User talk:NasssaNser
| This is NasssaNser's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
| vn-4 | This user talk page has been vandalised 4 times. |
WikiProjects
|
 | |
| Wikipedia ads | file info – show another – #80 |
Requested Move, 23 January in Israel-Hamas war
[edit]Hello. I just wanted to point out, in case you are not aware, that a "Requested Move" was recently concluded which determined a consensus that the title of the article should be "Israel-Hamas War." Thus your Requested Move is duplicative and disruptive. Would you kindly hat it? Thank you in advance. Coretheapple (talk) 15:25, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe I am biased on this specific dispute, but the consensus on keeping "Israel–Hamas war" don't look convincingly strong enough for me to hat it. I am in support of a moratorium, though. Thanks. NasssaNsertalk 09:26, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip rv. of edit
[edit]I have already removed this article from my watchlist. I like to consider myself impartial. To many, Israel is of course committing an act of genocide, but Hamas didn't on October 7? And blatantly filmed it, knowing what Israel's response would be on their own population. This includes things too graphic to write, but includes acts committed against women and children.
Anyhow, as I say, the article is no longer on my watchlist. Regards, Kieronoldham (talk) 01:06, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
2024 Kansas City parade shooting
[edit]Instead of closing the move discussion here, should we not vote on a new title? --Jax 0677 (talk) 12:58, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe. I am not familiar with WP:RMCI, though. Maybe we can request a third opinion here. NasssaNsertalk 14:54, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
- Somebody else opened a new move request, so yes, we are probably voting on a new title here. I have no objections to that. NasssaNsertalk 15:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I closed the move discussion, not in the direction you wanted, but hopefully my reasoning is understandable, Tom B (talk) 23:50, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Tpbradbury: To quote another discussion I've opened regarding WP:COMMONNAME:
Supporters do assert that WP:COMMONNAME does not explicitly support the current title, as it requires a clear consensus of reliable sources to support any given title. They are correct to say that no such consensus exists.
I believe the interpretationdeparture from (WP:COMMONNAME) requires strong evidence/argument
is flawed, as COMMONNAME explicitly encourages editors to consider WP:CRITERIA directly (which may result in titles uncommon in reliable sources or newly-coined WP:NDESC titles) on the lack of a clear common name as asserted in said discussion. - That said, the no consensus result seems good as the current situation makes the chance of any relevant RM passing pretty slim. NasssaNser 15:05, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- COMMONNAME says, WP "generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable, English-language sources) as such names will usually best fit the five criteria..." You say you've opened a discussion but not where it is i couldn't see in on the article talk page or the common name talkpage? Tom B (talk) 15:30, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Oh wait I worded stuff wrongly, that's the close post of the 23 January RM. NasssaNser 00:41, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- COMMONNAME says, WP "generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable, English-language sources) as such names will usually best fit the five criteria..." You say you've opened a discussion but not where it is i couldn't see in on the article talk page or the common name talkpage? Tom B (talk) 15:30, 19 June 2024 (UTC)