This is an archive of past discussions with User:Rebestalic. 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.
Hi Rebestalic! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Dathus (talk).
Hi Rebestalic! You created a thread called Wikipedia and Featured Articles at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.
Hi Rebestalic! You created a thread called Wikipedia edit blitz? at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.
Two examples: While working on articles on allergies to individual foods (milk, eggs) I found content in Food allergy that would be useful. I copied-and-pasted it. In my editorial comment I provided attribution to the source. For vitamin articles, I created a paragraph in one that I copied into others. Although attribution not required in that situation, I still noted that I was copying content I had created in another article. David notMD (talk) 11:51, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi Rebestalic! You created a thread called Nominating an article for assessment at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.
Hi Rebestalic! You created a thread called Is a userbox a template? at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.
Hi Rebestalic! You created a thread called Semiprotecting a page at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.
Hi Rebestalic, unfortunately I don't find a consensus on your edit-spree, changing the first sentence of minor-planet articles. Also, I don't understand this self-revert as the edit-spree has continued nevertheless. To me, these changes raise the following concerns:
Boldfacing minor-planet names first before the reiteration of the article's title. For 50 Virginia, boldfaced Virginia is an article about the U.S. state and does not redirect to this minor planet. (This also concerns articles like 31 Euphrosyne (Euphrosyne), 55 Pandora (Pandora), and 68 Leto (Leto), while most others minor-planet names likely redirect to a disambiguation page, e.g. Hebe).
Consistency: your changes on the first sentence are inconsistent with 90% of all minor-planet articles. (Hundreds of articles have been changed, but there are several thousands.) It is a mystery to me why someone, who has not amended these articles before, would embark on such an edit-spree without prior consensus.
Please stop your edit-spree on minor-planet articles until we have come to a consensus. For the time being, this post here will serve as a reference for any reverts on the changes mentioned above. Rfassbind– talk16:40, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
That's fine by me. Thank you for informing me about the issue.
Hello Rfassbind. Thank you for your reply. I've read your message. My revert to the post I made at WT Astronomy was so because I decided to cancel my "with" sentence, because I thought that sentence didn't "fit" with the rest of the article. I then copied the way that was used on 1 Ceres (Ceres (minor planet designation: 1 Ceres)). That was already there.
November 2018
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at The Teahouse, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Hi Rebestalic! You created a thread called Edit summary errors at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.
Hi Rebestalic! You created a thread called Minor planets 1001-2000: 1090 Sumida redirect issue at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.
Hi Rebestalic! You created a thread called Nominating an article for "Good Article" assessment at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.
Please don't fix the grammar on other users' user pages. There are very few circumstances where it's acceptable to edit user pages other than your own, and minor language fixes is not such a situation. Besides, apostrophes are often used when forming plurals of acronyms. See e.g. this. :-) --bonadeacontributionstalk06:33, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi Rebestalic! You created a thread called Does an "A" class article exist? at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.
Hi Rebestalic! You created a thread called Removing uncited material at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.
I'm way behind on the Teahouse archives but I saw this. The article is Les Misérables (musical). Please be sure to provide a link to the article because I had to check several articles. Yes, sources should be found for all the facts in that section but I don't think it's absolutely necessary for non-controversial material.
I noticed you helped answer questions in addition to asking one, and we appreciate that. I used to do that but I'm so far behind I'll never again get to answer new questions, or if I do, I'll be spending extra time reading everything a second time.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:45, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Rebestalic. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello Rebestalic. Please take notice where I corrected some errors published when you proposed Juan de Quiroga y Apablaza for deletion.[1] Thank you for your efforts to improve this encyclopedia and let me know if
I can be of assistance in the future, in any way. Cheers.--John Cline (talk) 10:02, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
Please participate to the talk pages consultation
Hello
Our team at the Wikimedia Foundation is working on a project to improve the ease-of-use and productivity of wiki talk pages. As a Teahouse host, I can imagine you’ve run into challenges explaining talk pages to first-time participants.
We want all contributors to be able to talk to each other on the wikis – to ask questions, to resolve differences, to organize projects and to make decisions. Communication is essential for the depth and quality of our content, and the health of our communities. We're currently leading a global consultation on how to improve talk pages, and we're looking for people that can report on their experiences using (or helping other people to use) wiki talk pages. We'd like to invite you to participate in the consultation, and invite new users to join too.
We thank you in advance for your participation and your help.
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.
There used be a tool at WP:5000, but apparently it will only work again once the responsible one goes check on the server. So to replace there is thistool (another user started making a dump of its daily data, though it lacks the mobile\desktop percentage that shows what pages need to be excluded). And if you want to do write ups, go ahead and do so with the list that's there in the link you sent me! igordebraga≠14:37, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
Thank you very much User:Igordebraga! The WMFLabs thing is quite helpful, yes (especially the Topviews tool except it's only daily). Enjoy your day,
We really need to post up the "How to do the Top 25 report" list (it's in the talk archive). But for the record, the reason India and the US are listed is because India and the US are the two countries with the highest number of English speakers. Also, Andrew Cuomo is on the list for his response to the coronavirusSerendipodous17:37, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello User: Serendipodous, I remember writing up the commentary for the Pandemic in India article and deciding against saying that India had a very large English-speaking population because I thought I could potentially be seen as racist 😂 But I see that I am wrong and I could have; would you like me to change it?
User: Igordebraga I'm so sorry for the ping but I couldn't resist haha, I'd like to thank you for your additions to this week's Top 25 report. I shall include you on the commentary list. No job is too small!
My role is to advise, not to dictate. This is your work. And your decision. But yes, India has the world's second-largest English-speaking population so that's why topics of interest to Indians appear in the Top 25. I wouldn't call it racist: the same thing happens re: topics of interest to Americans. Serendipodous19:27, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
You're welcome, and I must admit that only by seeing you mentioning the presidential campaign it brought some deep memories of that Last Week Tonight segment. (haven't seen Tiger King yet, but by researching for the Report I could see that the phrase you quoted is Joe Exotic basically foreshadowing the murder plot that would get him arrested - as many comments on the video are now noting) Feel free to write more, whenever you want, specially as many previous contributors barely appear again. igordebraga≠02:14, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
And oh, so that 'female canine animal' that Exotic referred to was the person he eventually proxy-murdered... enter the plot of every single murder-mystery I've ever readRebestalic[dubious—discuss]05:20, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Only today I discovered your efforts were separate from mine (and eventually, one other guy) in the correctly titled page, combined both in the main one. As for yours, I did my custom habit for Report pages with wrong titles (though the wrong part is usually the date), and asked a speedy deletion, hope it goes through. igordebraga≠21:37, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
You can change the Hamilton entries if you want to (specially the #17\18 combo), I'm not even that familiar with the musical. It's just that something different and not depressing inspired me to write as I added the data. igordebraga≠02:43, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Oh I see Igordebraga, that's a very nice offering but I'll reject it this time, that was your commentary and it's as entitled to publish-ment as is my own commentary
I was introduced to Hamilton by a buddy, and have listened to it... more than five times through, I'd say, not including listenings of individual songs. I agree with the not-depressing thing, yes it's great
Have you listened to a production of Hamilton before? If so, your favourite song? Hmm, what's mine... don't know
No, haven't heard the score aside from a clip of the title track and the Hamilton Polka I linked to at a certain point in the Report. Your fandom of it is exactly why you must be better at this than me, at least add your tidbits (specially when you complain about my input in the lead...) igordebraga≠05:42, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Igordebraga I don't think I'll be able to do much for this week's Top 25 report, I'll try my best. I'm sorry, I have an engagement that'll last me the week... and if you were wondering, no, I don't take a week to put a ring on someone Rebestalic[leave a message....]09:24, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
It's OK, me and Mcrsftdog already wrote this week by ourselves... only do it when you feel like it (or have time to do so!) igordebraga≠13:34, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Mztourist Thank you for reaching out! I apologise for my uninformed edits. Lucky you stopped me, as I was just about to make my next edit... no nefarious intentions implied or intended
Regarding my edits at Korean War; is there a specific guideline or rule that I broke? After reading BRD, I don't personally think my changes (except for that People's Republic of Korea edit) really added or removed information; since I didn't add or remove information (once again, not counting the PRK edit), would that still need a consensus? Or does every type of edit except for punctuation edits need discussing?
As you have chosen to engage with me here, I will assume that you are acting in good faith and haven't set out to deliberately vandalise the page. I don't regard your changes as an improvement on what is already written there and its unclear what you meant by "After the American outlaw of the initially created People's Republic of Korea", presumably you meant something different but exactly what I don't know. As detailed above if you believe that your changes add value then please follow WP:BRD and take them to Talk:Korean WarMztourist (talk) 09:08, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Mztourist, I fully understand what you mean now. Thank you for your clarification, I'll leave the article as is
P.S. My claim that the US 'outlawed' the People's Republic of Korea originated from the text 'In the south, the US military government outlawed the PRK on December 12, 1945' in People's Republic of Korea, which is uncited and in hindsight, a bad idea to add into the Korean War article
Your thread has been archived
Hi Rebestalic! You created a thread called Profanities in WP namespace content at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.
Just a comment: the notes on the entries for the top 25 report should be primarily about why they are charting, not just general knowledge. General knowlege is good for background, but what people want to know is why these topics are of interest now. Serendipodous14:48, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
You probably copy-pasted the number on Monday instead of Sunday - that Top 1000 updates daily with the previous 7 days. I did it on the right day, on a page with a wrong title (won't even link it, just ask for a speedy deletion). igordebraga≠05:56, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
Oh, I see Igordebraga! My apologies with the data mistake
Honestly, I was hell worried about you, I thought you had succumbed to COVID-19 and was taking a break 😂
Of course it was me, ever since this jackass was elected every day it's something unbelievable (or unbelievably dumb) being done or said in the government. Unsurprisingly, only another country with an equally unfit president has more COVID-19 cases than us. And yes, I only credited you for the table, but feel free to write something this week if you can. igordebraga≠16:04, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
As The Simpsons put it, "Brevity is wit", so I made the lead more straightforward (not that I hadn't abused exclamations before !!!!!11!!!!11!!eleven!!!!) Anyway, help is welcome. igordebraga≠16:40, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
There, made an edit Igordebraga and I made you a little treat in my edit summary
Don't worry, it just came out so quickly because by Sunday night Kingsif had written on everything, and then just when I would expand someone else wrote more. You can do it next week, or whenever you can. (and wonder if we soon prepare the 2020 report, been trying to add up and man, the election will take too much space, unlike last time) igordebraga≠17:17, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
Igordebraga Thank you for the reassurance and YOU BET I AM GOING TO RACE FOR THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ARTICLE 😂
Long time, no see. Just saying that since I've been repurposing the Top 25 drafts you started to make the newest ones, any time you're willing to write something will be welcomed. igordebraga≠19:07, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Igordebraga Hi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 It's been about a year and two weeks since I started with Top 25--such a long time ago. I'll try my best to help, in current times in a bit of a squeeze when it comes to temporal matters Rebestalic[leave a message....]20:26, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Igordebraga Hi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 It's been about a year and two weeks since I started with Top 25--such a long time ago. I'll try my best to help, in current times in a bit of a squeeze when it comes to temporal matters Rebestalic[leave a message....]20:28, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
This category is purely for humourous intentions, and of course isn't anything overtly serious that you'd find in a medical encyclopedia, for instance. I don't mind if it's speedy-deleted, if you'd prefer that
Hi Rebestalic! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Advertisements on Wikipedia of all places, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.
A tag has been placed on Template:The flight of a spacecraft (2) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is an unused duplicate of another template, or a hard-coded instance of another template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is not actually the same as the other template noted, please consider putting a note on the template's page explaining how this one is different so as to avoid any future mistakes.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. power~enwiki (π, ν) 05:54, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
power~enwiki, that's fine! Please go ahead, I completely forgot about that template's existence
Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Primefac (talk) 01:41, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi! I noticed you were the user who added the copy/paste tag to MC Hammer. I have gone through and removed/rephrased the material which was taken from the Spotify bio and have thus removed the tag. Cheers! Themillofkeytone (talk) 18:54, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
Hey Themillofkeytone, thanks for that! This actually happened to be one of the few edits which I hadn't forgotten about 😂
Yeah, so one day I think I was absentmindedly listening to U Can't Touch This and also reading Spotify's biography of him, and I came across this paragraph which looked eerily similar to one on MC Hammer's Wikipedia page...
every horrific mystery movie I had a look on the Wikipedia page, saw the similarity and I immediately thought "HOL UP SOLDIERS WE HAVE A PROBLEM RIGHT HERE EMERGENCY GET YOUR DONKEYS MOVING AND YES DONKEYS BECAUSE I CAN'T REALLY SAY THE ALTERNATE NAME FOR DONKEYS OF WHICH ALSO MEANS A BOTTOM, FOR FEAR OF GETTING IN TROUBLE HERE ON WIKIPEDIA"
I didn't really know what to do at this point so I just did what I always do, be a PWSATTRDQIOAAWTCBBTTIGBTBWATTCTTIOSA. That is, 'Person Who Slaps Any Template That Resolutely Demands Quality Improvement On An Article Which They Can't Be Bothered To Think Is Good Because They're Bored, Without Also Trying To Contribute To The Improvement Of Said Article'.
Oh, I've said way too much, mostly gibberish
But thanks again for that! It was good to find out that my two Wikipedia notifications today were actually about something positive today, as opposed to some formal complaint about my breach of the thirty-second section of the sixth clause of the WP:BRP policy, seventeenth revision Rebestalic[leave a message....]01:53, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
I was going to delete this page as it isn't a registered user and found that you had created it. This is a head's up in case you want to copy any of the information to one of your own user pages. LizRead!Talk!18:44, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
While I wait for you to write on the annual report (and maybe the regular one?), a sidenote: Last year I was accused of having a political agenda, and now what I write also qualifies as "ill-humored defamation piece" shoving down opinions. As if I need more reason to be repelled by politics (I have equal contempt for left wingers who complain about everything and right wingers who push for outdated and\or nasty ideas). igordebraga≠16:11, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
Igordebraga 'accused of having a political agenda' what?!?!?!?!?!? Sounds like a staunch Trump supporter 😂😂😂 From my very limited experience here at Wikipedia, I have found that some people on Wikipedia unfortunately fall into a class of frightening individuals characterised by disgusting, revolting, hedonistic pedantry; such people are dogmatically scrupulous and systematically use any single fault they find, big or small, to launch often morally futile calumnies on their chosen target. They are deplorable freaks, undeserving of a high place in any society. They misuse countless, often obscure 😂 Wikipedia policies and sometimes even visibly mispurpose well-known Wikipedia policies to the extent that their claim about it is directly contradicted in the policy's respective Wikipedia internal page. You're probably thinking that I'm one of those left-wingers who complain about everything by now 😂
It must already be January 1 for you - if so, Happy New Year, see if you want to write about one of the topics still unclaimed on the Top 50, finish that ASAP. igordebraga≠20:50, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
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.
![[2]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0b/Jair_Bolsonaro_em_24_de_abril_de_2019_%281%29.jpg){kind=link}