User talk:Eric/Archive 7, 2021-2022

Eric's talkpage archive 7, 2021–2022

Don't bite the newcomers

Hi Eric. Regarding this edit: Please don't bite the newcomers. I looked over a bunch of this ip's edits, and they are clearly attempting to contribute constructively. Not all of the edits are improvements, but many of them are and they all look like valid attempts. We were all new here once. Everyone has to learn...--Srleffler (talk) 20:03, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi- I'm aware of the newcomer etiquette, thanks, and I agree with it in general. I can sometimes be less generous when I see edits that look like experimental English. I didn't look into the IP's edit history, but I did look at the talkpage first, and the only message that was there was for unconstructive editing, which probably contributed to my (quick) decision to put a level 2 message there. Had I looked over their other edits, I might have gone with a welcome IP template. Eric talk 20:38, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Eric, I know I'm new, but I appreciate your hard work. Thanks for being on this website Eric. Xaqaii (talk) 17:33, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A cheeseburger for you!

Here is a cheeseburger for you eric, you deserve it. Xaqaii (talk) 02:36, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nogaret

"Nogaret is a major character in Les Rois maudits (The Accursed Kings), a series of historical novels by Maurice Druon, which were adapted into a television miniseries in 1972 and again in 2005." - kindly explain the difference between this text and the text that you deleted. The History Channel series is obviously very well researched and the historical Nogaret is one of its central characters. It would be unfortunate if such a well researched body of cinematography was ignored with regard to such a little-known (outside France) medieval person such as Nogaret. I am sorry that you do not like the name "Knightfall" but this is hardly relevant. As for 'disruptive', if you read the elements of the definition to which you hyperlinked, you will see that my edit is none of those things. As evident from the comments on your talk page, you should perhaps be a little less zealous in your Wiki-POV editing. Possibly when I reverted your revert, you should have stopped to think twice. Monosig (talk) 10:17, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I always think at least twice. While the "disruptive" template may not be perfectly suited to your revert and your judgemental, presumptuous edit summary ( Restored illogical, apparently unknowledgeable, reversion. Please do not revert again), I chose it as the best option short of taking the time to craft a custom message. Rather than throwing the term "POV" around on my talkpage -- which for multiple reasons is not likely to advance any dream of establishing the notability of a History Channel dramatization -- you might do better to bring the issue up on the article's talkpage. Eric talk 13:54, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sainte-Mère-Église

Moved to Talk:Sainte-Mère-Église § D-Day mention in lede
 – Eric talk 19:42, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused why you don't want D-Day mentioned in the lede. Isn't the lede supposed to summarize the contents of the article? pbp 18:46, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for suggestions

I am afraid that I do not speak English. In fact, all I have wanted to edit at Château Gaillard is that "Margaret and Blanche were kept imprisoned even after they became queens of France".——Heinrich ⅩⅦ von Bayern (talk) 12:04, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've made an attempt to incorporate that info. Do you know if it happens to be supported by the reference cited at the end of that sentence? What languages do you speak? Eric talk 23:56, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Any more citations to support that Margaret died in prison and Blanche was released only after her marriage was annulled? I have noy read the citations but the English and French Wikipedia pages of them and some other relevant ones. My mother tongue is Chinese.——Heinrich ⅩⅦ von Bayern (talk) 01:08, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom of France

Moved to Talk:Kingdom of France § Official religion statement
 – Eric talk 14:39, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Why did you undo my edit that was supported by a reliable source?, regards Hugitt (talk) 13:50, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It seemed out of place to me, and when I looked at your other contributions, it seemed to me that you might be on a campaign to make many such changes across many articles. Eric talk 13:53, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is a topic that I'm genuinely interested in. The material is relevant and it's supported by RS.Hugitt (talk) 14:24, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Populated coastal places in Barnstable County, Massachusetts

Hi, I noticed that you reverted several of my edits that added articles into Category:Populated coastal places in Barnstable County, Massachusetts. Your claim that "all 'places' in this county are coastal" is untrue. Forestdale, Massachusetts, Harwich Center, Massachusetts, Marstons Mills, Massachusetts, Pleasant Lake, Massachusetts, and South Dennis, Massachusetts are all examples of populated places in Barnstable County that are not coastal. –Aidan721 (talk) 01:36, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi- I think you will find that several parts of WP:OVERCAT apply here. See also this discussion from a couple years ago: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2019_February_27#Populated_coastal_places_in_Cape_Cod_towns. Eric talk 13:13, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, then I think a new discussion needs to be opened regarding merging Category:Populated coastal places in Barnstable County, Massachusetts into Category:Populated coastal places in Massachusetts. –Aidan721 (talk) 14:53, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I did some looking around at Category:Populated coastal places in the United States by state and it seems that Massachusetts is the only state to subcategorize populated coastal places by county. I'm going to create a merge discussion for all of the county-related categories to be merged into Category:Populated coastal places in Massachusetts. –Aidan721 (talk) 15:12, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, those sub-cats are the result of a massive and I believe unilateral campaign by one user. I and others found them to be superfluous. Eric talk 15:32, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I thought that was the consensus norm for these pages, but I now see that it is not. Anyways, figured I'd loop you into the discussion. –Aidan721 (talk) 15:35, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion about removal of content at "Tree squirrel"

Moved to Talk:Tree squirrel § Confusion about removal of content
 – Eric talk 20:02, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain why you are removing the content I added to [[Tree squirrel|"Tree squirrel"]. Saying that it's non-constructive isn't helpful because the content is supposed to be constructive. Ultimate of Ultimate (talk) 18:44, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest you take it to the article's talkpage. See WP:TALK. Eric talk 19:06, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I did [[Talk:Tree squirrels#Quotes from the section "Confusion about removal of content at 'Tree squirrel'" at Eric's talk page|that]]. Ultimate of Ultimate (talk) 19:30, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Execution of "Strasser"

Thanks for the revert on Strasser. I'd taken that image from the WP page Hanging; I have amended the caption (which said it was Strasser) on that page. Arrivisto (talk) 13:27, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arrivisto- Thank you for catching that. At the time I discovered the misidentification, I tried to track back to all the articles using the pic, but I knew I'd miss some. Eric talk 14:55, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Important notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in and edits about COVID-19. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. If you have questions, please contact me.

Girth Summit (blether) 15:00, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the templated message - never very friendly, I know, but I think it's important that you know that these are in effect, and they have changed since the last time you were notified about them. I've received your e-mail, and am typing up a reply now. Best Girth Summit (blether) 15:00, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, I'm aware of this development, and I find it worrisome. Thanks for the explanatory message; I'll be in touch soon. Eric talk 02:13, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recent activity at Meteorite

You may wish to engage at Talk:Meteorite#Overly long contribution to the History. HopsonRoad (talk) 23:47, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:EveStardust

If you have had to fix edits by this user, please post any concerns here. Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:02, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive Editing

Moved to User talk:EveStardust § July 2021
 – Eric talk 21:09, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can you explain what you mean by disruptive editing. Please elaborate with example so i can understand better. EveStardust (talk) 20:47, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Female guards in Nazi concentration camps, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hof.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ixodes scapularis and opossums

Moved to Talk:Ixodes scapularis § Predators
 – Moving discussion to article talkpage for broader exposure. Eric talk 21:21, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering where else in the article you think this info might be best included, as it feels significant to include in my mind. Let me know if you don't feel the same though. LogiBear180 (talk) 21:07, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really know. I would guess that many/most animals that groom themselves of insects would swallow them, as evolution would favor them doing so if it did not generally have a negative effect. But this only conjecture on my part. Eric talk 21:21, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Catalan and Irish for Stephen Maturin

Eric Thanks for the heads up on the further escapades re Stephen Maturin. I had stepped away. The lead for Patrick O’Brian article was changed again by the editor who cannot grasp Catalan as a demonym equal to Irish, after I added a brief description of Aubrey and Maturin in the article, so it could be carried up to the lead. An editor named GoodDay got him to sign his post at the end, rather than beginning of a post, and said to use Irish-Spanish. I do not know the status of that editor, so I have not matched lead to article. Posts were happening faster than I could type, and now I realize in at least two articles. Not sure any of my posts were read before another was posted by Temax. So it goes. - - Prairieplant (talk) 00:04, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Temax was rapidly making chaotic edits, copycat accusations, and posts while I was trying to address the situation. Then, as you may have noticed, he did a retaliatory report below mine on the admins' noticeboard. And now I see at my report that GoodDay has blocked Temax for a week. I'm heading over to the O'Brian talkpage to make a comment. Eric talk 00:19, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
When Temax's block expires. Perhaps, he'll follow my advice & open up an RFC on the topic-in-general, with the question being - Spanish or Catalan. GoodDay (talk) 00:11, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, let's hope so. Thanks for your attention to the matter. Eric talk 00:20, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

for your work. I only read so don’t know what I’m doing but wanted to send thanks. Cheers to facts. 2601:5CE:4300:D49:44EF:CBF4:2B31:A3DB (talk) 19:06, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Were there any particular edits that prompted you to leave me this message? Just curious. Eric talk 20:06, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RW test

Hey! I saw the test you did with redwarn in the test talk page for warnings. I had seen that used before but was confused because it said they used Redwarn however it wasn't a warning. I see now that you can actually edit the actual message you are giving a user outside of adding more info. You helped me see where that actually was with your test. Thanks. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 14:46, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blaze_Wolf, glad it helped! I actually just left a bug report on that tool: Wikipedia_talk:RedWarn#Issues_with_template_tool_"Not_using_edit_summary_for_more_experinced_users". Eric talk 14:53, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Reverting my edits to the Donaueschingen page

You tagged your reversion of my edits as "non-constructive", erm, why?! The bit of information I put is an interesting bit of Trivia, I also cross-referenced it with a source. Can you explain further why what I put is "non-constructive" in your opinion? FadBotherMucker (talk) 11:19, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello- While some trivia can be interesting to some people, we don't usually add info like that song title when it doesn't really contribute to the notability of the place it refers to. For example, if we added such info to the article on New York City, it could easily get unwieldy. There may be some helpful guidance here: Wikipedia:Handling trivia. Eric talk 11:35, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reptile and amphibian article editing

Moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles § Flurry of new editors

Hello @Materialscientist, Mindmatrix, Plantdrew, Pinethicket, and Elmidae: I noticed a pattern of recent edits to reptile and amphibian articles, all by new editors and at least some of which are problematic, that struck me as maybe a bit dodgy. If you have a minute, could you compare these contribution histories and tell me if you think I am seeing things?

I picked you all from the edit history of Spotted salamander. Posting here as I did not find a project page that would encompass these articles (hasty search); if anyone has an idea for a better place or other users to ping, please suggest. Eric talk 12:04, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Triple play

The Spanish article is still there (es:Afd) but has four 'delete' votes, and fr and en are gone already, so it looks like you're on your way to a triple play. Congrats! Mathglot (talk) 17:16, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathglot: So cathartic! Now if I could just clean my own house instead of WP's... Thanks for your input on those. Eric talk 17:28, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea! Now, let's see: if I do the living room, kitchen, and bedroom, I guess that would be a triple play, wouldn't it? Naah; I have a couple of articles that need work; the tidying and cleaning can wait... Mathglot (talk) 17:54, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Common frog

Hi I've fixed the citations on my previous edit to the article, sorry about this. Fourdots2 (talk) 00:53, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

St Louis IX page

Hi! I would like to know why my edit was reverted on this page. St Louis King of France Catholic School and Church is a real place in Austin. Thanks. 127squadfam (talk) 01:50, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I reverted your addition because we cannot list every place named "Saint Louis", and because you added a link to a non-existent article. In my view, that section already lists too many places. Eric talk 12:38, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

BrassiBase moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, BrassiBase, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. – Pbrks (t • c) 03:50, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pbrks: FYI, I've added some text and refs to that stub, and submitted it for review. Eric talk 12:54, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: BrassiBase has been accepted

BrassiBase, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

– Pbrks (t • c) 18:47, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022

Warning icon Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Ciboure, you may be blocked from editing. 迷斯拉10032号 (talk) 12:59, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nice try. Eric talk 13:07, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have discussed this inexplicable editing behavior of yours in the teahouse. Because I don't think your intentional removal of the built-in climate data templates in towns is currently considered vandalism, but it's definitely not worth promoting. You think that the built-in climate data template in the article will affect the layout of the article, but the most important thing as an article is its function of conveying knowledge.
And if you think you're right, you should delete all the climate data templates built into Łeba, Ustka, Yergobachen, and Antipayuta. 迷斯拉10032号 (talk) 13:28, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As I stated on your talkpage, you are generating a lot of clean-up work for other editors in the wake of your campaign. Eric talk 13:40, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 迷斯拉10032号 (talk) 21:45, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive behavior. Your behavior and motive for removing the climate data template in the entry is obviously not well-intentioned. If you still insist on going your own way, your behavior will constitute WP:POINT, which will be based on your edits. The severity of the circumstances of the act warrants your consideration of a topic ban. 迷斯拉10032号 (talk) 21:48, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are over eight hours late with your AN notice, as I pointed out hours ago at your posting there.
Your accusation of "disruptive behavior" and your comments above have no basis, and will not fool anyone. Eric talk 22:00, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Then I continue to ask you, what is your reason for deleting the climate data template in the article? 迷斯拉10032号 (talk) 22:59, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This behavior of yours belongs to WP:POINT and WP:GAME, and this is not an excuse for your malicious deletion of entry information. Your behavior is very similar to zh:LTA:FROG where Chinese Wikipedia is blocked indefinitely. 迷斯拉10032号 (talk) 23:00, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In answer to your question: I suggest you read my edit summaries (something you yourself might want to consider making a habit of providing to the community), and I suggest you participate in a substantive manner in the discussion I started at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Weather#Climate_sections_in_articles_on_individual_towns. You have made no useful contribution to that discussion. Your accusations are empty and not to be taken seriously. Please stop pestering me here and concentrate instead on following accepted procedures and on improving the encyclopedia. Your frivolous postings on the administrators' noticeboard could well backfire on you. Eric talk 23:15, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you withdraw as soon as possible your controversial deletion of the climate section in all your articles. Besides, you have provoked this contradiction first. You might as well end this controversial editing behavior as soon as possible. In addition, all the sources I added to the article conform to the definition of reliable sources on this site, and removing reliable sources is itself an inappropriate editorial behavior. If you feel that these climate data hinder the layout of the page, you can choose to adjust the relevant content, rather than just delete it. 迷斯拉10032号 (talk) 08:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Climate

So I've reached out to the user in question again to get them to put the parameters in to make the climate stuff not take up too much room. I've also opened another discussion on the template's talk page to try and get width=auto to be incorporated as default. I was going to do it myself, but then I looked at the template coding and very quickly backed away. Seriously too many of these templates are far too complex in a coding perspective. Canterbury Tail talk 19:10, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Thanks for taking the time to look into this issue and to weigh in. I'm surprised more weather-watchers haven't commented, but if their weather is like mine at the moment, it's understandable that they would not be at the computer! Eric talk 19:13, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What is the purpose of your multiple perturbations in the climate class template? Is it for brushing the edit count or something else? And you stalked my editors on Wikipedia many times, and you made rude remarks on my talk page, you are harassing. 迷斯拉10032号 (talk) 02:46, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Go away. You are embarrassing yourself. Eric talk 02:51, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revert of edits to Chiefdom article

Can you describe your revert here? The information has been 100% verified by a scholarly source which I had added. 103.249.233.6 (talk) 11:33, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You incorrectly changed the preposition "on" to "in", and added superfluous links. See MOS:OVERLINK. Eric talk 12:34, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Don't know how "MOS:OVERLINK" was violated but I restored the undisputed part. 103.249.233.6 (talk) 02:02, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I did not mean to delete the citation or the Indus Valley paragraph. I'm not sure how that happened. Eric talk 11:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revert of Western green lizard edits

Thank you for reading the new edits for the Western Green Lizard, however, I did research on this species with actual cited journals and articles unlike the previous edits with uncredited websites. It would be wonderful if you could explain why you reverted the changes and not an excuse of "it appears to be a school project". I do not think this is a valid excuse for a good-faith principle to be added. KorynW (talk) 02:22, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful? I'm not sure what you are saying here, or with "valid excuse for a good-faith principle to be added". I reverted the edits to that article--which looked to be well-intentioned (called good-faith edits here on Wikipedia)--but which were written in an awkward style, including unnecessary repetitious mention of the article subject's name, and putting the name in proper case, which runs counter to the style guidelines for common names here; see MOS:COMMONNAME. Note: I am changing the section heading for this discussion to something more appropriate; see WP:TALKHEADING. Eric talk 03:11, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]