User talk:Thi

Archives

Archive 1

Hello, Thi. 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

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.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thi, thanks for moving that item on the Manx cat in the talk page for me. I totally goofed on that one. I will be more diligent to put items in the correct section next time. dawnleelynn^(talk) 17:55, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. --Thi (talk) 18:40, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thi. 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

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.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You claimed that the proposal completely succeeded, yet only four Wikipedians agreed to remove the novel, thus only the addition part passed.--RekishiEJ (talk) 14:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the correction. --Thi (talk) 09:11, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, after sanctioning the proposal, I closed it marking it passed. Although according to the 15-day rule if after 15 days after the proposal there are at least five votes and at least two-thirds of votes are supportive it can be closed as passed, I wonder if it is appropriate to close the proposal right after voting to support it, making it to meet the criterion of passing according to the rule I mentioned. What do you think?--RekishiEJ (talk) 14:51, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think that consensus has been reached. --Thi (talk) 15:46, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see.--RekishiEJ (talk) 16:24, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thi! I noticed that you closed Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/4/Archive_62#Add_Foxconn as no consensus, 2-0. I think the proposal has a reasonable chance of passing, as no one has yet voiced any objection to my nomination, but I'm not sure how to draw enough attention to it to have a discussion. Should I nominate it again, or is there a way to re-open the discussion? Thanks for the help, Sdkb (talk) 19:36, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have now reopened the discussion. --Thi (talk) 20:12, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I understand you are the remaining moderator of the "vital articles" projects. I just want you to be aware of this. Fr.dror (talk) 20:48, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thi. Actually I "would" agree with no consensus for removal Heisenberg (I had on my mind to keep oppose vote for straight removal of Heisenberg without Niels Bohr, or without swap with Copenhagen interpretation) but technically removal was 4-1 (or 3-1 if You were neutral on removal at the closing). Cheers Dawid2009 (talk) 17:46, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thi! You recently moved my proposed change on Wikipedia talk:Vital articles to Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/2. However, the Level 2 talk page introduction says the following: “Since changes to this list may affect lower-level lists, discussions regarding its composition are best initiated at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles”. Since the proposed change only involves a Level 2 page and a Level 3 page, shouldn’t the discussion be on the main page rather than on the Level 2 page? Drevolt (talk) 21:49, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The intro text was added many years ago when only few people watched Level 2 talk page, but last year there were lots of proposals and active discussions in Level 2. Currently it is quite silent at all levels of the project and it is possible that the discussion will be open for several months. I added a link to moved proposal in talk:Vital articles. --Thi (talk) 22:41, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that lately you've been providing more detail when contributing to the vital articles discussions. I just wanted to thank you for that. Cheers, Cobblet (talk) 17:17, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This year, many people had COVID to fear,
The holidays are getting near,
One thing that will be clear,
We will still have holiday cheer,
Happy holidays and happy new year!!
From Interstellarity (talk) 14:11, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a quote of Ehrman (2012). DJE, pp. 184–185 ? --2db (talk) 16:33, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm sorry. --Thi (talk) 17:55, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Vital articles has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:55, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that your proposal to add

Thi,
I sincerely hope your holiday season goes well this year especially with what we went through last year. I'm optimistic that 2022 will be a better year for all of us: both in real life and on Wikipedia. Wishing you the best from, Interstellarity (talk) 13:09, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thi, and warmest wishes to Happy New Year !! I have some questions to you (will write point by point as I have quite not idiomatic language ability in English when write long sentences): 1 Could you please not close soonly discussion about Peru and Singapoor until there will be no few more comment by various people there (just as discussion about Design was opened for long stage). I noted you recently closed discussion about Netherlands, and I am ok with that, I admit but would wish to wait unitil something more will be said about Peru and Singapoore which are two examples of countries which are vital for entirely diffrent factors. 2 I know it is not my stuff but what do you think to add few more things to your userpage? (at least what your nickname mean, or to we know how we should reffer to you, "he?", "she?") 3I years ago noted article on

Happy New Year for you too. 1) I will not close the mentioned discussion. 2) Maybe I should have chosen some other username, but for me it is just three letters. Finnish has only gender-neutral pronouns, so I haven't paid attention for them. You can refer to me as you wish. 3) Unfortunately I already have too long list of potential articles to edit. --Thi (talk) 13:51, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually in "I think that the study of music is clearly vital topic at this level." "a" should be added after "clearly" and before "vital". Hope that next time you can proofread what you type carefully before submission.--RekishiEJ (talk) 06:10, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In a number of vital articles swap proposal you closed the discussion in ways like "result=Swap 1-1, removal 2-1, addition 1-2.". In my opinion this is not enough useful when most votes are voting removal and addition separately, and thus I think it is more meaningful to count votes that support/oppose swaps as simultaneously supporting/opposing removal and addition, such that result cited above would become "removal 3-2, addition 2-3.". C933103 (talk) 02:43, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I counted the votes separately, it was "removal 2-1, addition 1-2". "Swap 1-1" was meant as a sidenote. --Thi (talk) 18:50, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, noticed it is almost couple months since you did anything at VA or anything at Wikipedia. Dawid2009 (talk) 08:47, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thi, I would like to see your own list of vital articles to see what you think is important to cover for Wikipedia especially the People section for levels 3 and 4. Let me know what your thoughts are regarding my suggestion. There hasn't been a lot of activity on the vital articles pages within the past few months, so if you compiled your own list of vital articles, we could see what holes the list has in order to improve it. Interstellarity (talk) 00:20, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I noticed that you have not included a bird in the thraupidae family Pettymars0193 (talk) 13:55, 17 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

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.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

LightProof1995 (talk) 02:28, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]