User talk:Subtropical-man/Archive 2


User	Talk

Please leave a new message.

San Diego in-person Wikimania 2021 mixer

Saturday 14 August 2021: San Diego in-person Wikimania 2021 mixer

You are invited to the San Diego in-person Wikimania 2021 mixer on Saturday 14 August, from 8:00 pm to 9:00 pm at American Legion Albert J. Hickman, Post 460, in Kearny Mesa, San Diego. Join Wikimedians from San Diego, and from throughout Southern California, at one of a few in-person events happening throughout the world to commemorate the virtual Wikimania 2021.

Visit our event page for more information at your convenience.

We hope to see you there! --RightCowLeftCoast (talk · contribs)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for San Diego-area events by removing your name from the mailing list.)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:16, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfD you previously voted in

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devon_(actress)

I thought you might want to know its in AfD again.

Its back up again. You made some amazing arguments the first time around. Super (talk) 21:42, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the other delete votes they are also sock puppets. He has it least two. I am not using name because I am talking to a receptive admin r n. So we might get that topic ban. Super (talk) 15:31, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Supercopone: Yes, apart from break WP:BATTLEGROUND and abuses AfD templates and pages, I also noticed that this is a whole group of users who not only vote in the same way, use the same arguments but also defend each other. I used to notice (few years ago) that their actions by this group users are similar to Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry#Meatpuppetry. Therefore, I have left this topic aside. I do not intend to vote in the AfD on these porn cases anymore, it's just wasted time and nerves. If you want to fight to solve the problem (topic ban for this users for abuse AFD) or another idea: restriction option for everyone for example: each user can only create 10 new AfD reports per year and 40 votes on AfD pages per year, then you can send me a link to the discussion. Meanwhile, I'm out. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 15:54, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I started a ani on this.[1] This is some messed up stuff.Super (talk) 19:38, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, so sorry for dragging you into this. I just find the systematic purging of notable articles by a few users working together egregious.Super (talk) 22:16, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You should know better than to claim someone has a phobia

I'm positive you know about AGF. Doug Weller talk 10:38, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Hi - I've just closed the ANI thread. I did not see consensus for any sanctions to be applied to you, but it was a close-run thing: please take this as an indication that many of your colleagues saw your behaviour towards Spartaz as sub-par, and try to act upon that indication. While I am not empowered to implement an interaction ban on you, I would strongly advise you to act as though one were in place: Wikipedia is a very big place, it should be possible for you to simply avoid them. Best Girth Summit _(blether) 22:19, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. Regards. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 22:24, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edits on potential superpowers page

Hello My Friend,

I have seen you have been constantly undoing my edits mentioning China as Emerging/Deputy Superpower, however that's the reality assessed by many strategic analysts whether you like it or not. Also the edits mentioning were also done before by many users. You can see think tank assessments, as well as commentary by political analysts. It seems you are citizen of a country with anti-China sentiments & may be following biased news channels, but I recommend you to do self study before making any changes. No personal feelings. Have a great day !!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.233.84.224 (talk) 14:40, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@117.233.84.224: Must to be credible academic sources consistent with the consensus in the article. Also, your changes have marks original research/synthesis (breaks Wikipedia:No original research). Secondly, take into account that there are sources for other countries as well for term of "Emerging Superpower", therefore, favoring only China is breaking Wikipedia's rules (Wikipedia:Neutral point of view). Thirdly: the article is called "Potencial superpowers", you are trying to separate China from the rest by calling it as "Emerging Superpower" without any consensus. Fourthly, your comment of "It seems you are citizen of a country with anti-China sentiments" breaks another rule of Wikipedia: Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 15:31, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciated that you allowed my recent edits, & I agree with you that European Union should be tagged along with China as emerging superpowers, since their power & global influence is higher than India & Russia, however I've observed recently that user named IntForce is constantly undoing our edits, & vandalizing the page by constantly erasing the information with citations provided by me. Since I don't have registered account & use IP address (i'm new to wikipedia editing), is it possible for you to block or warn that used from further vandalizing the page ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.228.220.91 (talk) 15:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of official AEMET data in several articles.

Hello, I have noticed you have deleted official AEMET data in the articles of Málaga, Seville, Almería and Cádiz, data which was there way before my edits but another user wanted to separate it because it wasn't exactly the "mean maximum and minimums" parameter from the weather box template but the "highest and coldest means" so he wanted to specify that, we have reached mutual consensus way before my edits from yesterday. What you deleted was properly sourced, official AEMET data.

Can I ask you why did you delete that data? It's official AEMET data and easily provable in the file found in the link from the AEMET site. The "second chart" is smaller, and it has to be included separated from the main chart because it's not exactly the "mean MA/MI" parameter from the template. I can understand in not including it in cities/places with separate "Climate of..." articles but what's the problem in having that useful data there? I'm politely asking instead of reverting. --TechnicianGB (talk) 01:50, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @TechnicianGB:. It doesn't matter if the data is verifiable or not. The problem is that an article about the city is not a place for very detailed climate data. For very detailed climate data, there are separate articles for this (like Climate of...). AEMET provides a lot of climate data, if there are separate articles of "Climate of...", you can insert them there. The main article about the city should contain the most important and concise information about the climate of the city, there is no option to create more weatherboxes in articles of the cities, therefore, new additional/supernumerary weatherboxes will be automatically deleted from articles of cities. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 02:05, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Subtropical-man: There isn't any rule on Wikipedia regarding this, isn't it? Therefore they can be there, the boxes can stay at least being collapsed. Yet since I don't have time now and I don't want to make edit wars nor to involve admins on this, I agree with your point of view leaving that just on separate articles. But keep in mind many articles have separate boxes which are usually smaller and collapsed, in the latter example it's the reader's choice to see that data. But I agree. --TechnicianGB (talk) 04:52, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of hotels in Malta, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hilton.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perth

RE: 23:15, 24 March 2022‎ Subtropical-man talk contribs‎ 139,166 bytes −49‎ revert changes by 175.39.209.155 - old aboriginal name of a historical placeto use for modern!!! city is absurdal and debatable, a clear consensus is required per Wikipedia:CYCLE, WIkipedia:Stable version and Wikipedia:Consensus undo

'Perth' refers to a metropolitan city in Western Australia that was founded by British settlers/prisoners in the early/mid-1800s. It is my understanding that First Nations people who were hunter-gathers in the general area where Perth was founded used the word "Boorloo" to refer to a swamp or swampy area in what is now the area where the Perth train station is located. As 'Perth' and 'Boorloo' refer to physically and historically distinct entities, these two names should not be used interchangeably.103.101.170.85 (talk) 23:59, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding interpretation of WP:STATUSQUO, which version should be maintained while the Etymology section is being discussed. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Perth".

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Mitch Ames (talk) 05:44, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rhetoric

Please tone down the rhetoric at Talk:Perth. It's not helping; on the contrary, it makes it hard to take you seriously. Mitch Ames (talk) 23:45, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Sam Walczak ^Talk/_Edits 23:02, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Għajn Tuffieħa into Golden Bay (Malta). While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 01:28, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

You said 'OMG! Is this a joke?' in one of your edits on the Sydney page. I feel this is frustrating to see and turns people off from working on Wikipedia. Can you please stick to factual and civil comments as you have been asked to before? It would make editing disputes a lot easier for everyone.

Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sydney&diff=prev&oldid=1104910497&diffmode=source Poketama (talk) 15:00, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of FC Barcelona (disambiguation)

The article FC Barcelona (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Disambiguation page not required here. All these entries are also listed at FC Barcelona. Essentially "FC Barcelona" is not ambiguous.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:20, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please use an edit summary

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed a recent edit you made does not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits a summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! — Trey Maturin has spoken 19:55, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Topic banned and final warning

Subtropical-man, please read my close of the thread Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:OliveYouBean [2]. You are topic banned from two areas, both indefinitely, and both broadly construed: anything related to Australia, and anything related to indigenous people anywhere in the world. You have also been given a final warning for disruption; you're very close to an indefinite block. Please see the close for more details. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:07, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 21:58, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]