User talk:Neljack

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello, Neljack, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! SpencerT♦C 04:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Change to lead of Jerusalem[edit]

Please see my comment at Talk:Jerusalem#Suggested changes (and please revert your change to Jerusalem before someone else does). -- tariqabjotu 06:33, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Elizabeth II[edit]

The question posed at the Elizabeth II RfC, at which you commented, has been amended [1] to clarify a potential misunderstanding. Please re-visit the question and your comment and amend if necessary. Thanks. DrKiernan (talk) 17:04, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

A brownie for you![edit]

Brownie transparent.png Great work updating Dezső Gyarmati! LukeSurl t c 10:59, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Sian Elias[edit]

Hi Neljack, no issue with your raising the attribution and paraphrasing used in the Sian Elias article. I do take issue with simply removing cited material. If you read Wikipedia's policy on copyright, you'll see you're meant to tag the material in question first, which is what I've now done. Also, don't threaten other users, I won't win you any friends on Wikipedia. --LJ Holden 03:31, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Neljack, there's no need to be mystified. A key policy of Wikipedia is Wikipedia:Assume good faith. Your statement that I must not revert your edits was obviously not in good faith. I realise you're new here so won't labour the point. You've now used the proper template and I thank you for that. --LJ Holden 05:45, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Neljack, I'm not really interested in litigating with you over whether or not you acted in bad faith. You've followed the correct procedure and applied the template. Problem solved. --LJ Holden 07:51, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Neljack, yes I've read the close paraphrasing policy. I'm not convinced that the contribution you've highlighted broke the policy, since it was attributed. But I'm not fussed with your edits, although I may look at what the QC said as I think it wasan important counter-point to other claims made. Cheers. --LJ Holden 09:49, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Neljack, no dramas. --LJ Holden 07:47, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Kate Carney[edit]

Your change for gender reasons was incorrect, as the article refers to a female and the professional description (in British English) of your change is male. The guides suggestion exempts specific descriptors [This does not apply to direct quotations or the titles of works (The Ascent of Man), which should not be altered; or to wording about one-gender contexts, such as an all-female school (When any student breaks that rule, she loses privileges).]

In some North American English, the word "Comedian" is gender neutral, but like most professions where there are both male & female terms, neither js considered neutral. The artist was described in contemporary writing as a comedienne and she was British, so it should be revert to the original.

DonJay (talk) 00:52, 4 October 2013 (UTC)DonJay


You have missed my point, the use of the gender neutral is not required here, as the article about a female subject. I included the relevant guide clause enclosed above in [ ].

DonJay (talk) 13:42, 4 October 2013 (UTC)DonJay

October 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Richard Northey may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Northey was a [[lecturer]] in Political Studies and Planning at the University of Auckland]].<ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:14, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Kate Carney (cont)[edit]

I disagree with your interpretation. Suggest that an administrator address this change. I am worried that this policy be used on too many unnecessary cases, but have no desire to get involved in a conflict. The guide states "or to wording about one-gender contexts, " with no limit to type of contexts and no suggestion of groups only.. Kate Carney, the subject of the text, is female and is not gender neutral. Your interpretation of the rule is too narrow. The exception is not only for groups but for singular persons as well. Otherwise the statement "Tessie O'Shea is a large woman" would be changed and become false as "persons" would include men, and she was not large compared to men OR there could be no "Best Supporting Actress" at the Oscars: to give over-simple examples.

DonJay (talk) 14:41, 5 October 2013 (UTC)DonJay

Thanks. I feel strongly over the unnecessary limitation of the English language, but recognise that this may be from the period & place of my education (1930s & 40s in the UK) . Other contributors should give a better opinion. In both Canada & the UK, I have found that female professionals generally like to be designated by the female form of their profession, even when supporting Gender Neuter forms for other usage. How is it in New Zealand?

DonJay (talk) 14:50, 6 October 2013 (UTC)DonJay

"Comedienne" is rarely used in Canada these days and most style guides indicate that gender-neutral language is preferable. There is still some debate over the use of the term "actress" in North America, and usage varies, but I would say that "actor" is increasingly used for actors of both genders. Most other occupations have become gender-neutral, such as "fire fighter," "police officer," "flight attendant," etc. I don't interpret WP's style guideline about gender neutrality to extend to statements such as "Tessie O'Shea is a large woman." It is entirely permissible to call a woman a woman when referring to an individual :) Sunray (talk) 20:30, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I think that's the sort of thing the exception about one-gender contexts is getting at, not gender-specific terms for occupations. I cannot recall ever hearing female comedians described as "comediennes" in New Zealand - they're just referred as "comedians". Neljack (talk) 23:36, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Tadeusz Mazowiecki[edit]

Hey, what is wrong with this fragment? I don't want to revert again, so please explain what's the matter. //Halibutt 10:33, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Request for Comment[edit]

Please see here Regards IJA (talk) 00:30, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.[edit]


This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Republic of Kosovo". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 00:29, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Marie Curie nationality, new options.[edit]

Hello, Could you please go back to [2] and indicate if any of the newly provided options are preferred? Thanks, Hobit (talk) 16:44, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Not Forum[edit]

Neljack, I agree with you 100%. We want material that discusses the institution. The particular section unduly involves presentations of the particular views of certain people. There is an attempt to tie in these views as being the views of the institution, but doing so is SYN. Thanks for letting me restate this policy on your talk page. – S. Rich (talk) 04:12, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, S. Rich. I think I may have originally expressed myself poorly - I was trying to find a middle ground that might make a compromise possible. I agree that the section as it stands is problematic. Unless reliable sources about the Institute discuss the publications, they shouldn't be included. I think the section should probably be removed, except for the bit referenced to the SPLC, and then if people can find reliable secondary sources discussing the Institute that talk about controversial publications of theirs then they can add it in. But I'm not optimistic that much progress will be made while POV-warriors keep blocking change. Hopefully one of them will be removed if the AN/I thread is reclosed in favour of a topic ban. Neljack (talk) 05:51, 1 November 2013 (UTC)


I have opened a new RFC at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style § RFC: Proposed amendment to MOS:COMMA regarding geographical references and dates for further discussion. sroc 💬 08:24, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

WP:BLP and John Tavener[edit]

The relevant part of the policy to do with posthumous death states: "The only exception would be for people who have recently died, in which case the policy can extend for an indeterminate period beyond the date of death - six months, one year, two years at the outside. Such extensions would apply particularly to contentious or questionable material about the dead that has implications for their living relatives and friends, such as in the case of a possible suicide or a particularly gruesome crime." I totally fail to see how this applies to the material you persist in removing, which is totally innocuous and indeed reports laudatory reports on Tavener early in his career. It clearly wasn't an issue while he was alive and certainly isn't while he's dead. The appropriate action would have been to tag the material asking for citations. Alfietucker (talk) 23:11, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Vishy Anand[edit]

Thanks for reverting at least one edit by this "Vishy Anand" account, which obviously impersonates the defending world champion. I have submitted a block request at here. Please continue to help keep an eye out for any further acts of vandalism on his part, and let's place warnings as necessary. Thanks! --Art Smart Chart/Heart 23:31, 12 November 2013 (UTC)


For your informed contributions to the WP:VA/E discussion. Would that there were more people like you. Alas, I've kind of given up hope on that front for now. Cobblet (talk) 01:57, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

During the original discussion Gabe suggested defaulting to remove, not keep. Nobody said anything for or against that idea at the time—I would've objected, but I was pretty new to the discussion at the time and didn't want to stop things from moving along. The issue was actually discussed a couple of weeks ago at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Expanded#Closing the #Regions discussion, but still it doesn't seem there's a consensus on what to do. Cobblet (talk) 10:10, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Let me go refill the pot :) Things were getting a little too heated at WP:VA and WP:VA/E for my taste, and I was partly at fault, so I decided to take a break. I've spent a lot of time working on those lists the last few months, and while clearly much work remains to be done, I'm glad that at least we've made a lot of progress. Even if it ultimately amounts to nothing, I've found the whole exercise a lot of fun—I've read so many articles I would never have thought to, if it weren't for this project. Cheers, Cobblet (talk) 13:22, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Neljack! Haven't seen you on VA/E in a while – hope you've been having fun elsewhere on the 'pedia. Gizza has been trying to improve our coverage of law and we could use another pair of eyes for this rather specialized topic. If you've got a chance, would you mind taking a look? Happy editing, Cobblet (talk) 04:10, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Your reverts on Alejandro García Padilla[edit]

We are having a dispute resolution about this very same issue at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard. Please cease reverting and join the discussion there instead. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 01:18, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Your deletions[edit]

If you want to discuss it someplace, I suggest you do. However, please do not edit war. I assure you, you will not come well out of it. And I found your comments on Overagainst's talk page about me unfortunate and judgmental. Please remember that everyone is capable of looking at contributions. Regards,--Wehwalt (talk) 11:13, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I do not wish to offend you, you seem an earnest editor with content skills. But I think you're barking up the wrong tree here. We can consult experienced, uninvolved editors, if it is helpful.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:32, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Neljack reported by User:Nomoskedasticity (Result: ). Thank you. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 08:14, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Please stop[edit]

Can you take a break pushing his button? While I agree with your BLP interpretation, you aren't helping matters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Two kinds of pork (talkcontribs) 09:07, 23 November 2013 (UTC)


I have created a a new report on the ANI noticeboard regarding the block of Joefromrandb. TigerShark (talk) 23:15, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 16[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Albert Clauson, 1st Baron Clauson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lord of Appeal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Arizona Territory (Confederate States of America)#Requested move[edit]

Please provide your opinion on the alternate proposal to move the article in question to Confederate Arizona. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:55, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Romani people in Croatia[edit]

Because you commented in the earlier move discussion, I'm hoping you can also comment on Talk:Romani people in Croatia#Requested move 12 January 2014. Thanks. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Clarrie Grimmett, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bill O'Reilly (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject Freedom of speech[edit]

There is a WikiProject about Freedom of speech, called WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do:

  1. List yourself as a participant in the WikiProject, by adding your username here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Freedom_of_speech#Participants.
  2. Add userbox {{User Freedom of speech}} to your userpage, which lists you as a member of the WikiProject.
  3. Tag relevant talk pages of articles and other relevant pages using {{WikiProject Freedom of speech}}.
  4. Join in discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Freedom of speech.
  5. Notify others you think might be interested in Freedom of speech to join the WikiProject.

Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, — Cirt (talk) 22:27, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Wellington Regional Stadium may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • location and state of disrepair. The stadium was also built to provide a larger-capacity venue for [[One Day International] cricket matches, due to the [[Basin Reserve]] ground losing such matches to

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:01, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Ideas for vital articles (10'000)[edit]

Hello fellow vital project member, I had many ideas for additions to the vital 10'000 whilst away and busy. But thought I would ask others opinions of the almost 100 articles that came into my mind before flooding the project talk page with them. If you have time let me know which articles you like and which you dislike, I am still looking for removals as well by the way. (I listed my ideas on my own talk page, here). Carlwev (talk) 16:50, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Australian sport naming rules[edit]

Hi, and thanks for contributing to the RfC. While I understand your answer to Q2 perfectly, it would be helpful if you could explain which sort of inconsistencies would be acceptable to you, in the discussion section below. In a few days we are going to have to figure out what the result means and I think this would make it easier for us. Thanks again, --John (talk) 18:19, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, John. That makes sense and I'm happy to do so - I was actually going to in the comment with my vote and then I realised it would go over the 20-word limit. It's getting late where I am, so I'll do it tomorrow. Neljack (talk) 09:24, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sambit Bal may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • author.html?author=31;genre=119</ref> Before joining Wisden, he edited ''[[Gentleman magazine)|Gentleman]]'', a monthly features magazine published from Mumbai. He lives in Mumbai with his wife

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:02, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Another RfC on naming[edit]

Please see the further RfC here. --John (talk) 17:39, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

ITN credit[edit]

--ThaddeusB (talk) 00:03, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Thaddeus! Neljack (talk) 02:42, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Palestine (historic region) topics[edit]

Template:Palestine (historic region) topics has been nominated for merging with Template:Palestine topics. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you.GreyShark (dibra) 15:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the Brownie![edit]

Thank you Neljack :). It's good to see some old faces returning and contributing to the VA discussions again. I appreciate your efforts to improve the coverage of civil law jurisdictions. I'm not familiar enough to make suggestions easily in that area. Gizza (t)(c) 06:06, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Hi, Neljack,

I just wanted to say thanks for your steady work on the vital articles project level 4 list of 10,000 articles. I particularly admired your turning to a standard reference source to help prioritize the articles about sports figures. I look forward to reading your other nominations and comments in discussion. The list of 10,000 is improving greatly from its state on Meta with your help. Keep up the good work. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 22:12, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, WeijiBaikeBianji! I really appreciate the great work you've been doing on biological articles. Referring to textbooks on the subject is a very good idea, particularly since it is an area where it can seem hard to assess what is vital and what isn't, with so many species, families, orders and classifications of various sorts to assess! Neljack (talk) 12:52, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Puncak Jaya[edit]

Hello. Thanks for your edit at Puncak Jaya. That list of "highest of's" has drawn my attention before, and to be honest, the paragraph still reads awkwardly, though I'm not sure if that's what you meant by "confusing".

'Highest of Australia (continent)' does seem redundant if it's also the highest of Oceania, but the reason it was there is because that particular distinction is what includes the peak in the Seven Summits list. There is no consideration in the list for Oceania. I suspect because of it being more of a region rather than a geological entity and it not being a traditional continent, etc.

So we can leave it out, unless in light of this you would want to put it back, or restructure how all this information is presented and then work the statement back in if it works. --RacerX11 Talk to meStalk me 15:02, 13 July 2014 (UTC)