This is an archive of past discussions with User:QEnigma. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
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.
Hello. I was curious as to why the edit on Shroud (gamer) was reverted, because currently it says "he was born in Toronto, Canada" (there is no source saying that). However, the edit suggests that instead of mentioning the city it would be best to mention the REGION instead (Ontario encompasses BOTH Toronto AND Mississauga), since he attended a school in Mississauga - which is sourced instead of Toronto. Please let me know your reasoning, I'd love to hear back ! Also I'd love to see a source stating he was born in Toronto, since that is the edit you have reverted
@Warmtoned: Hello and thank you for your message. The edit was reverted because it altered existing information about a living person without providing proper sources. As per Wikipedia's Biographies of Living Persons (WP:BLP) policy to which the article is subject to, existing content about living individuals, even if unsourced, should not be replaced or significantly altered without reliable citations. Replacing one unverified claim with another, even if it seems plausible, does not meet Wikipedia's standards for verifiability.
If you have a reliable source supporting the change, you are welcome to attempt the edit, ensuring that the new information complies with Wikipedia's guidelines. If no source supports the current statement, the correct course of action would be to mark it for removal or discuss it on the article's talk page as per WP:BRD and reach a broad consensus. QEnigma(talk)17:13, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
“The greatest threat to our planet is the belief that someone else will save it" … or that someone else will build it, fix it, fight for it!
Or… maybe someone else will show their gratitude and love to you!
@Noah Nil: Hello, Your draft article (Draft:Wasi Sddiquee) was declined primarily because it does not adhere to the formal and encyclopaedic tone required for Wikipedia articles. Additionally, the subject does not meet the notability criteria outlined in WP:CRIN and WP:OFFCRIC. Please review these guidelines to understand which domestic tournaments are considered notable.
As per above, the domestic tournaments mentioned in your article, despite being classified as First-class or List A cricket, do not meet the required standards for notability and WP:GNG criteria. Furthermore, the draft lacks sufficient WP:RS and WP:IS sources to satisfy WP:V. While ESPNcricinfo is considered a reliable source, the references provided in your draft consist solely of statistics and scorecards.
Please revise the article with these points in mind and ensure that it meets Wikipedia’s notability and sourcing standards before resubmitting. Best regards. QEnigmatalk14:58, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Just a quick note that you probably shouldn't MFD drafts unless there's extraordinary circumstances. Most declined drafts are automatically deleted after 6 months of no edits via WP:G13. That's the normal way that these are handled. Hope this helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 11:14, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
@Novem Linguae: Hello, I would like to draw your attention to the draft article Draft:Ahmed Jaha, created on 7 January 2025, and the mainspace article Ahmadu Usman Jaha, created on 27 December 2024. Both articles refer to the same individual. I have already declined the submission of the draft article. Could you kindly advise on the appropriate action to take in this instance? Should the draft be nominated for CSD or XfD or left alone? Best regards. QEnigmatalk13:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Hey QEnigma. Thanks for the question. In these cases I like to redirect the draft to the mainspace article, to discourage folks from working on the draft, which would just be wasted work since there is already a mainspace article. You can redirect the draft by editing the wikicode and replacing the entire page with #REDIRECT [[Ahmed Jaha]]. Hope that helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 13:09, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Additionally, as this article concerns a living person, it must comply with the biographies of living persons policy. To satisfy the GNG, the subject should fall under the creative professionals category, and the article should be written in an encyclopaedic style. The current draft does not fully meet these criteria. I recommend reviewing related articles, such as those in Category:Sinhalese artists, for guidance on how to develop a comprehensive and informative article.
If you disagree with my assessment, you are welcome to re-submit the article through the Articles for Creation (AfC) process, where another reviewer will evaluate it. Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you are now eligible to create articles directly. However, please note that newly created articles will still be subject to review by the New pages patrol (NPP). Thank you for your understanding. Best regards. QEnigmatalk11:18, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Linux Article
Hi, QEnigma, I'm not new to Wikipedia I'd say.
As for a lack of sources, there's no source to say that the "unix shell" is the default "shell" on Linux either as there is no shell on Linux. The boot process launches PID 1 (the init) which is responsible for spawning every other process from there on. A Linux based system has no obligation to have a shell, and many don't by design.
Also citation 15 on the History of Linux article: History of Linux and this specific blurb mentioning com.os.minix, the POSIX standards, the Unix course that helped inspire Linux,
"On 3 July 1991, in an effort to implement Unix system calls in his project, Linus Torvalds attempted to obtain a digital copy of the POSIX standards documentation with a request to the comp.os.minixnewsgroup. He was not successful in finding the POSIX documentation, so Torvalds initially resorted to determining system calls from SunOS documentation owned by the university for use in operating its Sun Microsystems server. He also learned some system calls from Tanenbaum's MINIX text that was a part of the Unix course."
and:
"Linus Torvalds had wanted to call his invention Freax, a portmanteau of "free", "freak", and "x" (as an allusion to Unix). During the start of his work on the system, he stored the files under the name "Freax" for about half of a year. Torvalds had already considered the name "Linux", but initially dismissed it as too egotistical."
@TotallyNotSkyNet: Thank you for reaching out. The inclusion of reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject is essential. Wikipedia articles must not contain original research. Any content added without proper references can be removed because it might not meet these standards.
If your latest edit is reverted due to a lack of source material, please refrain from engaging in an edit war or violating the three-revert rule, as this could result in you being blocked from editing. The most appropriate manner to seek a consensus is to commence a discussion in the article talk page. Please refer to WP:DR as well.
With regards to your comment on difficulty in citing sources, please make use of the ProveItgadget to aid you in future. Please note the responsibility for providing citations policy: All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution. Best regards. QEnigmatalk06:06, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
@QEnigma the sources I referenced here in a reply to you include a mix of secondary sources. If you consider these to not be secondary sources, then we need to fix the History of Linux wikipedia article as it's full of them according to you.
As for an editing war, no one is engaging in one, so I'd suggest that you don't imply / suggest that someone is engaging in one because they're having a discussion with you. It comes off as bullying to suggest that because you specifically don't agree with edits even when sources are provided, especially when you start mentioning people being blocked from editing.
Wikipedia is meant to be a friendly collaborative website run by volunteers. You restoring un-cited information and accusing people of editing wars and using first party sources is a very hostile behaviour.
I'm going to leave a note on the Linux talk page and not re-edit it as you clearly disagree with the edits but aren't acknowledging that one of the things being edited is a removal of a un-cited claim "Linux uses the Unix shell".
At this point I'm going to be stepping away from this edit and ask you refrain from pinging me further as your tone has continued to be non constructive, and is now bordering on threatening.
Edit:
In the very Linux article where you undid my edit as being un-cited, it mentions "It was with this course that Torvalds first became exposed to Unix. In 1991, he became curious about operating systems.[69]" and "On July 3, 1991, to implement Unix system calls, Linus Torvalds attempted unsuccessfully to obtain a digital copy of the POSIX standards documentation with a request to the comp.os.minix newsgroup.[70] After not finding the POSIX documentation, Torvalds initially resorted to determining system calls from SunOS documentation owned by the university for use in operating its Sun Microsystems server. He also learned some system calls from Tanenbaum's Minix text." Not to mention Minix is also known as a Unix clone.
My edit to say Unix was an influence was already cited like I had thought I read already. This entire negative interaction could've been easily avoided, however it has happened and can't be undone. So again, please don't ping me any further, and feel free to reply on the Linux talk page.
@TotallyNotSkyNet: Hello, and thank you for your reply. I would like to clarify that it was you who initiated this conversation on my talk page, not the other way around. Please do not interpret the highlighting of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines as bullying, non-constructive behaviour, or borderline threatening.
I regret that you perceive it this way. Every editor is free to contribute as they wish, provided their edits comply with Wikipedia's guidelines. I trust you will have an enjoyable and productive experience on Wikipedia. Best regards. QEnigmatalk12:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
@QEnigma Again, it was you who started all of this with both an edit reversal, and a message on my talk page that came off as condescending rather than helpful.
As for highlighting Wikipedia policies and guidelines, it was clear what your intent was as you made a clear implication that I was starting an editing war and undoing undo-edits repeatedly. You're also suggesting that the sources that are accepted across two articles relevant to Linux are first party sources, yet at this point only taking issue with my edits and not trying to correct the issues you perceive.
Again, Wikipedia is meant for collaboration and co-operation. If you believe that my edits are invalid, I've added it as a discussion to the Linux talk page as well.
As for the implication that the sources I am citing are not secondary sources, I would like to know which ones are such. As the sources I'm citing, and the references I'm making between articles contain sources no one else seems to believe are primary sources.
I've also asked you to no longer ping me for a discussion that is not productive, but now bordering on harassment. This discussion has been wholly unprofessional and unproductive. I'm subscribed as of now to this discussion and don't need to get emails that I'm being pinged to engage in what has devolved into a bickering match.
