User talk:Revirvlkodlaku

Precious anniversary

Precious

Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:01, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Hudba Praha moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Hudba Praha, is not suitable 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. I did this rather than removing the uncited material in the article, which I felt would be more disruptive. When you have the required sourcing (and every assertion needs a source), and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:03, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Emilis Vėlyvis notability

Dear David Revirvlkodlaku,

I have been contributing to Wikipedia for almost 16 years. Recently I wrote Emilis Vėlyvis article. An American, New York-born editor onel5969 has questioned Emilis' notability. In response, I have added content referenced by three independent, reliable non-English media sources, delfi.lt, Lithuanian TV3 and Lietuvos rytas. In addition, a new section "Selected awards and nominations" has been introduced.

I therefore deem the Velyvis' notability criteria has been satisfied.

I have informed onel5969 on his talk page and have requested to remove the "notability" tag. onel5969 is not eager to follow through. I myself can not remove the notability tag due to possible conflict of interest because I have started the article about Emilis.

Can you please remove the notability tag?

Thank you for your help and attention, Tomas Ttk371 (talk) 06:09, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Tomas, I can look into the matter, but first, I have two questions to ask you:

1. Why is it important to you that the notability tag be removed?
2. Why come to me about this?

Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 06:12, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

David, thank you for your prompt reply.

1. To answer your first question, I admit confusion (smile). Editor Onel5969 originally might have had good reasons to request to improve the article, so I did improve. I do not attend to editing Wikipedia on very frequent basis. The notability tag may lead to article deletion in my absence. I hope this thus answers your question, even if partially.

2. I have asked you because a) your page welcomes those seeking help b) you have written or contributed to articles about European cinematography c) you have kindly thanked me for a minor edit of The Good Plumber.

Verily yours,

Tomas Ttk371 (talk) 06:33, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

David,

I further ask you to help. I have asked editor Onel5969 Can you please outline a roadmap to facilitate the notability of Emilis Vėlyvis solved?. Onel5969 has requested to stop posting to my talk page. How to close the matter of Emilis Vėlyvis notability now?

It feels like a stalemate. Please advise, is there an appeal process in Wikipedia - if it's time to consider an appeal?

Thank you for your help and attention,

Verily yours, Tomas Ttk371 (talk) 12:22, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

You fail to mention that I asked you to stop posting on my talk page due to your incivility. I've let you know that you need at least 3 in-depth sources from independent, reliable, secondary sources to show notability. I've let you know that foreign language sources are perfectly fine. I've let you know that interviews, as primary sources, do not go towards notability. That's the road map. And my apologies to Revirvlkodlaku that you got dragged into this. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:26, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

I respectfully ask David to make his own judgement on civility of my communication. I consider my communication polite and respectful.

Verily yours, Tomas Ttk371 (talk) 12:38, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

@Onel5969, it's possible that you and I have a different idea about what constitutes civility, but after reading the exchange you've had with Ttk371 on your talk page, my conclusion is that there is no lack of civility on their part. Ttk371 approached you with the utmost degree of courtesy, as they have demonstrated on my own talk page, and your response was rather curt, even dismissive. Yes, you have outlined the steps this user should take in order to meet your criteria, but you made no effort to be nice about it (not that you are obligated to do so).

@Ttk371, I'm not going to remove the notability tag from the Emilis Vėlyvis page, as I don't want to get embroiled in another dispute, but I would advise you to follow the steps outlined by Onel5969 on their talk page. This should hopefully resolve the issue. If not, my next step, in your place, would be to seek a third opinion through the appropriate 3O channel. Hope this helps :)

Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:15, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much, David! I completely understand and support your decision to not remove the notability tag.

1. Can you please guide me into 3O ("third opinion") process? What page to start it on?

2. Do you happen to know if an instrument similar to "change of venue" in the United States courts of law, or "removal of judge" in Lithuanian courts of law exists whereby an editor is removed from deciding on tagging a page like Emilis Velyvis and another rather neutral editor is assigned instead?

I feel indebted.

Verily yours,

Tomas (or Tom in English-speaking countries; he/him) Ttk371 (talk) 14:42, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

@Tom, here is a link to the 3O process: WP:Dispute resolution requests/Third opinion. I don't know the answer to your second question, unfortunately, as I've never looked into that myself. Sorry to disappoint. By the way, we also use Tomas, or Thomas, in English-speaking countries ;) Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:01, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Good morning David, may I please invite you to share your insight in Talk:Emilis_Vėlyvis#Silver_Crane_award_effect_on_notability?

This discussion may solve the notability question not for Emilis Velyvis alone, but for many or all awardees of this prestigious Lithuanian filmmaking industry award. A discussion on the subject article talk page is also a precursor for initiating the third opinion request.

Thank you kindly, Tom (I prefer Tom solely because Tomas is often mispronounced in Spanish-culture-rich United States. My full name is rather pronounced as Thomas (smile) ) (talk) 16:56, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Tom, I've piped up on the Emilis Velyvis page, although I admit that I haven't done any proper research into the criteria for WP notability. I'll keep an eye on the discussion for the time being though. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 04:44, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Mockrát děkuji David! Coincidental to your interest in Czech culture I am proud to remember interviewing Vaclav Havel on August 9, 1989 at his summer home near Mlade Buky where he was deported by police - that's three months before the Velvet Revolution. I was a very young journalism student at the time. Tom Ttk371 (talk) 08:39, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ttk371 Nemáš zač! Wow, that's quite the claim to fame! I was only nine years old in 1989, probably shortly before moving from Montreal to Prague. Was Havel a pleasant man to speak to? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:11, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

I'd be glad to share the experience of that day but Wikipedia is not the best place to do so :) You can also find me on FB forward slash tchadaravicius :)

We (Havel, my photographer and myself) were at a picnic table outside. I was asking questions in English, Havel was answering in Czech. There was a bottle of vodka on the table. He offered us a shot and had some himself. All lasted about one hour.

Finding his hut in the spruce-covered hills was another adventurous story. I spoke German with local farmers who had guided us to Havel's home.

Tomaš :) Ttk371 (talk) 16:20, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ttk371 Holy, what an adventure! I always assumed Havel could speak fluent English, for some reason, though I'm not sure why. I've sent you a fb request, thanks for being so friendly! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 17:34, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

He said, he could speak English, but "we are in Czechia, I will be responding in Czech." Ttk371 (talk) 18:17, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Today, Sunday, December 4th I have posted a question, Wikipedia_talk:Notability#Does_winning_a_national_industry_filmmaking_award_satisfy_notability_criteria? on the Wikipedia:Notability project page.

Yours, Tom Ttk371 (talk) 01:57, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

I have initiated a 3O (third opinion) request at Wikipedia:Third_opinion#Active_disagreements. Such request requires notification of discussion participants.

Thank you, Tom Ttk371 (talk) 10:11, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

January 2023

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Miso Film, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Here and elsewhere, you are actively making articles worse for no good reason at all. Please stop. Fram (talk) 15:27, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Please explain why the edit was not constructive. I reverted the addition of unreferenced content. This is standard practice. Stop hounding me, you appear to be engaged in a personal vendetta, and this will not be tolerated. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:31, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

The previous content wasn't sourced either, all you did was WP:BITEing an editor and removing actually sourceable content. It is very unclear why you opposed the addition of a review from a professional magazine as an external link to Ane Brun, your edit summary was rather cryptic. Fram (talk) 15:37, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

The fact that the previous content wasn't sourced either isn't relevant and shouldn't prevent me from removing further unreferenced content. Your line of reasoning suggests that if a page contains one line of unreferenced content, I should be free to add an entire paragraph of unreferenced content, or even more, which is absurd.

As for the Ane Brun article, I pointed out that as per WP:External links#Minimize_the_number_of_links, the link was unnecessary. Once again, please keep your activity and criticism constructive; at the moment, you appear to be on a personal vendetta. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:43, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

No, you didn't point that out: if you had, I could have corrected you immediately. That section is about official links (official websites, twitter accounts, instagram, ...), and has nothing to do with other, independent external links as in this case. Fram (talk) 16:32, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

WP:External links#Links_normally_to_be_avoided please read carefully, and then stop bothering me. This unfriendly conversation is not a good use of my time (and hopefully, yours either). Unless you have something constructive to add, I will no longer be engaging. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 17:04, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Tense of Guertel-case

Hi, I notice you did a lot of grammar editing on Gürtel_case. But the elephant in the room is that the entire article is in the present tense. Isn't this a long-since finished case, a case that should now be in the past tense? I'd have changed it, but I didn't want to tread on your toes, and thought you might know more about it than I do. Elemimele (talk) 17:05, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Elemimele, thanks for pointing this out, as I hadn't thought of it. Thank you also for being considerate of my toes :) There is a tag at the top of the page, suggesting that it should be updated. Would you be willing to do this? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:47, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

I could do the tense; I don't know anything about the subject (I was just looking at recent changes when I found it the first time), but tense is just language. I'll have a look, it might be tomorrow before I get to it. Best wishes! Elemimele (talk) 06:55, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

January 2023

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:06, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Hotel Alcron

Hi, I see you reverted my edit on the page for the Alcron Hotel Prague. You changed "Pre-WWII guests included" back to "Pre-WWII guests have included." That is grammatically incorrect in English, that's why I changed it. In English, you would only say "guests have included" if something is still ongoing. Because we're talking about a period that has ended - the Pre-WWII period - the correct English wording is "guests included." Jamesluckard (talk) 22:01, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Jamesluckard, you are corrected, that was my mistake. I didn't notice the "Pre-WWII" part. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 00:35, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jamesluckard, I'm surprised to note that you haven't seen fit to acknowledge my retreat and admission of error on this topic in any manner. If you with to maintain good relations with other editors, and in order to encourage good behaviour, it's important that you reinforce it when it occurs, and the best way to do that is not to ignore when someone has made a concession to you. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 21:20, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

I apologize, but I'm not sure what you mean. Is there a format to post recognition for something like this. I promise, it wasn't an intentional oversight, but I've been editing pages here for many years and haven't heard of this before. Happy to do so if you can explain how I should though. No offense intended. :) Jamesluckard (talk) 06:38, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jamesluckard, it isn't as complicated as you make it sound. If you've been editing Wikipedia for years, surely you must be aware of the "thank" feature. You also had the option to respond to my last comment, using the words of your choice. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:21, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I've never heard of a "thank" feature on Wikipedia, I promise you. Nobody has ever mentioned it to me and I've never seen it. However, if you would explain to me how it works, I'd be more than happy to do that. None of this has been meant as a slight to you, I promise. I am genuinely grateful that you acknowledged that my grammatical fix was correct. I would have stated that earlier, but in all honesty, I've just never been asked before to say anything like that in all my years here, so I didn't imagine there was a need to. But I do, indeed, gratefully acknowledge that you retreated and admitted your error, as you stated. Jamesluckard (talk) 22:58, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I just realized you mean the thing where you get notifications that people "thanked" you for an edit. I don't know how I would do that for a comment you made in "talk" though. In all honesty, I've never paid much attention to those "thanks." If that's a mistake, I apologize. Jamesluckard (talk) 23:01, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

When I go to your user page, I see a "heart" icon, with some options, but none of those options include "thanks." How do I do that? Jamesluckard (talk) 23:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I found a page explaining "thanks." It looks like it's a special program that needs to be downloaded. I've never done so, which is why I don't have an icon for it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Notifications/Thanks The process to install the "thanks" program seems a bit complicated. Is this the only way to do it? I truly didn't mean to make you feel slighted, but I'm being honest when I say nobody has ever mentioned this to me before. Jamesluckard (talk) 23:05, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I read the page explaining how to download and install "Thanks" and I genuinely can't follow it. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Thanks I apologize. I'm being honest. I'm just not a computer whiz and it seems very complicated. Is there a simple way to install it? Jamesluckard (talk) 23:08, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jamesluckard, I'm baffled by what you're telling me. In fact, I'm struggling not to think that you're trolling me. It appears that you've been editing Wikipedia for just as long as I have, and you've never once noticed that there is an option to thank an editor for every single edit they make? I just looked up the Thanks page, and it doesn't seem like it's anything you have to install—it's a default part of the English Wikipedia. I also don't know what you mean by "heart icon" on my user page.

Either way, no harm, no foul. I do have a question for you though: why is your user name redlinked instead of being clickable, like other users? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 23:33, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I promise you, I'm not trolling you. I use my real name as my username here. I have absolutely nothing to hide. I think my username is red because I've never bothered to create a biography page for myself here. I just like to read articles and make edits. Did you check the links I posted above? "Thanks" appears to be an app you have to add onto Wikpiedia. It doesn't appear to be there automatically. I'm on a PC, maybe it's different on a Mac. This page: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Thanks describes "Thanks" as an extension that must be download, and includes a Download section. That's the part that I'm totally confused by. It doesn't look like a normal program that you just download and open. I do see now on "History" for each page that there's an option to "Thank" a user for an edit. I've never noticed that before and never done it. However I still am not sure how I would have "thanked" you for the comment you left here. I only see "reply" as an potion next to each of our comments. I don't see "Thanks" as an option. Or did you mean you had hoped I would have pressed "Thanks" next to your incorrect reversion of my original edit? I can go do that now. I'm sorry I didn't realize that was a thing people expected. As I said, nobody has ever mentioned it to me before. Jamesluckard (talk) 23:45, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I just hit "thanks" next to the last edit you made on the Alcron Hotel page, the one we discussed and I undid. I hope that's helpful. Sorry, I've just never been through anything like this before. As I said, I use my real name as my username here. You're more than welcome to friend me on Facebook or something, so you can see I'm not an anoymous troll. Jamesluckard (talk) 23:47, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Oh, and the heart icon is along the top. The options are READ, EDIT, VIEW HISTORY, then a picture of a heart, then a star, then MORE, then SEARCH WIKIPEDIA. I've never used the heart. I'm not sure what it does. Jamesluckard (talk) 23:50, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Not the very top line, sorry, the line below it. The very top line has your username, then a bell, a box, and a bunch of other options. I meant the one below it. Jamesluckard (talk) 23:51, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I like to edit pages on hotels and movies. How about you? Looking at your history, your interests seem to range pretty widely, which is cool! Jamesluckard (talk) 23:53, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jamesluckard, I see the source of confusion now (and I no longer think you are a troll). While there may be an extension with a separate "thank-you" function, what I'm talking about is built into the enwiki software, and as you've yourself discovered, it's there to be found on each page's history. That's actually the key here, and perhaps why you didn't notice it before—you didn't see the "thank" feature on the talk page, because you have to go to the page's history to see it. I didn't think of that earlier, because I'm always looking at edit histories (for pages on my watchlist), so I see the feature all the time. No, I didn't mean you should thank me for my incorrect reversion :) I see a James Luckard in Los Angeles who likes Love Actually. Is that you? As for the heart and star you mention, I don't see those, likely because you and I are looking at Wikipedia using a different skin. Did you download the latest skin update? I'm still using the old one, so I don't see the heart or star icons. Well, I edit articles on a range of topics, mainly because, like you, I'll read something and if it contains errors, I just can't leave them there. My main interest is music though, so most of the new articles I've created are on that topic. It's nice to meet you, by the way, James; I'm David Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 01:59, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Yep, that's me! And yep, that's why I hadn't noticed the "thank" feature before, I rarely visit the "History" page for articles and hadn't looked at the layout closely. I had noticed a few times that people had "Thanked" me, it showed up on the bell icon next to my name, and I wondered how they did it, but I never got curious enough to investigate. At least now I know. :) What are skins? I'm not familiar with that. Is that like different layouts you can choose? I've seen that on some chat forums I visit. I would assume I'm just using whatever the "default" skin is here, I don't remember ever changing any settings. I've always been fascinated by hotels, and I started noticing a few years back how woefully incomplete many pages on famous/historic hotels were. They would have dates that I knew were incorrect for their opening, or they would neglect to mention multiple name changes. One hotel's page misleadingly seemed to suggest that the structure was the original historic structure, when it was, in fact, a modern replica. I started correcting these and then I started creating pages for hotels I liked that felt noteworthy and had no pages. I just looked at my own contribution history and discovered I've been here for 18 years! Yikes! I had no idea it had been that long, time sure does fly! When I started, sources were not required at all, it's been interesting to see how things have evolved. I work hard to find as many sources as possible now. Luckily, with the number of newspapers and books that have been digitized, that's usually pretty easy. It's nice to meet you too! I'm glad we got everything cleared up. I totally understand why you thought I was a troll at first. It's sad that there are so many people out there who have nothing better to do with their time but cause trouble, but I'm just here to update pages on hotels and movies, mostly. :) Jamesluckard (talk) 04:51, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

How did you come to be following the page for the Alcron Hotel? I hope to see it someday. I missed seeing it the one time I was in Prague, in 2001. I actually created the page here for it, a number of years ago. Jamesluckard (talk) 04:53, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jamesluckard, it's as you said, a "skin" is a page layout/interface. Wikipedia periodically updates the default skin, and I know a new one was just released a day or two ago, although if I'm not mistaken, it has been available for some time now, as many non-English wikis use a different skin from the one I'm still on.

I had no idea that references were ever not required on Wikipedia! Those must have been the Wild West days 😅😅😅

I'm actually half Czech, and I lived in Prague for three years as a child. I was recently in a Czech restaurant here in Edmonton, where I reside, and they had an item on the menu with the name Alcron, so I had to find out what that was all about. As it turns out, they make their chicken in the "Alcron" style, as I think there's an eponymous restaurant in the hotel, right?

I sent you a fb friend request, by the way; I'm David Tonner Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 06:02, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Pertaining to changes made by ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ

Hi Revirvlkodlaku, saw you reverted changes by ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ, do you happened to know where could this issues be raised on? As ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ didn't just made those changes to Extraordinary Attorney Woo and Glitch but to more than thousands other articles as well, and now those unreverted ones has misleading subheader in their Infobox where other params (like Developed by, Director, Writers, Starring, etc) not under Infobox Korean name is displayed as if it's grouped under Korean name which is incorrect and misleading. I had tried to reverted their edits as much as possible but looks to be an impossible task. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 16:45, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Paper9oll, I didn't realize the scope of this issue, and thousands of similarly misedited articles is certainly a big deal. What I would do first is try to communicate with the editor, by leaving a message on their talk page. If this fails, I would likely turn to one of the noticeboards, such as WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. I don't have time to do anything about it now, but do keep me updated, and I'll be happy to assist you if you still need help in a few hours. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 17:19, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

@Revirvlkodlaku I had just raise the issue at their talk page (for your reference), however also noting that another editor had previously raise the same issues previously on 11 January 2023 on their talk page also, their response is to be me personally rather fierce and seemingly uncooperative with intention to push ahead regardless. Also posted on here on WP:Templates for discussion/Holding cell to see if there would be other editors that would help out or not. Thanks! — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 17:43, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

This change has been done in far more pages by multiple users slowly over the years. A few may have disliked the changes, others have sent me thank notifications for them, they aren't "misedited". Rest assured I have no intention of pushing ahead, I have better things to spend my time on. Thanks. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 19:56, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

@ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ, I'm perplexed by your attitude on this subject. User:Paper9oll politely explained the issue your edits were causing, and asked you to pause until it was resolved. You chose to take a combative stance and dig in your heels, as if the fact that your edits were creating a problem with the visual presentation of thousands of infoboxes was irrelevant. I admit that I'm not familiar with the topic being discussed, and which has, supposedly, swallowed countless hours of yours and many other editors' time, but that seems somewhat beside the point if your actions are actually creating a problem on Wikipedia. I can understand how this whole situation would be frustrating for you, but please keep in mind that any pushback you get on the subject has nothing to do with you, so please don't take it personally. Additionally, I think it would be correct on your part to undo the edits until the issue can be resolved, rather than leaving a trail of broken infoboxes behind. Thank you. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 22:54, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I have received multiple thanks for the same edits you are calling broken, clearly some people think they are an improvement. What you are calling an issue, some others consider it as a feature. I have got objections and I have stopped. I am not going to revert them only for those who like it to re-revert it back. Anyway I withdraw all of my edits pertaining to Infobox name module, feel free revert anything you are comfortable taking responsibility for (it appears Paper9oll has already done that), I don't care at this point. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 02:53, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

The nation of Québec

Hi there, hope everything is going ok for you

If I were to prove you that Québec is, actually, a nation, something as strong and as binding as a constitution amendment explicitely stating so, black on white, added according to legislation in place, and whom the lack of acknowledgement would be a clear unneutral stance as strong as denying a distinct nation's existence, would you let me put back my edit? Many thanks.

Important post-scriptum : a country/state and a nation are not the same thing, they're different concepts and words for a reason, even if many people do the easy mistake of not realizing it, which I don't blame you for, I did the same mistake years ago. The two however, when combined, form the nation-state, which is were the confusion come from. I mean, just reading the definition of nation, Québécois already fit and you should let me do that in accordance with Wikipedia neutrality, as denying a recognized nation's existence and having them written as another is clearly not neutral or innocent, but I'm willing to go a step further with what I proposed, what do you say? 166.62.226.25 (talk) 05:38, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, the first thing I'll need you to do is to tell me what article you're referring to. I make large and small edits to dozens of pages every single day, so if you don't mention the page you're referring to, how am I supposed to remember?

Second, as far as I know, Quebec is a province of Canada. I'm not sure what definition of "nation" you're using, and I'm curious to find out, but I can't guarantee that I will revert myself based on that. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 05:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi there again. The article in question is Gilles Vigneault first and foremost. Sorry for not having it pointed out earlier. Secondly, I was talking about the one of the very wikipedia page of nation I linked. Does it satisfy your requirements for the basis of such a revert or do I need another one? A nation can also at the same time be a state (where it becomes a nation-state, a nation and a state, I say Québec is also the former even if it is not explicitely named "the nation of Québec"), a province or any other form of governance or absence thereof, hence the stateless nations (Québécois are right there on this page with an academic source to back it up), while still being a nation. A nation is not a nationality but a more inclusive form of ethnicity, based on a shared sense of identity, culture, language and institutions/distinct legal status on a specific territory. 166.62.226.25 (talk) 06:23, 21 January 2023 (UTC)