User talk:Bastun/2023

Andrew Tate article

I want to meet minds about what it means to be "raised as a [insert religious identity here]" versus "raised in [insert religion here]". To my mind, it is different to be "raised as a Christian" than to be "raised in Christianity". I was raised in Christianity but it never took because I viewed the god figure like I viewed Santa Claus, so I was never "a Christian". Whatever my parents were trying to raise me as, it didn't work; I was never raised "as a Christian", because the attempt failed. It seems to me that "raise as a ___" implies that the person did become indoctrinated with the religion through their upbringing. Succubus MacAstaroth (talk) 09:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

I was raised as a Christian but am now an atheist. I think most people would not see any difference in meaning between the two formulations, though the latter is a more awkward construction. But my talk page is not the place to discuss this; it should be discussed on the article talk page. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:27, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

N. K. Jemisin

I'm curious. What part of MOS:NICKNAME is unclear to you? We never structure first lines like this if someone is known by their initials and that name is used as the article title. Why on earth would it be necessary? Why should Ms Jemisin be an exception? It's not her pseudonym; it's merely her name. An obvious similar article would be J. R. R. Tolkien, who also wrote under his initials; we don't spell out his "pseudonym" because it wasn't a pseudonym. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:26, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

The place to discuss this is at the N. K. Jemisin article, not my talk page. I opened a talk-page section there, which crossed over with your post here. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:33, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Block

• @Daniel Case: - it's not clear where the 3RR violation occurred, nor when. Can you point out where? Genuinely confused here - Alison ^talk 23:51, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

@Alison: I have unblocked. The edit summary here led me to believe it was the same as the other reverts, but oddly the actual action has nothing to do with them. Daniel Case (talk) 03:09, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Um... @Daniel Case:, @Alison: - I can see I've apparently been issued a block in error (now lifted). Genuine mistake, no worries. However, can the record of that block be expunged, please? I have been editing here for over 15 years and have a clean block record that I'd like to keep, if at all possible. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 08:45, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Sure ... but an oversighter has to do it, I think. Never mind, I've RevDel'ed it. (But if you do want it to be invisible to admins, ask an oversighter. Daniel Case (talk) 17:48, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

• @Daniel Case: - the reason I took note in the first place, is that you blocked an established editor for 3RR without any warning whatsoever. No nothings. On top of that, you've marked a 15-year unblemished record and, as it turns out, done so in error. Yet you've not even apologized - c'mon. I suggest rather than Bastún try to deal with the OS folks, or the Devs or whoever, that you try to put this right and reach out to them - Alison ^talk 20:46, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I have been in contact with the OS team and they have informed me that not only can they not do this; the log entries cannot be RevDel'ed, either, so I will have to undo that.

This whole affair may sharpen your interest in this proposal at the Community Wishlist Survey, BTW. Daniel Case (talk) 02:17, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

I have restored the long entries. Note that my summary for the unblock states that it was my mistake. Daniel Case (talk) 02:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Can't say I'm happy about this, @Daniel Case:. Who can I talk to about this? Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 10:02, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

The oversight team, maybe, but they'd probably tell you the same thing. ArbCom is above them, but I don't know that they'd see it any differently. The opposes to that proposal at the Wishlist Survey suggest any argument on this has a very steep slope to climb. Daniel Case (talk) 19:27, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@Daniel Case:, @Alison: - would it be usual for Oversight to just not respond to an email? I found their page four days ago and sent an email; received a copy from wiki@wikimedia.org, but have heard nothing since, not even an acknowledgement. I know they're volunteers too, but that seems... slow? Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:58, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

They're probably really busy so it's no harm to ping them again. I was one myself, so know the deal - Alison ^talk 17:32, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Cheers, Allie, will do! Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 17:50, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia

You did not identify the source of the material in your edit. It appears to be Adoption. Copying within Wikipedia is acceptable but it must be attributed.

This type of edit does get picked up by Copy Patrol and a good edit summary helps to make sure we don't accidentally revert it. However, for future use, would you note the best practices wording as outlined at Wikipedia:Copying_within_Wikipedia? In particular, linking to the source article and adding the phrase "see that page's history for attribution" helps ensure that proper attribution is preserved.

While best practices are that attribution should be added to the edit summary at the time the edit is made, the linked article on best practices describes the appropriate steps to add attribution after the fact. I hope you will do so.

I've noticed that this guideline is not very well known, even among editors with tens of thousands of edits, so it isn't surprising that I point this out to some veteran editors, but there are some t's that need to be crossed.S Philbrick(Talk) 13:49, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Sphilbrick: - thanks for bringing this to my attention. I have seen the mentioned phrase "see that page's history for attribution" around the place, now I know why - every day is a schoolday! I'll follow the advice there now. Cheers, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:06, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

I think I have everything done now: edit summary (even got the date right the second time!) and text template added to the destination talk page. Cheers, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:55, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank-you. Interesting that you have seen the phrase, and may have wondered what prompted it. S Philbrick(Talk) 16:07, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Christopher Palles

Hi, nice to talk to you again haha. Reading what you linked again I remember, but I'll copy and paste it here: "Categories regarding religious beliefs or lack of such beliefs of a living person should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief in question (see WP:BLPCAT), either through direct speech or through actions like serving in an official clerical position for the religion. For a dead person, there must be verified reliable published sources that, by consensus, support the information and show that the description is appropriate. Religion is not heritable. Never categorize by a religion of any parents or other ancestors."

So this entirely fits with adding him as a Catholic. I know you think that he doesn't qualify but it even mentions him being Catholic twice in his wikipedia article, three times if you count a note in the sources, once it being notable that he was denied being a full "Scholar of the House" specifically because he was Catholic and that Catholics weren't allowed to be Scholars of the House at the time. In addition in other articles it mentions that he fought important political battles for Civil Rights for Catholics more or less.

You're the only one on wikipedia I've ever met who has this opinion of being this stringent of who should be qualified to be put into a religious category. There are literally hundreds, thousands of people on wikipedia who are less notable for being of their religion who are still put into that category and it seems accepted and even encouraged to categorize them like this.

Christopher Palles guy, March 18th 2023 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.112.246.69 (talk) 06:46, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Well, the people who came to a consensus on WP:BLPCAT and WP:CAT/R clearly agree with me, as do those who also remove inappropriate religious and no-religion categories where the person's notability doesn't derive from their religion, so there's that... 🤷‍♂ Cheers, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:19, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't know, it seems that the WP:BLPCAT and WP:CAT/R clearly agree with me........ 🤷‍♂🤷‍♂ Cheers

- Christopher Palles guy

BLPCAT: Categories regarding religious beliefs (or lack of such) or sexual orientation should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief (or lack of such) or orientation in question, and the subject's beliefs or sexual orientation are relevant to their public life or notability, according to reliable published sources. CAT/R: Categories regarding religious beliefs or lack of such beliefs of a living person should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief in question (see WP:BLPCAT), either through direct speech or through actions like serving in an official clerical position for the religion. These are pretty unequivocal. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 21:44, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello Bastun

Please read my replies on your notification to my page please Peacefulrelations (talk) 23:07, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Now I have some questions about you reverting my changes on a few things.

Why did you revert my explanation on Anti-Irish sentiment when I explained where Anglicans, Presbyterians and Catholics are from. To American readers and elsewhere, they may not understand the complexities. They may not know that Catholics were the indigenous people of Ireland, they may just read it all as religion.

For my Know-Nothing changes, I added in quotes from an academic journal written on their impact on America. You got rid of my changes. Can I please re-edit thank u Peacefulrelations (talk) 20:05, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Also as for Ulster Scots, the term that is used to describe whom live in Northern Ireland as a whole these days. Only came into usage, for that descriptive purpose, a hundred or so years ago.

Even in 1861, Anglicans made up the majority of Northern Irish Protestants, so its not used because they were the vast majority.

The term "Ulster Scots" was initially used to describe the Scottish settlers who migrated to Ulster in the 17th century. Over time, the term came to be used more broadly to refer to all people of Scottish descent living in Ulster, regardless of their religious affiliation. However, it was not until the early 20th century that the term began to be used more broadly to describe all residents of Ulster, including Anglicans and other groups. This broader usage of the term fails to reflect the region's complex and diverse history, and doesn't acknowledge the contributions of all communities to the cultural, social, and political landscape of Ulster. Peacefulrelations (talk) 20:10, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

And not only census but laws in the time of Protestant Ascendancy also reflect that Anglicans rather than Scots held greater power and influence in the region. Such as the Test Act 1704-1719 which placed prohibitions on anyone who wasnt Anglican.

You can edit this in rather than me, you are better with words. Peacefulrelations (talk) 20:12, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Irish tax resisters

Is there a definition available that allows one to add someone to this category? Does one have to self-identify? Is it sufficient to be outed by a newspaper? What's the selection criteria and who decided them? Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:18, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

No definition that I have seen. I removed the category from Mick Wallace due to the discussion on the talk page, and the fact that the only "resistance" mentioned in the article were failure to pay due taxes (tax default rather than tax resistance), and campaigning against bin charges (which are not a tax). It seems an odd, somewhat POV, category. (I left the 'far left' category because that's at least referenced). Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:44, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree that the category is probably POV. As such, the correct thing to do was to nominate it for deletion. While it remains, however, and while Wallace seems to be in scope, he should be returned to the cat. Laurel Lodged (talk) 07:26, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

See my addition to Talk:Mick Wallace. I don't agree with restoring the category, as it's unreferenced, but no objection if you want to go ahead and do so. Looking further at the category, I removed two others who didn't seem to fit it and/or whose articles didn't mention tax resistance. The only ones left in the category all seem to be anti-bin charge protestors. Is that "tax resistance"? Probably not. May nominate for deletion later. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:46, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

What about delete and re-parent remaining articles to Category:Anti-austerity protests in the European Union? Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:00, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

I think that would work for most of the category members. Alternatively, move/rename the 'Irish tax resisters' category to 'Anti-austerity protestors in Ireland' and make it a sub-cat of 'Anti-austerity protests in the European Union'? Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:26, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Regarding your message

I am fluent speaker of Irish language but you claimed that my edit was incorrect. Please do not revert my contributions. Opopopdavay (talk) 19:29, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Trolling, Opopopdavay? I mean, like, this was your edit... 🤣 Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 21:48, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

I am fluent speaker of Irish. I don't think you know what that means. Opopopdavay (talk) 14:34, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Gabh mo leithscéal, Opopopdavay, tar arís? Your edit literally changed Irish' (Standard Irish: Gaeilge), also known as Gaelic... to Irish (Standard Irish: Mac Soith), also known as Gaelic... - so no, I don't think you really are a fluent speaker of Irish or English; I think you're possibly a bit of a mhic soith yourself, who found a translation site. Your joke wasn't funny; give it up now. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 16:07, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

ANI discussion involving you

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Disruption by Laurel Lodged. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:14, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Extra bug snacks ...

... in your dwelling pod for you, sir! - Alison ^talk 23:40, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

crunch crunch Mmm, protein! Yum! 🤣 Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 00:23, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Template:Abortion in the Republic of Ireland

Hi Bastun, I have written a message on the talkpage over there if you'd like to contribute. I see others have also raised the issue of non-neutral language to describe the activist positions (pro or contra). Thanks. JustAChurchMouse (talk) 13:49, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Irish English

You reverted my edits on Irish English, could you explain why? If you look at pages such as International Phonetic Alphabet chart for English dialects, American English or Barbadian English the keywords of lexical sets are in small all caps. Monophthongs and diphthongs don’t need to be seperate sections, as they aren’t in most English dialect pages, and particularly in the case of Irish English since it realises a lot of the "diphthongs" as monophthongs. I also restored a link and organised the footnotes. Sorry for any inconvenience, I’m only writing to know what was unconstructive to avoid doing it again. 2A01:B340:87:8A2:B1F1:9:D915:7AB3 (talk) 09:54, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

As per the message at the top of the page, "if you came here to discuss article content, please post at the article Talk page." Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:37, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, will do. FYI that message doesn’t pop up for mobile editors (you have to tap on a learn more about this page disclaimer to find it). 2A01:B340:86:6AA:B025:530E:91C4:78F6 (talk) 00:02, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Easter Rising

Hi. A late reply, I suppose - sorry. Elected to take a break to clear my head and whatnot. Consensus is obiviously ideal however the article has largely been inactive, barring my contributions. I tend to operate with considerable boldness which is admittedly not always the perfect solution. If you wish to discuss any grievances, please do. We both, of course, want the same thing. DMT Biscuit (talk) 11:13, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

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) 00:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Articles of deceased persons.

Hello, I recently saw that you edited the late Shane MacGowan. I am trying to learn and improve my skills and accuracy as a wikipedian. I would like to ask, when someone dies, does a fellow wikipedian manually change the tense from present to past or does it occur automatically?

Kind Regards, WikiBits17 (talk) 21:37, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi WikiBits17. Yes, tense changes are all done manually. Best practice is to insert the {{Recent death|last= ,first=}} template at the top of the page, and make small edits to sections, as when a very famous person passes, a lot of people start editing the article at once. Basically, save early, save often, to minimise edit conflicts. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 23:59, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Arbitration Committee procedures

Hi Bastun. I'm Barkeep49, an editor and member of the Arbitration Committee (ArbCom). I noticed that you undid the close of an Arbitration Committee discussion performed by an ArbCom clerk. Under Arbitration Policy and Arbitration Procedures this can only be done by ArbCom itself; individual editors may not do so. If you have feedback about the motion you may leave it at the Arbitration Committee Noticeboard. Please let me know if you have any questions, otherwise thanks for your understanding. Sincerely, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:30, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Apologies, Barkeep49, I'm not all that familiar with Arbcom's procedures. No worries, I've added my comment to the Noticeboard, FWIW. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 22:50, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rotimi Adebari, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University of Benin.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hi Bastun. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at the permissions page in case your user right is time-limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page or ask via the NPP Discord. In addition, please remember:

• Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page, including checking for copyright violations using Earwig's copyright violation detector, checking for duplicate articles, and evaluating sources (both in the article, and if needed, via a Google search) for compliance with the general notability guideline.
• Please review some of our flowcharts (1, 2) to help ensure you don't forget any steps.
• Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. If you can read any languages other than English, please add yourself to the list of new page reviewers with language proficiencies. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:51, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, @HJ Mitchell:, I've read some of the NPP tutorial already and will work through the rest before I start reviewing. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 20:17, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I granted your request because I've seen you around and I've thought you've seemed sensible. As long as you take it slow to start with and build some experience I'm sure you'll be fine. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Why revert without adding a source?

I noticed you reverted my edit to Anti-Irish sentiment removing a poorly written and unsourced historical claim that, in its current phrasing, comes extremely close to attributing anti-Irish violence to the provocations of Irish migrants. Given the current political climate, I think a statement attributing mass violence to foreign hordes should at least carry a citation, and I'm confused as to why you would revert without any attempt to discuss.

Keep in mind Rollback privileges should only be used in cases of vandalism or where the reason for the revert is clear and obvious. 2600:1700:3901:6A40:2D50:758A:1DE1:2E40 (talk) 04:40, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

I read the section as violence being perpetrated against the Irish, without provocation, not the other way around. The statement was clear enough to me, at any rate. I'll add a reference now - it's not like they're not easy to find. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 08:42, 30 December 2023 (UTC)