User talk:Revirvlkodlaku

Your changes broke the timeline, I fixed it, please leave the date format as is. 2A02:A46A:2C29:1:A151:A69D:59C1:FF8 (talk) 13:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It appeared that I made some errors adding sourced genres to the "Forget" article. I am curious as to what errors have been made. Misterspaceman (talk) 20:01, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Misterspaceman, a great way to begin a conversation with someone is by offering even a simple greeting like "Hi" or "Hello". Your message strikes me as mildly passive-aggressive, which is unfortunate; please let me know if I'm mistaken. I don't quite understand what you're asking of me: what errors are you referring to, and what kind of explanation are you hoping for that isn't obvious from my edit? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:29, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to begin with a greeting, so hello :)! I did not intend to be passive aggressive, and I apologize if my comment caused a negative feeling. In fact, I was rather content and not angry, and right now I am also content. The errors I were referring to were some recycled sources used for "new wave" on the article, namely the Chicago Reader and Billboard sources. "Forget" has been called "new wave" across the Internet due to its strong nostalgia for 1980s pop, which was why the genre initially had 4 citations on the album's article. I didn't know that repeat sources were not encyclopedic, so I'd like to give my kind gratitude to you for fixing my edits. I also gave you a "Thank You" with a smiling chat box graphic as well. Have a good day, and Happy belated New Year! :) Misterspaceman (talk) 06:46, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Misterspaceman, thanks for the explanation. I can sometimes be sensitive about perceived tone 😖

Anyway, I'm glad there is no misunderstanding or dispute regarding our respective edits. I think all I did, apart from formatting stuff, was to remove two duplicate references. Cheers, and happy new year to you as well! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:47, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Revirvlkodlaku. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "CHPTRS".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:55, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Order of Ľudovít Štúr has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Newklear007 (talk) 09:12, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Ever since I created the Teya Dora article, you have been an helpful editor in terms of improving the article and I never got to thank you for that.

However, I noticed you reverted my expansion of the lead, claiming the content is "unreferenced". But is it though? This edit is clearly supported by a citation of the artist's participation on the upcoming music competition. --Azor (talk). 17:16, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @--Azor, I see that now, thanks for mentioning it. That was my error, but if I could suggest you be a bit more clear in your edit summaries, it would help other editors understand your edits better. Thanks! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 04:27, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've read your comment at User talk:Nina&John Hendy, where you refer to them as "a single-issue, disruptive user". I totally agree, and I did consider blocking the account right away, but decided to just add another warning to the one you had already posted, and then watch for further editing. So far the account hasn't edited since I gave them that warning, and if it stays like that there won't be any need to do anything. However, if the same thing starts up again, either from the same account or from another one, I will be willing to reconsider blocking. JBW (talk) 18:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do not revert other people's edits especially when they have added a large amount of content and sources to the article. You may have added citations needed tags before, but I was in the process of adding additional sources to the article and you provided no reason for your revert. If you have concerns, I suggest you explain them on the talk page before deleting sourced content. Thank you. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 19:53, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nkon21, apologies for the wholesale revert. However, in the future, you should endeavour to provide an edit summary, and this way, your work is less likely to be considered questionable. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 05:26, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You don’t need to accuse me on starting an edit war. All I did was providing an edit summary. SailorGardevoir (talk) 20:22, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nkon21, I'm confused: you engage in an edit war with me, but you don't want me to point it out to you?

If you are certain that the song was released through Polydor, you must demonstrate it with a reference, not simply claim it to be true. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 01:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to ask why you reverted my edit to The Little Mole (here). The current statement ('commuter train') is arguably as much Wikipedia:OR as 'long distance train' or 'indicating the family section'. I would argue citing a source in this figure caption would be an example of WP:Overcite, however, if you really wish, I can add a reference to e.g. this article. DWeir (talk) 21:18, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @DWeir, please consider adding a greeting when communicating with someone—it makes if feel less like you're poking your finger in my chest angrily. I explained my revert in my edit summary: A commuter train is easily recognizable based on its form, whereas "indicating the family section" is not only purely speculative (as far as we know, the entire train could be decorated with the same design), but it seems like unnecessary detail for an image caption. Hope that helps. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:25, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But some filmographies like Stellar, Big Forest, and Bait does not have linked entries - Jjpachano (talk) 11:27, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Jjpachano, I appreciate your message, but you should know that I'm much more receptive when people use courtesy, which includes saying hello first. I understand your point, but I don't think it's a justification. There are many filmographies that need cleanup. Personally, I think a selected filmography should mainly include linked entries, with few exceptions. This makes the article more tidy, especially when an actor has a large oeuvre. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 11:36, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I put some references. Thanks for help!—Miha (talk) 15:15, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the following taken from Template:Cleanup bare URLs

Bare URLs—add this tag

• http://www.example.org/page.html

Good citations—do not add this tag

• Fuster V, Walsh RA, Harrington RA, eds. Hurst's The Heart. 13th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2011. http://www.accessmedicine.com/content.aspx?aID=7812984.
• Fuster V, Walsh RA, Harrington RA, eds. Hurst's The Heart. 13th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2011.

So please do not add bare url templates to the pages where there is no bare reference, Egeymi (talk) 05:45, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Egeymi, I believe you are mistaken. I think the page is replete with bare urls. They are not mere links, as is shown in the "add this tag" category on Template:Cleanup bare URLs, since they also include a title, but no other identifying information is provided, such as cite template, website/source, date, date accessed, etc. Please look at refs 6–22; do you not consider these bare urls? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 10:07, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the cases you mentioned we don't use bare url template, but another one, full citation is needed. So please use the correct template, Egeymi (talk) 10:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Revirvlkodlaku. I was wondering if you could proofread the Fally Ipupa and Koffi Olomide articles that I have been working on since last year. I have expanded both articles, which were previously stubs. The Fally Ipupa article has been promoted to a "C-Class"; however, the Koffi Olomide review is still pending.

Thanks! EdwinAlden.1995 (talk) 13:12, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @EdwinAlden.1995, no problem, I'll add them to the top of my list 😀 Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:44, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Revirvlkodlaku, thanks for your extensive work on Koffi Olomide's article. That was some solid work, fam. EdwinAlden.1995 (talk) 12:44, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EdwinAlden.1995, I appreciate the kind words. It's a hefty article, so I had to do it in sections, but it's also a fun project—you're teaching me about African music, something I knew almost nothing about until now! I'm not quite done with it, by the way ;) Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 20:06, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Revirvlkodlaku, thanks for keeping me in the loop! I'm glad you're finding the article satisfying despite its length. I am a music nerd, and Congolese music it's such a rich and diverse subject. Take your time with it, and I can't wait to peep the final piece! Let me know if you need any more info or help along the way. EdwinAlden.1995 (talk) 23:40, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @EdwinAlden.1995, there are a couple of points in the Fally Ipupa that I need more clarity on:

1. What is the meaning of "conductor" in the context of the bands in question? Is this actually the correct term, or would manager/director be more appropriate?

2. What is Quartier Latin Académia, and what is its relationship to Quartier Latin International?

3. What is the meaning of "Anelka"? If it needs to be mentioned, then it should also be translated.

Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:15, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Revirvlkodlaku, apologies for the delayed response. Let me clarify some points here:

1. In the context of a band, a "conductor" is a musician who plays a crucial role in conveying the band leader's vision for the music to the other musicians. The conductor also has the authority to bring in new musicians, but the band leader must approve any newcomers. While the conductor is subordinate to the band leader, they are still considered more important than other members of the band.
2. Quartier Latin Académia, which is now known as Collective A, is a Congolese music group led by Sam Tshintu. It was founded in February 1991 by Dolce Parabolique Somono and Lebou Kabuya, who were both former members of Koffi Olomide's Quarter Latin International. The collective was formed by several musicians who had left Koffi Olomide's band after not receiving the promised amount or value of the bonus for their performance at the two historic concerts in the iconic halls of Olympia Hall, Zenith de Paris, Brixton Academy, and others. They named their newly formed band Quartier Latin Académia. During the 1990s, Koffi Olomide's band was the most prominent, and many musicians left their own bands to join his Quarter Latin International. The band Talent Latent, for instance, slipped into obscurity due to consecutive departures of its musicians, including Fally Ipupa himself.

I hope that this information is helpful. Please do not hesitate to reach out if you need further clarification. Best regards. EdwinAlden.1995 (talk) 05:48, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @EdwinAlden.1995, your response wasn't delayed on my end, since I went to sleep shortly after posting my comment 😁

Thanks for the explanations. This usage of the word "conductor" seems unorthodox, so unless it's regional, I suspect it may be incorrect, and this is why I asked if a different term could be used, like director or manager. Alternatively, is there a source that could substantiate this novel usage of "conductor"?

I had also asked about the nickname "Anelka". If it doesn't have any lexical meaning, I think it should be omitted.

Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:25, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Revirvlkodlaku, "conductor" might not be the best choice for the intended audience's readability and clarity as it is a regional term. Instead, using "director" or "manager" would be clearer and more appropriate. Though there exists validation for the usage of "conductor," I am inclined to agree with your proposition.

As for the name "Anelka," it refers to the French professional footballer Nicolas Sébastien Anelka, who transferred to Real Madrid for £22.3 million in 1999. This transfer was considered one of the most expensive of that year. Coincidentally, in the same year, Fally Ipupa joined Quartier Latin International. His arrival was accompanied by the nickname "Anelka," as a tribute to Nicolas Anelka's transfer. This nickname was given to Fally Ipupa because his own transfer was also seen as the "most expensive transfer." EdwinAlden.1995 (talk) 17:22, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @EdwinAlden.1995, thanks for the explanation—I've gone ahead and made the change from conductor to director. Thanks also for clarifying Anelka! I feel foolish, because the answer was staring me in the face the whole time 🤦🏼‍♂️ Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 22:02, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Revirvlkodlaku, you're welcome! We all miss the obvious sometimes. I'm glad I could help clarify things for you EdwinAlden.1995 (talk) 02:46, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @EdwinAlden.1995, in the 2022 Stade des Martyrs crowd crush section of the Fally Ipupa article, I don't think it's necessary to mention the two cancelled shows that preceded the fateful event; it doesn't add anything for the reader in terms of the section topic. What do you think? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 04:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Revirvlkodlaku, You are absolutely correct, and removing those two redundant statements concerning the canceled concerts is critical. As you pointed out, the canceled shows wouldn't compromise the reader's comprehension of the section's topic since these statements don't provide any substantial information. EdwinAlden.1995 (talk) 04:33, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Revirvlkodlaku, thanks for meticulously proofreading the article and for rectifying any grammatical errors. Your keen eye for detail is much appreciated. I would have suggested more articles, but I see that you have many projects to work on. EdwinAlden.1995 (talk) 04:38, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EdwinAlden.1995, glad we agree on the concert topic. Thanks for the kind words, I'm glad you've found my input valuable. I was actually thinking yesterday that there's doubtless many other articles you and I could collaborate on, as it seems you are quite busy fleshing out many music-related pages (doing great work on that front, by the way!) I'd like to focus on a few pages that are at the top of my list at the moment and which I've neglected due to a busy schedule, but give me a few months, and I'll have time to tackle another one of your musical projects 😀 Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:09, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Revirvlkodlaku, I'm really flattered you think of me as a music article whiz! 😄 I'm glad you're enjoying working on the music pages. I know you've been busy, so no worries about taking a break. Just let me know when you're ready to jump back in and we can brainstorm some ideas! EdwinAlden.1995 (talk) 14:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EdwinAlden.1995, will do! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:32, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @EdwinAlden.1995, in your latest edit on the Koffi Olomide page, you added two "Africar" awards. I just wanted to check if that was intentional, or if you meant to write "African". Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:11, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Revirvlkodlaku, thanks for your inquiry. After consulting various sources, including Radio France Internationale (RFI) and other reputable outlets, it has been confirmed that the correct spelling of the award is "Africar," as opposed to the commonly assumed "African." EdwinAlden.1995 (talk) 15:26, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @EdwinAlden.1995, in the International success and emergence of homegrown bands section of the Congolese rumba page, there is mention of an "Aficanus Society". I'd like to clarify what this society is, and whether or not its name has been spelled correctly. Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:10, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings @Revirvlkodlaku, I also initially thought it was a typo and that "Africanus Society" was the correct term. However, after reviewing Clément Ossinondé's work, I found that he referred to it as "Société Aficanus" in French, which translates to "Aficanus Society" in English. It appears that "Aficanus Society" may not be a typographical error after all. Thus, I can confidently verify that this translation accurately represents the intended designation.

Best regards, Edwin Alden. EdwinAlden.1995 (talk) 15:25, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EdwinAlden.1995, thanks for the response. Perhaps it should be clarified on the page what the society is all about? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 16:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Revirvlkodlaku, I searched for information on the "Africanus Society" but came up empty-handed. Despite my thorough search, there were no relevant results. I am uncertain whether the society is not well-known or if there is simply a scarcity of available sources. That's all the information I have at the moment. EdwinAlden.1995 (talk) 04:36, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EdwinAlden.1995, fair enough, thank you for the effort. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 04:52, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @EdwinAlden.1995, on the Congolese rumba page, could you provide more clarity as to the meaning of "antiphonal"? Thanks! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:23, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Revirvlkodlaku, apologies for my delayed response. I have now added a hyperlink to the term "antiphonal" in its corresponding article to help the audience more conveniently understand its meaning. EdwinAlden.1995 (talk) 19:14, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @EdwinAlden.1995, in your latest edit on Koffi Olomide, you mention tcha tcho, which is also mentioned elsewhere in the article. You likely have a better idea of this than I do, and I didn't want to re-read the entire page, but is it explained anywhere in the article what tcha tcho is? Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:33, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Revirvlkodlaku, tcha tcho is a musical style thoroughly described in the article's section "1985–1986: Diva, Tcha Tcho, Ngobila, and Quartier Latin International." It is characterized as a slower variant of soukous. EdwinAlden.1995 (talk) 06:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EdwinAlden.1995, ah yes, I see that now. That was an easy one, actually; thanks for indulging my laziness 🫣 Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:51, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about edit overlaps with you at The Truth Will Out. Some of those were accidental: I hadn't seen your intervening edits as I was also editing there. I'll try to be more careful.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 20:35, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @shaidar cuebiyar, no worries, but thanks for reaching out. I'm happy we are collaborating on improving the page 🙂 Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 01:04, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Can you clarify why you removee the picture of Jacob Desvarieux from Kassav', the pioners of Zouk, in the Zouk page?

Have the best. 2001:2042:302E:ED00:1CF1:F04A:90C3:D711 (talk) 12:58, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sure, the reason was that the picture wasn't properly formatted or situated, and insufficient context was provided as to what it depicted, and since I was in a rush, I didn't take the time to research it. The image seems fine in terms of permissions, so I don't mind if you restore it, but it needs to be properly formatted and contextualized. What makes that difficult is that the Kassav' page itself is a mess, with very few references, so it's not clear to me that Desvarieux is the pioneer you claim he is. Before anything further is done with the image and the zouk page, I would like to see the Kassav' page cleaned up and properly referenced. Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:55, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody should have to "check iTunes" to verify something. It should be sourced on the article per WP:V. Something as important as an artist's upcoming album should be sourced with a quality news source. The user you reverted my revert of has now been indefinitely blocked for habitually adding unsourced information. If that's the kind of behaviour that gets somebody indefinitely blocked, those are not the sort of edits we should be restoring, and clearly "checking iTunes" is not sufficient. If it were, they wouldn't now be blocked. Ss112 15:56, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ss112, I disagree with you about iTunes. Most discographies on WP do not reference each existing release, and when upcoming releases are easily verifiable on an established music service like iTunes, a reference isn't required either. Anyway, I see that you've found a ref for it, so it's all good. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:09, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely nothing against you, but you haven't changed anything in this edit (in the past, I have rightly suffered unpleasant consequences for such aesthetic "changes"). JacktheBrown (talk) 08:59, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @JacktheBrown, can you please clarify what you are trying to convey? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:39, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Revirvlkodlaku: nothing, just curiosity. A great day! JacktheBrown (talk) 13:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JacktheBrown, just to clarify, I've always left a line break between images and text. I find this makes it easier for editors to locate images within text. As for images at the beginning of an article, it makes more sense (to me) to lump them with other non-text markup, such as the infobox, so that's what I've always done. Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:10, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, David, in the yakisoba article, I had rendered it as ‘yaki udon’ specifically because ‘udon’ is considered a Japanese loanword to English; it has common usage within English, per MOS:FOREIGN. Despite “yaki udon” in its entirety being taken from Japanese, only the ‘yaki’ part needs to be treated as a foreign word, per the MOS. So, in the yakisoba article: it should be ‘sara udon’ and ‘yaki udon’.        —I'llbeyourbeach (talk) 10:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@I'llbeyourbeach, that makes sense, thanks for pointing it out. I'll go ahead and fix it. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:46, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!! I had, uh, thanked you for the edit where you also italicised “udon” because I misread the diffs and thought you did the same thing to “sara udon”, but thank you frfr for that now. <3        —I'llbeyourbeach (talk) 13:54, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Revirvlkodlaku,
You correctly reverted the edit that contained a copyright violation on Hirokin, and are correct in saying that there is no longer a copyright issue. However, our revision deletion criterion WP:RD1 requires that the actual historical page revisions (the two ones I specified in the template) are redacted by an administrator as they contain copyrighted content.
The template is not shown to logged-out users and should be removed soon once the page revisions are hidden from the public archives. Please do ask me if you have any questions. – Isochrone (talk) 19:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm confused: Why is there a template for citing a press release, if (according to you) a press release doesn't qualify as a source? As for the other source, I thought I was citing the album cover notes (also per Wikipedia template), with a wikilink to the article about the album, but not implying that the Wikipedia article was the source. Apologies if I did that wrong. Please clarify if you can. Jcejhay (talk) 10:33, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. If I redo the edits, I can also add this source, a review of Never Not Together in an online music mag that refers to "frequent collaborator Doug Gillard"—i.e., collaborator, not band member: https://whenthehornblows.com/content/2020/2/9/album-review-nada-surf-never-not-together Jcejhay (talk) 13:08, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As you know, it can be difficult to document a negative (i.e., the absence of a former band member), but I also see that Pop Matters on Never Not Together has text and photo documenting the post-Gillard lineup. I'm going to redo the edits in good faith now, citing all four sources, and I hope you won't revert again or leave any more unnecessarily disparaging edit summaries. I'm here, if you'd like to have a constructive conversation.

https://www.popmatters.com/nada-surf-never-not-together-2645126135.html Jcejhay (talk) 13:16, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Jcejhay, I've read through all the articles used to support Doug Gillard's inclusion in the band, and none of them actually state that, so I've removed all mention of him from the article, except as a supporting member in the band members section.

I do apologize for my edit summary. It wasn't disparaging in any way—please look that word up before accusing someone—but it was certainly snarky, and that's uncalled for. Thanks for bringing the issue up with me. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:14, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for helping make the article better, and for the apology. Of course, I do know what "disparaging" means, and publicly suggesting that I was trying to foist non-sources on the community fits the bill, imho. (Maybe you should look it up? I like how M-W Unabridged covers it.) Jcejhay (talk) 14:24, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jcejhay, I don't think it does—the most you could say is that I made insinuations—but that's ok, we don't need to argue semantics. Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 16:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The funny thing is, the first word that came to mind was the word you used—"snarky." I went with "disparaging" in an effort to be tactful. Anyway, have a good one. Jcejhay (talk) 16:18, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lambert Hamel, 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/Lambert Hamel 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, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kassav', you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CBS Records.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I do not see your logic in reverting my edit to remove Bernard Hill from the cast. It really didn't matter he didn't have a character name (at the time), he was reliably sourced by the BBC as being part of the series as it was now something that would be posthumous for him.

Really wonky logic for a needless revert. Rusted AutoParts 19:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Rusted AutoParts, I'm always open to discuss the edits I make with those who disagree with them, and you did the right thing to bring it up with me, but my willingness to have a conversation becomes frayed when my interlocutor thinks it's ok to be rude to me on my talk page. I haven't harmed you in any way, so there's no call for rudeness. You could have told me that you disagreed with my revert and left it at that, instead of adding your bit about "wonky logic". Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:43, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how describing the line of thinking is rude? I'm not saying there's something wrong with you, I just don't get the reasoning. "If no character is added, what's the point of including the actor?", why does not having a character name result in the actor, who was reliably sourced as being cast in the series, needing to be removed from the page? I'm sorry if you're interpreting this as rudeness, that's not the intention. I'm just....confused. Rusted AutoParts 02:50, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rusted AutoParts, "I just don't get the reasoning" and "wonky logic" are two VERY different statements, and I'm sure you must realize that.

I didn't have a strong case for removing Hill—it just didn't make sense to me to include him if the reader was left unaware of his character in the show. Anyway, he is back now, with a character to boot, so all's well, and this should be no more than a clarificatory conversation, not a confrontational one. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:01, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't get how me assessing the removal as having "wonky logic" is being rude nor me coming here to ask for some clarification as being "confrontational" but it seems we're just going to be agreeing to disagree on this. Rusted AutoParts 03:14, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rusted AutoParts, I don't know why this is so difficult for you to see. Just because you disagree with or dislike something doesn't make it "wonky", or anything else, for that matter. That's akin to describing food you don't like as being bad.Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:25, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You said that because he had no character name, there's no point in listing the actor as part of the cast and deleted him. This really makes no sense because he was still verifiably confirmed as part of the cast, we just didn't have a character name yet. A plethora of upcoming films or shows has instances of announcing cast without giving out a character name, this has never made it an issue in adding them into the cast list. This is why I assessed your reversion as wonky, because no character name didn't mean his being in the show was not true. This was not me saying you yourself are wonky, or your decision making process as a whole is wonky, this lone instance I have seen was what I found wonky, or misguided, or whichever word to describe an edit not being a logical one. It was by no means used with the intention to be rude towards you, or confrontational, or hostile, or any kind of antagonistic approach. It was simply the word I wound up using to describe the edit, that's all. I'm sorry you're taking such umbrage to it, but there was really nothing personal about it. Rusted AutoParts 03:35, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rusted AutoParts, it may not make sense to you, but it made sense to me, so it's subjective, not wonky. Anyway, thanks for explaining, I feel better now :) Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:38, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Revirvlkodlaku. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Debustrol".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:25, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Austronesian peoples, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Penannular.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hiya, minor note about coal chamber. im not adding white space, is probably the mobile editor doing that. ty. Chchcheckit (talk) 13:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Chchcheckit, thanks for mentioning it. I've often wondered why some editors do this, and it never occurred to me that it might be automatically generated. Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:01, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Chchcheckit, by the way, please stop using profanity in edit summaries. I've now twice seen you use the word "shit". It's not that I think it's bad or wrong—I just don't think it belongs in an encyclopedia. Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 04:38, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And you know what? I will. Chchcheckit (talk) 09:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, seriously, this is the first time anyone’s called me out on it. You’re right. Chchcheckit (talk) 09:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Chchcheckit, thank you for the positive response. It's easy to expect snark on Wikipedia, because it's so common, and therefore it's refreshing when once in a while, a user can acknowledge a point you're trying to make, even if it's critical of them. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:48, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yeah. I recognise that in days of wiki past i was a bit of an pseudo-opinionated asshole and couldn't recognise the implications of things I did, long story but most of it is probably the autism/adhd and lack of good parenting. Since recognizing my issues around last year thanks to a regretful incident, I've definitely tried to get away from that part of myself, though there are probably still heuristics and other things I haven't noticed yet. So for me, any advice is good advice.

On why this is relevant; because the last thing i ever want or intend to do is upset people, and I need to grow up. Chchcheckit (talk) 15:28, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Chchcheckit, once again, that's much appreciated. Thank you also for the reminder that likely a significant proportion of regular Wiki editors is neurodivergent, and not simply assholes—something I need to keep in mind when I feel reactive.

"in days of wiki past"—I like that 😉 Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 22:59, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What historical expedition was this? The lead says speculated. Doug Weller talk 14:27, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller I guess that's a fair point (do you not say hello to people when starting a conversation?), but I'm curious to see what comes of this discussion, so perhaps we should leave it in the meantime? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:44, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Ok, we’ll see. I am often terse, not being rude. Doug Weller talk 18:11, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller no worries, I appreciate the clarification. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 00:33, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Revirvlkodlaku, I am a new editor/contributor, and I would appreciate having a better understanding of my mistakes in adding a new section about Luba's documentary special entitled "Luba, Between the Earth and Sky" which aired on CBC on October 30, 1987. Unfortunately I wasn't aware that I hadn't properly logged on prior to making this addition. That was my first mistake. I am aware now that IMDB should not be used as a reliable source. However the other citations included were the Toronto Star, and the reliable magazines "Cinema Canada" and "Canadian Musician". I was planning to add additional citations today from the Globe and Mail. I uploaded the photo of Luba from the concert as non-free, fair-use, acknowledging the source and copyright as a publicity photo from production company, Cambium Productions' press kit, which was used extensively to promote the TV special. I would appreciate your help. Thanks. Wiredwidget Wiredwidget (talk) 10:52, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Wiredwidget, thanks for reaching out. The reason I removed the images was because they both appeared to be missing appropriate permissions, and they were flagged on Wikimedia.

As for the paragraph you added about the documentary, apart from the IMDB references, which you're now aware of, all other references were simply titles without links, which I didn't find helpful. If you can provide those references, with external links, then I don't see a problem with the content (though I will still copy edit it, of course). Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:47, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This might help. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Infoboxes#Nationality_and_citizenship

Rodericksilly (talk) 17:28, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Zuby Nehty, 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/Zuby Nehty 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, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stop reverting. Having ancestors from some country won't make a person actor etc of this country. Mena Suvari is half Estonian (her father was Estonian), but she isn't listed as American-Estonian actor. His acting career is all Russian. He does not speak Estonian. Also in case of Baltic States do not use the names of illegal entities set up by the occupier as birth places. These were internationally unrecognised organisations that had no sovereignty over the territories they acted on. Same as Donetsk People's Republic etc today. Governments of Baltic states continued to work in exile, diplomatic missions continued and were recognised by the western states. State continuity of the Baltic states. Executive zombie (talk) 19:57, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Same with Yuliya Aug who is from Narva. It does not say that she is Estonian actress. Russian actor, director, director and screenwriter with Estonian roots, Also Käro "Russian theater and film actor Kirill Käro was born on February 24, 1975 in Tallinn." Executive zombie (talk) 20:11, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok @bud, first things first: check your attitude. You do not come posting on my talk page without a basic level of courtesy and give me orders; you will not make any headway with me using that attitude. You are a new, inexperienced user, and as such, the least you should do is act with humility and courtesy toward more experienced editors.

Now, as for Kirill Käro, the page says he is Estonian (though the supporting reference is a dead link, unfortunately); he was born in Estonia; his father is Estonian-Russian; he has an Estonian name; his cousin Volli Käro is Estonian, etc. What exactly is your argument? If you have any solid reasons for your claims that Käro is not Estonian, start a talk page discussion, stop edit warring, and don't be a jerk to other editors. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 20:48, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but it was your attitude, started to threaten with warning if someone does edits that you don't like.

Which page says that? It's not relatives that makes someone an actor or other personality of a country, As Mena Suvari whose father is Estonian isn't called Estonian-American actor, or Yuliya Aug who also has Estonian roots. His career is Russian based. He is known as a Russian actor. Executive zombie (talk) 21:04, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Executive zombie, it's not "attitude" to tell a disruptive editor to stop edit warring—it's policy. As I said in my previous comment, start a talk page discussion if you have an issue with the page content, and stop posting on my talk page. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 21:07, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We have a disagreement. You reverting my edits is not less "disruptive" as my edits. Can we find common ground, that's the way of wikipedia. Not gatekeeping and telling others that their opinions are disruptive etc. I added source instead of the dead one.Executive zombie (talk) 21:29, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Executive zombie, you seem to be confused about what "disruptive editing" means. I can tell you that reverting bad edits is not it, so you're making a (self-serving) false equivalency. Regardless, I'll do my best to find common ground with you. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 00:01, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There was a user named DollysOnMyMind who is now banned as a sockpuppet of Giubbotto non ortodosso. They reverted my edit of adding the "electro" genre to the 'Alone at Prom' article because they believed it violated WP: EXPLICITGENRE. The source's description of "electro" was quite direct, as a quote from the source stated, "Rekindling a forgotten sound by way of luscious synths, funky strings and crunchy, electro drum patterns..." Should I restore the edit from the sockpuppet, or was there something from WP:EXPLICITGENRE that I missed?

The source: electro^[1] Misterspaceman (talk) 22:10, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Misterspaceman, per the source, it appears you were correct to include the electro genre, so if I were you, I would restore it. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 23:59, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please can you stop reversing my additions on the Charles Soludo articles. I think the information been added are necessary Obi Trice 19 (talk) 06:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Obi Trice 19, I'm not just reverting your edits for fun. I've explained my reasons in the edit summary: the content you are adding is either non-neutral, meaning, you've included all kinds of non-neutral adjectives to embellish Soluldo's character or accomplishments, or you've added a bunch of publications that Soludo has only contributed to, which I don't think is necessary, as there is no attempt to make an exhaustive list of all the things he has ever written. If you disagree with my reasoning on either of these, please start a discussion on the appropriate talk page to allow other editors to chime in as well. Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:06, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have attempted to update the genres for both of Joy Division's albums, but they have been reverted because the articles were adequately covered and met a popular consensus. However, I have two things to discuss: A well-sourced genre for "techno-pop" on the article for 'Isolation' was reverted because it "only referred to the chorus." I reverted the well-sourced "synth-pop" for 'Love Will Tear Us Apart' out of fear of the same thing happening. The reverter is named FMSky. Do these genres deserve to be removed, or should I restore them?

The source: ^[2] (similar to AllMusic's rock music guide) Misterspaceman (talk) 13:44, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, good morning from Washington, DC! :) Misterspaceman (talk) 13:46, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Misterspaceman, it would have been helpful if you had linked the pages in question so I didn't have to go searching for them. I'm not very familiar with Joy Division songs, and genres are notoriously difficult to pinpoint. My suggestion to you would be to start a discussion with FMSky and see where it goes. Have you tried that? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:31, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late response. I've talked to FMSky just a few hours ago and I'm currently awaiting a response. I also apologize for not linking the articles. I do not know the "coding" to type that directory in. Have a good evening! :) Misterspaceman (talk) 00:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Misterspaceman, I'm glad you reached out to FMSky about this. Hopefully, the issue can be resolved amicably.

What did you mean by "'coding' to type that directory in"? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 01:29, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well on their talk page Misterspaceman got that message which was about what was a self-published source: it must have been understood because Misterspaceman erased it [1] Woovee (talk) 02:48, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Misterspaceman, what gives? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 05:21, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I concede that a mention of India in the short description of Climate of Bihar is helpful; however, every Wikipedia article is an overview of something: therefore, starting a short description with "overview of", "review of", "summary of", or similar phrases is useless, unless the article is something like Literature review whose topic is itself an overview/review/summary/etc. —LucasBrown 04:44, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LucasBrown, I see the point you're making, but I disagree. I don't think the word "overview" is either redundant or useless. I consider it to be a practical introductory word for the rest of the short description, and it reads better than "The climate of the Indian state", not to mention that Wikipedia:Short description discourages the use of initial articles (a, an, the). Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 05:24, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:39, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David, good to meet you. I have seen that you reverted one of my changes on Rimini Protokoll because I did not cite properly. I fully understand you position. Perhaps you can help me sort out, what kind of references we need here. Until now, I am only familiar with standards of the German and a few other language WP-project, where we usually did not reference in the introducing abstract. My experience in En-WP is long-standing, but scarce. I will subsequently provide theatre studies literature, which I already referenced in the "edit summary". Additionally I found a lot more sources, such as eg F. LeRoy: Rimini Protokoll's Theatricalization of Reality, in: Bastard or Playmate?: Adapting Theatre, Mutating Media and Contemporary Performing Arts, 2012, pp. 153-160, at 153. [2] I guess this and a few other articles I found on Jstor, could be a good foundation to revise and extend the article which is desperatly in need of reliable sources. What do you think? ... Looking forward to hear your advice, --Olag (talk) 19:05, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Olag, in your edit summary, you made the claim that Rimini Protokoll isn't a theatre group but rather a label used by the group. The content of the article doesn't seem to support this claim, and to my knowledge, neither do the provided references (I admit that I haven't read them, however). Are you able to provide a source that clearly states that RP isn't the name of the group itself? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:58, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks that you make clear what you ve read and have not. I just read the provided article (above with link). It actually identifies RP as a label (as does RP themselves, btw on their website). The German translation of the text cited in the edit summary also does it in the blurb. But thanks for mentioning that the English version might differ, I will check this asap and will make a suggestion in the part of the article further below under the abstract of how to resolve this question. Of course you are right in that Rimini Protokoll is sometimes called a group of 3, but considering their method of work, big parts of the literature rather call it a collective or a label which involves many more contributors but of which the three are the founders. Even in the productions of RP they are working in different constellations one two or three (and more cooperators) while directing a piece. Let's keep evaluation that on the basis of articles of theatre studies etc.---Olag (talk) 07:40, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Olag, I'm a little confused by what you mean when you say "I just read the provided article (above with link)", and even though the website does mention "theatre-label", I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean—it may also be a subtle mistranslation. The truth is, I'm not a theatre person, so I don't even know what a "label" would be, in this context. Anyway, let's please keep this discussion where it belongs, on the Rimini Protokoll talk page.

One more thing I'll point out is that you are quick to publish, and then you do multiple follow-up edits. This is fine in most cases, but when writing on another user's talk page, it just creates unnecessary notifications (I had five for your first comment and six for the second one), which is a little annoying. Please consider editing your message before hitting publish. Thanks! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:06, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I will link this discussion there, if you do not mind.--Olag (talk) 15:45, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop reverting well sourced parts of the article and please do not make unfounded allegiations about me being blocked. I actually do not know what you are talking about.--Olag (talk) 17:37, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Olag, my apologies for the false allegation. I misread the discussion on your talk page, where it actually states that the user who accused you of vandalism has been blocked.

As for the Rimini Protokoll article, this isn't the place to discuss it. I've explained in my revert why I did so. If you disagree, please start a discussion on the appropriate talk page. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:18, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, actually this is not an article issue, but a personal issue, because you vandalized parts of the article, which were well sourced. You even admit (above) that you did not care to read the open access sources + that you are "not a theatre person". So I would be happy if you justify your revisions thoroughly on the discussion page.--Olag (talk) 05:59, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Olag, you just changed the dynamic of this conversation. Unfounded accusations of vandalism can be reported, and you may be censured. Watch what you say, and stop writing on my talk page. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 12:57, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, a link to a guideline, please. Thanks. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:46, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bretonbanquet, context please? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:26, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your reverts at Tango in the Night, thanks. Bretonbanquet (talk) 10:32, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bretonbanquet, here you go: Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Punctuation inside or outside. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:05, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It says, When quoting a full sentence, the end of which coincides with the end of the sentence containing it, place terminal punctuation inside the closing quotation mark. There are multiple errors of terminal punctuation situated outside the closing quotation mark, introduced here. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:05, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bretonbanquet, remind me where you stand: punctuation inside quotation marks or outside? I generally place it outside, which is what the MOS suggests, except when it's a direct quote that contains punctuation, in which case, I leave it as is. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:11, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My position is just what the MOS says in the part I quoted, really, that when quoting a full sentence, punctuation goes inside the quotation mark. These appear to be full sentences, although I think the quotes on this article are generally too long. When quoting sentence fragments, part-phrases or words, punctuation goes outside. Bretonbanquet (talk) 13:16, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bretonbanquet, it seems we are in full agreement then! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:38, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great, so shall I go through Tango in the Night and ensure the punctuation is as it should be? Bretonbanquet (talk) 15:04, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bretonbanquet, that works for me! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:13, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Bruce Soord. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and Currently no indication of being notable. Profiles and blogs aren't sufficient referencing.. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. scope_creep^Talk 10:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert of my painstaking edits to the Sikh diaspora article are lazy and bad faith. Your reasoning -- "Reverting what appear to be motivated edits; please discuss on talk page." -- is absurd. All edits are motivated, in this case by a motivation to improve the article, which they do. Are you too lazy to read my edit summaries and review the changes/diffs? Do you think you own the article? 50.75.202.186 (talk) 17:45, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wary of large-scale edits by unregistered users, especially when they don't provide satisfactory explanations for content removal. India-related topics are especially contentions, and that only adds to my caution.

It seems you misunderstood my use of the word "motivated"—I meant it to suggest that you have a personal motive to change the article to your preferred version. I may have been mistaken, but I invited you to discuss the topic on the talk page, per BRD. The invitation stands, and your painstaking work isn't lost, so all you have to do is be civil in your discourse, and I don't see why we couldn't reach an agreement.

I will let you know that I do not tolerate abusive messages and accusations of bad faith. If you do this again, my willingness to engage in a discussion with you will immediately vanish. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 04:54, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. 50.75.202.186 (talk) 22:03, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a reference to Anak Jalanan. Why did you return it? Are those references not enough? 182.0.226.6 (talk) 01:24, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In Indonesian, The references I added are more reliable than the previous references. 182.0.226.6 (talk) 01:25, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please, check. Thankyou. 182.0.226.6 (talk) 01:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This conversation belongs on the Anak Jalanan talk page, so let's have it there. I'm open to what you have to say, but please stop imposing your preferred version of the page until we have reached an understanding. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 04:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, with regard to your recent revert. I'd have to say I disagree. Not with the fact that we (editors/Wiki) do not/should not list everything such as all appearances by an artist, but in this specific instance I'd say Firefest is significant enough to warrant a mention. I accept it does not have a Wiki page at present, but that's something I hope to address in the near future. I see many things on Wiki that are of far less overall significance in the big scheme of things than Firefest, and these still have pages, and quite sizeable pages in some cases.

Firefest is quite a thing here in the UK, and a quick Google will see it mentioned many many times in relevant media. Hence I have opted to reinstate my original edit.

If you are not convinced by my preceding words, rather than begin and edit war, could I suggest we throw the 'mention or not' topic open to the wider Wiki community, and then run with whatever their consensus might be? Fair? SurfaceAgentX2Zero (talk) 14:50, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SurfaceAgentX2Zero, it's fine for you to disagree, but let me point out a few things:

My personal talk page is not the place to discuss a content disagreement—that's what the article talk page is for; please take the discussion there.

"Firefest is significant enough"... according to what or whom? It's not enough to simply claim this to be true—this is why the issue should be discussed on the talk page.

I didn't begin an edit war, you did. I engaged in BRD, which is entirely legitimate and appropriate. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 15:15, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'd like to understand your intention behind reverting my edit without a proper explanation.

Kumis is a drink that belongs to all the steppes. Mongolians are East Asians, not Central Asians. Furthermore, the term 'Mongolic' refers to groups such as the Kalmyk, Mongolian, Khitan, and Buryat peoples.

This is akin to labeling all Turkic nations as Turkish. Or in your case, labeling Czech (a slavic nation) as Slovaks. I believe it’s unnecessary to specify where Central Asia is. Mongolians and Mongolic nations are East Asians, and they consumed kumis in the eastern steppes, not in Uzbekistan.

Thanks for reading. Have a nice day! 176.216.236.232 (talk) 22:53, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, I think we're actually saying the same thing, just using slightly different words. I've made a few modifications that should satisfy both our preferences. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 02:58, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Your details made the article a lot better. 176.216.236.49 (talk) 03:19, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, glad to hear it :) Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:23, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! I wasn't meant to add "sports"! I added Notability tag due to lack of enough coverage for the band; GNG requires multiple, not just one. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:25, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Clariniie, can you please provide context for this comment? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:40, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I meant I would appreciate it if anyone could find significant coverage of the band. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 16:45, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Clariniie, that's not what I meant by context. If you're going to post on someone's talk page about something or other, you need to make it clear what you're talking about, especially if you've waited close to a week to bring it up. In this case, what you should have done was include the specific edit you're referring to, with a link. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 17:36, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First off, I'm confused as to why you refuse to start a discussion and continue to revert, despite past warnings and blocks about it. But bad decision making aside, why do you act like "released" is a bad word or something as you suggest here. I'm not aware of any concerted effort to avoid the word. I'd understand if it was over used, but we're talking about the very fist usage of the word in the article. Please help me understand your continued efforts to add awkward synonyms to the article. Sergecross73 msg me 02:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73, I'll gladly have a civil discussion with you, but your aggressive and snarky attitude won't get us far. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:13, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive my exasperation but your insufficient summaries and refusal to discuss is disappointing for an editor as experienced as yourself. "Published" is not common wording for the release of a song. It's common to say one published a book or an article, but not common for works of music like albums or songs. It's not common, for example, for one to say that the Smashing Pumpkins published Siamese Dream or "Cherub Rock" in 1993. Do you have an explanation or not? Sergecross73 msg me 03:27, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73, you seem to be applying a double standard, not to mention an odd position on what is or isn't common=appropriate. Here's a few examples of edit summaries I've left: "Not bizarre; it's a contextual synonym, to avoid overused 'released'"; "It doesn't matter that it's not common—as long as it's contextually clear. Why do you stubbornly insist on wording that is unnecessarily repetitive?" Here are examples of yours: "context for releas"; "Bizarrely worded". Now tell me honestly, whose edit summaries are "insufficient"?!

As far as I'm aware, terms like "release", "publish", "issue", and "come out" are more or less equally appropriate for music as they are for books. You need to do more than suggest that something is or isn't common in order to justify needlessly repeating the same overused word ("release"). Not only is there no grammatical rule (or WP guideline) against using synonyms such as "publish" to refer to music, but your lack of exposure to such synonyms doesn't establish their inaccuracy or inappropriateness.

Finally, your exasperation with a dissenting opinion doesn't release you from the responsibility to be decent toward other users, nor does it give you the right to post aggressive messages on their talk pages. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 04:56, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How is it "overused" when it's the first use of the word in the article. You still haven't explained that. Sergecross73 msg me 10:37, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73, before I edited it, the sentence read "It was released on March 29, 2024, and was the band's first new music release in six years, following 2018's Eat the Elephant. Do you see it now? The word "release" is used twice in the same sentence. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:00, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do. It would have been far less awkward to just remove the second use of "released" and not even replace it with anything. You retained the superfluous one. Sergecross73 msg me 14:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You made three changes to my edits. You cited MOS for, presumably, two of them; however, the first punctuation change was to a complete sentence, which, as I read the (unusual) MOS statement on periods and quotation marks, says full sentences call for the period to be before the quotation mark. also, why did you revert my use of the prpoer name? With the pronoun, the sentence is not immediately clear as to which of the two men are being referred to. Kdammers (talk) 22:07, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Kdammers, a couple of housekeeping things first: it's polite to start a conversation with a greeting. When you omit this basic human ritual, you come across as combative, which I hope was not your attention. Secondly, it's courtesy to include a link to the diff/edit you're referring to instead of making the other editor go digging for it.

I didn't make three changes. As far as I can tell from the history, I just reverted one of your edits. I'll go see what you're referring to. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:08, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. JeanetteMartin

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pickman%27s_Model&diff=prev&oldid=1253532112

Care to explain why? It certainly makes for a poorer legibility of the bullet list.

79.19.132.227 (talk) 19:57, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to write on my talk page, I ask that you be courteous. "Care to explain why" is not a courteous way to start a conversation.

The reason I reverted your edit is that it's simply not the standard way to list characters. Going forward, please bring up the issue on the appropriate talk page rather than on my user talk page. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:04, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Allow me to apologize for the language; english is not my mother tongue and I've gone for brevity rather than politeness. Thank you for pointing this out.

I'll bring the issue on Pickman's Model's page.

79.19.132.227 (talk) 07:35, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I removed your proposed deletion tag, because I see evidence in the article and online that they toured, which potentially means they pass WP:NBAND. You can go to WP:AfD for community consultation. Bearian (talk) 04:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Revirvlkodlaku, I wanted to thank you for reverting the edits made under my name to the page. I really do not know what happened there as the edits I "thought" I was making were simply grammatical changes. After looking at the changes listed as being made by me, I am completely confused as to what happened and know that the inserted passages were not made by me at all. I quite simply don't have the knowledge to make most of the changes attributed to me. I'll be more careful in the future...... Thanks again! Scottbeth13 (talk) 05:33, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Scottbeth13, no worries. Is it possible you accidentally deleted content without realizing it, or perhaps someone else used your account? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:59, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, appreciate the sentiment. I'm still confused as to what happened as I have no real knowledge of the subject, and I supposedly inserted a lot of information I know nothing about! Accidently deleting entire paragraphs is one thing, but then insertion of subject matter completely unknown to me is a different thing entirely. It might be that I edited an earlier revision rather than the then current version? Other than having my account stolen, I think this might be what happened...

My edits are usually simple grammatical changes where I find the language to be clumsy (at least to me, lol). Scottbeth13 (talk) 16:20, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Scottbeth13, right, I see what you mean. I'm a similar kind of editor, mainly focusing on grammar edits. I'd suggest keeping an eye on your contributions, to see if your account is being misused elsewhere. If not, then just consider it a sleep edit 😉 Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 17:00, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

did you check charts? Agent (talk) 12:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Agent, who are you, and what are you talking about? Please make the barest effort to be courteous and properly contextualize your messages. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 23:45, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you check the charts or these numbers are fake?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Still_Kids Agent (talk) 09:39, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Agent, please check WP:ONUS. "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material".

Additionally, next time, if you're not able to communicate with another editor in a courteous manner and provide the appropriate context to the topic you wish to discuss, then don't bother. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 12:47, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia section is discouraged per WP:TRIVIA. The statement should be better moved to lead sentence or Production section. The stories also look over-detailed. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:37, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Clariniie, have you considered adding a greeting when starting a conversation with another editor, the way you presumably would IRL?

Also, I think this conversation is better had on the relevant talk page. Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 00:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]