what I was doing, particularly with that part of my edit which reverted to some long-standing consensus wording. So, why the special mention of "non-pov pushing"? Bluevista99 (talk) 14:57, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion invitation: Ganesha

[edit]
Hello, Remsense. You have new messages at Talk:Ganesha#Infobox image.
Message added 14:31, 4 March 2025 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

KnowDeath (talk) 14:31, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Remsense&oldid=1278815036"