This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.
2017
Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Pavel Sukhoi into Sukhoi. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa🍁 (talk) 20:21, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I reverted your change that had replaced most mentions of "T-50" with "Su-57". The terms are not synonyms: T-50 is the name of the prototype (and probably the internal factory designation of the overall design); Su-57 is the name of the final version, which has not yet flown. It's rather analogous to the difference between YF-22 and F-22.
I agree with you that some of the uses of the terms T-50 and PAK FA in the article had become inappropriate & confusing after the aircraft's final designation has been revealed. I made my own attempt to clean them up.
Your contributions are highly welcome, but "replace all" is not the way to go about things. Not unless you look at each replacement individually. — Tetromino (talk) 23:18, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for translating and adding the material from the Russian Wikipedia. However, there are two issues which I would like you to address (also in order to not repeat this in the future). First, you copied some templates which are incompatible with ours. If you go to the reference section, you will see a lot of red text indicating that some parameters are not filled in and even some templates do not exist here. Second, the Russian Wikipedia has much lower verifiability standards than we have. I hope you have been careful enough and only translated the text which is based on reliable source; otherwise I would ask you to double-check this. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:42, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Josephua. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Western Rapid Diameter, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page E18 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
Hello Josephua, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Rosatom have been removed, as they appear to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa🍁 (talk) 15:37, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Josephua. 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.
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sukhoi Su-57 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of WelpThatWorked -- WelpThatWorked (talk) 20:40, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent editing history at Christchurch mosque shootings shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Please discuss before restoring the name to the lead at Christchurch mosque shootings --- Coffeeandcrumbs05:51, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Coffeeandcrumbs: There is no reason why I should be barred from editing because I re-done the edits after resolving the issue in the talk page. This is a false accusation and I suggest you lower such aggressive behavior. - Josephua (talk) 06:02, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Do not settle disagreements with an accusation of edit warring out of nowhere. I had taken my time to discuss my point of view in the consensus and due to a lack of response, assume you agreed and put back the edits. If you still disagree, talk in the talk page. - Josephua (talk) 06:09, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's a habit. Sorry. However, I'm gradually making edits non-minor gradually so you'll see me not making those mistakes. - Josephua (talk) 16:38, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sheremetyevo International Airport
Hi Josephua, thanks for the revert of IP user 109.70.252.3's edits you made just now. I was in the process of doing the same thing. I was looking for a source for the text in the second edit, and found that it's a very close paraphrase of this press release: [1] so I think it's not suitable for inclusion. Just thought you might like to know, in case it shows up again. --IamNotU (talk) 15:02, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No problem! Press-releases are good as citations for only sentences, not an entire passage. If you are looking for citations for passages, look to FlightGlobal or RusAviaInsider. They are pretty reliable and fit the requirements of WP:RS. - Josephua (talk) 15:06, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is not acceptable since it does not preserve the article history. If you want to move the article and think the move is uncontroversial, please use the move function. (In this case, I would expect a RM though). --Ymblanter (talk) 19:29, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: It doesn't work when I tried moving it. I believe the reason is why is that there is a M11 motorway (Russia) article already, but it is redirected to Moscow-Saint Petersburg motorway, which I am trying to reverse. - Josephua (talk) 19:31, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is quite possible. In this case you can request a speedy deletion, we have a dedicated criterion. The deleting admin may disagree with you, but if the move is truly uncontroversial the page always get deleted.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:33, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: Alright, but can you find a way to move the article to M11 motorway (Russia), since I have no experience with this part of Wikipedia about moving articles etc.. I also believe it to be better if a redirect was put in place instead of a deletion. - Josephua (talk) 19:42, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. Pleae put {{Db-move|page to be moved|reason}} on the redirect page, indicating the reason. Wait until the redirect gets deleted (I will not delete it, somebody else will). The deleting administrator can choose to move the page themselves; otherwise, you will have to move it via the standard interface option. When you move the page, the redirect gets created automatically.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:51, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sukhoi Superjet 100 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 1.02 editor -- 1.02 editor (talk) 02:40, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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 have noticed, you made a great contribution on translating Yekaterinburg article from Russian.
Could you, possibly, make the translation of the city parent region - Sverdlovsk Oblast - too? After finishing the current Shenzhen activities, of course.
I have no sufficient proficiency in English nor enough experience in Wikipedia article writing overall, to do it myself.
If you are interested, I have a scattered list of the Russian languages articles that can be translated and combined in the Oblast history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cian Akril (talk • contribs) 11:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@The Sr Guy: I am unable to respond to questions at this time since I’m in a vacation and only have my phone with me. Noticing you made this change, please do a RfC on this edit. I will give a proper response when I finish my trip. - 祝好，Josephua(聊天)11:36, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Airbus A350 XWB you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lizzy150 -- Lizzy150 (talk) 17:20, 20 January 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.
It would be extremely helpful for our study if you could explain a little bit further why you decided to challenge this edit. Feel free to comment on this talk page or write us an email at WikipediaStudy@web.de.
We are also more than happy to have a short interview of around 15 minutes, in which we would further talk about your general experiences and motivations as a Wikipedia editor. The interviews have received approval from the Ethics Committee of the University of Cambridge and it will be ensured that you can stay completely anonymous.
We are looking forward to hearing from you soon and are glad to provide more information about the study if you send us an email!
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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! 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.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Shenzhen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2011 Universiade. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
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.
I performed a GA reassessment of the Su-57 article based on the GA criteria and found that the article didn't meet those standards. Consequently, the article has been delisted from GA status. In fact, the original GA assessment of the Su-57 didn't seem to actually assess the article in accordance to the criteria listed. Since the the reassessment, I have considerably rewritten the article to improve its quality. Please assess the article in accordance to the GA criteria before nominating it as a GA. Steve7c8 (talk) 18:48, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for June 24
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bone Tomahawk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Classical.
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dragged Across Concrete, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Walter Williams.
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bone Tomahawk you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of David Fuchs -- David Fuchs (talk) 17:41, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
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.
The article Bone Tomahawk you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bone Tomahawk for comments about the article, and Talk:Bone Tomahawk/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of David Fuchs -- David Fuchs (talk) 19:03, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive
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! 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.
