User talk:Kraose
Welcome
[edit]
|
Terrorism vs terrorist
[edit]Thanks. That's embarrassing, I meant terrorism of course. Doug Weller talk 17:18, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
Adding non-existent categories
[edit]You shouldn't add red-linked categories as you did eg here per WP:REDNOT. Either create the category or eg use a more general category such as Category:Companies established in 1910 rather than Category:Canadian companies established in 1910. TIA. Le Deluge (talk) 22:54, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Breaking links
[edit]This move has broken numerous links between articles, creating more problems than it has solved. Who's gonna repair them? @Johnbod: --Ghirla-трёп- 06:56, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Gnomes will - plus I've done a few. The disam page has picked up a tag, which will alert the gnomes. Actually there aren't that many, and they aren't actually broken, they just take you via the new disam page, and are in Russian contexts where it will be clear which is the right choice. Most in fact should strictly be changed to say "State" or "Lomonosov" (and these still redirect to St P). Johnbod (talk) 14:36, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Morgan Creek Entertainment Group Requested Move
[edit]The Morgan Creek Entertainment Group move request to Morgan Creek Entertainment was closed, and I wish to discuss the consensus before opening a move review. Please see additional links/proof to support the move request from Morgan Creek Entertainment Group to Morgan Creek Entertainment: Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Morgan Creek Website, and IMDb Pro. Morgan Creek is commonly referred to as Morgan Creek Entertainment and Morgan Creek in various secondary sources, so guidance under common name shouldn't hold much weight. I'm hoping there is a way to resolve this. Taylor-winnie-bk (talk) 23:59, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
- Read WP:RS. When you are evaluating WP:COMMONNAME, you have to weigh upon reliable sources that are independent from the subject. Kraose (talk) 10:25, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]
Hello, Kraose. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 |
Closure of discussions
[edit]Kraose, I noticed that you recently returned from about an year-long hiatus from wikipedia and over the last three days have closed over 50 move requests and RFCs. I found some of these to be problematic. Would you mind taking a break from this activity for now? Abecedare (talk) 06:30, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
- FYI, I have posted at the Administrators' Noticeboard requesting that your recent closures be reviewed. You are welcome to respond there, if you wish. Abecedare (talk) 06:58, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
- Regarding Talk:Indigenous Aryans#Request for comment: IA/OoI is a fringe theory, the RfC-question was
Should the article say in the lede that the Indigenous Aryans / Out of India theory is a fringe theory as in the suggestion below?
- I stringly urge you to change
Extensive discussion has been made whether the subject should be called 'fringe'. There is no consensus to modify the existing text.
- into
Extensive discussion has been made whether the subject should be called 'fringe' in the lead. There is no consensus to modify the existing text of the lead to mention the term "fringe" there.
- to reflect the RfC-question correctly, and avoid misunderstandings. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:26, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
More closure discussions
[edit]Kraose, you closed a contentious RfC on The People's of Mujahedin of Iran talk page. Last year, you also participated in a contentious ANI report about "Iranian opposition articles" that also involved this article. Per WP:BADNAC (and because this is a contentious topic that requires an experienced closer), it would likely be best for someone else to close that RfC. Could you please withdraw your close and let someone with more experience and who hasn't been involved in past disputes close that RfC? Thanks. Alex-h (talk) 18:08, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
- I also ask that you withdraw your closure. I am disappointed by the fact that you dismissed, as you say,
"makes better sense", "look very similar" and "the content is related"
aspoor arguments
; those are of course decent reasons why two sections of an article should be merged. In any event, you closed a 10-6 discussion for the side with 6 participants; WP:BADNAC says that you should refrain from closing RfCs whereoutcome is a close call (especially where there are several valid outcomes) or likely to be controversial
, and I think closing in the >40% minority is certainly a "close call" in pretty much every case. I hope you will consider reversing your closure in the near future. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 21:50, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Notice of noticeboard discussion
[edit]
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Alex-h (talk) 13:54, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 |