User talk:Bejnar

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

Bottom of Page

Things to remember

On terminology[edit]

I have noticed some of your constructive posts in some talk pages and would appreciate your view on a question I posted here. Thanks. --Caballero//Historiador 13:51, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Old Norsk in Sicily[edit]

This is the English wikipedia, not Italian. The editwar are clarified in discussions and not with external warnings. "Be careful, do not trust anyone." Vituzzu and Shivanarayana are two famous users linked to extreme political parties (the Lega Nord) and Vituzzu does everything to disguise (speaking in Sicilian) Attention, always check their contributions. These users hate southern Italy and its inhabitants;They are racist and xenophobic.--151.82.38.106 (talk) 00:15, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Cesar River, Chile[edit]

You introduced the idea in 2008. Google does not confirm the existence of such river. There is probably Laguna Cesar.Xx236 (talk) 10:24, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

See revised article: Cesar River, Chile and citation there. Google maps shows the river here. --Bejnar (talk) 05:26, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Discussion on sources[edit]

At a talk page I wrote "sources must discuss the subject of the article" and you replied "Not entirely true; sources must support the statements made, and conclusions need to be conclusions of the cited sources in order to avoid synthesis or original research." The problem is that I have seen numerous instances of editors adding sourced material that doesn't mention the subject of the article and while they are obviously making a point not in the sources, they aren't drawing conclusions, but writing in such a way that readers will draw conclusions. If you'd like to discuss this would you ping me please? Thanks. Doug Weller talk 10:42, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: I found your original phraseology a bit too restricting. I do agree that it can be considered synthesis where something (something less than obvious) is implied by using a citation that correctly makes the point cited for, but does not mention the subject of the article; however, I see that setting the background facts for a topic can be done without the author of the source having even considered the topic in question. Examples would be things like, "When his hometown of Stettin was overrun by the Red Army [citing to a source that doesn't mention him], he was serving on the Western front under General Foertsch and was subsequently interred in the Rheinwiesenlager.[citing source that does mention him]" or "Early studies of stone-age man in the Pyrenees focused primarily on cave deposits [citing to a source that expressly concludes that, but one that doesn't mention mesolithic pottery], and it wasn't until Santonja investigated the alluvial deposits in the Meseta Central that mesolithic pottery entered the picture.[citing a source for the first discovery of Iberian mesolithic pottery, but not mentioning the previous emphasis just on caves]." Another example would be a biographical article where the individual came from Pomerania, but source A only says that he came from Stettin, it seems entirely resonable to use another source (B) that says that Stettin was a major industrial center in Pomerania even though source B doesn't mention the article's topic. --Bejnar (talk) 02:34, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
The example I have in mind is the article on the Black Egyptian Hypothesis. There's an article in the BMJ about Ramesses III written with the objective " To investigate the true character of the harem conspiracy described in the Judicial Papyrus of Turin and determine whether Ramesses III was indeed killed." It mentions a haplotype found in his mummy and another one and concludes the two are related. It doesn't say anything about the race of Egyptians, their origin, etc. But there are continued attempts by socks and others to add it to the article, sometimes with a statement that it's a subSaharan haplotype. Which is true but not all the truth, and was also found in a set of Norse Viking skeletons from Northern England. So a reliable source, but only for the purpose it was written for. Doug Weller talk 16:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: I appreciate that you were striving for brevity as well as clarity in your example, but I may have missed the twist in your example. It is not sufficient to dismiss a source because it was not written "for the purpose of proving or disproving an hypothesis". The point is whether it is used inappropriately to suggest something that is not only not stated, but subject to question. I am not a geneticist, but whether or not a particular haplotype is substantially present in subSaharan populations and is substantially absent elsewhere would seem to be a factual issue, and not dependent upon what article it was being used in. If the twist here is that the second part of the equation (substantially absent elsewhere) is not addressed, then the statement should be removed not because of any infirmity in the source with regard to the existence of the haplotype in the mummy, but because the "fact" (present in subSaharan populations and substantially absent elsewhere) is not established by sources. --Bejnar (talk) 06:03, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
So far as I recall, consensus has always been about cherry-picking raw data from genetic reports, with the emphasis being on sticking to the analysis/conclusions sections. Even the use of abstracts has been criticised at times as they aren't always written by the authors of the report. What you are talking about sounds very much like WP:SYNTHESIS, combining two or more sources to make an argument. Looks like we'll have to agree to disagree. Doug Weller talk 06:25, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: It well may be WP:SYNTHESIS in your example, but the use of sources that do not mention the topic is not the problem, although it may be an indicator of where problems in WP:SYNTHESIS exist. --Bejnar (talk) 07:39, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Ok, I take your point. I probably only notice this where it's clearly synthesis and don't notice it other wise. I do have a lot of fringe stuff on my watchlist. Doug Weller talk 07:49, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Tina Dabi page is not just about one event[edit]

Tina Dabi page is not just about one event. There are many similar pages like this but once there are ample third party credible sources , it can be created. Same have been done for many new cricketers, players whose pages have been created. Apart from being UPSC topper, its the hard working and inspiring story of Tina of being an incredible Dalit girl which is the main factor for creating the page.--Juneymb (talk) 03:46, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Tina Dabi[edit]

Hello, Bejnar,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Tina Dabi should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tina Dabi .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Chris Troutman (talk) 14:25, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Parodi, Beed[edit]

Dead link.Xx236 (talk) 08:04, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

@Xx236: Thanks. Fixed. --Bejnar (talk) 16:03, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Do you know the Marathi name?Xx236 (talk) 05:47, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
पारोडी --Bejnar (talk) 19:10, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Arumeru District[edit]

My dear Bejnar hi!
Please see Talk:Arumeru District. With kindest regards! --Aristo Class (talk) 12:02, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Bejnar. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 24 November[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 27 November[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Fixed --Bejnar (talk) 01:03, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 9 December[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

December 2016[edit]

Hello Bejnar, I just found that many articles related to settlements in India were lacking of a language code. So that I just added the particular language code to those articles. Next time I will be more responsible and productive in such cases. Thank you for your guidance.Jayabilla (talk) 08:58, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Bogdan Janković for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bogdan Janković is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bogdan Janković until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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. Joeykai (talk) 06:05, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Marisa Lazo[edit]

I saw your comment at the Marisa Lazo. Thanks for reading my comments.

You wrote: "...No redirect to Crane climbing, although it is possible that one of the reliable sources from this article might contribute content to the article, I see no need to mention specific climbers in that article, absent independent notability. "

I made a case for Lazo's independent notability in the AFD, which you said you did not find compelling. Farley, a highly respected psychologist, commented, at length, about the psychological aspects of Lazo's behaviour. Lazo's motivation remains a matter of speculation. But Farley used her as an example of the negative risk-taking of individuals like her.

I'd be interested in your opinion of this addition to the crane climbing article. Geo Swan (talk) 02:46, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

I think that it is more journalistic than encyclopedic and focuses unduely upon Marisa Lazo. What iwould be encyclopedic is: "One type of craane climber has been idenified as Type T personalities.[citation]" But only if the Type T personality was generally recognized. which apparently it is not. --Bejnar (talk) 13:01, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Bogdan Janković for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bogdan Janković is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bogdan Janković (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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. Yosemiter (talk) 15:32, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Doklam[edit]

Hello, I removed this sentence of yours from the Doklam page, China is believed to have not taken kindly to India building many new bunkers and upgrading older ones along the border in Sikkim in the recent past to augment its defences against the People's Liberation Army (PLA). It's not written in an encyclopedic style so that's why I have removed it for now until it has, thanks. I'm not sure if it's supposed to be a quote from the source. (137.147.162.243 (talk) 08:04, 6 July 2017 (UTC))

@Bejnar: Don't worry, I've reinstated it by quoting it from the source. (137.147.162.243 (talk) 08:11, 6 July 2017 (UTC))

Objectivism discussion[edit]

Hi - I saw you tried to ping me at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Objectivism by country but the extra bracket was missing. Since the discussion is closed, I thought I'd reach out here and explain my thinking. After a cursory reading of that article (now deleted), the Objectivism (Ayn Rand) article and Objectivist movement, and not being a movement expert in any way, it struck me from a layman's perspective that there was a lot of duplication in those articles. Since the Objectivism by country article was in no way as detailed as Christianity by country, it could be put into one of the main objectivism articles, but which one? Reading them both, there seems to be no reason to distinguish between the philosophy and the movement behind it. We do have an article for both Christianity and the Christian Movement, but the latter redirects to List of Christian movements, where there are dozens of religious, political and philosophical offshoots of Christianity. Unless you call Objectivist movement#The Peikoff.E2.80.93Kelley split a new movement, we're still talking about one movement, and as such it seemed to be a simple argument to make that the two articles should be combined. I'm in no way qualified to discuss what content should survive, but I'd like to hear an argument for keeping them separate. If I understand you correctly, you question whether the info should even be there in the first place. That's not my judgement - just that we don't need two articles. If others want to propose a merge, I'd likely support it, and the duplicate info (and unnecessary info) could be pared down then. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:28, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Robert Bundtzen[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Robert Bundtzen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I don't think this guy hits the bar for encyclopedic notability. There is no SNG for dog racing or the Iditarod, but since he's never come in better than 27th place I doubt he would qualify even if there was one. There is some minor local coverage from the Anchorage press, but nothing wider than that, so no GNG pass either.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC(talk) 13:13, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Delta-4 Heavy rocket listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Delta-4 Heavy rocket. Since you had some involvement with the Delta-4 Heavy rocket redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — JFG talk 12:43, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

205dvanvoorhees[edit]

yes i do have the page numbers to Booss's book they are pages 573-579

Move review[edit]

An editor has asked for a Move review of Grand Duchy of Kraków. Because you participated in an earlier requested move for this article, you might want to participate in the move review. Academicoffee71 (talk) 05:10, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Bejnar. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy Holidays[edit]

Snowflake macro (Unsplash).jpg Happy Holidays
Wishing you a happy holiday season! Times flies and 2018 is around the corner. Thank you for your contributions. ~ K.e.coffman (talk) 00:59, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Postage stamps and postal history of Zimbabwe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Beira (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 10:16, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Scotch Corner, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carlisle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 23[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Postage stamps and postal history of Norway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christiania (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:15, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Ida New and William Madison Turner Farm[edit]

I expanded the article. Feel free to do more. Thanks.Zigzig20s (talk) 17:48, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 24[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sansare, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mayan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 28[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Binga District, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Binga (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 23[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Arab Struggle Movement for the Liberation of Ahwaz, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page El Mundo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Mine AFDs[edit]

Thank you for a long comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zhonghe mine. I'm not sure if you noticed that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valencia mine and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tubas-Tumas mine were relisted at the same time. The Valencia mine article has received some expansion since nomination. --Scott Davis Talk 06:22, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Bejnar. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

References[edit]

Hello, it was a very long time ago, but are you able to help add sources to Bara, Nigeria? Thanks for looking into this, Boleyn (talk) 19:50, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Brilliant Idea Barnstar Hires.png The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
What a great idea to turn Consent search case law into an index. A simple change but an amazing improvement to the encyclopedia. Thanks! Wugapodes [thɑk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɹɪbz] 18:16, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Abor, Ghana[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Abor, Ghana requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-5238.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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 deleted 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. SITH (talk) 17:08, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

This hasn't been deleted – instead, I've reverted the page to before the copyright violations were added. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:28, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
I did create the Abor, Ghana page back in 2011, but the copyright violation was material added in September 2018 by SPA Padmorea. I am glad it got cleaned up. --Bejnar (talk) 20:09, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you![edit]

Compliments of the season to you, too! I hope you have a great holiday and a wonderful 2019! Grutness...wha? 01:58, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

"Caña (Chilean slang)" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Caña (Chilean slang). Since you had some involvement with the Caña (Chilean slang) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. © Tbhotch (en-2.5). 22:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Image optimization for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Image optimization is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Image optimization until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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. flowing dreams (talk page) 08:08, 2 October 2019 (UTC)