Jump to content

User talk:Isaidnoway

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is a WikiGnome.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is more fun to talk with someone who doesn't use long, difficult words but rather short, easy words like: "What about lunch?"   — A. A. Milne


Folks, it is 2024, there is nothing wrong with using LGBTQ as an acronym on Wikipedia

        

A message from Villkomoses[edit]

Hi! can you recheck Heibai Wuchang entry under 2020s list as based on citation and sources was aired before 2020s so I moved it to 2016s ,since its gone should be moved to 2010s? ,also  this article is about Chinese Animations and not the historical ,mythical origins of the same Title, see "In popular culture" section of Heibai Wuchang and follow the citations I made there to see what I mean, this asides awesome thanks for the assist in making the page better.

https://myanimelist.net/anime/33562/Heibai_Wushang/pics Villkomoses (talk) 14:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the citation errors for you, and I think myanimelist.net is probably an unreliable source, since it appears to be user-generated content, I wouldn't use it, look for a better source. Isaidnoway (talk) 17:38, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pennsylvania Railroad class T1[edit]

Hello I noticed you and Shadow311 recently reverted an IP user(s) edits to Pennsylvania Railroad class T1. I just noticed that large number of edits have occurred again by an IP editor(s). You might want to give it a review.

Also, have you noticed any vandalism trends on Pennsylvania railroad articles? Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 02:02, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Classicwiki - my guess it is the same user judging by the proximity of their geolocations and the same pattern of editing behavior. I only ran across the article because it was listed in a category where I was doing clean up of citation errors. I'll have a look though and review their edits. And no, I have not noticed a pattern of vandalism on Pennsylvania railroad articles. Thanks for reaching out. Isaidnoway (talk) 09:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A question concerning screen readers[edit]

I think I've dealt with your concern about colors at comparison of anti-ballistic missile systems by adding a question mark to the status of the items noted as questionable by color. The other entries already had out-of-service dates/status and in-development notes. My question now concerns flagicons. The flagicons now display with the name "Republic of Korea" etc below - does a screen reader perceive that? If not, how do you suggest it be approached? I'm no big fan of flagicon decorations, but in this case they do help with quick orientation. Acroterion (talk) 01:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Acroterion, I didn't notice the Period of use column, so yeah, that column works, my apologies. Might I suggest to match the same terminology in the 'Legend', with the table, specifically Under development or In development and Unknown status or Awaiting development, so they match, while screen readers can not read colors, it will read those words in the legend. And the flag icons are fine because they are accompanied with the text of the country. Thank you for reaching out on this issue, I appreciate it. I will remove the tag since it is not required. Isaidnoway (talk) 02:29, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think I'll make the wording consistent throughout, there's really no distinction between "under development," "in development," etc., it was just the way it developed over several days of editing. Thanks for your help, that table format isn't something I've worked with very much, almost everything I've done has been in prose. Acroterion (talk) 12:05, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C[edit]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of sovereign states by date of formation[edit]

Issue is resolved. Mistake was not mine. Wtmitchell responded on his talk page Isaidnoway (talk) 03:08, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Your edit here unreverted a reversion I had made here. Please re-read WP:BRD. Please do not WP:Edit War. The edit summary of my reversion had said: Reverted good faith edits by Isaidnoway (talk): The reason for removing the clarifying quotation was not explained. Your unreversion said: Undid revision 1223404102 by Wtmitchell (talk) *clarifying quotation* was not removed, as can clearly be seen in the ref. The quote at issue reads: "The sovereignty of a State is co-extensive with its territorial limits.", and can clearly not be seen in any ref in the article following your unreversion. Please fix this. If you disagree, please take this to the article talk page. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:15, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you have also left a message on my talk page. I'll take another look at this and respond there. One of us got this wrong, and I do not discount the possibility that the mistake might have been mine. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Work and publisher[edit]

A television station is a publisher, not a work: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hackney_Diamonds_Tour&diff=next&oldid=1225407935 Please undo this. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:09, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Justin - No, I will not undo a valid and legitimate edit. The work parameter is an acceptable use for the cite news template, as shown in the template documentation, and I have used the work parameter thousands of times in the cite news template when creating references. Additionally, the work parameter is an alias for the website parameter, and the source for the information comes from a website. You had no cause to change a valid citation in the first place. Moving it to the references section per WP:LDR is fine, but you had absolutely no reason to redo a citation to your personal preference. Please leave it alone. Thanks. Isaidnoway (talk) 13:40, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did have a reason, which is that the news station was the publisher, so I listed it as the publisher. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:16, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, you just needed to add a ref name and move it to the references section. Instead, you changed the citation to your personal preference. Isaidnoway (talk) 20:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You wrote that I had no cause and that is untrue. I had a cause. The news station is the publisher, not the work. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, what I wrote is that you had no cause to change a valid citation, and it was a valid citation because the work= parameter is a valid parameter for the cite news template. If you don't like the fact that a news station can be used in the work= parameter as a valid use of that parameter, then you need to take your complaint elsewhere, because you repeating the same argument over and over here on my talk page is getting tiresome. Isaidnoway (talk) 22:16, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It’s a valid parameter, but you put in inaccurate information. A TV station is not a creative work, it is a publisher. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I already told you it is a valid citation, and I will not undo my edit. Your refusal to drop the stick is making me uncomfortable. Please leave me alone. Isaidnoway (talk) 05:18, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Response[edit]

Sorry. I did not mean to leave those behind, so in that manner I did "mangle" then I suppose. I just meant to remove the unreliable sources to that one site. I will go back and review now. Iljhgtn (talk) 13:42, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for looking into it. I appreciate it. Isaidnoway (talk) 13:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cut them altogether now. Should be better if you want to check. Iljhgtn (talk) 13:51, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not a redundant ref on George Platt Lynes[edit]

Hi, Isaidnoway! Thank you for your work fixing references.

I wanted to let you know that your edit here (presumably redundant ref in your edit summary referred to "JRLObit") removed a reference that was not redundant. I re-inserted & re-enabled "JRLObit" because this citation establishes that Joseph Russell Lynes was his father & died in 1932. This information is not contained in the skimpy "NYTObit". Peaceray (talk) 18:53, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic. Isaidnoway (talk) 20:00, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Giridih[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Giridih, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 06:09, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LGBTQ[edit]

I came here for something else but I saw, "Folks, it is 2024, there is nothing wrong with using LGBTQ as an acronym on Wikipedia" - what's that about? I've noticed it seems to usually be LGBT, I personally prefer the Q included or just "queer" though the latter is a bit controversial. MWQs (talk) 07:26, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's about there is nothing wrong with using LGBTQ as an acronym on Wikipedia. Thanks for asking. Isaidnoway (talk) 16:14, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Isaidnoway&oldid=1230094965"