User talk:Moonraker12

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another attempt on Crowd collapses and crushes

Hi, Have you seen Talk:Crowd collapses and crushes#Requested move 30 November 2021? Regards, WWGB (talk) 01:46, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh! Thanks for the heads-up: I have replied there... Moonraker12 (talk) 23:35, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect targets changed

Why did you change redirect targets like here? — Qwerfjkl talk 07:07, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwerfjkl: thanks for the note; I changed the redirect there (and elsewhere) because the target article has moved, following a long discussion here. Still got a long way to go, though... Moonraker12 (talk) 21:13, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Laputa for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Laputa, 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/Laputa 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, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 28

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Francisco Jover y Casanova

added a link pointing to Expiatory chapel

Félix Pyat

added a link pointing to Expiatory chapel

Ghent government in exile

added a link pointing to Expiatory chapel

Invasion of France (1795)

added a link pointing to Expiatory chapel

Rue de Créqui

added a link pointing to Expiatory chapel

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed 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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Moonraker12. Thank you for your work on Highbourne Cay Wreck. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for taking the time to create the article! Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ Contact me! 12:59, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Copenhagenization (warfare) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Copenhagenization (warfare), 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/Copenhagenization (warfare) 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, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Chief

Hi! Long ago, you helped me a lot. Perhaps you have an advice. Is it possible to undelete file "Kalaunuiohua.jpg" so that it can be used in this article? Maybe we can change the resolution. If you have the time, you can message. :-) - V. K. (talk) 19:25, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed 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 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Czech railway stations

Hi, I'm posting this on your talk page since the RMTR contest is probably not the best place to. First off apologies if I sounded rude in the original contest of the request; that wasn't my intention and I amended the statement. About the naming - since technically it is a bold move it should be reverted upon a contest, but this seems like a bit of an exception. I went down a rabbit hole trying to find older discussions about this and there's been a lot of disagreement about this. I strongly encourage you to open an RM here, as if I or another page mover simply reverted the move it would just continue this dispute without resolution. WP:RMPM are the instructions on opening a multi-page RM. There hasn't been a clear discussion on this since 13 years ago and one desperately needs to be held, so please do this when you can.

On the reasoning: while the naming is consistent with other Czech railway stations, there have, as you linked, been discussions and consensus based on WP:UE for other countries in Europe, so maybe a systematic change to all Czech railway stations is needed. This can only be done through an RM. Consensus can change, and maybe it has since the last RM 13 years ago. Best, HurricaneZeta^C 21:17, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@HurricaneZeta: Sorry, I didn't know this was here (didn't get an alert for some reason!) Again, I agree this needs an RM, but do you have any advice on the point that any RM wouldn't be based on the status quo ante, and so would be weighted in favour of where they've been moved to? (I'm also still a bit narked that the page mover was able to get away with this!) Regards, Moonraker12 (talk) 21:35, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Moonraker12 The current consensus in the ancient RM was moving from the Czech title to the English title, which closed as not moved, so I think it's fitting to start the other RM on the same pretense instead of moving it back (since the "status quo", if I didn't miss another RM about another Czech railway station, is to keep it at the Czech title). Additionally, before the 2020 move the station on which the entire discussion happened a few months ago it was at the old Czech title. It might be weighted but supporters would simply support the RM and opposers would oppose to keep it at the current title.

This has flared up a couple of times since that RM, got "resolved" only to flare up again a few years later. While technically it could be "resolved" by reverting these moves, my own opinion is to IAR (letting them "get away" with it) and push it to RM to solve the underlying issue - at least in future disputes one can cite an RM under Wikipedia's current processes instead of back when we still did surveys and strawpolls. This should be quite a large RM to avoid it being buried and overlooked if it were just for one page. HurricaneZeta^C 21:51, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also make sure to link to all the previous discussions in your RM! HurricaneZeta^C 21:59, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@HurricaneZeta: Just to be clear; is the ancient RM you mentioned the one involving the Prague station? That page started out with a title in English, had several undiscussed moves, then ended up at the Czech title, whereupon the RM to move it to English failed as there was no consensus to do so.

OTOH the seven I’ve referred to (and discussed on the Ostrava page) were posted with Czech titles, moved by me in 2020 (I assumed a move made under a guideline wouldn’t need to be discussed), and remained there until they were moved in March. Where they now sit. I do see them as separate issues, because I feel these seven moves were made with an unfair advantage, and any RM to move them (all) to English would be an uphill struggle. So I don't really know where to go from here...Moonraker12 (talk) 22:29, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Moonraker12 I'm really sorry but I thought a lot about this and I don't think I can move it back. Another page mover might have a differing opinion, but for me reverting this move would be an obviously controversial action and something I should probably not use the page mover tools on. You can say that in the RM statement, that you don't think the page should have been moved at all. FWIW, the main issue here seems to be the translation of English (and the German counterpart which remains untranslated as part of the naming convention), so my tip is to include alternate proposals too for the other English translation (imo, there is opposition and support to this, and i don't think it's entirely an uphill battle if you present the RM properly). If there is no consensus to move the closer can look at the nomination and the recent undiscussed move and decide that the best thing to do is revert back to the 2020 title before the undiscussed move. I'm doing this in my best judgement and I don't know if there's anything that's the "right" thing to do as this is all pretty complicated. HurricaneZeta^C 23:13, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm somewhat reconsidering my original approach to this, that these moves should be reverted at all. I don't want to movewar and two others have expressed if not support, at least intent to keep the title following the move. Again I'm really sorry if I'm overly complicating all this. HurricaneZeta^C 23:19, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My thanks (belately!) for your comments: I’d like to clarify that I had accepted and understood your decision; my comments are more me talking into a listening ear. I haven’t decided what to do next; this whole saga has been profoundly dispiriting...Moonraker12 (talk) 23:02, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
PS: (note to self: the RMTR request was here. )