User talk:Moldspaeries

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Moldspaeries! Thank you for your contributions. I am Iryna Harpy and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:05, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Moldspaeries, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Moldspaeries! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Missvain (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:21, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

February 2016

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved without good reason. They need to have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia.
Please stop your multiple page moves without consulting with other editors or even leaving an edit summary. Renaming articles unilaterally does not enhance the Wikipedia project, it is detrimental to it. Even if you think that there are no other editors working on, or watching articles on ethnic groups, you should attempt to start a discussion. Better yet, take your queries and explain your intentions to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups. Iryna Harpy (talk) 02:57, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Iryna Harpy, thanks for your suggestions. My changes correct the unnecessary changes made by User talk:Bizertshine, who got the message that "so trying to apply it to galleries located in other parts of an article, such as "Notable people" sections, is not really appropriate and is going to lead to problems." Moldspaeries (talk) 03:07, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nevertheless, there was never a 'consensus' gallery for the Canadians in France article. I'm not going to despair over it being reintroduced in its own section, but I'd suggest that there should only be one instance of the notable: i.e., if someone is wikilinked to their bio in the gallery, their name and wikilink should not be duplicated in the text list.

My main concern is with your moving pages, and I find myself wondering how you managed to get autoconfirmed, enabling you to make such moves, with less than 90 and well under 300 edits under your belt. I'm not going to pursue this strange relationship to Bizertshine, nor the fact that you started page moves from the inception of your editing... at this point. I just ask that you be certain that these moves are not disruptive, and that you check that there is higher level WP:RfC consensus indicating that your changes to the nomenclature for European diasporic groups is in keeping with other pages. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:42, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think that I made my changes within the right framework, nevertheless, I will refrain for awhile to make new changes. Moldspaeries (talk) 03:47, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. Appreciated. There are a great number of editors who work in the area of ethnic group diasporic communities, and some who have very staid views as to what's 'right' and 'wrong' in terms of nomenclature, and I'm concerned that you may bump into such editors and rub them up the wrong way... so do remember to always use an edit summary. If edit summaries don't come naturally to you, it may be useful for you to check the reminder box in your preferences until it's become second nature to you. You'll see the "Preferences" menu along the top of the right hand side of the pages. Click on this menu and go to "Editing". In the editor section, you'll see a check box marked "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary". Check that, and it'll remind you to enter a summary of what you've changed, and why.

There is actually a discussion on WikiProject Ethnic groups regarding "Title format for diaspora articles in various countries" here at the moment. It might be a good opportunity for you to familiarise yourself with other editors, and for them to get to know you.

A final tip before I've overstepped the mark and gone into tl;dr mode: add a little information to your user page so that it doesn't show up as a red link. Red links can act as a psychological impediment for other editors if they feel that you're either concealing something, or feel that you're above having to say anything about yourself. It shouldn't work that way, but it does. The Wikipedia:User page design center is a quick way of popping in a little something in about yourself. Happy editing! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:30, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The threshold for becoming autoconfirmed is only 4 days and 10 edits, Iryna Harpy. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:21, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Cordless Larry. Thanks for informing me of that. I've just checked WP:AUTOCONFIRM and realised that the figures embedded in my head refers to those going through the Tor network. I have to say that I think that's a very low threshold, but that's just my personal opinion. I guess I've been involved in so many clean-ups after new users (and block evaders) have moved around up to literally hundreds of articles against consensus decisions that I'm being somewhat anal. Moldspaeries, so that we're clear on this, I do recognise that you're being constructive and haven't reverted any of your changes since we started our discussion. Again, happy editing! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:04, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Iryna Harpy, thank you for your help. Btw do you know how to secure the sourced content of a page that is constantly deleted ? Ex. Berbers in France. Moldspaeries (talk) 21:12, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In this instance, the easy way would be to go through the article's history. There haven't been many edits to the page, so you should be able to find removed content quickly. If any of the sources you're interested in examining are dead links, give me a yell and I can try to dig up archived versions. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:20, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Appreciated. If I need help I will ask you.Moldspaeries (talk) 21:23, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition of flags on articles about ethnic groups

Hello. Please stop adding the flags, the articles, at least the ones I have checked, are about ethnic groups, not nationalities. Germans, for example, live as a majority or a native minority in many different countries (Germany, Austria, Switzerland and several others), and can't be represented by the flag of just one of the countries they live in... Thomas.W ^talk 21:43, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit-conflict) I was just going to make the same request. If nothing else, these are ugly (especially at these huge sizes) and have close to zero information value for these articles. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:44, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi to both Thomas.W and Fut.Perf.. But I used the example for English people - English flag, (Irish people - Irish flag; Scottish people - Scottish flag) and so on from [Ethnic_flag#Northern_Europe]. Also, the flags are included in articles like Australians, Israelis, Americans, Canadians and so on and no one is removing them. Moldspaeries (talk) 21:48, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Most of those flags are just made-up, and only supported by small groups of people, and thus can't be used to represent entire ethnic groups in an encyclopaedia. Thomas.W ^talk 21:54, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's because Australians, Israelis, Americans and Canadians aren't about ethnic groups, but nationalities, unlike Russians, Germans, English people and the others. If you don't know the difference between ethnicity and nationality, please stay away from such articles. Thomas.W ^talk 22:00, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas.W, I am very confident that I know the difference between the two. I have a question but I do not want to be interpreted negatively from your side. My question is why then there is an English flag and Swedish flag (to represent the aforementioned ethnicities) that are national flags of England and Sweden under the label "This user is of English and Swedish ancestry" that you have in your user page: [User:Thomas.W]. Moldspaeries (talk) 22:14, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For many different reasons, from being born in one country and living in the other to having dual nationality, i.e. two passports (by birth even). The flag of England is IMHO also more aesthetically pleasing than the Union Jack. But this isn't about me and my user page, it's about articles in an encyclopaedia... Thomas.W ^talk 22:22, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas.W, I did not want to be personal as I wrote I have a question but I do not want to be interpreted negatively from your side. But the question was why the Swedish national flag was used as an ethnic Swedish flag and English flag was used as an ethnic flag? Moldspaeries (talk) 22:26, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's a user page and is hardly going to hurt anyone's feelings, unlike representing ethnic Germans, as a group, in an encyclopaedia with the modern-day flag of the Federal Republic of Germany. I doubt it's appreciated by ethnic Germans who have lived in other countries since many hundreds of years before the Federal Republic of Germany even existed... Thomas.W ^talk 22:37, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas.W, then we have to remove the Italian flag from the article Italians even though all over the world (especially USA, Australia, Canada) the ethnic Italians express their Italian ethnic pride using the Italian flag. I am going to remove it. Moldspaeries (talk) 22:45, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than just remove it, bring it up on the talk page of the article. There's been a pseudo-consensus to use it for that article which has been discussed ad nauseum, but has been pushed by at least one editor as being acceptable. It's better to address it again and establish that it can't be a local consensus issue because it breaches WP:NOR... and policy trumps local consensus every time. Just have a quick read through the article's talk page. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:53, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Iryna Harpy, thanks for that. I am new here and it will be time consuming to get the nuts and bolts that fast. I hope someone else would put that issue. Moldspaeries (talk) 22:58, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as you've already removed the flag, I thinks that's probably the best way to reintroduce the issue per WP:BRD. If anyone tries to reinstate it, I'll start a new section after I've reverted it. The problem is that discussion over the use of the flag is mixed in with changes to presentation culminating in the long overdue WP:NOETHNICGALLERIES. Alternatives to collages and galleries of notables in the infobox were being discussed simultaneously with the idea that the national flag is some form of 'better' option. It's just a waiting game now. I'd rather pick my timing and address a challenge to its removal when it is challenged. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:10, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)I suggest you first check if there's a local consensus for having it there. What I did was revert wholesale undiscussed addition of flags on a considerable number of articles about ethnic groups. Which is not the same as removing it from an article where the flag has been for a while, without a prior discussion on the talk page of the article. Thomas.W ^talk 22:57, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The archived discussion can be found here. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:59, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) One of the broader problems with the use of contemporary flags to represent an entire ethnic group and its history is that it is the ethnic group that is the subject of the article, not the contemporary nation state (which is why I've reverted your addition of the Greek flag on the Greeks article). It's an undesirable conflation of contemporary nation-states with ethnicity. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:04, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Iryna Harpy, I got it your point.Moldspaeries (talk) 22:15, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did not appreciate your edit summaries, especially not on this edit, where you remove the flag on Israelis, even though I have expressly said that the article is about a nationality, not an ethnic group, or this one, where I said you should discuss it on the talk page of the article first. So what you're doing now is just plain disruptive. Thomas.W ^talk 23:03, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Again, Moldspaeries, while you may be editing in good faith, I urge you to slow down and familiarise yourself with the talk pages of articles, and the fact that all articles do not fall under a single 'rule' of parity. Each article is treated on a case by case basis. Yes, parity may be desirable, but I didn't realise that you'd removed the Italian flag invoking Thomas.W as supporting your removal. Wikipedia is a long term project and, other than WP:BLPVIO, nothing has to be changed immediately. I don't actually have the time to start a discussion on that talk page as I'm flat out being pinged on multiple articles in different areas of Wikipedia: articles and issues that are far higher on my list of priorities. Please stop pressuring other editors into keeping up with your priorities. It is disruptive. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:37, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stop adding irrelevant templates

No its not "suitable" for any of these countries. Stop adding these templates before I report you to ANI Makeandtoss (talk) 18:31, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Makeandtoss, then if not suitable remove all of them, from the pages of Talk:Demographics of Jordan, Talk:Demographics of Iraq, Talk:Demographics of Lebanon, Talk:Demographics of Syria, and Talk:Demographics of Egypt. Btw please, do not you personal attacks. Moldspaeries (talk) 18:34, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did remove them all, and I did not initiate any personal attacks. --Makeandtoss (talk) 18:37, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. Moldspaeries (talk) 18:38, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to multiple articles

I came here to leave a note after I'd spent some time correcting about 20 of your recent additions to "See also" sections in "Irreligion in ..." and other articles (e.g. Irreligion in Azerbaijan, Religion in Somalia). You'd added red links in many cases and we don't do that - see WP:SEEALSO. Now that I've read the above discussions, I see a bit of a pattern. In less than a week, you've made multiple page moves, you've added flags to many articles, you've added unsuitable templates to many articles and now you've added red links to "See also" in multiple articles. Many of these have created problems that other editors have had to fix.

I appreciate you're eager to improve the encyclopedia, but please could you spend a little more time getting used to the way it works before making changes to multiple articles? I suggest simply picking one or two articles to improve. That way you'll improve the encyclopedia and learn more about editing it without making lots of work for other editors. NebY (talk) 11:59, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NebY, thank you for your help. Moldspaeries (talk) 04:54, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NebY, I noticed that the IP [1] is possibly the same banned user using sock account BlueUndigoFucking1BlueUndigo that you reverted his/her contributions [2] I am not sure but think it has a connection. Do you know how to deal with incidents like this? Moldspaeries (talk) 04:28, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Falafel. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 01:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ARBPIA alert

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Please stop your POV-pushing at Falafel and elsewhere. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:33, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Malik Shabazz, thank you. Okay then. It seems Wikipedia is a tough place to contribute, a lot of rules to know. One food edit and I ended up in the Arab–Israeli conflict ;) Moldspaeries (talk) 04:26, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 23 April

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

On the Demographics of Lebanon page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (Fix | Ask for help)

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, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 24 April

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

On the Berbers in Algeria page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

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) 00:18, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Moldspaeries. 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)[reply]