User talk:Golden: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 03:24, 13 June 2022

This is Golden's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6: 35 days

AA2 advisory

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 Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts. 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.

- LouisAragon (talk) 22:32, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of In the Ploughed Field. Spring

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article In the Ploughed Field. Spring you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AryKun -- AryKun (talk) 11:01, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Fresh Wind. Volga

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fresh Wind. Volga you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AryKun -- AryKun (talk) 11:01, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Fresh Wind. Volga

The article Fresh Wind. Volga you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Fresh Wind. Volga for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AryKun -- AryKun (talk) 06:01, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strength

Hey man, Being vandalised isnt cool, and Im proud of you for reporting it properly and getting the situation resolved. People can be jerks sometimes, but dont let that get to ya. :) PerryPerryD Talk To Me 14:38, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Working on ADR article

Hey Golden, I saw that you rewrote the Declaration of Independence of Azerbaijan article which was quite well done, so I was wondering if you'd be interested in rewriting the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic and possibly the First Republic of Armenia articles as well? Cheers -𝑵𝒖𝒏𝒖𝒙𝒙𝒙 ✪ 𝑇𝑎𝑙𝑘 10:27, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Nunuxxx: Sure, I'd love that. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 13:11, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. We can do it on my sandbox and discuss it on its talk page. Cheers - 𝑵𝒖𝒏𝒖𝒙𝒙𝒙 ✪ 𝑇𝑎𝑙𝑘 13:20, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of In the Ploughed Field. Spring

The article In the Ploughed Field. Spring you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:In the Ploughed Field. Spring for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AryKun -- AryKun (talk) 12:41, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a sock account.

Hello. I do not really understand these "rv" things . And may i know why was I banned? Are you Azerbaijani btw? Blaxoul (talk) 19:53, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Blaxoul: I don't think anyone implied you were a sockpuppet. believe you're referring to this edit with the edit summary "Restored revision 1088136192 by Blaxoul (talk): Rv banned sock". That was simply a restoration of your edit, not a revert of your edit. The "banned sock" part refers to the edits that came after yours, which were made by a now-banned sockpuppet account, not to you. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 19:57, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh,okay.Thanks for clarification.🙂 Blaxoul (talk) 20:00, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for They Did Not Expect Him

On 18 May 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article They Did Not Expect Him, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ilya Repin changed the main character in his painting They Did Not Expect Him (pictured) from a woman because it looked too similar to another painting? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/They Did Not Expect Him. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, They Did Not Expect Him), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 12,111 views (1,009.3 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of May 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 02:12, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Fresh Wind. Volga

On 22 May 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Fresh Wind. Volga, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that it took Isaac Levitan four years to paint Fresh Wind. Volga? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Fresh Wind. Volga. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Fresh Wind. Volga), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 5,930 views (494.2 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of May 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 04:53, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Habibi (poet)

On 24 May 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Habibi (poet), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the poet Habibi was adopted by Aq Qoyunlu ruler Ya'qub Beg as a child after he was found shepherding? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Habibi (poet). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Habibi (poet)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Declaration of Independence of Azerbaijan

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Declaration of Independence of Azerbaijan you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kaiser matias -- Kaiser matias (talk) 16:41, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of In the ploughed field. Spring

Hello! Your submission of In the ploughed field. Spring at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 16:51, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Flag of Azerbaijan

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Flag of Azerbaijan you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Most Comfortable Chair -- The Most Comfortable Chair (talk) 04:40, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Declaration of Independence of Azerbaijan

The article Declaration of Independence of Azerbaijan you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Declaration of Independence of Azerbaijan for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kaiser matias -- Kaiser matias (talk) 17:22, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Evening Bells (painting)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Evening Bells (painting) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 14:02, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Evening Bells (painting)

The article Evening Bells (painting) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Evening Bells (painting) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 17:42, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Evening Bells (painting)

The article Evening Bells (painting) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Evening Bells (painting) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 19:02, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Evening Bells (painting)

On 12 June 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Evening Bells (painting), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Isaac Levitan was inspired to paint Evening Bells (pictured) when he came across a small monastery in a remote village? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Evening Bells (painting). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Evening Bells (painting)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Declaration of Independence of Azerbaijan

On 12 June 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Declaration of Independence of Azerbaijan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the adoption of the Declaration of Independence of Azerbaijan made the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic the first successful republic in the Muslim world? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Declaration of Independence of Azerbaijan. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Declaration of Independence of Azerbaijan), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What BRD is not

Good evening, Golden. After you reverted my edit in Azerbaijan article, shall I remind you what BRD is not?

BRD is not a justification for imposing one's own view or for tendentious editing.
BRD is not a valid excuse for reverting good-faith efforts to improve a page simply because you don't like the changes.
BRD is never a reason for reverting. Unless the reversion is supported by policies, guidelines or common sense, the reversion is not part of BRD cycle.

My edit was neither vandalism, nore against common sense or policy and was in good faith, to reflect the terminology used in Artsakh article itself, so why did you revert it (even if you disagreed with it), instead of discussing? In view of your previous history of disregarding Wikipedia policies, I will have a low threshold for reporting this, unless sensible explanation is provided and an apology is offered. See further discussion about the content itself here: Talk:Republic of Artsakh#"Self proclaimed" vs "breakaway"

Kind regards, --Armatura (talk) 15:16, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't cited BRD as the reason for my revert, so I fail to see the relevance of citing it here. You changed long-standing terminology in a contentious topic area without any prior discussion, and you did not expect to be reverted? Sorry, but if the roles were reversed I would rightly be asked to have discussed the changes before-hand. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 17:42, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, what WP policy are you citing for 1) reverting me and 2) not discussing your revert? --Armatura (talk) 17:47, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1) WP:EDITCONSENSUS; 2) I am discussing this revert right here with you. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 17:54, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1) Care to elaborate? Which bit of that policy you are referring to? Specifically, where in that policy it says "if someone changes a long-standing terminology in a contentious topic area without prior discussion, reverting should be your primary method of operation"?

2) If you reverted and opened a talk page discussion, I would've counted it as WP:BRD. However, you did not discuss and you were not using WP:BRD you said. You just undid my WP:BOLD good faith edit with a comment that consisted of two parts: A) - "it's not loaded" (while WP:JUSTLIKEIT kind of argument is not an argument and "self-proclaimed" has negative connotation) and B) "it's the most commonly used word" (wrong information about which I can assume good faith, if you care to participate in the relevant content discussion I pinged you to).

3) Why did you choose to ignore the WP:DONTREVERT policy which says that For a reversion to be appropriate, the reverted edit must actually make the article worse. and that Even if you find an article was slightly better before an edit, in an area where opinions could differ, you should not revert that edit, especially if you are the author of the prior text. Kind regards, --Armatura (talk) 20:24, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Armatura: Hey Armatura!
You seem to be very confused. Golden posted on my talk page requesting advice on how to handle this situation, but my only conclusion is Golden is not doing anything wrong here. Therefore, the only response I can give is one addressed to you.
(1) Policies, by their very nature, are meant to be broad. To ask someone for a policy, is to request the general rule. The general rule found in WP:EDITCONSENSUS is that articles, as they exist, are reflective of consensus. You are looking to change the consensus, so the burden is on you to try and achieve that consensus. That's the essence of WP:BRD (which, for the record, isn't a policy despite being widely accepted as a practice).
Also, you seem to have misunderstood the meaning behind BRD is not a valid excuse for reverting good-faith efforts to improve a page simply because you don't like the changes. If you follow the link, it leads to WP:OWNBEHAVIOR (a policy page) where you will see the actual "examples of ownership behaviour". Golden in this situation has exemplified none of them.
(2) Now, as I mentioned earlier, policies represent fundamental principles and general rules. One of those that I am sure you may appreciate is WP:NOTCOMPULSORY. Golden is under no obligation to participate in any talk page discussion if that is their desire. Golden explained their objection to your edit in the edit summary of the revert. You may not agree with Golden, but if you understood the intention behind the revert then that should be good enough for you. In fact, you were able to successfully start the talk page discussion by making constructive points in response to said edit summary. If Golden wants to further respond with points of their own, they'll probably do so there rather than here (and at their own pace; not when it's been demanded).
(3) Finally, this particular point of yours bothered me. WP:DONTREVERT is not a policy; it's an advice essay. Golden obviously didn't choose to ignore the WP:DONTREVERT policy because it isn't one. They are under no obligation to follow that essay, and I find it particularly strange an editor of more than 15 years like yourself does not understand the particulars of WP:PGE.
For the record, I really hate having to constantly weigh in on these disputes. I have no affinity towards the country of Azerbaijan. If I see Golden doing something wrong, I'm going to call them on it. However, this is the third time in a row Golden has made an incredibly minor action which can be seen as slightly pro-Azeri despite being perfectly within Wikipedia's guidelines, and I again see another well established editor (such as yourself) overreact and threaten to report them over it. I'm getting sick of this pattern. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 03:24, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your DYK nomination

I have requested help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts. SL93 (talk) 17:49, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 17:55, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 124: / Line 124: @@
 ::::2) If you reverted and opened a talk page discussion, I would've counted it as [[WP:BRD]]. However, you did ''not'' discuss and you were not using [[WP:BRD]] you said. You just undid my [[WP:BOLD]] good faith edit with a ''comment'' that consisted of two parts: A) - "it's not loaded" (while [[Wikipedia:I just don't like it|WP:JUSTLIKEIT]] kind of argument is not an argument and "self-proclaimed" [https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/149033/is-self-proclaimed-negative-word has negative connotation]) and B) "it's the most commonly used word" (wrong information about which I can assume good faith, if you care to participate in the relevant [[Talk:Republic of Artsakh#"Self proclaimed" vs "breakaway"|content discussion I pinged you to]]).
 ::::3) Why did you choose to ignore the [[WP:DONTREVERT]] policy which says that ''For a reversion to be appropriate, the reverted edit must actually make the article worse.'' and that ''Even if you find an article was slightly better before an edit, in an area where opinions could differ, you should <u>not</u> revert that edit, especially if you are the author of the prior text''. Kind regards, [[User:Armatura|--Armatura]] ([[User talk:Armatura|talk]]) 20:24, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
+:::::@[[User:Armatura|Armatura]]: Hey Armatura!<br />You seem to be ''very'' confused. Golden [[Special:Diff/1092825067|posted on my talk page]] requesting advice on how to handle this situation, but my only conclusion is Golden is not doing anything wrong here. Therefore, the only response I can give is one addressed to ''you''.<br />(1) Policies, by their very nature, are meant to be broad. To ask someone for a policy, is to request the general rule. The general rule found in [[WP:EDITCONSENSUS]] is that articles, as they exist, are reflective of consensus. ''You'' are looking to change the consensus, so the burden is on ''you'' to try and achieve that consensus. That's the essence of [[WP:BRD]] (which, for the record, isn't a policy despite being widely accepted as a practice).<br />Also, you seem to have misunderstood the meaning behind {{tq|BRD is not a valid excuse for [[Wikipedia:Ownership of content#Examples of ownership behaviour|reverting good-faith efforts to improve a page simply because you don't like the changes]].}} If you follow the link, it leads to [[WP:OWNBEHAVIOR]] (a policy page) where you will see the actual "examples of ownership behaviour". Golden in this situation has exemplified ''none'' of them.<br />(2) Now, as I mentioned earlier, policies represent fundamental principles and general rules. One of those that I am sure you may appreciate is [[WP:NOTCOMPULSORY]]. Golden is under no obligation to participate in any talk page discussion if that is {{gender:Golden|his|her|their}} desire. Golden explained {{gender:Golden|his|her|their}} objection to your edit in the [[Special:Diff/1092775845|edit summary of the revert]]. You may not agree with Golden, but if you understood the intention behind the revert then that should be good enough for you. In fact, you were able to successfully start the talk page discussion by making constructive points in response to said edit summary. If Golden wants to further respond with points of {{gender:Golden|his|her|their}} own, {{gender:Golden|he'll|she'll|they'll}} probably do so there rather than here (and at {{gender:Golden|his|her|their}} own pace; not when it's been demanded).<br />(3) Finally, this particular point of yours bothered me. [[WP:DONTREVERT]] is not a policy; it's an advice essay. Golden obviously didn't {{tq|choose to ignore the [[WP:DONTREVERT]] policy}} because it isn't one. {{gender:Golden|He is|She is|They are}} under no obligation to follow that essay, and I find it particularly strange an editor of more than 15 years like yourself does not understand the particulars of [[WP:PGE]].<br />For the record, I really hate having to constantly weigh in on these disputes. I have no affinity towards the country of Azerbaijan. If I see Golden doing something wrong, I'm going to call {{gender:Golden|him|her|them}} on it. However, this is the third time in a row Golden has made an incredibly minor action which can be seen as ''slightly'' pro-Azeri despite being ''perfectly within'' Wikipedia's guidelines, and I again see another well established editor (such as yourself) overreact and threaten to report {{gender:Golden|him|her|them}} over it. I'm getting sick of this pattern. &#8211;<span style="font-family:CG Times, times">[[User:MJL|<span style="color:black">MJL</span>]]&thinsp;[[User talk:MJL|‐'''Talk'''‐]]<sup>[[User:MJL/P|☖]]</sup></span> 03:24, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
 == Your DYK nomination  ==