This is an archive of past discussions with User:Sundostund. 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 Sundostund,
Why was the information I had inputted into List of heads of state of Afghanistan removed? They were Afghan empires who were the heads of state of Afghanistan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sirmortimer3 (talk • contribs) 00:54, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
@Sirmortimer3: Hello. First and foremost, it is generally accepted that the Afghan state started in the 18th century, with the Hotak and the Durrani dynasties. Before making such a big change as you proposed with your edits, you should start a discussion and get input from other editors. Also, I saw the need to remove your edits as you included only a single ruler of both Lodi and Sur dynasties, instead of putting all of them in the list. That made the lists appearing confusing, and "broken" in a way. It seemed unnecessary to me to keep the list the way you left it. —Sundostund (talk) 01:08, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Reply to List of Heads of state of Afghanistan
Hello Sundostund, I wouldn't say it is generally accepted that the Afghan state started in the 18th century, Afghans have had a state multiple times before the 18th century. (Sur Empire, Lodi dynasty, Ghurid, etc.) I will add all the Afghan rulers of the Afghan Sur Empire along with the Lodi Empire to make it not confusing. Is that fine with you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sirmortimer3 (talk • contribs) 04:14, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
@Sirmortimer3: Well I am sorry, but we have to agree to disagree on that. It is generally accepted that the Afghan state started in the 18th century, especially with the establishment of the Durrani dynasty in 1747. The list of heads of state was stable in that regard for a very long time, and if you want to change it, you should start an appropriate discussion (maybe also add a formal request), and get input from other editors. That is an appropriate way to proceed before making such radical changes to the list, instead of just doing what you want. In my opinion, all leaders before the 18th century should be left out the list. —Sundostund (talk) 06:21, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
@Kanto7: Honestly, I think that you did quite a good job there so far, so I see no urgent need to add/remove something myself. Currently, I have some other things to do, so I will look more carefully into the Spanish Guinea article at some later point. —Sundostund (talk) 08:51, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 19
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mohamed Lemine Ould Guig, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Colonial.
@Klofáč: Hello! Thank you very much for your kind words! Unfortunately, I don't use Facebook or other social networks. I only use Viber for close personal contacts, as well as email I mentioned in a user box, on my user page here. I will be very glad to stay in contact with you, both here and on some other platforms in the future. —Sundostund (talk) 17:54, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
Greetings,
It is already past the middle of the contest and we are really excited about the Months of African Contest 2021 achievements so far! We want to extend our sincere gratitude for the time and energy you have invested. If you have not yet participated in the contest, it is not too late to do it. Please list your username as a participant on the contest’s main page.
Please remember to list the articles you have improved or created on the article achievements' section of the contest page so they can be tracked. In order to win prizes, be sure to also list your article in the users by articles. Please note that your articles must be present in both the article achievement section on the main contest page, as well as on the Users By Articles page for you to qualify for a prize.
We would be awarding prizes to different categories of winners:
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list
Disambiguation link notification for November 16
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of the Jews in Libya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berber.
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.
Lists of heads of state/presidents/prime ministers
Hello Sundostund. I don't know if you have these types articles on your watchlist (as you edit them a lot), but if you do, and you spot any edits from an IP address changing dates, they may be a sock of EducationThruLists (talk·contribs) – this is a typical contribution from them and their socks (see a list here). If you want to flag it up with me, I'll happily block them. Cheers, Number5717:16, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
@Number 57: Hello! Yes, I do have many such articles on my watchlist, but I scroll through them even without relying on my watchlist too much. Its a real hobby of mine to edit them, and one of my favorite activities on Wikipedia... As for the vandalism involving changing of dates, I've heard about it, and saw it occasionally on the lists, including a long-term vandal from Malaysia who's apparently changing only years of birth. I have no idea if that's related to the case you pointed at, but anyway – I'll certainly flag it up with you, once I see such edits. Cheers, and Happy New Year! —Sundostund (talk) 19:19, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
@Number 57: Yes, I just added them. Thanks for the input, and for your blocking actions, of course. Just a question – once I notice more of their dynamic IPs, would you like me to ping you here, message you on your talk page, or add them to the list you pointed at, without informing you? —Sundostund (talk) 17:54, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
I've watchlisted that page, so will see you adding any. If you think any require blocking immediately (as they're still going), you can ping me directly. Cheers, Number5719:01, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I am VickKiang. I see that you have contributed to the article significantly, and previously reverted Mentewab's edits. However, he removed info on House of Savoy, which I reverted, but also claimed on the talk page that: "Your source is not an Ethiopian source. We will go public with this. Wikipedia - gatekeepers of a white supremacist narrative". IMO the sources utilised for the section "House of Savoy" is acceptable (IMO it definitely is, including the NY Times article). Could you please also advise me on what I should do about it? Many thanks for your help. VickKiang (talk) 00:11, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
@VickKiang: Hello! Yes, I certainly contributed alot to that article... IMHO, the user in question (Mentewab) is merely trying to push their own POV, disregarding sources on nationalistic/racist basis. I really see it as disruptive editing, and it should be reported if the editor is persistent with it. Also, you may think about reporting about the situation at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Cheers! —Sundostund (talk) 02:15, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battle of Kwajalein, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Harry Schmidt.
You tagged some of Beaneater00's userboxes for MFD discussions (like User:Beaneater00/Userboxes/Balkans/RSKRightofReturn and User:Beaneater00/Userboxes/Balkans/CrnaGora), but all you did was put a tag on the page, you didn't post a notice of discussion on the MFD page. This means that a discussion regarding tagged pages will not occur and these pages will not be considered for deletion. I recommend that you start using Twinkle to tag pages for deletion as it will not only take care of tagging the page you are concerned with but also create an entry of on the appropriate XFD page.
If you did create an entry on the MFD page, please correct the page tag so that it links to the discussion you have started. Right now, it's not a working link. If the tagged pages still are not linked to a deletion discussion page after this weekend, I'm going to remove the tags from the pages you are concerned with. You can always retag them should you want to. Thank you. LizRead!Talk!00:13, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
@Liz: I'm sorry, but I don't understand what is the problem here. I did use Twinkle to tag pages for deletion, and those pages are linked to their respective entries on the MFD page. —Sundostund (talk) 00:26, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
I was wrong, I see that you started deletion discussions at MFD, they are just not linked to the userboxes under discussion. Are there working links on those two pages for you? They just led to empty pages when I clicked on them. LizRead!Talk!01:17, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
Okay, Sundostund, I was doubly wrong. I went to the userbox pages and the links work from those pages. I was looking at pages that the userboxes were tanscluded to (places where the userboxes were posted) and tried the links from those pages which don't work. Because the userboxes are basically templates, the pages where they are transcluded are also marked for MFD deletion (which you can see here, here and here.
So, I was mistaken, my apologies. I'm sorry if I came across as a little bit lecturey but I spend the day posting warning messages on user talk pages and sometimes it's hard to step out of that persona which I should have done with an editor with your level of experience.
@Liz: Everything is fine, really! I want you not to worry about it; mistakes do happen! Its perfectly normal, especially to an admin here – I would go nuts if I have to post all those warning messages on user talk pages, in a single day. I don't think that you came across as a lecturey, on the contrary. You are very polite, as it seems to me. Of course, I hope you have a pleasant weekend yourself! Cheers! —Sundostund (talk) 10:24, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
September 2022
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from 1990 Venda coup d'état into another page. 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. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Sennecaster (Chat) 20:30, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
@Sennecaster: Actually, I used 1987 Transkei coup d'état as a model for creating 1990 Ciskei coup d'état and 1990 Venda coup d'état. Those articles may be using similar wording, but I don't think that constitute direct copying. And they certainly use different sources for referencing... If the similarities between them really require that I mention copying in the edit summary, then I will have that on my mind when I create articles in the future. The subject of the articles is quite similar, so I decided to somewhat "borrow" the idea from the Transkei article, that's all. Cheers! —Sundostund (talk) 22:49, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
I noticed it was flagged from Bantustan actually; the template asks you to list the page it was copied from, not copied to. The template is asinine in that way, since you catch it by reviewing the page content was copied to and then warn the person from that page :P. Your footnote had the same text from the Dissolution section; you don't need to use the exact thing, just linking the page in your summary will suffice :) Sennecaster (Chat) 23:54, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
@Sennecaster: Actually, I took that footnote from the Transkei article, along with some similar wording, and transferred it into the two articles that I created. So, the creator of the Transkei article was the first who "borrowed" the footnote from Bantustan, and the "chain" started there. I didn't even look at Bantustan when I worked on those articles. But I do understand your point, and I will link the page in my edit summary, next time when I create a new article, and use an existing one as a close model. —Sundostund (talk) 01:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
I want to start out by saying I feel you deserved that barnstar. However, in my opinion you should do more extensive checks first going forward with future nominations as some of the MfDs you have put up were made in good faith. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:57, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
@Knowledgekid87: Thank you for saying that you feel I deserve it. I am thankful to Dronebogus for giving it to me. But my aim isn't to get barnstars (of course, I never refuse them when I get them :). When it comes to the issue of Neo-Confederate materials, my only aim is to remove content that is, obviously, incompatible with the goals of Wikipedia. Being a strict anti-racist, I feel compelled to participate in that work. If there are any mistakes in doing that, they are completely unintentional and made in good faith. Same applies to any possible mistakes in my MfD nominations. As I earlier said here – the "cure" is very simple: consensus of editors can always refuse to delete my nomination(s). —Sundostund (talk) 14:20, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
@Pizzaplayer219: Well, when I see MfD nominations which I support, and don't have other comments to add beside stating that support, I am using (and will continue to use) Delete per nom formulation. Will that be pushed aside? I don't know, and I don't care. I simply stated my opinion, by supporting the nominator's reasoning. Afterwards, consensus of editors is free to decide what to do with that particular nomination, and my opinion within it. — Sundostundmppria(talk / contribs)00:47, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
I'm not saying that you have to stop doing those things. I'm just saying that it is likely for your "votes" to be dismissed by the closer of the discussions. You can choose to continue using that argument if you want. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs02:19, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
@Pizzaplayer219: Oh no, I understand what you wanted to say, and thank you. As I said, its my way to stress support for the nominator's reasoning. What comes after that is entirely up to consensus formed during the discussion, and to the closer of course. — Sundostundmppria(talk / contribs)02:29, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
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.
The user Norprobr is constantly vandalizing several articles referring to the Dominican Republic, I wrote him a message to stop doing that, he did not want to read it and even deleted it from his discussion page, do you know an administrator who you can contact to talk to him and block it for vandalism? Oli (talk) 13:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
@OliverDF: Hello, Oli. If the activities of Norprobr really constitute vandalism that you noticed, you could contact admins such as Bbb23 or Liz, or raise the issue at WP:ANI, which would probably be the best option. Once at ANI, the issue would be seen by a large number of admins, instead of just one or two. — Sundostundmppria(talk / contribs)14:01, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi Sundostund, hope you're doing well! I want to get your feedback on an article idea - not all hate group are subject to GENSEX lol (also, continuing to write good articles on hate groups should show good behavior and the ability to write about GENSEX hate groups in future, as I hate all hate groups equally). Identity Dixie is a neo-confederate group that split from The Right Stuff (blog). I'm not sure if the sourcing justifies its own article or just a subsection on the TRS article.
Quick sourcing breakdown:
I collected 48 RS total.
21 are from the SPLC (about half have SIGCOV, half are just passing mentions, their most in-depth article is here).
Many sources simply list them as included in various SPLC reports
Fauquier reports details of their flyering to intimidate an anti-racist rally
ABC News notes the SPLC reported on them and calls out their importance
USA Today reports on their podcasts and how much content they've produced/since when.
The Daily Dot reports on how ID had supported a canvasser for Rubio who was assaulted and comments on their activities.
Salon briefly reports on how a racist author had posted material on ID before.
I'm planning to write the article on them after finishing up the Crown Heights Tenant Union, so I'd appreciate any thoughts you have beforehand! Thoughts on if sourcing justifies its own article or just a subsection to the TRS article, any wiki-projects where I could ask for feedback, and whether you'd like a ping after I write it to help me review it and work on it! TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 19:04, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi TheTranarchist! I am doing well, and I hope the same is the case with you too, and that you do your best to stay positive! And, of course, that you are well within your TBAN limit; time will fly by quickly, and that TBAN will be gone eventually. Just be patient... IMHO, I would say that Identity Dixie could have an article of its own, and that the sources you listed are sufficient enough to create such an article. At the same time, its possible that a subsection to the TRS article could be sufficient as well. You should consider both of those options. As for wiki-projects to ask for feedback, I would say that WP Discrimination and WP Human rights could be useful for something like that. Whatever you decide to do – feel free to ping me, and I will try to help, as much as I can! — Sundostundmppria(talk / contribs)19:43, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Unfortunately, an article you recently created 2023 Niuean general election, is not ready as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage with citations from reliable and independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. I've moved your article 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 WP:GNG guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page. M.Ashraf333 (talk) 02:43, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. LizRead!Talk!05:16, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Sundostund. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Minister of Foreign Affairs (Palau), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Hello, Sundostund. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Minister of Foreign Affairs (Nauru), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Head of the Luhansk People's Republic until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Sundostund sorry to bother you but could pls stop reducing the imagine size on the presidentials and prime ministerial lists . Why are you doing this the pics on the gabon articles had been on that size for years the list of prime ministers of Australia has similiar size and is a Featured lists . Also could tell me why are are youdoing this the pics is it becasue of the quality of the photos ? Friendlyhistorian (talk) 03:29, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
@Friendlyhistorian: I believe that your prefered size of images is too large, at least for the format of lists where you implemented it. Those lists and articles aren't of the same format as the list of Australian PMs (and they don't contain the same amount of data), so they shouldn't be viewed in the same way. You are the one who is trying to change the size of images on Gabonese artciles, the size that was the same for years. But anyway, I think that your prefered size should be reduced somewhat, and it would look fine. — Sundostundmppria(talk / contribs)15:20, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Sundostund i been trying to standarize some stuff a lot of the lists are inconsistent . It makes zero sense that one list has huge pics and the other has tiny the us list is worse i has huge huge image size i think my size choice makes sense . I can show many examples in african lists and even asian lists also i have a zoom of 150 precent on my brwoser and still look small . But i am open to ideas what do you propose ? Friendlyhistorian (talk) 16:39, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
@Friendlyhistorian: I get your point, but it is unlikely to expect achieving consistency on the issue of image sizes. With all the lists of officeholders around, and so many sizes of tables and their format, it could hardly be achieved. Your prefered size isn't probelmatic in itself, but it just isn't fit for any style of table, as they greatly vary in size and data. My browser is set at a zoom of 150 precent as well, and images at 70px-80px looks just fine. I don't find them to be too small. My idea would be to enlarge them at maybe 90px, as I already did at some lists, but certainly not much larger than that. — Sundostundmppria(talk / contribs)16:50, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
@Friendlyhistorian: Well I can't generalize on that subject at all; as I said above - there are many lists of officeholders around, with many sizes of tables and their format. Any change depends on how the particular list already looks, and how much data it contains. It would be very hard to set some general standard on the size of images. — Sundostundmppria(talk / contribs)17:20, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks ok my proposal is we will make list of the president , Vice president and prime minister Gabon at 90px but you we will live the cambodian head of statr and prime minister list alone since its more like the australian list as for the Equatorial guinea i prefer it at 100 but i think at it is better at 90px since i do need to do some minor modification but now . The other issue i want to raise is the the list of prime minister in Congo DRC and Congo Brazzaville and Gabon they used to have election but i think you removed them i dont remember if you did it or not so if did not i apologize in advance . Can i put them back since they are both semi presidential republican and the french list of prime minister has the same system Friendlyhistorian (talk) 19:17, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
@Friendlyhistorian: I really prefer all the mentioned lists to have images no larger than 90px, including the Cambodian and the Equatoguinean lists. As for parliamentary elections at DRC, Congo-Brazzaville and Gabonese lists of PMs I don't have a particular opinion about it; its possible that I removed them at some point. You can re-add them if you want, and I'll modify those lists somehow if I find it necessary. — Sundostundmppria(talk / contribs)19:26, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Ok but may i know i what lists should i have like 100px cause like the new zealand and australian lists have it 100px and they are very similiar to the cambodian lists is the the presidency or head of state at the end of the list that makes it so as the have to be smaller or is it the photo assymetry cause i can see the issue with that many photos are diffrent so having them all at same size does look weird I am asking so that we don't have any dispute in the future Friendlyhistorian (talk) 19:37, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
@Friendlyhistorian: As you can see, the New Zealand and Australian lists have various elements that are absent from many other lists of officeholders, like the data about cabinets and coalition governments. Such additional data makes the list far more complex, and can justify the size of 100px. Also, images should have the same size within the list; otherwise, the list have weird, misshapen appearance. In the end, I truly hope that we'll avoid any dispute in the future. Best, — Sundostundmppria(talk / contribs)20:30, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Ok thank you for discussing it with me . Btw you know what is funny we are having duscission about this minor issue but the lebanon pages are a mess up and i have lost all hope they keep changing like every three months it amazing people add stuff remove stuff change formats plus the vandalism i have legit given up Friendlyhistorian (talk) 20:38, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
@Friendlyhistorian: Honestly, I kinda dread every time when I open the Lebanese pages. I fully expect them to be a mess every time, and to spend several hours attempting to sort them out. So I get what you mean... Thank you, and please take care yourself! — Sundostundmppria(talk / contribs)20:44, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Please stop removing maintenance templates from List of beys of Tunis after superifically adding a citation or two in the lead. In order for this long and detailed list to be properly sourced, every row in the tables will need to be reviewed and verified with reliable scholarly sources, and any unverified details would need to be removed in the process. R Prazeres (talk) 19:19, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
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.
