User talk:Cassiopeia

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

Welcome to my talk page. Please adhere to the talk page guidelines and particularly the following:

Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page.
Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end.
Please specify a descriptive subject or headline for a new topic and separate subtopics by ===heading=== lines, if needed.
Please indent your posts with one more ":" than what you are replying to, i.e. begin with ":" if replying to an existing topic and "::" if replying to a reply.

I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply.

⇒ Start a new Talk topic.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120
121

This page has archives. Sections older than 4 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Question from CarDriver897 (19:09, 21 January 2025)

Sooo Cas, I have been struck again by the ANNOYING Revirvlkodlaku dude again. I wrote about Things From the Flood, which is the 2nd artbook by Simon Stalenhag, on the Simon Stalenhag page. I wrote that it was the sequel to Tales From the Loop (True fact in the books) and he says it's "Disruptive writing". I am truly offended, especially when I wrote a true Stalenhag fact. I'm not sure what to do, soo yeah, --CarDriver897 (talk) 19:09, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CarDriver897 Good day. This was your edit. User:Revirvlkodlaku was not annoying but informed you that the content you added did not provide a source to support your claim, which their revert and warning is justifiable. Any content added/changed must be supported by independent, reliable sources, such as major newspapers or books, for verification. To add an inline citation (source), please use the horizontal format of Template:Cite web if the source is from the web. Let me know if there is anything else I can help with. Be safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 09:35, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CarDriver897, calling me annoying is uncalled for, and asserting that I called you out for nothing is untrue and therefore disingenuous on your part. This kind of attitude is not welcome on Wikipedia, and if you persist in this vein, you can be sure to receive more warnings in the future. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:43, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Revirvlkodlaku I dont think CarDriver897 know the Wikipedia guidelines well. I dont think anyone here is trying to upset the other people. Let's assume good faith as CarDriver897 has only 19 main space edit. Cassiopeia talk 21:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source

Hey!

I did add a source to the article on Swedish actress Barbro Larsson!

https://www.dn.se/familj/dodsannonser/#/CaseInline/945126?query=barbro%20lARSSON 92.39.0.212 (talk) 07:02, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I click on your source above and didnt see what you added on the article. Cassiopeia talk 07:06, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added Larssons full name, which was not in the article before.

92.39.0.212 (talk) 10:40, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

M'Clure Strait

My name is Bernard Peissel I was the land coordinator of the Passage through Ice expedition. My son Nicolas Peissel was the expedition leader. During the trip we never were able to communicate with Cowper and did not know if he was ahead or behind us. So we only claimed we were the first sailboat through. Now this article proves we were the first civilian boat (not an icebreaker) through M'Clure Strait. What other proof would you like? BernyVA2BP (talk) 08:31, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BernyVA2BP Good day, and thank you for the message above. There are three issues here. (1) Since you are the land coordinator of the Ice expedition, that means you have a conflict of interest (COI)to edit the page. If you want to edit the page, then you need to disclose, see instructions here -WP:DISCLOSE, your COI on your user page - HERE. Secondly, you need to provide independent, reliable sources, such as from the major newspapers or books, to support your claim for verification. Sources from social media, edu, org, gov, foundation, institution, subject official websites, and private companies are considered unreliable and/or not independent. (3) We don't assume the info from the article and make our opinion or judgment. All content needs to derive from an independent, reliable source from a neutral point of view with your own words.

To add the inline citation, you can use the horizontal format of Template:Cite web if the source is from the web. Be safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 08:45, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am confused. How can anyone know the log of the boat you seem to accept Cowpers location. I quit understand I could be giving you false information but who can confirm the veracity of my clame. I have McGill university professors specializing in arctic affairs who can vouch for me ? Would that do? BernyVA2BP (talk) 09:08, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BernyVA2BP The only source we need is from independent, reliable source such as from the books or major newspapers for verification. If you can find the source stating what you claim then it can not be added into Wikipedia article. Cassiopeia talk 09:57, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In that case I protest that you claim with no proof that Belzebob2 went through M'Clure strait after Polar Bound. No other source can claim that. All we know for the last 13 years is that we went through on the same day. I recently came across your article and read Cowpers time of completion of the strait looked at my log found the first fix after passing Cape Prince Albert and was delighted to see we infact were being followed by him. You have no proof of the contrary so lets correct the explicite statement that Belzebob laged behind. Thank you for your help. I can't see how we could have made a claim back then of facts we did not have. We took the prudent move of claiming first sailboat as an undeniable fact. BernyVA2BP (talk) 10:19, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BernyVA2BP Thank you for your explanation; however, in Wikipedia, the core principal is verfication (proof). If there is no independent, reliable to verifies the claim, the it does not belong in the article. Be safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 10:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

on the day of the Passage and for weeks after all news coverage was on Belzebob2. COWPER NEVER MADE A PEEP. HOW CAN YOU INSIST HE WENT FIRST. FIND ME A TIMELY ARTICLE ON COWPER. BernyVA2BP (talk) 11:03, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BernyVA2BP Again, if you want to add or change anything, then provide the independent, reliable source to support the claim. The editor who added/change the info need to provide the proof (source).If no such source is availabe then the info can not be placed in the article. Cassiopeia talk

Question from Imcheesemaster (01:06, 24 January 2025)

Greetings Ma'm I wonder on how may i put links to some articles --Imcheesemaster (talk) 01:06, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Imcheesemaster Good day. Thank you for your question. See below; there are some issues with your edit, and I will also answer your question below:

(1) Do not change the name: The inbox name is as per the article name, so do not change it - see your edit - HERE.

(2) All info added or changed needs to be supported by an independent, reliable source, such as from the major newspapers or books. The person who does the edit needs to provide the source to prove your edit claim - see WP:V the core policy of Wikipedia.

(3) Linking through hyperlinks - links provide instant pathways to locations within and outside the project that can increase readers' understanding of the topic. - see Help:Link on how to do a hyperlink and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking for details info.

(4) Since you are new to Wikipedia, I strongly suggest you take WP:TWA short program (30 mins) so you can familiarize yourself with some of the fundamental Wikipedia guidelines, which will help you tremendously in editing.

Let me know if you have further questions. I am here to help. Be safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 01:55, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magomed Magomedov (judoka born 1991)

I did a major rewrite of the article, putting the focus on his 3 world championships in combat sambo. Thought you might reconsider your AfD nomination. Papaursa (talk) 03:29, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Papaursa Good day. Long time I havent heard from you. Believe you are well. MANOTE is not a notability guidelines but I assume good faith here since he has 3 world sambo championship, which I believe, the subject would have some coverage in Russian media/site. I have withdrawn the nomination. Happy New Year and be safe. Cassiopeia talk 03:50, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your prompt response. I've cut back on my WP editing to just martial arts AfDs. Hope 2025 is good to you. Papaursa (talk) 04:12, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Papaursa Whatever you do, please do not leave WP, especially in MMA articles; we have lost Peter for some years now, and you are the only one left who knows the history of WP MMA project the since day one, and you are such a valuable editor. Thank you for your time spent and effort. Be safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 04:36, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roster Watch

To play devil's advocate (look that up), why do you allow X as sources for Roster Tracker / UFC Roster Watch removals?

The obvious answer is there are exceptions and "sparingly" right? You said you do not allow X/social media posts, right?

I know exceptions are made sparingly, but let's hear your explanation Marty2Hotty (talk) 12:14, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marty2Hotty It is well recognized that, often, when a fighter is released from the UFC, most media media do not report on the event. As a result, we remove fighters from the list of current UFC competitors if they have not participated in a UFC event within the past two years. Additionally, fighters are removed if their fight record on Sherdog indicates participation in another promotion. We utilize the UFC watch to maintain the updated list. We always substitute UFC watch when we find an independent, reliable source reporting the event. Should you wish, you may choose to eliminate or revert all UFC Watch sources from the articles, thereby retaining all fighters who have departed from the UFC on the list of current UFC fighters, and in their respective articles that they are still considered UFC fighters. Cassiopeia talk 16:05, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is right, but it conflicts what you previously said about not using social media, right? :) You said you cannot use social media for a source, but here you can? Why? You didn't explain why it is okay here.

So, your answer is the media does not always report it, right? This is the case for certain situations as well. Also, the answer is the roster watch is "reliable", is it not? Please answer. Marty2Hotty (talk) 21:22, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, it can be used in sparing cases when the source is very reliable like UFC Roster Watch on X (social media), right?

You were always against "all" social media as being unreliable including the ones from OFFICIAL accounts. But this is okay? Come on! Marty2Hotty (talk) 21:23, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marty2Hotty As I said, should you wish, you may choose to eliminate or revert all UFC Watch sources from the articles, thereby retaining all fighters who have departed from the UFC on the list of current UFC fighters, and in their respective articles that they are still considered UFC fighters. I have substitute all the January 25 releases sources on 2025 in UFC and list of UFC current fighters pages. Cassiopeia talk 01:59, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits have been reverted

Hello, Your recent edits to First 100 days of the second Donald Trump presidency have been identified as vandalism and have been reverted. Please be aware that adding disruptive or false information to pages goes against community guidelines. If you continue to make such edits, you may face further action, including being blocked from editing. If you believe your edits were constructive, feel free to discuss them on the article's talk page. Thank you. 79.168.93.9 (talk) 14:30, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

79.168.93.9 My edits have not been reverted. If you continue to vandalize the page indicating Trump declared all "American are born female" again, you will be blocked. Cassiopeia talk 16:14, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Many reputable sources have indicated that this is a fact.

just because you don’t agree with it doesn’t mean it’s vandalism

continuing to vandalize that page by claiming that these reputable sources are lying will result in you being blocked 79.168.93.9 (talk) 21:19, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is Wikipedia, and Wikipedia set the rules and guidelines which media is reliable. I will state no more. Cassiopeia talk 23:09, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Jewish post is a reliable source, your source was not. Please reframe from vandalising or I will block you 79.168.93.9 (talk) 23:15, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit has been reverted by the admin and you have been blocked. Cassiopeia talk 23:17, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Global Fight League

Just wanted to drop you a note to thank you for the work you did on the Global Fight League page regarding their draft. Excellent way to display a lot of info. Udar55 (talk) 14:51, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Udar55 Good day. I would like to express my gratitude for your message. I sincerely value your acknowledgment, as we are all here to support one another and collaborate effectively on this project. Cassiopeia talk 16:24, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect application of vandalism

Just to let you know, I doting a page in good faith with a source is not vandalism

it may not be an edit you agree with or may not be what Wikipedia wants but labelling it as vandlism is disingenuous and an abuse of your powers

vandelism is typically when someone defaces the page by deleting content

i hope I’ve been able to help you learn how Wikipedia works and become a better admin in the future 148.69.58.211 (talk) 00:42, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

148.69.58.211, Go to the article talk page and discuss your edit "Trump indicates All American are born female". Btw Jerusalem Post is not in the list of reliable source in Wikipedia. Cassiopeia talk 02:20, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]