User talk:Wester

Archive User talk: Wester/1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Abkhazia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Armenian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Abkhazia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Armenian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 17 May 2014, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jean-Luc Dehaene, which you substantially updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Spencer^T♦C 00:15, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you put in "o please" on the article when you reverted those names in India's official languages. Is there a reason on why you remove those. 174.91.72.116 (talk) 18:49, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you think it's to much? India has only two national official languages.--Wester (talk) 21:44, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You modified the Django Reinhardt page and removed the references [1] to put false informations, please see "Nationality" on Talk page [2]

Playsound (talk) 19:53, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What false? It's not a secret that he is Belgian-born. In fact, he is more known as Belgian than as a Frenchman. But in reality he was probably mostly a gypsy regardless of nationality.

BTW: in Wikipedia it's common for people with multiple nationalities to simply use the place were he is born. That's more factual. --Wester (talk) 20:02, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for making the changes and providing a source. Allow me to explain myself: I saw your edits, at two pages on en.wp and at nl:Vlag van het Brussels Hoofdstedelijk Gewest. I searched for 15 minutes in both English and French and came up with nothing, so I thought it was safe to say that you were mistaken, and I reverted it. Some of my edit summaries were more friendly as well, from the Dutch article: Ik kon geen enkele bron ervoor vinden, en ik zou graag zo'n bron lezen!. Whether you were right or wrong, I knew that whether I reverted it or added a tag, you'd see it in the same amount of time (though actually reverting it gave you a notification: even better!). So there's my explanation.

Other than that, I find this fascinating. I follow news about Belgium, Brussels and even about flags in general, so I can't believe I hadn't heard of this. I'm also shocked that the French language press seems to have missed something so big entirely (though I found a few sources in Dutch after you posted the law). Lastly, I think that flags shouldn't be updated to fit with the aesthetics of the day, and the new flag is just awful; no flag of any serious organization should have a stylized heart on it. But then again, nobody asked me.

Thanks again for your changes. I've restored your content at nl.wp and even added sources there. I will do the same shortly on en.wp. Cheers, Oreo Priest ^talk 21:16, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I completely agree that the new flag is dreadful. A new logo is one thing, but a flag is normally much more conservative. You don't change a flag every 10 years as with a logo. This source gives the right arguments against a chance: [3]--Wester (talk) 21:37, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I still can't believe more people didn't stand up to the change. "Groen is tegen de vernieuwing van de vlag. "Brusselaars zijn wel met andere dingen bezig", zegt parlementslid Arnaud Verstraete.". Talk about missing the point! Oreo Priest ^talk 22:45, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the bill has passed committee stage, but isn't law yet. I've updated some articles and undone other edits to reflect this. Of course, we'll restore the versions featuring the new flag once it becomes official. Oreo Priest ^talk 13:33, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you update the Dutch article to reflect this? My Dutch isn't good enough, sadly. Oreo Priest ^talk 13:40, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, although once it's approved in the commission it's only a formality to be approved in general.--Wester (talk) 13:44, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've also found the report of the 'commission Territorial Development' of 17 December: [4]. There was a proposed amendment to the original bill so that the names of the colours are changed into the correct heraldic terms. But even that was repelled.

Especially the discussion is interesting . That can be included in the article. --Wester (talk) 13:56, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I will do that at some point in the future. Oreo Priest ^talk 15:54, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I saw. It's a shame they went through with it. I'll add details to the article in a few weeks, but at the moment I'm much too busy! Oreo Priest ^talk 15:54, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See

Do I detect that you're indulging a meatpuppet in

WP:WIKIHOUNDING? I can't remember why I had your talk page on my watchlist, but am pleased that I have. Only two contributions from this IP, yet you're at the RM arguing arguing against RGloucester within moments. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:37, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

That's a Ukrainian user. See [5]. I'm Belgian. And I do not need any meatpuppet . I'm glad that user informed me so I could participate in the discussion. But I can see that everyone basically agrees (except you) and RGloucester is alone with his stance. That anonymous user probably contacted me because I moved the page earlier.

Also, it would be nice if you'd not accuse people out of the blue based on nothing. That's not the way we threat each other. --Wester (talk) 00:58, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't accuse you of being a meatpuppet, Wester. My apologies if you misunderstood that: I said that you were indulging a meatpuppet. I simply find it strange that you don't check the special contributions of an IP when you're being canvassed. There's nothing improper about regular editors who know each other to bring an RM or RfC to the attention of editors they know might be interested (so long as it doesn't extend to blatant

WP:CANVASSing. There is, however, a problem when you respond to a sock or meatpuppet who has selected you on the basis of being certain that you'll side with their POV. That's no way for regular editors to treat each other, either. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:24, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Force Publique, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dutch. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are interested in this topic, you may want to help with our current draft at

]

WikiProject Hillary Rodham Clinton

You are invited to join WikiProject Hillary Clinton, a WikiProject dedicated to improving articles related to American politician Hillary Clinton. You received this invitation because of your history editing articles related to her. The WikiProject Hillary Clinton group discussion is here. If you are interested in joining, please visit the project page, and add your name to the list of participants.

Thanks for your consideration, and please note that joining this project is in no way an endorsement of HRC or her political positions. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:50, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I misread the dates. I am sorry. Guy (Help!) 10:53, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK. -12:03, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi,

This is a notification to let you know that there is a

Thanks. And have a nice day. NickCT (talk) 18:57, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

But it is conformed that he is the third bomber in Brussels Airport. That should be mentioned in the article. --Wester (talk) 13:17, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Then add a

WP:RS too. Do NOT add unreferenced material. Erlbaeko (talk) 13:22, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

[7]--Wester (talk) 13:28, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That article says "Cheffou was arrested Thursday night. His exact role in the Brussels attacks is not known yet.", at least according to Google translate. Please, find a real RS that says Fayçal Cheffou was one of the perpetrators, or self-revert. Thank you. Erlbaeko (talk) 13:40, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's quite obvious it's him. He's also arrested for 'terrorist murder'. Though you're right that it's not 100% it's him, it's 95% certain it's him. In media he is called 'Fayçal C.' because he is not convicted yet. I'll change it to that. --Wester (talk) 13:47, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, the tone on that move discussion is worse than it needs to be, and this edit didn't help. Can you please rephrase? Horrible events bring out strong emotions (as well they should), but editing talk pages is most productive when we put our emotions to the side. Thanks for your consideration! VQuakr (talk) 01:34, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What's so bad on the comment I wrote? I simply stated that Wikipedia has flexible rules and that were not autistics. If there is need to have an other article title the 'rules are rules'-argument does not hold. There are no fixed rules on article titles. --Wester (talk) 02:02, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You see a problem neither with using "autistic" as a pejorative nor with implying that other editors have autism? VQuakr (talk) 02:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If I could bump in, there are Wikipedians out there that identify with having autism... By chance, could you please re-phrase, or delete, that part of the comment? I've retracted my statement if you were responding to me.

Talk to me 02:33, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello, Wester. Voting in the

2016 Arbitration Committee elections

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wester. 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]

Hello, Wester. 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]

Hello, I'm Wikaviani. I noticed that you recently removed content from Caucasus without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:32, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wester. You have new messages at Talk:List of people whose names are used in chemical element names.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:20, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content as you did here based on your personal opinion. The articles talk page clearly demonstrates the need for this information. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:04, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called

page-specific restrictions

, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the

guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here

. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called

page-specific restrictions

, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the

guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here

. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

EvergreenFir (talk) 22:38, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That talk page just isn't the place for sitewide or statewide policy discussion. If you want to compare and contrast two or more cases, you should take it to a higher level. A Wikiproject, a noticeboard, something like that. Don't be afraid to write your newsmakers, politicians and/or judiciaries, either. Timing isn't everything, location is also half-key. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:11, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. EvergreenFir (talk) 23:29, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it."

Look, I've been in your position of "intellectual" zeal. You are not doing anyone any favours by acting like a superior on something you know nothing about. You aren't here to squabble over The Latest Media Outcry. You're here to document information. I love you, but you're damaging the ability to dialogue with everyone else. I'm not calling you stupid mind you. Please, don't get that impression. I just want you to know that documenting history isn't celebrating it. That's on the reader. To do otherwise is a severe undermining of Man's intellectual integrity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.147.62.176 (talk) 18:22, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yuri Oganessian, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Russian.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 20 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) 00:20, 29 November 2022 (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) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]