User talk:Maxeto0910
|
Nomination for Deletion
Nomination of Jana Pareigis for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jana Pareigis, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jana Pareigis until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Should the PPP-adjusted figure be used for 2023 [1]? Historically it wasn't always available, but for recent years PPP figures would be more accurate. CurryCity (talk) 01:06, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
- I'd be fine with both, though with the current wording, unless otherwise stated, it clearly refers to nominal GDP, as it's a contextually relevant adjunction to "[...] the United States has had the largest nominal GDP in the world since 1890 [...]". I think it could disrupt the flow of reading if we'd switch from nominal to PPP-adjusted GDP all of a sudden, but it all depends on the exact phrasing if we wanted to change the sentence accordingly.-- Maxeto0910 (talk) 01:16, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 22
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Artificial general intelligence, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Strong AI.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:08, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Re linking names in photos - I think you are strictly applying editorial rules with no regard to readability, which must always come first. That's a shame, because Wikipedia is, first and foremost, a resource to be used. I won't revert again, but I think you are wrong on this point and I would encourage you to think about readers and how they use Wikipedia. Millstream3 (talk) 13:17, 17 April 2024 (UTC)