It is approximately 2:19 PM where this user lives.
Has this user made a silly mistake? Click on the trout to notify him!
Welcome to JaventheAlderick's talk page!
Welcome to my talk page! If you have any comments or feedback about or regarding me, just post it down somewhere below. I'll usually reply as soon as possible.
@Yeetermemer: Thank you for providing me a working link to the Mashable article. From there, I see that the article says that "46. On record, the longest game of Monopoly ever played lasted 70 straight days.", but there is a problem that arises from here: namely that Mashable is a news blog. News blogs can be used on Wikipedia articles, but they cannot be used to support exceptional claims (as stated on WP:NEWSBLOG, do have a look in it). Since the 70-day long game of Monopoly can be considered to be an exceptional claim, it thus cannot be supported by this Mashable article, and unfortunately cannot be inserted into the article. Don't despair though, we have plenty of other articles that you can try your hands at editing in. Should you need any help, you can always ask me here for help. Happy editing, JaventheAldericky (talk) 19:23, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@2A00:23C5:59A1:6D01:3CA6:461:57A7:627F: Your edit (over here: [1]) was reverted because of two things: Firstly, the edit you made changed the wikilink to "Biological sex", which is not grammatically correct (it should have been "biological sex". Secondly, "biological sex" is a redirect to the Wikipedia article of "Sex", hence it is better if you pointed the wikilink directly to the Wikipedia article, rather than a redirect to the article. However, I would like to apologise for the revert. Minor mistakes like these can usually be done with another edit to correct it, rather than a revert. My apologies. You can go ahead and make your edit. By the way, it helps if you create an account on Wikipedia. JaventheAldericky (talk) 14:19, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Suggestion for Possible Modifications to Your User Page
Greetings! This is to notify you for applying minor edits to your user page if necessary. I have read your not-so-random to do list and realized that you are fond of adding sources to MRT stations in Singapore (if this user is not mistaken). Actually, there is one thing you weren't aware of three months ago and which is the Thomson–East Coast MRT line as it first opened at thirty-first of January 2020. So why in the world don't you add it to your list as number 7B? To be not too frustrated, well, the existing number 7 would change to number 7A! Do respond below as soon as possible (unless if you're infected… er, this user means, on a Wikibreak!). Good luck on your future edits and a not–so Good Friday[why?]! 129.205.113.142 (talk) 03:12, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
NB: STRICTLY, DO NOT FORWARD THIS PIECE OF $|—|!+ TO ANYONE [why?]!!!
@129.205.113.142: Thank you for reminding me. (lol) I've updated my to-do list with the Thomson–East Coast MRT line. Take note that I can only add sources to currently-open stations; the stations on the rest of the line still under construction will need to wait until they are open.
Also don't worry, I've not been infected, its just that I've been relatively busy lately, so I've not been able to edit as much as I would like to on Wikipedia. :/ JaventheAldericky (talk) 13:05, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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.
Hey, JtA! I thinkthis edit was made because there's as far as I can tell no source for this dish actually being prepared in Hainan, but without an edit summary I can't know what your reasoning is. It would be helpful if you'd start to use edit summaries a lot more often. Right now you're using them between 50-60%. I aim for 100%. There's a preference you can enable that will remind you to add an edit summary if you forget. I keep it enabled. —valereee (talk) 19:33, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Valereee:, that's right; the aforementioned edit was because the cited SCMP source does not mention the dish being served in Hainan (that would be Wenchang chicken instead). I typically don't put edit summaries for relatively minor edits (such as several edits made to an article, in which I place one edit summary for the string of edits). I'm sorry for the confusion I caused you by the lack of edit summaries, so I've just enabled the preference you mentioned (hopefully there'll be less confusion in the future this way lol). JaventheAldericky (talk) 19:52, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Totally. Honestly for those who aren't clueless &/or jerks, always using edit summaries is the final frontier for those who'd like to just bump along mostly without drama. :) —valereee (talk) 20:14, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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.
Hello, Could you include a reference that demonstrates Vietnamese citizens holding passports with AB stamps are allowed in visa-free? I cannot find any information on this AB stamp on the internet. All I read was Vietnamese citizens that are travelling to China for public affairs purposes can enter China visa-free... If an AB stamp is equivalent to a public affairs endorsement, I cannot find references in any language that says all Vietnamese citizens are eligible for an AB stamp. If no references can address these two issues, I believe Vietnam should be removed from the list. Temptation115 (talk) 18:27, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Temptation115: Hi there, welcome to my talk page! In general, Wikipedia's visa policy articles (including that of Mainland China) cite the Timatic database, which links here. By inputting "China" as the destination and "Vietnam" as the nationality, you can see that this "AB stamp" does indeed exist - there is no mention of Vietnam having a "public affairs endorsement".
Separately, there is a Vietnamese government website here that shows that Vietnamese citizens are eligible to obtain this AB stamp, provided they pay a fee to get the stamp. It isn't cited as a source in China's visa policy article because the Vietnamese government website doesn't mention China itself. I imagine this is similar to Mongolia's case where their nationals need an E-series normal passport to enter China visa-free (but Mongolian citizens are allowed to apply for such a passport). Hope this helps. JaventheAldericky (talk) 18:55, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Techie3 The Vietnamese government website I linked above contains no such restriction though. Its likely that both are true at the same time - that is, all ordinary passport holders can obtain the AB stamp if it is done in Vietnam, whereas AB stamps issued outside Vietnam (e.g Malaysia) are restricted to those on official duty only. JaventheAldericky (talk) 09:54, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Vietnamese phrase is "Tem AB là một loại giấy miễn thị thực cho người mang hộ chiếu phổ thông đi công tác nước ngoài." Based on some Google-Fu, I believe the correct translation is "Stamp AB is a visa exemption paper for ordinary passports holder on business trip." The phrase "công tác nước ngoài" means foreign work, công tác meaning work and nước ngoài meaning foreign, and looking it up on Google show pages with business trip advice. Techie3 (talk) 10:43, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Techie3 Admittedly I'm not knowledgeable in Vietnamese, but the Vietnamese government website doesn't appear to require applicants seeking an AB stamp to provide evidence to prove that they have business in China. If its stated on the website and I overlooked it, please let me know. Furthermore, the ABTC Business Travel Card (which Vietnamese are eligible to apply for) essentially duplicates this AB stamp, since it too caters to business travelers only.
JaventheAlderick, because this article is being featured on the main page under ITN, it is no longer eligible to be included at DYK. I thought you'd want to know that the DYK nomination has been marked for closure because of this. The good news is that because ITN posts stay on the main page longer than DYK articles (which are limited to 24 hours, and sometimes only receive 12 hours), ITN gives the article more exposure. Thanks for considering DYK! BlueMoonset (talk) 03:30, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello. I think there might be an issue with the automatic edit summaries being generated, as many of your recent ones aren't right (e.g. here and here the description of the original short description is wrong.
On a related note, the reason why they were set to none is WP:SDNONE – i.e. articles with sufficiently detailed titles don't need them. In my view elections fall into that category. Would you mind changing them back? Cheers, Number5717:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, thanks for dropping by @Number 57:. I was actually going to go over to your talk page to raise a separate (though semi-related) matter, but I'll address your concerns first since you're here:
I was trying to add new short descriptions to the affected election articles as none of them have any short descriptions (which I'll get to in a sec), but I'm not sure why various "invisible" shortdesc appears in my edit summaries when using Shortdesc helper - this invisible shortdesc doesn't show up anywhere else within the articles concerned. Is it caused by Wikidata (per WP:SD-VS-WIKIDATA)?
With regards to the addition of the short descriptions themselves – I understand where you're coming from, but I'd disagree on general elections falling into that category. From my understanding, WP:SDNONE applies only if "article titles are sufficiently detailed that an additional short description would not be helpful". Since articles are generally encouraged to have short descriptions, my rule of thumb is to apply WP:SDNONE based on its strict definition - that is, if the short description will not add context or any other useful information, it should be left blank. As an example, I'll use my most recent edit of the 2020 Singaporean general election - I set its short description as Elections to the 14th Parliament of Singapore - in my view, I added additional context that the election was held to elect MPs to the 14th Parliament of Singapore, which isn't present in the article title. Presidential elections would qualify under WP:SDNONE as such elections are only held to elect a single president and not a body (in other words, the article title is self-explanatory).
I would guess it might be a Wikidata issue. Perhaps worth raising as a bug at the Shortdesc helper talk page?
Re your point on SDNONE, I don't quite understand your logic about the difference between parliamentary and presidential elections, as one could equally argue that a presidential election is electing the 14th president. But anyway, it had been on my mind that might be worth having an RfC at WT:E&R to have a definitive answer to point people to, as I regularly see backwards and forwards on this across election articles (usually longer-term editors setting it to none and new editors adding long descriptions).
@Number 57: Yea I thought so, I might ask around there.
True, but in general there won't ever be an article for "14th President" - since its a single person, the person themselves would normally warrant an article under their own name (and not an article titled XXth president of XX). On the other hand, separate articles exist for bodys like Parliaments. If parliaments didn't have their own articles (XXth Parliament of XX), the distinction between presidential and parliamentary becomes more or less superficial in nature. Feel free to ping me if there will be a future RfC over this matter.
Re the protection, it shows up like that as I moved the article to its current title. You can see the prior protection history here. It looks like the article was plagued by disruptive editing around 2011 due to a problematic editor. But yes, I agree it shouldn't be indefinite, so will unprotect it. Number5719:23, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Add a Visa policy map of Yemen for the countries which have visa free access and visa on arrival access for Diplomatic and Official passports
@JaventheAlderick Hi, I have seen that you have edited the Visa policy of Yemen page. I have a proposal. Can you add a Visa policy map of Yemen for the countries which have visa free access and visa on arrival access for Diplomatic and Official passports. Thanks Ggrudea96 (talk) 23:21, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JaventheAlderick I would asked them, but I have seen on their user talk page that they weren't active there and they didn't replied to other user's messages. So please ask someone you may know to create the map for Visa policy of Yemen regarding diplomatic and official passports. In addition, ask to create also a map for Visa policy of Sudan regarding diplomatic and official passports. Thanks Ggrudea96 (talk) 12:07, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Fork99: Thanks for the info! I've seen the two sockmasters' pages before, and having also reverted some of Suomi2023's previous socks before, I agree its a duck of Suomi2023. According to the CheckUser's investigation, User:Denosio is a different sockmaster though and isn't related to Suomi2023 (other than their shared interest in visa policies / requirements). =JaventheAldericky= (Would you like to talk to me?) 19:25, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
