User talk:Lihaas/Archive 23
This is an archive of past discussions about User:Lihaas. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:37, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:59, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
"Tehran University withdraws report on death of [Lotfi Zadeh]"
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:31, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of Reactions to the 2010 Moscow Metro bombings for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Reactions to the 2010 Moscow Metro bombings 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/Reactions to the 2010 Moscow Metro bombings 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. TheGracefulSlick (talk) 19:56, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
ITN recognition for X
On 6 October 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article X, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. BencherliteTalk 09:08, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Pointless nominations deserve pointless credits. BencherliteTalk 09:08, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Reactions to the Catalan independence referendum, 2017, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Express (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:13, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:36, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:37, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Lihaas. 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)
New Page Reviewing
Hello, Lihaas.
As one of Wikipedia's most experienced Wikipedia editors, |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:38, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Reverting a Discussion Close at ITNC
When an admin closes a discussion it should not generally be reopened without first discussing it with the closing admin. While I am presuming good faith here, re-opening the UNGA discussion served no purpose since there was not (and still is not) the slightest chance of reaching any consensus. Thank you for your contributions to the project. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:54, 24 December 2017 (UTC) |
MOS ?
Hello there, What means MOS ? It sincerely doesn't seems right to me to express most numbers in numbers an 9 in letters. Yug (talk) 20:12, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
- Yug, MOS means the Wikipedia Manual of Style. However, the edit changing "9" to "nine" was made in error, since while numbers up through nine are typically written in words, as it says in the MOS section MOS:NUMNOTES,
Comparable quantities should be all spelled out or all in figures, even if one of the numbers would normally be written differently
. In this case, that means that "9" was correctly rendered as a number, since the other three vote counts were all properly numbers. (They could all four have been written out in words, but the same method needed to be used for all four, and numbers were what the original editor chose.) I have changed it back to "9". BlueMoonset (talk) 01:44, 26 December 2017 (UTC)- Thanks for this explanation. Got it ! :D Yug (talk) 14:32, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
Articles for Creation Reviewing
Hello, Lihaas.
I recently sent you an invitation to join NPP, but you also might be the right candidate for another related project, AfC, which is also extremely backlogged. |
December 2017
Warning Please desist in your disruptive editing at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates. When an admin closes a discussion it should not be re-opened without first discussing the matter with them. A point which I made in my earlier note above. Let me be clear. I have closed the discussion in my capacity as an administrator and it is not to be re-opened other than by an admin. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:16, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Ad Orientem (talk) 17:04, 25 December 2017 (UTC)Lihaas (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Why is this blocked when there is no consensus whatsoever thereof? the ITNC page indicates a majority, or near majority, yet it was unilaterally closed. Lihaas(talk) 17:07, 25 December 2017 (UTC) {{help-admin}}
Decline reason:
Does not address the reason why you were blocked. Stephen 22:23, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
- Note: There are two possibilities here. One is that you were deliberately thumbing your nose at how we do things at ITNC and the project more broadly, (and me specifically). The second is that after almost ten years here and with well over 70,000 edits, you really don't understand that repeatedly reverting an admin close without so much as a "how do you do" is a no no. I'm not sure which is worse. In any event you have made no indication that you even understand why you were blocked much less that you regret it and won't do that sort of thing again. That coupled with your very impressive block log gives me no reason to reconsider my block or its duration. If this were to change, I might consider reducing the term of the block (though I doubt lifting it outright). -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:01, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
- Lihaas, if it was you who just performed this edit, and I have a very high degree of confidence that it was you or a meat puppet, Block Evasion will get you indeffed. Right now you are a micro inch from an indefinite block. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:09, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
- Just a view from a passing tps but I personally think the block length is excessive guven how many years it is since the last block. Block logs are not red letters and if you stay out of trouble its unfair for historical past conduct to get you treated more harshly, Spartaz Humbug! 04:42, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Spartaz. I had been considering reducing the length yesterday, but given their block evasion, I am now opposed to any reduction. Their disruptive editing has been really flagrant. I came very close to indeffing them last night. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:55, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Agree with Spartaz. Last block was 3 years ago. I would also not call the disruption "really flagrant"; it hardly seems worse than regular edit warring. What's done is done, but I'd suggest in the future simply letting another administrator close the nomination. There are enough admins watching ITNC that odds are it would've happened in less than 24 hours. It'd have saved a block + some drama, and most people would probably have come out happy. Banedon (talk) 12:12, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Honestly, reopening an admin close (or any close) of an RfC is nothing like "regular edit warring".Seraphim System (talk) 13:05, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- Just a view from a passing tps but I personally think the block length is excessive guven how many years it is since the last block. Block logs are not red letters and if you stay out of trouble its unfair for historical past conduct to get you treated more harshly, Spartaz Humbug! 04:42, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
- Lihaas, if it was you who just performed this edit, and I have a very high degree of confidence that it was you or a meat puppet, Block Evasion will get you indeffed. Right now you are a micro inch from an indefinite block. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:09, 26 December 2017 (UTC)