User talk:StellarNerd

April 2020

Hello, I'm S0091. I noticed that you recently removed content from Jack Swigert 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. S0091 (talk) 18:25, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did not REMOVE. I MOVED content. I moved the sentence of him being a boy scout to be next to his schooling.

My sincere apologies, StellarNerd! I clearly misinterpreted the change. My mistake so I reverted myself and your change stands. Again, I do apologize for my error and thank you for your contributions! S0091 (talk) 18:37, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :-).

Welcome StellarNerd!

Now that you've joined Wikipedia, there are 48,235,223 registered editors!

Hello, StellarNerd. Welcome to Wikipedia!

I'm S0091, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.

To help get you started, you may find these useful:

The Five Pillars (fundamental principles) of Wikipedia

A Primer for Newcomers

Introduction to Wikipedia

Wikipedia Training Modules

Simplified Manual of Style

Creating a new article via the Article Wizard

When editing, follow the 3 Core Content Policies:

1. Neutral point of view: represent significant views fairly

2. Verifiability: claims should cite reliable, published sources

3. No original research: no originality; reference published sources

Brochures: Editing Wikipedia & Illustrating Wikipedia
Ask a Question about How to Use Wikipedia
Help

Remember to always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~ at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to this (your talk) page, and a timestamp.

Sincerely, S0091 (talk) 18:40, 11 April 2020 (UTC) (Leave me a message)[reply]

Sanctions against all members of State Duma by EU

All the 351 members of State Duma (450 members), under house of Russia, and also a lot of legislative members in Federation Council, upper house of Russia, are sanctioned by EU .

Consillium.europa.eu: EU adopts package of sanctions in response to Russian recognition of the non-government controlled areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine and sending of troops into the region

[...]"Within the existing framework for sanctions, the EU will extend restrictive measures to cover all the 351 members of the Russian State Duma, who voted on 15 February in favour of the appeal to President Putin to recognise the independence of the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk ”republics” --92.76.99.82 (talk) 18:38, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I put yesterday in Category:Russian individuals subject to the European Union sanctions all duma members of Putin party United Russia (325 members) and of right wing party LDPR (22 members), not the members of opposition left parties (Communist Party of the Russian Federation and A Just Russia — For Truth). --92.76.99.82 (talk) 18:45, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But this is something specific to these people personally, it was a blanket measure against hundreds and thousands of people based on them being members of bodies. Russia also passed sanctions, should all bios sanctioned by Russia be marked? Other countries? There will be no end here. StellarNerd (talk) 05:19, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Lidl. Thank you. ThereminPlayer (talk) 11:05, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For your attention:

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 governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

Vigilantia automata (talk) 05:40, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Violence against Muslims in India

I don't think you are aware of the scope of this subject.

You have to read the discussion at Talk:Violence_against_Muslims_in_India/Archive_2#Section_break_for_ease, Talk:Violence_against_Muslims_in_India#Hemantha's_reverts and Talk:Violence_against_Muslims_in_India#Large revert.

The scope is restricted for this page to cover only major incidents, this had been once again clarified by the long term editor of this page, Vanamonde93 in the words "I don't think minor incidents ought to be mentioned in list form at all (on this page, or any similar overarching page about violence). Of course, that tends to be a pointless argument; every page has its POV pushers demanding the inclusion of every last incident."[1]

Do you have consensus to expand the scope? If you don't have one, then you must self-revert yourself here. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 20:14, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You made many changes in that one huge edit, and I don't see wide ranging user agreement in that discussion. You have one user agreeing with you about different content in February. Back then you were discussing this removal of 1452 letters. Now you are removing eight times that, 12,543 letters, in your edit. I agree with Vanamonde93 that minor things shouldn't be there, but you aren't only removing minor things. --StellarNerd (talk) 20:19, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion didn't just involve removing 1452 letters but reverting back to the "last stable version". I have already described how I reverted to the last stable version. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 20:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article was 70,958 letters at 05:44, 27 December 2020‎ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Violence_against_Muslims_in_India&oldid=996541012 and 72,875 letters on 17:27, 14 November 2021 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Violence_against_Muslims_in_India&oldid=1055229464 . You took it down to 60,903 letters with https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Violence_against_Muslims_in_India&diff=1090750469&oldid=1090750352 . The last time this article was so small, was in the beginning of 2020: https://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo/en.wikipedia.org/Violence_against_Muslims_in_India#year-counts . You aren't taking it to the stable version at all. --StellarNerd (talk) 20:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody talked about including minor incidents. To understand how this version was longstanding can be understood by comparing this version March 2016 version with September 2020 version. You will find no difference when it comes to "Major incidents" other than the addition of 2013 Muzaffarnagar riots and 2020 Delhi riots, to which I don't object. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 20:29, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DS Alert

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 India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 20:28, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. Last person who posted one of these blue things here got blocked like twenty minutes later. Good luck. --StellarNerd (talk) 20:29, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Madness of Crowds

Concerning this edit, WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY would be better served if the Eagleton discussion (and quote) were included in the body as well, without removing the mention in the lead. Bht without my typos, I hope. :) Newimpartial (talk) 21:19, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Newimpartial, is this better? --StellarNerd (talk) 21:22, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly is, though I don't think "mostly positive" necessarily belongs... I was working with an imperfect version. ;) Newimpartial (talk) 21:25, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have a point there. Certainly a varied response. --StellarNerd (talk) 21:30, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2000 Mules

You more or less dismissed an edit I was suggesting without thoughtfully looking at what I suggested. I would like to AGF and ask that you please review my comments in response to you there in the talk page. Misunderstandings happen. 205.168.105.204 (talk) 20:05, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done, apologies I was confused by your use of "add" when you were suggesting to modify an existing paragraph. --StellarNerd (talk) 20:09, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Standard ArbCom sanctions notice

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 gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

Newimpartial (talk) 20:08, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deportation of Chinese in the Soviet Union

Hi, I am the translator of Deportation of Chinese in the Soviet Union, which is now under deletion review due to User:折毛's hoax. Although the English version differed from the Chinese version created by 折毛 from the very beginning, it contained English translation of the Chinese content created by 折毛. To eliminate the impact of her content, I have validated the sources and removed all sources if they are unverifiable. Also, I have added new content backed by new reliable sources. I am thankful for your participation in the previous discussion of the deletion review, but now that the deletion review is not being relisted, I am not sure whether you might want to take a look at the new, mostly re-written, and validated version of the article and express your opinion in the deletion review. I will be most grateful to your further comment regarding any potential improvement of the article and regarding your decision in the deletion review.

---HNlander (talk) 16:54, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IIHF's view

The IIHF calls the country Czechia & that's where I limited the page moves. However, you're free to open up an RFC on the matter, in the appropriate place. GoodDay (talk) 20:22, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The IIHF doesn't rule on country names in Wikipedia or in English, it just copies what the country asks. If you want to make it, please launch a proper request moved and have an uninvolved editor close it, preferably a sysop. --StellarNerd (talk) 20:24, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't about the country, it's about the hockey teams. Recommend WP:HOCKEY, as the place for an RFC on the matter. GoodDay (talk) 20:25, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is about the country, as the team belongs to the country. --StellarNerd (talk) 20:26, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you're not gonna bring it up at WP:HOCKEY? Then I will. GoodDay (talk) 20:27, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus was against your point of view, but you decided to act and revert anyway.

In that case you should backtrace all GoodDay's changes and revert them all. Chrz (talk) 21:46, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What are all of GoodDay's changes ? I am only aware of the Czech Republic team. --StellarNerd (talk) 04:34, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Recent moves to Czechia women's national ice hockey team, Czechia men's national junior ice hockey team, Czechia men's national under-18 ice hockey team, Czechia women's national under-18 ice hockey team. FromCzech (talk) 06:44, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lavender oil

User:StellarNerd Please undo your revert. The RfC below is *not* to determine if the current source should stay in, it's to determine if *more* source should be added. Consensus was already reached on the current source that Zefr keeps removing. 50.45.170.185 (talk) 18:30, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a consensus to add this content. --StellarNerd (talk) 18:32, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]