User talk:Sjö/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Hi, why did you revert my edit with the image for Ä?

To be clear, I moved the image because it's easier to see it there. Is there any reason why you reverted? Thanks! MEisSCAMMER (talk) 22:41, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I made a mistake. Since the page size decreased by 196 bytes and I didn't see any of the removed content from the earlier version I assumed it was vandalism. I have reverted to your version. Sjö (talk) 07:33, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For reverting vandalism on my talk. Thank you very much. Keep up the great work.  :) Ashleyyoursmile! 08:39, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Why did you remove the racial controversy section from This Is Not a Theatre Company?

Please explain how a post from a former employee with screenshots of email exchanges with the director of the company does not constitute a reliable source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.49.27.134 (talk) 18:53, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Please see WP:RS for what counts as reliable sources on Wikipedia. Also, because this is only sourced to someone's social media it also fails WP:DUE:"in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources".Sjö (talk) 19:02, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thank you for reverting vandalism on my user page. ☎️ Churot DancePop 15:30, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Edits on Grossmont Alumni

Hello you removed the addition I made to the Grossmont High School Notable Alumni page. What resources do you need as I provided a citation originally? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.245.110.34 (talk) 16:26, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi! You would need a reliable source that specifically says that she went to that school, such as an interview in a reputable newspaper or on a reputable news site. Our content guideline Wikipedia:Reliable sources says that content that can be challenged should sourced to "reliable, published sources". A reputable newspaper or a reputable news site is generally considered a reliable source, but not personal knowledge, most blogs or email someone sent (because only the person who received them can check them). Katarina Schweitzer's own web page or social media mightbe OK for non-controversial statements about herself. A source does not have to be online, but it is preferred as it makes it easier for everyone to check that the source does support the text.

You also have to add the source to the article. If you click the "Edit" button there is a "Cite" button over the editing window. The "Automatic" function will work for most links. Sjö (talk) 17:09, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Now that reliable sources has been cancelled for Fake News, do we have to continue to use it to mislead the public? 104.188.120.127 (talk) 17:40, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

I have no idea what you mean with ”reliable sources cancelled”.Sjö (talk) 17:59, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

There is several websites stating that she went to that school: https://www.baltimoresun.com/sdut-el-cajon-student-wins-legion-valor-award-2011oct27-story.html She is a graduate in 2012

Here is the website stating that she is Miss Idaho USA http://missidahousa.com/reigning/

as well as the wiki site https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miss_Idaho_USA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.245.110.34 (talk) 19:07, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

The Baltimore Sun article isn't available in Sweden, so I haven't read it. But I would say that it is not a sufficient source, since it could be another Katarina Schweitzer that went to Grossmont High. You could look for some local news site or even the school for some coverage along the lines of "Our Katarina Schweitzer became miss Idaho".

And I strongly urge you to create an account. The IP that you use has a history of vandalism which means that any edits from it will be suspected and will be likely to be reverted. Sjö (talk) 06:17, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

1326?

Why do you want Engelbrekt's year of death to precede his murder by 10 years?! Surely that's not in the ref you provided? Do you not read what you reinstate? Shall I revert this again, with the same edit summary about an obviously incorrect year, an edit summary which you then might ignore again, or will you fix it now? Just askin'. Best wishes, --SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:00, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

What's with the snark about what is an obvious typo? If you read the ref you will see that it lists the year as 1436. You could have corrected the mistake in much less time than it took you to post a rude section to my user talk.

And since you have taken the confrontational path: I didn't mention it in my edit comment, out of consideration for a fellow editor, but the ne.se source was already in the article when you removed the dates as "unsourced". You could easily have found the source and corrected the typo instead of obnoxiously assuming bad faith.Sjö (talk) 19:39, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

My main question was "Do you not read what you reinstate?" after my very clear edit summary about an incorrect date. Looked like you just didn't care about it, perhaps because I'm the one who wrote it. I get that a lot. Wanted to find out about your attitude. Sincerely sorry you got so offended. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:51, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

No Idea what you are on about.

Hey Sjo,,

Never edited anything about HPV vaccines or otherwise. In fact never edit or add to Wikipedia in any shape or form. As the one of the formulators of the Robinson paradox I refrain from such actions. please refrain from any contact with me with such spurious , and frankly bizarre , issues.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.129.79.49 (talk • contribs)

IP addresses can be shared by many people and the users can change over time. This means that messages left on a IP adress talk page can be read by people other than the intended recipient. In this case the warning was about this edit made ten days ago. I hope this clears up everything. Sjö (talk) 06:22, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Holt, "Trumpism"

As with all my recent edits, I introduced a neutral point of view to this entry, which had been tendentious. If you cannot recognize left-wing bias, that is your and Wikipedia's problem.

Wikipedia is supposed to be factual, not a playground for leftists to insult and mischaracterize with impunity.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.216.95.227 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit seemed less than neutral and also unsourced which is why I removed it. Sjö (talk) 18:14, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

148.3.14.104

I blocked him for a month but as for a global lock—per Wikipedia:Global actions that can only be done by a steward, either by request on meta or through the stewards email list (as you should probably also know as a svwiki admin). AIV really isn't the place to request them. Daniel Case (talk) 05:33, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I guess it differs between language versions. Thanks for the information. Sjö (talk) 05:35, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

hi

No Idea what you are on about — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imran8789 (talk • contribs)

Your edit removed sourced content and then in a later edit you introduced unsourced content. Wikipedia relies on content in the articles reflecting the content in reliable sources, which is why I removed your edits. My edit comment mentioned that you did that without any explanation in the box marked "Edit summary". Please see Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia with helpful information for new editors. Sjö (talk) 08:34, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

2603.9907

Don't worry, that persistent disruptive editor with the roaming ip address from Florida has been blocked for an additional 3 months. He is really something else. Doriden (talk) 22:40, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for answering.

Hello dear,

I just forgot to cite the source, could you please check this source: https://www.sovereign-order.uk/kingdom-of-neustria

Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historian John Albert U.K (talk • contribs) 21:25, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

I do not think that is a reliable source. The organization appears to be unknown, and anyone can put up a website that supports their point of view. Sourcing from news organizations, scholars, and public records are much better. Sjö (talk) 21:41, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Inflation

Dear Sjoe

Missing income from exports is not leading to inflation . I will try to explain a single time on the article, but please do research on yourself .

Rule of thumb for you, an increase in quantity of money through growth of GNI and GDP is demand pulled inflation for example . Your statement is therefore inherently flawed ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dark Flow (talk • contribs)

Not in itself, no. But if the government is dependent on export for its income and tries to replace the lost income in a way that increases the amount of money in circulation (without a corresponding increase in production) it can cause inflation. I see that you have expanded the section. Good job!Sjö (talk) 18:24, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Re: Mango sticky rice?

Hello,

Just look at the page now since my edits. Wow they've vampirerized my original post. It is now completely unrecognizable. I noticed that you had added a "citation needed " tag on one of the "In Laos" section line. Have you read my original post instead of the trimmed, dare I say vandalized versions?

Thank you, 416ixfarm 416ixfarm (talk) 10:32, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

I checked the version but I don't think it adds much. The sources you added (those that can be found online) did not support the text you added (some of them didn't even mention mangoes), and if there is a section called History you would expect it to be about the history of Mango sticky rice, not about mangoes. Please find sources that support the text you wan to add. Sjö (talk) 11:26, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank for the quick response, and I appreciate your feedback, I am still trying to learn Wikipedia. I, maybe, should have put some of the info in the "In Laos" section instead of "History". Just want to be completely understand about the original statement regarding how glutinous rice, for context, was cultivated by Lao people in the Great Mekong Sub-region for approx. 4000-6000 years and its souces were removed because My original sources didn't mentioned mangoes?

What about the statement regarding the 16th century Xieng Mieng manuscripts that mentioned mango and sticky rice? That statement was in Reference to how deeply ingrained it is in Lao culture to the point where it is in our folklore.

I will definitely find more sources stating Lao peole eat mangoes too as well.

From what I am seeing regarding references on the page, people seems to have have no problem with blogs, articles or TV Shows in Thai (that most English people can't read/understand), it seems like the people who screams the loudest and can have a group of people help coordinating an edit war usually wins SMH.

Thank you, 416ixfarm

Well, if the main point in the sentence preceding the reference is that mango sticky rice is a common dessert in Laos, the reference should support that fact. It happens all the time that people add a reference that looks like it supports a main point, but really only supports a minor point. Then the main point looks supported, but it is not. Sjö (talk) 18:33, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Why did you remove my soup 2 years ago?

It still keeps me up at night Kateyelkovan (talk) 06:19, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't have any idea which edit you mean.Sjö (talk) 17:16, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Bros (British band) ‎

Hi Sjö

In this edit[1], you reverted Bros (British band) to some unspecified earlier version, but you left no edit summary to explain why you did so.

Your edit almost halved the size of the wikicode, so this was a huge change. Since you offered no reason for doing that, I reverted your edit.

What happened here? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:50, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

I have no idea. I must have edited an older version without noticing it. Thanks for reverting my mistake. Sjö (talk) 12:48, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

thanks for the revert on hate speech page

I've never been able to do that "multi-revert" thing without mucking the page up, so I was hoping you would be by to fix it. Agreed with your rationale for the revert. Thanks. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 16:46, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mr Serjeant Buzfuz: Thanks for the kind words. I used the rollback feature, you could get it too if you regularly encounter vandalism and want to revert it. Wikipedia:Rollback has all the information you need including a link to Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback. Sjö (talk) 07:21, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

New Page Review queue September 2021

Hello Sjö,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.

---

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. (t · c) buidhe 01:59, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

November 2021

Sjö, for future reference, it's generally not worth it to request deletion of talk pages, especially when there were previous edits to them (as this one did—I was the one who created it). In this case, it would have been better to simply revert whatever the addition of promotional content was. Hopefully this helps

Kent2121 (talk) 06:25, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:07, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Swedish prime ministers

Howdy. I was going by List of current state leaders by assumption of office, which lists the 'next' prime minister of Sweden. GoodDay (talk) 21:34, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

It's like Whack-a-Mole. You fix one article and wrong information shows up in another. To be fair, everything happens quickly now, so mistakes are understandable. Sjö (talk) 21:38, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Korean mythology

Why I can't edit about seolmundae halmang in korean creation mythology? At least I want to know the reason about it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.142.77.79 (talk) 19:24, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Your addition needs at least one reliable source, see WP:V and WP:RS. Sjö (talk) 19:27, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Alright. I understand — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.142.77.79 (talk) 19:29, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Kahr Arms edit

Sjo,

The link referenced as the source for this claim is invalid. I have been going to this church for years and can tell you what you wrote is factually incorrect.

I am interviewed here by sky news at the 4min mark. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAwb5Pl71eM

Thank you, Mira Williams — Preceding unsigned comment added by Myrrh11 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

@Myrrh11: Nothing in the link above contradicts the two sources I referred to in the edit comment. Sources are important here, see Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. One person's say-so just is not enough. Also, since you appear to be a member of the church you ought to refrain from editing articles connected to it, per Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Sjö (talk) 20:24, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Again the first source has a non functioning link. The SPLC source is suspect as they do not make clear where they got the information from, they simply make the claim. For example they don't say they interviewed anybody to determine why the AR-15's were present. Here are two sources that clearly show that it should be "with" instead of "for":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wz3OgEgiek At 50:10 - 50:30 the emcee, Tim Elder, explains that the ceremony is not for blessing the guns themselves.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hundreds-of-worshipers-gather-at-church-hosting-ceremony-featuring-ar-15s/ "Tim Elder, Unification Sanctuary's director of world missions, told worshippers the ceremony was meant to be a blessing of couples, not "inanimate objects," calling the AR-15 a "religious accoutrement." "

Notice that unlike the SPLC article, CBS actually cited where they got the information from. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Myrrh11 (talk • contribs) 22:05, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

I'll copy the text to Talk:Kahr Arms#Blessing "with" or "for" AR-15's as that is a better place for this type of discussion. Please continue the discussion there. Sjö (talk) 09:12, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Swedes in Germany!

According to the Federal Office, 30,000 Sweden live in Germany and 29,470 Germans in Sweden. And I've been working since November, and you're breaking my trouble

i'll advise you to reverse this! Linus Hagenbach (talk) 07:42, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

I think that JBW gave a comprehensive explanation for the block at your talk page, and what he wrote is the reason that I reverted many of your edits. You must remember to support any future edits with reliable sources where one can actually find the numbers that you add. Please also add sources to the edits that you have made on other language versions, or you might be blocked there as well. Sjö (talk) 10:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Bucha massacre - "mass killings"

The wiki article on "mass killings" indicates that 1) it is a term used when compiling a list of genocidal events 2) the most common accepted definition for the term is the intentional killing of a massive number of noncombatants where a "massive number" is at least 50,000 intentional deaths over the course of five years or less.

Not every massacre is a mass killing. This is abundantly clear if you scroll down the mass killing wiki page and look at the table there to see what kind of events have qualified as "mass killings" in the past — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisanthusjohn (talk • contribs) 05:54, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022

New Page Review queue March 2022

Hello Sjö,

At the time of the last newsletter (No.26, September 2021), the backlog was 'only' just over 6,000 articles. In the past six months, the backlog has reached nearly 16,000, a staggering level not seen in several years. A very small number of users had been doing the vast majority of the reviews. Due to "burn-out", we have recently lost most of this effort. Furthermore, several reviewers have been stripped of the user right for abuse of privilege and the articles they patrolled were put back in the queue.

Several discussions on the state of the process have taken place on the talk page, but there has been no action to make any changes. The project also lacks coordination since the "position" is vacant.

In the last 30 days, only 100 reviewers have made more than 8 patrols and only 50 have averaged one review a day. There are currently 804 New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All 851 administrators have this permission, but only about a dozen significantly contribute to NPP.

This means we have an active pool of about 450 to address the backlog. We cannot rely on a few to do most of the work as that inevitably leads to burnout. A fairly experienced reviewer can usually do a review in a few minutes. If every active reviewer would patrol just one article per day, the backlog would very quickly disappear.

If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, do suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Sent 05:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Glossary of firearms terms, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bolt.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022

New Page Review queue June 2022

Hello Sjö,

Backlog status

At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000 at the end of May.

Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.

In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).

While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).

Backlog drive

A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. Barnstars will be awarded.

TIP – New school articles

Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.

Misc

There is a new template available, {{NPP backlog}}, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:

Very high unreviewed pages backlog: 13162 articles, as of 04:00, 22 November 2024 (UTC), according to DatBot

There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.

Reminders

• Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
• If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
• If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
• To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Notes

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

NPP July 2022 backlog drive is on!

New Page Patrol | July 2022 Backlog Drive
On 1 July, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 20:26, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Mr.Blow is a racist

You removed the comment of Mr Blow being a racist as "uncited" the comment is completely cited and I posted the link that allowed the reader to see what he said and also published for all the world to see. He is stating that Mrs.Donham is guilty of a crime that she has been found innocent of on SEVERAL different occasions. 2600:1003:B863:EFEF:1C30:DDB8:7472:2E64 (talk) 13:28, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Please se WP:OR. We need a reliable source that explicitly calls him racist. Editors' conclusions do not matter at all when it comes to what can be published on Wikipedia. This is extra important in articles about living people. Sjö (talk) 13:33, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Respect for marriage act

The full text is “Imagine if Utah or some other state decides to grant legal recognition to polygamous marriages. Section 4 would require the federal government to do the same... Such hypotheticals don't much bother me.” Somin is clearly talking about a hypothetical, not an objectively factual result of the law. And it’s just his opinion. Google “respect for marriage act” and “polygamy” and see how few sources are actually talking about this. 24.209.186.103 (talk) 13:58, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

The place to discuss this is at the article talk page. Sjö (talk) 14:00, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

So you’ll revert me but not discuss it? 24.209.186.103 (talk) 14:02, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Go to the talk page! Sjö (talk) 14:03, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

thank you so much for your notice regarding change of name of Mr.Daryush Shokof to Shokoofandeh. Shokof is simply his artist name, and he has decided to use his true iranian last name Shokoofandeh on all net and global links. It is most appreciated if this most important undertaking will be firstly supported by wikipedia so that many others can easily follow. Shokoofandeh is his name also in his German Travel document which we can submit a picture of if helpful. best regards Belle Vue

Shokoofandeh is his real name in his German travel document. Mr.Shokof is deleting his name on all international media and related links. we are thankful in advance for your support. again most appreciated,Belle Vue "Management of Baloo & BelleVue Productions" presenting Shokoofandeh Lines of Fashion and Perfumes. 217.9.101.141 (talk) 17:30, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I have moved the discussion to Talk:Daryush Shokof. Sjö (talk) 17:51, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion over a topic ban for me, and you might wish to participate

The link is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Epiphyllumlover additions of polygamist information.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 20:25, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Talkback

I've just posted an answer to your message at User talk:J.yang 51163, but forgot to ping you, so this is a remote ping instead.JBW (talk) 16:31, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

30.09.2022 The President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin signed a decree on the entry of the Zaporozhye region into the Russian Federation as a subject of the federation

30.09.2022 The President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin signed a decree on the entry of the Zaporozhye region into the Russian Federation as a subject of the federation Дмитрий Примаков (talk) 10:44, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I know, I follow the news. The article should reflect what an overwhelming majority of scholars, news organisations, governments and NGOs call the decree: a violation of international law, supported only by sham referendums and the wishful thinking of the Russian leadership, and invalid outside of Russia. Calling it a part of Russia is WP:FRINGE and should be given the corresponding place in articles, i.e. if at all mentioned it should be mentioned as a position without valid support held by a minority of relevant people. Sjö (talk) 13:15, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Complete mistake

Thankyou for reversing my horrendous mistake on SRT Richard Nowell (talk) 08:49, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome. I figured it was a mistake when I looked at your edit history and talk page.

Sjö (talk) 08:51, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Water bottle

On water bottle you added content here resulting in a cite error at top of page. Cheers Adakiko (talk) 03:39, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Prime minsters elected

Hello! Can we agree that Swedish prime ministers are elected by Riksdag, not appointed? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:29, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

That is not relevant to my edit so I'll say "no comment". Sjö (talk) 19:46, 30 November 2022 (UTC)