User talk:Tiger7253/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Edit war at Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore)

Hi there, with regard to the edit-war going on at Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore), per WP:BRD if you are reverted, the burden is yours to open a discussion on the article's talk page, not to resubmit the content without consensus. Please don't resubmit this content again without consensus to do so, as it will result in your editing privileges being interrupted. Note also that if the other editor doesn't agree with you, your remedies are to see a third opinion or to open a request for comment. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:12, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Hi, thanks for your message. The editor in question is unfortunately an awful, vindictive troll who has a history of edit warring with numerous other editors on other pages for the fun of it, as his history suggests. Virtually all of his edits are edit warring, and this troll has also been giving me a headache by spamming my page (thank you, Sro23 (talk · contribs), for removing his spam). His 'warnings' on my page were made frivolously, and with regards to the article Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore), he blanked content that I have tried to reinstate, which he then decided to blank again anyway. The content that I'm trying to resubmit was blanked out by him for no reason.

This person is frankly repulsive and I'm not going to mince my words because it's my first time dealing with a dedicated troll on Wikipedia who has also gone out of his way to harass other editors. He's trying to make me look equally guilty in this whole situation when that's hardly the case at all. Tiger7253 (talk) 11:00, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

As I look deeper, I believe the user is evading a previous block. Stay tuned. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:58, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Okay, so it turns out this guy was evading a block. One of the earliest accounts the CheckUser found was JohnPeterson. What this means to you, is that you are not under scrutiny and you're free to edit as you were doing. If you suspect this editor has returned to continue their disruption, please notify an administrator (easiest might be via WP:AIV) and please provide a clear narrative (ex: "Hi, I suspect X of being a sock of JohnPeterson based on the following editing similarities. __ __ __) explaining the issue, please link to the sockpuppet investigation I provided above, and please provide "diffs", which are links to edits that show similarities between one editor and another. And since this editor is "de facto banned", you can revert their edits as necessary without worrying about edit-warring issues. But please be sure you're properly explaining your reversions, and please be sure you are not inadvertently reverting an innocent party. And if none of the above was clear, please feel free to drop me a line with any questions and I'll be happy to explain. Happy editing, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:21, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Thank you, that's a relief. I've always been wary of British flag-waving nationalists (as this guy professes to be, what with all the British Army stuff on his page). They're usually incredibly condescending in their interactions with people from countries that were former colonies, and are often completely deranged. Case in point, this guy (with his multiple accounts, a sign of derangement) thinks he's the go-to expert on Singapore, and eagerly shuts down actual Singaporeans on Wikipedia for disagreeing with him. Reeks of colonial arrogance to me. Oh well. Thanks again. Tiger7253 (talk) 13:02, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

In my experience it's best to not try to get into the head of someone who's being disruptive. It'll always be frustrating because you'll never know for sure what their motivations are. Some people just have an axe to grind with Wikipedia, some people are just imps, some people are paid to forward an agenda... Who knows. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:47, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Republic of Singapore Air Force

Blind patriotism is not the reason for removing the several forms of the text regarding Singapore Air Force’s info box. The article is about the Air Force of Singapore, and not the fact that they employ four languages. We have a Singapore page which can tell all the readers about the different dialects used in that country. And if Malay is the ceremonial language of the Armed Forces, please provide a source per WP:PROVEIT. Lastly please refrain from trying to belittle your fellow editors, it looks poorly upon yourself - Thanks FOX 52 (talk) 22:26, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

@FOX 52: You miss the point. You have absolutely no knowledge of the subject matter. I fail to see why you're insistent on including specifically Chinese and Chinese alone when Singapore has three official mother tongues, not just one. My assumption is that you're someone with the impression that Singapore is a Sinitic state like Taiwan and Hong Kong, when it isn't. Tiger7253 (talk) 07:45, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Again refrain from trying to belittle your fellow editors, it looks poorly upon yourself FOX 52 (talk) 20:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

@FOX 52: With all due respect, I have better things to do with my time than go out of my way to 'belittle' strangers. I have zero tolerance for edits that are ignorant (this is an encyclopaedia, there is no excuse for editors making poorly informed edits - should stick to the topics they know best) or for edits that seem agenda-driven, which is a behavioural trait I've witnessed on this platform countless times. You're editing an article on WikiProject Singapore, so you should have some prerequisite knowledge of the country, but you went ahead and deleted two of the country's major non-English languages while retaining one. Why? Is it because the prevailing impression of Singapore in your country is one of it being a part of China, or being an ethnic Chinese state, when it is neither? Either way, your edit can be perceived the wrong way (chauvinism), so I'm just letting you know that.

Furthermore, I don't need to 'prove' to you that Malay is indeed the ceremonial language of the armed forces. I was merely trying to reinstate content that you deleted for no rhyme or reason; I wasn't trying to add or create content - I'd only need to provide proof or sources in that scenario. Tiger7253 (talk) 09:12, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi... Could you please be so kind to participate in request for comment on Template talk:Infobox military unit. This is somewhat related to the user above. Thanks. (Ckfasdf (talk) 07:32, 7 October 2019 (UTC))

@Ckfasdf: Hi there, thanks for leaving a message on my talk page. As much I'd love to back you up, this was two years ago, and I no longer have an interest in rekindling old discussions or heading into another edit war. Just stay the course and make use of the infobox parameter as you so please. If the other editor has a problem with it, keep reverting their edits until an admin steps in. You're not doing anything wrong since you're merely making use of a pre-existing parameter within the template. Cheers, Tiger7253 (talk) 08:22, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

no problem... thanks for the reply. I just don't want to keep reverting edit, and want to have final conclusive decision before admin steps in.(Ckfasdf (talk) 09:12, 7 October 2019 (UTC))

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Tiger7253. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

GDP image

Hi Tiger7253, let me reassure you that I did not "make edits according to your [my] whims and fancies" to article List of countries by GDP (nominal). I disagreed with the content of the diagram as it was inconsistent with the rest of the article, so I changed it. Clearly you have a strong opinion on this too, and either didn't fully appreciate my reasoning or disagreed with it. Either way, I have started a discussion on the article's talkpage. -- DeFacto (talk). 08:42, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Tiger7253. 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)

List of Singapore MRT and LRT lines moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, List of Singapore MRT and LRT lines, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 13:28, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi tiger7253, Greetings. Pls note that stand alone list do need sources just like any other article - pls read - WP:STAND. For stand alone list, group sources are acceptable and sources can be in any language. Once you have provided the source then click the submit button for review. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 13:30, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

@CASSIOPEIA: Hi there, thanks for your message. I created the article today and got a bit weary after keying in all that HTML to form the table, so I thought I'd continue with expanding the table and adding the references later this week. In any case, thanks for giving me the chance to incubate it in draftspace. Cheers, Tiger7253 (talk) 14:01, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi tiger7253, good day and take your time to do that. You just need to create a column on far right for "Ref." and use the "horizontal format" of WP:Cite Web if the source is from web. Pls read referencing for info. Once it is done, then ping me. cheers. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 23:35, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Tiger7253, any updates on the MRT lines article? Thanks. TheGreatSG'rean (talk) 13:40, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi @TheGreatSG'rean:, I unfortunately do not have the time to commit to significant edits at this juncture. With that being said, feel free to make edits of your own, and I shall follow up when I am able. Cheers, Tiger7253 (talk) 18:16, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Sure. I'll try. TheGreatSG'rean (talk) 01:26, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Article cleanup and rewrite

Hello Tiger7253.

I note your interest in the MRT articles and thank you for helping out! Would you participate in the the latest discussion I have started in the Singapore MRT Talkpage and offer your feedback? Every opinion is important and I do not wish to make further big edits without knowing the thoughts of my fellow editors. Thank you! Seloloving Thank you! Seloloving (talk) 04:05, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

GI

While I can see where this post would come from, I would not accuse him of pushing ethno-nationalism, rather needlessly trying to be a contrarian advocating against the usage of the term "Greater China", by using irrelevant disputes such as Outer (Republic of) Mongolia and even Vladivostok. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 19:09, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi CaradhrasAiguo, thanks for visiting my talk page. My post was informed by that user's rather brazen and clearly unfounded insistence on lumping Singapore into the Greater China political realm on other pages (most notably the Greater China page itself), which provided the context to my quip to them on the Coronavirus page. It can be a bit hard to assume good faith when the user has been involved in an edit war on the Greater China page over this particular issue. Cheers, Tiger7253 (talk) 19:19, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Please obtain a consensus before removing source-supported content

Hi. I had restored content which was removed by you in the Greater China article. Please follow the WP:Consensus policy: "If an edit is reverted and further edits seem likely to meet the same fate, create a new section on the associated talk page to discuss the issue." Thanks. --Matt Smith (talk) 10:24, 31 January 2020 (UTC)