User talk:Linguist111

Contents

A message from AlexVulovic

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.

---

Why did you mark my page for spedy deletion before i even finished it???? AlexVulovic (talk) 20:45, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Mario Leone Bralic

Hey, I don't really see where Mario Leone Bralic is advertising at all. This really fits more of a CSD A7. The article really just talks about the subject and what he does. Just a thought. Keep up the good work.  {MordeKyle}  ☢ 20:45, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

@AlexVulovic and MordeKyle: To me the page looks very much like spam. Mario defines his life's journey through his three great passions – his passion for fine art photography and film making, his passion for sea travel as captain and scientist, and his passion for observing and honouring the differences amongst peoples., In the last ten years, Mario has founded Oasis - a group of like-minded individuals, involved in ecological restoration and committed to conservation. They are dedicated to the promotion and realization of sustainable development programmes, for the purposes of protecting the planet's ecosystems and repairing ecological damage throughout the world. He lives mostly on the Swahili coast of eastern Africa and spends his time, energy and resources on humanitarian projects worldwide, helping those less fortunate then himself, whose sheer survival often depends on the very little that Mario has to offer. – this is promotional in tone. Linguist ^Moi?Moi. 20:48, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I get what you are saying, but this is really no different that any biographical article on Wikipedia.  {MordeKyle}  ☢ 20:53, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Respectfully I have to disagree. Pages written in this tone are usually speedily deleted as spam. Linguist ^Moi?Moi. 20:56, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

First of all, page is created 5 minutes ago, it cant look like anything yet. Tone of the article is artistic because it is about artist, great photograper and newly promoted Canon ambassador. Its not near finished, just started. Third, tone of the article cant be judged objectivly, so that is your subjective opinion. And finally, I need 2 days to finish it with all the links and references and then you can judge. --AlexVulovic (talk) 20:56, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

First of all, page is created 5 minutes ago, it cant look like anything yet. – the page was written in a promotional tone.

Tone of the article is artistic because it is about artist, great photograper and newly promoted Canon ambassador. – See WP:TONE.

Third, tone of the article cant be judged objectivly, so that is your subjective opinion. – See above.

And finally, I need 2 days to finish it with all the links and references and then you can judge. – If you want the article to be kept, I recommend you remove the text from the article that I mentioned in my first reply. Linguist ^Moi?Moi. 21:03, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

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.

Elisabeth Brichet case

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.

---

Yesterday I created Elisabeth Brichet case (my fourth creation so far); could someone please review/curate it? Thanks. Linguist ^Moi?Moi. 01:39, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

 Done. KGirlTrucker81 ^{huh? what I've been doing} 07:37, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

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.

Speedy deletion nomination

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.

---

A tag has been placed on User talk:I have an unhealthy obsession for trolling Sro23 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Supreme Genghis Khan

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Blake Gripling (talk) 04:42, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

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.

A message from DDKay

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.

---

Hello, I have some questions. I dont understand why someone delete the Call out orders in every cycle from Germany's next Topmodel? I think its better to leave them there, because these are important infomations and the same is for Austrias next Topmodel. And why is Ukraines next Topmodel and some other Topmodel Shows delete and not in the list of the Topmodel Franchise? They are a part of that, too. I am a little bit sad, that so many informations are deleted in the past months and i hope we find a solution to get them back. Greetings from Germany — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 15:25, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

@DDKay: Hi, DDKay, nice to see you again. I deleted the call-out order tables per this policy; as GNTM and AustNTM do not follow ANTM's "call-out order" format, the actual call-out order is irrelevant, and should not be included, as it counts as an indiscriminate collection of information. Now, as a matter of fact, I have added an appropriate results table to Germany's first cycle's article, and I'm aiming to have one for all eleven cycles soon; in fact, I've nearly finished doing cycle 10's. As for Supermodel po-ukrainsky, I haven't found a reliable source which says the show is a licensed Top Model adaptation (see this discussion). Linguist^talk|contribs 15:34, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer, but we have thos call out orders for over 10 years and now they have to go? Ive looked every time in it to see which constant goes in which moment (sorry, english isn't my mother language and sometimes i have problems to find the right words). Even if the call out of the girls are random, in the finale it isnt random the last finalest gets call from best to worst in the final. But at least you make an table like the one in cycle 1. do you want to do it for every cycle? That would be better than nothing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 15:45, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2) we have thos call out orders for over 10 years and now they have to go? – WP:UNCHALLENGED

in the finale it isnt random the last finalest gets call from best to worst in the final – per what source?

do you want to do it for every cycle? That would be better than nothing. – Yes, I'm planning to make a table for every cycle's article. It's taking a long time, but I'm working on it. Linguist^talk|contribs 15:53, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

In the final Heidi call forward from best to worst, exept last year. In one final desicion for place 5 or 4, im not sure anymore, the finalist have to open something. But all the other desicions are from best to worst in the final. Cant find a source, but it was said in the TV. Im not 100% sure too for the complete call out order. Fred was called as the first one who gets eliminated, because she was the worst out of the Girls. But if i want to google for sources i cant find anything to get an answer. It was only said on tv. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 16:06, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Im not 100% sure too for the complete call out order. Fred was called as the first one who gets eliminated, because she was the worst out of the Girls. – We've discussed this several times already. Even now I understand German a bit better, and still, nothing said on the show supports what you've said about the call-out order. As for the finale thing, I'll look into it, and if it is true, I'll add it to the tables. Linguist^talk|contribs 16:28, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

It wasnt said in the show. It was said in an interview, after the episode where Fred was eliminated. They talked with Michalsky and asked him, because Fred was in his Team. Thats why some girls get eliminated immediately and some girls have to go back and wait for the desicion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 16:31, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Still, that's no credible evidence that the call-out order is reflective of placement. Linguist^talk|contribs 17:04, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

And why did you do that to Germany, Austria and Denmark and not to Serbia? Serbia have the same Call out order — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 18:46, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

I didn't know about Serbia. Remember that you can be bold and fix things yourself. Linguist^talk|contribs 19:17, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes but if i do something, someone makes it like it was before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 19:20, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, if that happens, remember you can offer your opinion on the article's talk page and try to reach consensus with the editor who challenges your edit (WP:BRD). Linguist^talk|contribs 19:25, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

[1] ----> here they called Saskia as the second out.

[2] ----> and everywhere they write about the girls in the order they eliminated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 19:37, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Those articles merely state what happened in the episode. Their writing about the order still establishes nothing. From now on, I'd like you to refrain from discussing these call-out orders with me. Linguist^talk|contribs 19:44, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Mongolia's Next Top Model

Hey, i found out that people in Mongolias dont use and know family names. I write an info under the table with the constants about that. And i think Anu-Jin, Bat-Oyun and Nomin-Erdene where write with an hyphen in there names ---> [3] On this site you can see the russian names of the girls and in russian form there where write with an hyphen. And the girls have in there russian names a letter with point infront of the name. For example Sarangerel is written Т.Сарангэрэл in russian. In german or english T.Sarangerel. This letter is from the Father i think. In Mongolia the names have two components, the real name and the name of the father. [4] ----> you can read it here, but its in german, i hope you can read it — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 09:41, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I know that. I didn't think we needed to include it in the article though. Linguist^talk|contribs 09:52, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

@DDKay: Just a little note: if you want to view the call-out tables you can look through the history of the articles, where all the edits are archived. Also, since your addition of the "no family names" statement is being challenged, I'd advise you not to add it again but rather discuss it on Talk:Mongolia's Next Top Model (cycle 1), so you don't get involved in an edit war. Linguist111 (away) (my main account) 10:09, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Mongolia's Next Top Model (cycle 1) ---> is that okay? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 10:15, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes. I'll reply in a while. Linguist111 (away) (my main account) 10:46, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Why is it deleted now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 10:48, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

What do you mean? Linguist111 (away) (my main account) 10:53, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Ive changed the names how i discribed it and someone make it like it was before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 11:17, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

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.

Reply from CJojoC

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.

---

Hello. I removed the content from Lay (entertainer) because I created a discography page for him Lay Discography. Next time, I will explain the changes in detail. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CJojoC (talk • contribs) 15:51, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

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.

Germany's next Topmodel

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.

---

Hey, i dont get this edit summary. Can you explain me this? And there are 31 and not 30 Models at Germany's next Topmodel cycle 12. You forgot Anh. And this are only the Semifinalist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DDKay (talk • contribs) 21:09, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

@DDKay:

Hey, i dont get this edit summary. Can you explain me this? – See WP:ES, assuming you mean the edit summary notice I left you.

And there are 31 and not 30 Models at Germany's next Topmodel cycle 12. You forgot Anh. And this are only the Semifinalist. – I haven't been following that article, but remember, you can be bold and fix it yourself.

Two more things: please remember to sign your talk page messages with 4 tildes when you reply to an existing discussion (like this: ~~~~), and click the link that says "Start a new talk topic / Démarrer une nouvelle discussion / Ein neues Thema starten" in the grey box at the top of the page when you want to start a new section on my talk page. Thank you. Linguist^talk|contribs 21:17, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

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.

Re-adding welcome templates

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.

---

I noticed you're repeatedly adding welcome templates to User talk:86.174.63.180, when the user has said that they don't want it on their page. Since it's their talk page, why keep putting it back? I don't think I've seen an edit war on a talk page before. Mortee (talk) 15:31, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

@Mortee: They're a block-evading sock, so they have no right to edit their page (WP:EVASION). Linguist^talk|contribs 15:32, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

I don't [edit: see] the benefit of insisting that the template remain. It'll only wind them up without improving the encylopedia itself. Still, it equally doesn't matter to me if you do keep putting it back. I only saw because it's filling up recent changes. Mortee (talk) 15:38, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Generally, you should just leave blocked users alone. There's no point to edit warring with them over harmless content on their talk page. If 86.174.63.180 wants to remove a welcome message, just let him/her. There are very few things editors can't remove from their own talk page – mostly just declined unblock requests. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:41, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Then if they're so awful an editor, why are you insistent on welcoming them?

There are things, such as block notices, that have to stay in place. This is not one of those things. Please stop. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:43, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

I wasn't "insistent on welcoming them". They are a sock puppet of an IP that was blocked at the time. Users are not allowed to edit while blocked. WP:EVASION makes it clear that anyone is free to revert edits made by block-evading editors. Linguist^talk|contribs 16:26, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Editors are allowed to edit their talk pages whilst blocked.

This is why we have additional rules for the handful of things they're not allowed to edit (block notices), and an additional distinct level of blocking where their talk page access is revoked, in addition.

This had just turned into ping-pong reverts, and they're pretty dull. So whatever it was, that wasn't working (and so best stop doing that). If their talk page editing was really disruptive (which generally means personal abuse), then an admin can pull their talk: access too. As it was though, it's just not good to poke angry blocked people with any sort of stick, unless it really has to be done. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:11, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I understand what you say, and that editors are allowed to edit their talk pages while blocked per WP:BLANKING, but in this case, an IP was blocked and was using the 86.174.63.180 IP to evade that block, and continued to use the sock IP to edit their talk page after that sock IP was blocked. Isn't that prohibited per WP:EVASION? Linguist^talk|contribs 17:22, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

• I can't see this specifically covered at WP:EVASION. I have never seen it enforced in this way before. Where I've seen similar, the general behaviour has been to treat all the talk pages of an exposed sock equally as their talk space, unless deliberately restricted later (often a non-disruptive sock might be permitted to carry on, so long as they agree to abandon all but one).
• Ping-pong reverts are ridiculous. Something wasn't working, so try something else.
• If it's a problem, get talk: page access pulled. Or if it isn't, don't beat them up for making use of it. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:55, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Sock templates

Linguist, I agree with the others, but that's not why I came here. On a related issue, please don't put sock templates on user pages (SuperSonicTailsKnuckles1058). That's the province of the blocking administrator or an SPI clerk. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:15, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

@Bbb23: I didn't add the tag. Sro23 did. The sockpuppet blanked it, Sro reverted it, the sock reverted, I reverted the sock. I merely edited the tag to say the user was blocked. Linguist^talk|contribs 16:18, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

You shouldn't have reverted and you shouldn't have edited it. What Sro23 did initially was unfortunately compliant with practice. I may some day try to remove the "expressed a concern" permutation, but I haven't tackled it yet. To use a technical term, I think it's stupid. However, once the user removed what Sro23 did, Sro23 was absolutely wrong to revert. Nonetheless, the user reverted again, leaving the page blank. That was when I came in and CU-blocked the user without putting a tag on their page. Whatever Sro23 had done before the block, you should have left it alone. As an aside, if the user were going to be tagged, it wouldn't have been as "suspected".--Bbb23 (talk) 16:34, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm confused. What Sro23 did initially was unfortunately compliant with practice. – so, you're saying it's not okay for a non-admin to add {{sock|some user|blocked}}, but it is okay to add {{sock|some user}}? How does that follow? The only difference between them is that one says the suspected sock has been blocked and the other, less efficiently, doesn't. However, once the user removed what Sro23 did, Sro23 was absolutely wrong to revert. – surely the sock was the one who had no right to remove the tag? The rules say that blocked users may not use sock puppets to make edits, and that any edit made by someone using a sock can be reverted without regards to 3RR. Then you come along and say that that's all wrong (and rollbacked me again after I explicitly asked you not to a while back). I'm lost. Linguist^talk|contribs 16:55, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

When I made this edit, I'm not going to lie, I wasn't really thinking. Too quick on the rollback of all that user's edits, which isn't a good idea, especially since the user hadn't been blocked as a sock at the time. I know the rules say 'any edit made by someone using a sock can be reverted without regards to 3RR', but just because you can revert an edit, doesn't mean you should. I know you're acting in good faith, but you don't need to take this policy so literally. Obviously when socks fix typos, undo vandalism, and make harmless edits to their own userspace like this and this, they shouldn't be reverted, just for the sake of reverting.

Tagging socks I've always been very iffy about as well. I guess only administrators and those on the SPI team are supposed to tag (after the sockpuppet has been blocked?). It's all confusing. Sro23 (talk) 17:11, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Wow. You folk want a simple rule? Don't use sock templates.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

There is no consensus (see Template_talk:Sockpuppet#.22An_editor_has_expressed_a_concern....22) for Bbb23's "only admins can use this template" viewpoint. They may be right, maybe that's how we ought to be working. But at present there is no such agreement, and as such it is wrong to complain of any editor who is using it in such a way. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:49, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

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.

A recent COi templating

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.

---

This was unnecessary, and also bites a newcomer. I'm sure you've reviewed it already, but when you have a moment please have another look at WP:USERPAGE for why this template was not needed and the speedy deletion request declined. -- Euryalus (talk) 19:33, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm about to go on WikiBreak, so I'll just keep this short. Sorry about the speedy tagging, it probably was overkill. I saw the external links they posted and the one to their personal blog and thought that violated WP:NOTWEBHOST. Second, their username popped up at WP:UAA/B. It was false positive, but I looked up the username to see if it was a famous person and the results came up with a politician involved in elections who had a blog, and the user was editing pages about these elections and also the blog link in their userpage matched that in the results, so I left the COI message. Linguist^talk|contribs 19:39, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

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.

PantherLoop

Sandbox? What shoud that? Someone has made the paragraph Contestans on America's Next Top Model 23 totally gone and I just made it back. And now you tell me I should leave it, although I only wanted to help. NOT WITH ME. Complain with someone else than with me. OK. I hope this does not happen again when I try to HELP !!! PantherLoop (talk) 15:19, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Linguist is on a temporary wiki break PantherLoop and won't be responding to threads on his page for a week or two. In the mean time, I'll update you quickly on what has happened. When Linguist reverts somebody through Twinkle it automatically prompts him to leave a message/warning on the editor in question's user talk page. Just so we're clear, Linguist has undone their reversion of your edits here. That is, your edits have been reinstated. You may safely ignore the template on your talk page. I gather that; Deutsch ist dein mutterspracht? Ich spreche nur ein kleines bisschen Deutsch, aber, Linguist's warnung ist annulieren und deine beitrage restauriert. I'm trying to say the warning is annulled and your edits restored. I needed an English-Deutsch dictionary for a few words of that, I hope that's close enough and you can understand what I'm saying. I'm only trying to explain in German because your English, which is far superior to my German, is fractured and a little difficult to parse. Mr rnddude (talk) 16:03, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

@PantherLoop and Mr rnddude: Hi, thanks for the comments. I just have one last comment to make. There's been a little misunderstanding. Here, I made a mistake while reverting PantherLoop's edits; one of the edits was constructive [5] but the other wasn't [6] (there they made the colspan of one cell 45 cells long, while only around 12 cells long would have been needed), and I mistakenly reverted both edits. I self-reverted before going back to undo the unconstructive one [7]. Linguist^talk|contribs 19:52, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Hmm... that is a bit unusaual. I didn't notice earlier because it only rendered the ninth column as empty. I imagine the issue would have arisen at some point while the table was being filled in. I.e. a new column even after all the episodes were completed. I can't tell why that was done, whether accidental or intentional, or what the intended effect was meant to be. Mr rnddude (talk) 22:29, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

WikiBreak

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.

---

Could an admin please remove the WikiBreak stuff from my commons.js page? I'm on mobile view at the moment and would like to end it early. Thank you. Linguist^talk|contribs 19:36, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Should be done, give it a try. -- Euryalus (talk) 19:43, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Works, thank you! Linguist^talk|contribs 19:45, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

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.

Germany's Next Top Model

Hi Linguist111. I saw (in recent changes again) that you undid an IP user's edits adding 'call-out order' information to pages like Germany's Next Topmodel (cycle 11) (the same for 11 seasons). I feel sorry for that new user that what looks like a lot of hard work has been dismissed so summarily. You cited WP:IINFO but I think this could use some more justification. This isn't random information, it's part of the detail of the series. Similar sections exist for plenty of other series (e.g. Hell's Kitchen, RuPaul's Drag Race) so this seems like standard practice. Could you talk to the IP user on their talk page about why you think the information is inappropriate, or add messages to the talk pages of the articles? It would be a shame to lose what seems like a highly-motivated new editor this way. If the tables are genuinely inappropriate for the encyclopedia then much broader changes are needed and an RfC might be the way to go. Mortee (talk) 20:55, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

@Mortee:  Done. Left a message on the IP's talk page. Linguist^talk|contribs 21:02, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Looking again I see you did replace the information they'd added with a table in a different format but with a lot of the same information. I'm sorry I didn't check that detail before messaging you; I saw the undo's and prioritized getting in touch. Thanks again. Mortee (talk) 21:05, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

CSD criteria

Hi. Necessary to get a wider consensus for this before enacting. There's some useful commentary on possible new CSD criteria at the top of the talkpage; I do wonder if this one might fall foul of #3. But that's a matter for the consensus discussion. -- Euryalus (talk) 22:11, 10 February 2017 (UTC)