User talk:Wizmut

French Territories

Can you add Réunion, Mayotte, French Guiana, Guadeloupe and Martinique to list of all countries by area because i dont know how to and i want to see the full list thanks Mehmetberkgung (talk) 01:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Russia can't be ONLY in europe or ONLY in Asia

Yes, Russia is a transcontinental country, but it can't be ONLY in Asia, it extends to both Asia and Europe. Russia is the largest country in the world, but it cannot be counted in conventionally divided territories such as Asia and Europe, because the country is not located in any of them completely Ethernexis (talk) 18:27, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this at the talk page for the article in question. There is already a topic open on this so you can add your post there.

Talk:List of Asian countries by area#Inclusion of Russia

The topic of Russia has also been discussed there in 2017[1] and on the population article talk page[2][3] Wizmut (talk) 18:36, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Solar PV capacity by country and territory (MW) and share of total electricity consumption

This table was removed from "Growth of photovoltaics" with comment that is included in "Solar power by country", but I fail to find it there. It was also absent on the date of edit (January 2, 2024). I suggest to add it the later article. Bglazar (talk) 16:50, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, the discussion on the solar growth article found that the data by historical year was not suitable for a table. Which data points do you believe should be present?

Edit: I understand your comment better now. The section in Growth of photovoltaics which had a detailed table like the one in Solar power by country was deemed to be redundant, as that section already links to the table article. Wizmut (talk) 17:07, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

		The Geography Barnstar
		For your diligent research and high-quality improvements to List of countries and dependencies by area. --Lasunncty (talk) 10:13, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Hello, Wizmut. I noticed that your recent edit to Energy development added a link to an image on an external website or on your computer, or to a file name that does not exist on Wikipedia's server. For technical and policy reasons it is not possible to use images from external sources on Wikipedia. Most images you find on the internet are copyrighted and cannot be used on Wikipedia, or their use is subject to certain restrictions. If the image meets Wikipedia's image use policy, consider uploading it to Wikipedia yourself or request that someone else upload it. See the image tutorial to learn about wiki syntax used for images. Thank you. - Sumanuil. _{(talk to me)} 01:54, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching that - I accidentally had "File:File:" in the wikitext. Wizmut (talk) 02:07, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

United States

9,525,067 is the correct size of the United States. This includes internal waters such as rivers and the United States portion of the great lakes(Lake Michigan, Lake Superior, Etc.. it’s not fair or accurate to include all of Canada Portion of the Great Lakes and it’s other large lakes and rivers but exclude the United States Portion of the Great Lakes from its total area. All of Russia lakes are included in its total. Every other country includes their lakes in their total area as well. 9,369,417 is inaccurate information. The United Nations, Brittanica, or the CIA fact book does not have that total listed. We should try our best to include accurate information instead of misinformation ZeusDragon2024 (talk) 21:19, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

United States continued

Size ZeusDragon2024 (talk) 22:41, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The U.S census is used to assess the population of the United States. The United Nations, Britannica, World Atlas, CIA Facebook, World Bank etc.. all include the United States portion of the Great Lakes in its total area. As I mentioned above, Lakes are included in total area of countries. Thats why Canada portion of the Great Lakes is included in theirs, Lake Baikal is included in Russia, the African Great Lakes are also included in their respective countries total area. It’s puzzling why this is up for debate when 99.99% agree that the U.S Great Lake portion should be included in the total area. The census has a different section for the Great Lakes is because the Great Lakes are shared with Canada and are not owned exclusively by the United States. 9,369,417 is not found anywhere to describe the size of the U.S ZeusDragon2024 (talk) 22:41, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of US cities by population

You screwed up the rankings on January 10. 174.67.226.163 (talk) 22:57, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aru Islands Regency

Dear Wizmut, in updating the latest population statistics for the Aru Islands Regency from mid-2022 to mid-2023, I was distressed to notice that you deleted a considerable amount of information from the table of districts, stating that you found it "non-notable". While this data may not have been of interest to you, I assure that it is of interest to many other people, and if you had taken the trouble to look at any other article relating to Indonesia's provinces, regencies or cities, you will see that the table in the Aru Islands article contains comparable data to every one of them. Please do not vandalise articles just because you do not need all of the information they contain. Rif Winfield (talk) 19:57, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not vandalism and please discuss this on the relevant talk page and ping me there. Wizmut (talk) 20:09, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of countries and dependencies by area

Do you really not know that the United States has an area of ​​9.8 million square kilometers, not 9.5 square kilometers? Where do you get the information from where they tell you that the United States has an area of ​​9.5 million square kilometers?? You can find a lot of information but you don't know that the United States has an area of ​​9.8 million square kilometers? And you try to change that information to make the United States look like 9.5 million square kilometers? 2403:6200:8860:DC8A:61C6:12C:B79:27F6 (talk) 13:49, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this on the relevant talk page. See Talk:List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_area#United_States. Wizmut (talk) 14:10, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Turkey" vs. "Türkiye"

Hi! I saw you used the name "Türkiye" as the name of the country generally known in English as "Turkey" in your recent edit to .List of countries by arable land density.

Here's a Q-and-A about why this shouldn't be done, based on Wikipedia's policies:

Q: Why don't you use the name Türkiye, the correct name for this country?

A: Because the English-language Wikipedia has a WP:COMMONNAME policy. We use names for countries and places that are the names commonly used for them in English, regardless of what official organizations use. Technically, this kind of name is known as an exonym. For example, we use the name Germany, instead of the native endonym Deutschland, and we use the name Japan instead of the native name 日本.

Q: But the Turkish government, U.S. State Department, and United Nations all use "Türkiye", so it must be correct.

A: Indeed they do. But WP:COMMONNAME is not authority-based, but usage-based. Please also see WP:NAMECHANGES for more guidance on this.

Notice that this does not apply when we are quoting a literal name in Turkish; for example, the newspaper is called Türkiye, not Turkey. To do that would be hypercorrection, and we don't do that. Nor do we mangle the name into English in direct quotations, including titles of documents, nor in URLs. But it does apply for all uses in Wikipedia's own voice in the English language, including article titles (so the capital is Ankara, Turkey, not "Ankara, Türkiye")

If or when that general English-language usage changes (as has happened in the past with place names such as Mumbai and Beijing), the same WP:COMMONNAME policy implies that the English-language Wikipedia will necessarily also follow suit. So far, that hasn't happened.

This has been discussed many times, with the same result every time because of the common name policy. If you'd like to discuss this further, please take it up at Talk:Turkey. — The Anome (talk) 08:35, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Missed that one. I'll keep an eye out. Wizmut (talk) 08:46, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Accent (sociolinguistics)

Hi. I made the short description of Accent (sociolinguistics) slightly longer than you had. I think it is necessary, since both accent in that sense and Stress (linguistics) are features of language. I made it, "A distinctive way of pronouncing a language". Cnilep (talk) 00:51, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's short enough to fit into the search bar, so it checks out. Cheers Wizmut (talk) 01:10, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FYI Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Short_descriptors; you may want to have a say. It looks like you stepped into the same issue. - Altenmann >talk 03:35, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NextEra Energy Request

Hi Wizmut, I saw that you were a member of WikiProject Energy, and I was curious if you had any interest in taking a look at my last request for the NextEra Energy article. I have a COI so I can't make any changes directly. I appreciate any insight you can offer. Cheers NextEraMatt (talk) 17:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UK is a transcontinental country

If the Netherlands and Denmark are considered transcontinental countries when their overseas territories are self governing, why isn't the UK? Especially when the UK is listed on page Wikipedia page as a transcontinental country and the only one in all seven. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.8.188.143 (talk) 15:14, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this on the relevant article talk page. Wizmut (talk) 18:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reverting

I understand that I made a wrong edit that I misread from artlebedev.com/susha/ and your edit made me realise my mistake. I just want to thank you for revving my misinformation. Thank you so much :) Kirbstyre 63 (talk) 03:03, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of countries by population density

Please, before reverting any changes, do some math work. The data on the Netherlands did not make sense, since if you were to take the population and divide it by the surface you would not get to that number, plus the surface was wrong. Now they are OK. You can check also on citypopulation.de — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.219.77.2 (talk) 11:35, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Citypopulation.de is an admirable site but is not as reliable of a source as the United Nations, which is the source for all the data in the table unless stated otherwise. Wizmut (talk) 12:20, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please ensure proper documentation for attribution when archiving

I noticed your edits to Talk:Feral pigeon, and your creations of two archives from that content (Talk:Feral pigeon/Archive 1 and Talk:Feral pigeon/Archive 2), and must ask that you please ensure that proper procedures are followed when moving content around Wikipedia, as attribution and content histories must be easily accessible. See Help:Archiving a talk page for details on that procedure and an essay about other instances when attribution must be maintained. Please return to the source talk page, and the target archives and make dummy edits to add the required information to the histories by way of edit summaries. If you are confused about what to do, please ask for help. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 23:52, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was following the procedure at Help:Archiving_a_talk_page#Cut_and_paste_procedure. Can you be more specific on what steps I missed? Wizmut (talk) 00:00, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'll be! I may have merged the ideology of correct attribution into the published procedure in my mind, or perhaps the procedure has been significantly altered since I learned it, but sure enough, Help:Archiving a talk page/Details#Manual archiving (the ultimate endpoint of the link you just shared) only suggests a plain text summary. If you read that essay I linked though, you'll learn more about how attribution must be maintained on the project, and it's typically done by adding links to stuff and ensuring they don't break by making sure stuff that is linked to doesn't vanish. As things stand, I must retract my request and apologise for the misunderstanding, but, I would like to try to convince you to follow a higher path than required anyway:

Note the summary in this example (just the most recent article talk archive from my contribs, though I do the same for my own talk page) when I archived Talk:Aurora (singer) some time ago, with a link to the archive being created. Then a link to the page being archived is present in the summary when creating the archive. Any editor watching the page, or searching for content, can use these links to navigate the attribution history with ease. It takes a little extra thought and effort, but results in a more organized wiki. So, yeah, you did exactly what the instructions said, and I have a malfunctioning memory, but maybe in future you could still add the links anyway? Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 00:58, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah roger wikilink to the new page. That does sound handy, will do. Wizmut (talk) 02:33, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Phoenix Program, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WGBH.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:57, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Archive refactoring Second Amendment

Greetings. I noticed the refactoring you performed on the 2A talk archives. While I'm not convinced of the utility of the changes, I also see no harm in them. However, there's one niggling detail that bothers me - there are now five 'dangling' archives listed in the index, 31 through 36. Would it be appropriate for me to tag those empty archive pages for speedy deletion? cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 21:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The archive bot can handle it either way, but if it's more normal to close them for a while, no biggie. My only request is to not make them redirects, because the bot doesn't know how to override that :) That happened to several archive pages at Talk:Creationism (2 thru 10 were empty), which also has duds at the end of its list now. Wizmut (talk) 21:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I waited 24 hours before inquiring, in hopes that the bot would be able to take care of it, but obviously it didn't. Yeah, no redirects for sure, that would really muck things up. I think I'll wait one more day just to be sure before submitting the delete requests. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 22:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for finishing the cleanup on Talk:Timeline of Internet conflicts and its archives. I didn't notice the maxarchivesize=10K. I wonder what will happen with the sort-of-blank archive 2 when it gets around to filling archive 1.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 03:32, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. If I remember right it should know what to do. The only thing I've seen break it is if someone makes an archive into a redirect. Wizmut (talk) 03:36, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extend the protection

Sorry for the intrusion... mr. Wizmut, do you think it is right that we ask for a period of time to extend the protection of the article → List of countries and dependencies by population ?.

If the Afghanistan article was not protected, chances are high enough that the user will also make some vandalizations there. It is not right that the good faith work of users is disrupted by a fanatical user who wants at all costs to impose his personal beliefs.

There are several countries where the population is in doubt, but if the official authorities display certain data, those data take precedence, not personal beliefs like that... I think so, I sense that it is more or less, I am right not the authorities, or I vandalize the page until you accept my personal conviction and other personalized ideas. Anyone is welcome to edit, but with fanatical users who want to impose their own beliefs although they have official data available, only administrators can explain to them how wiki works, tempering them with certain warnings.

Somehow that continued vandalism of the page has to be stopped... a good day I wish you!. MIHAIL (talk) 15:43, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It could help, just for a bit. Although occasionally a visitor will help make contributions to the article as well, so I wouldn't want it to be indefinite. But a discussion were to be held I'd probably support that.

I will say that I don't consider it irrational for someone to disagree and say that other sources are better. After all, occasionally an official source will be so old that we end up just copying the value from the UN article. I also (having looked into it) don't think any of the Afghanistan estimates are really all that good, from any source. The last census is just too old. Even the UN and CIA disagree by a large margin. I really wish there was an easy way to notify readers when some numbers are sketchy. Wizmut (talk) 14:33, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That user in Afghanistan will probably vandalize the page further. He's probably going on the premise of "everything or nothing" roulette to vandalize, until an administrator intervenes to interrupt this ongoing vandalism. It quite clearly states, that he doesn't care about anything, he doesn't care about official data, doesn't accept any options, sometimes they attack you verbally, doesn't care about warnings and wants to impose his own personal opinions forcibly.

Many people would like their country to have a population that is 50% bigger, or even double would be ideal. If everyone would behave in such an manner just to disrupt, where is the essence of the wiki to edit with official data, not with personal beliefs ?.

A survey on the talk page to ask other users if the article's protection can be extended temporarily to protect it from vandalism... he'd be welcome!. MIHAIL (talk) 19:50, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsed banner holders

Hi Wizmut, did you know that {{WikiProject banner shell}} also supports the collapsed parameter, so that you don't need to add a second {{Banner holder}} if the talk page only contains WikiProject banners? That way, people can still see the class rating for a page without having to expand the banner. Harryboyles 08:30, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I sometimes leave it open and sometimes put it in a box. It's been my preference the past few days to put the box there and any large non-warning banners into it, although I've changed my preferences a lot in the past two weeks. Appreciate the input. Wizmut (talk) 10:29, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shadowrun

I rolled back your archiving of the talk page of Shadowrun because it was deleted rather than being archived. I had to use rollback due to there being a blacklisted URL in the text somewhere. Archiving is fine, but we cannot have the talk completely deleted. Canterbury Tail talk 01:42, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, must've been going too fast. Wizmut (talk) 18:59, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan

Mr. Wizmut, you saw that I was right :)) ?!... I told yout that Afghan person will not give up changing, even if discussed on the talk-page, and will change hoping that some users will get bored to warn him. Now he doesn't even want to accept the UN variant. Although discussed on the talk-page, he wants at all costs to put the highest possible figure... he'd put 100 million in just to fulfill his dream. I felt he was conflicted, and I don't want anything to do with him. That person will stretch your nerves a lot.

Have a good day ahead!... and many greetings!. Mihail (talk) 00:09, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]