User talk:Ghost of Kiev

Stanwell Power Station

Please respect the rules about using the appropriate variant of the English language as per WP:ENGVAR. In many (but probably not all cases), this is also shown at the top of the article. This is the case with Stanwell Power Station which contains the clear directive to use Australian English. If you are not familiar with the spelling of that variant of English, do not change the spellings in the article. Kerry (talk) 07:18, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I didn't know Australia people spell English different. Ghost of Kiev (talk) 13:56, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Ashton-Cirillo

Thanks for your helpful edit at Sarah Ashton-Cirillo, especially for catching the bit of overstatement regarding her impact on the local GOP. However, most of your edit went against provisions of our Manual of Style and related guidelines, so I've had to revert it. I explained in my edit summary, but had to really cram it all in there, so, to elaborate:

MOS:LEDECITE: Citations are not required in the lede for things verified in the body, usually. I did add citations for "only transgender journalist", though, since that's a specific and significant claim.
MOS:DATELINK: Unlike some other Wikipedias, the English Wikipedia does not link dates.
MOS:OVERLINK: Country names and very general terms like "police officer" and "gay men" usually should not be linked if only being mentioned in passing.
MOS:DUPLINK: A term should usually not be linked twice in an article's body. (You may just not have noticed that Chattah was linked in the previous section.)
WP:REDNO: Gonzalo Lira was deleted by consensus, so the title probably shouldn't be redlinked
WP:NPOV: Saying someone "transitioned to womanhood" is a complicated, politically fraught phrasing. Was she not a woman before? Is that how she sees it? Is that how Wikipedia sees it? Etc.

Again, thank you for your edit, and I hope to see you around. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 18:43, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The directions that pop up on my screen say to add links in the articles and to do copy edits, but do not give me all of this information. This is helpful. Ghost of Kiev (talk) 18:47, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We should never call any religious text “holy”

Applies to all religions. Doug Weller talk 19:27, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why not call the works of all religions "holy"? Like the Holy Bible and the Holy Quran? Wouldn't this be ok? Ghost of Kiev (talk) 19:28, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller?? Ghost of Kiev (talk) 19:38, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Doug Weller talk 19:48, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why not? Is there a rule against this? Ghost of Kiev (talk) 19:48, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is the good sir stating his opinion @Tamzin @Kerry or is there a rule about this? Ghost of Kiev (talk) 20:24, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The rule would be Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (NPOV). Wikipedia neither endorses nor denies the point of view that the Quran is holy, nor the Christian Bible, the Tanakh, etc. If the official title of a text contains the word "Holy", then that's one thing, so like one might see "He published A New English Translation of the Holy Quran", where that's the actual title of the book; but when we say "the Quran", we're speaking in the encyclopedia's voice, and it would violate NPOV to say that it's "holy". Same reason we generally don't say "the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)" or "Jesus Christ", although admittedly the latter rule is under-enforced. Also, ping for Kerry Raymond, who I assume you intended. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 20:32, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the explanation good lady this is helpful Ghost of Kiev (talk) 22:31, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The general principal is that we are not here to express an opinion but to provide sufficient information from which the reader may form their own opinion. There are many words and phrases that we tend to avoid (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch) because they express an opinion. If you live in a predominantly Christian country, you will see mentions of the Holy Bible in the media and other writing all the time, because of the cultural norms that apply. But we write for an international audience on Wikipedia so we need to be more careful. Saying that "punk rocker Sid Vicious died tragically from a drug overdose at the age of 21 years" is an opinion. Some might think his early demise was tragic, but others may think the world is better off without drug-using punk rockers influencing impressionable young people. So we write it with the age and the cause of death but not the word "tragically". Provide the facts without the opinion. It takes practice though but after a while it becomes a habit. Kerry (talk) 22:13, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the explanation good lady this is helpful Ghost of Kiev (talk) 22:32, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Ghost of Kiev, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! GizzyCatBella🍁 20:30, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The Wikipedia Adventure is helpful in learning the hackerman-style editor. Ghost of Kiev (talk) 21:46, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Ghost of Kiev! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 20:31, Tuesday, November 15, 2022 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Ghost of Kiev! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 20:35, Tuesday, November 15, 2022 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

November 2022

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. ProofRobust 22:36, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you good sir I shall use these when vanquishing vandals Ghost of Kiev (talk) 13:51, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bruce Fein, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Emoluments Clause. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:03, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed restrictions

Hi Ghost of Kiev,

first of all, a belated welcome to Wikipedia. You have created your account over 7 months ago and made over 140 edits; thank you for these.

However, 140 is not 500, and when I saw your username, I noticed that you may need to be informed about something that happened since your registration.

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 Eastern Europe or the Balkans. 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.

You are currently prohibited from editing about the Russo-Ukrainian War. This is because you have not yet made 500 edits to Wikipedia; details can be found at WP:GS/RUSUKR.

Just to make sure it has been mentioned, similar restrictions exist for the Arab-Israeli conflict (WP:A/I/PIA).

Please let me know if any questions arise, or when you have reached 500 contributions and would like to receive a quick formal confirmation that these rules do not longer apply to you.

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:06, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree: Hello good sir. Can you give me the extended-confirmed power? I want to copy edit Sam Bankman-Fried, but I cannot because I do not have the power. I am making lots of talk page requests, but only one has been replied to. If you do not want to give me this power, can you reply to my requests? Ghost of Kiev (talk) 15:20, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to have a very poor command of English. You might want to reconsider whether the English Wikipedia is the right one for you to be editing. Lard Almighty (talk) 15:28, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good sir, why do you insult my English again? Do you need to insult me in multiple places? Ghost of Kiev (talk) 15:29, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not insulting your English. I am saying that a certain standard of English is required to edit en-Wikipedia, and you might want to consider whether your level of English meets that standard. Lard Almighty (talk) 15:34, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok sir. Ghost of Kiev (talk) 15:36, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ghost of Kiev, the extended-confirmed permission is rarely given manually, and I personally see no need to do so yet. The reason for this type of protection is to filter out edits by comparatively inexperienced users and to encourage them to gain experience in other, less controversial areas of the encyclopedia before jumping into the water of contentious topics. I think this situation is fine. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:05, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Thank you comrade. Ghost of Kiev (talk) 16:06, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree And they’ve gone on a spree at WP RPP. Doug Weller talk 16:31, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd like me to stop asking for protection on these articles, I can do so. Ghost of Kiev (talk) 16:36, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any clue as to how much work that might cause for other editors? Doug Weller talk 16:42, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did not think that asking for protection on these articles would cause others to perform a lot of work. I am sorry if I have caused harm to Wikipedia; all I want to do on this website is to make it better. Ghost of Kiev (talk) 16:48, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ANI discussion

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 16:36, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Good sirs"

Stop writing that. It is sexist because it assumes your audience is male. It is classist because it assumes that your audience is high status. It is a presumptuous affectation and is irritaing. Women do not want to be called sir, and a lot of men (including me) do not want to be called sir either. And very few LGTBQ people want to be called sir, unless they are in a position of authority. Cullen328 (talk) 17:07, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I will stop. Ghost of Kiev (talk) 17:13, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cullen328 If you look at today's contributions I see an effort to rapidly get ECP by a a lot of quick edits, including a disruptive series of 52 protection requests, all now removed. Doug Weller talk 17:40, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gaming the system to get ECP

Won’t work, I’ll just remove it. Doug Weller talk 21:06, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller, while I understand that my additions to the request for protection page were disruptive and ill-advised, I do not know why you keep accusing me of "gaming the system". @Jayron32 has explained to me why my reqests did not improve Wikipedia, and I understand it now: pages are not protected until someone disrupts them. But what I do not understand is why I was told by one moderator that I am acting in good faith, when your messages are making threats to punish me for a good-faith mistake I have already repeatedly apologized for. Ghost of Kiev (talk) 21:14, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Broadly construed

Hi Ghost of Kiev, the restriction at WP:GS/RUSUKR is broadly construed, meaning that if you are unsure if something is part of the topic, it probably is. For example, [1] is a violation of the restriction. Please avoid the topic more clearly than you currently do. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 06:57, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As is your Teahouse post about translation or any attempt to discuss someone related to the Crimea or USSR. Doug Weller talk 08:50, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller Абдулла́ Ибраи́мович Дерменджи́ died in 1976. Why can I not write about him? How is he related to the war? Ghost of Kiev (talk) 14:22, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Writing about that specific person may be okay. The impression caused by this, though, is that you're looking for the closest-to-the-war possible topic you can find that isn't covered by the restrictions. If that's the case, you'll need to stop it. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:21, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My username gives off the wrong impression. I do not wish to primarily edit about the 2022 war. I do want to write about ethnic minorities in the Soviet Union during Soviet rule. (Crimean) Tatars, Kazakhs, Turkmens, and other minorities in the Soviet Union are not written about much in English on Wikipedia. I want to change that by writing articles and translating articles that exist in Russian Wikipedia and other languages.

I do not think that editing about someone who died over 15 years before the collapse of the USSR is anywhere close to the discussion about the war between Russia and Ukraine on the basis that the individual was a Criman Tatar poet. To say that a man who died in 1976 is related to a war that began in 2022 is like to say that Pancho Villa is closely related to the 1840s Mexican–American War: neither are a "closest-to-the-war possible topic you can find that isn't covered by the restrictions". Ghost of Kiev (talk) 19:38, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, no worries from my side then. Thank you very much for the clarification. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:49, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Thank you for your reply. Ghost of Kiev (talk) 19:51, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Now that the issue is clarified I agree. Doug Weller talk 20:12, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy that this is clarified. Ghost of Kiev (talk) 20:38, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree Thank you for this knowledge. Ghost of Kiev (talk) 14:07, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FOLLOWING

Hi, I have concerns about these reverts at Vox (website), where you reverted Doug Weller's edits despite never having edited the article before, as well as this edit, another first edit to an article immediately following Doug's. Please do not follow other users' contributions around if there are no patterns of unambiguous errors or policy violations (as there are not in this case). DanCherek (talk) 15:39, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this knowledge. Ghost of Kiev (talk) 15:40, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AFDs

Hello, Ghost of Kiev,

If you are going to participate in AFD discussions, you have to have a solid knowledge of relevant Wikipedia policies on notability and other subjects. For example, your comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stark, Arizona (2nd nomination) was just a personal opinion that is in contradiction to the guiding policy on this subject, WP:GEOLAND. It would help to understand that policy and make your argument based on that.

I recommend you review Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions so you understand what is helpful and is not helpful should you continue to participate in AFD discussions. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:39, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz It's worse as they know about AfDs having created some themselves. Doug Weller talk 14:21, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DE at WP:RSN

This was not a good idea. Please self-revert, and we can discuss calmly whether an RFC is justified/needed for the purpose. Abecedare (talk) 22:22, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]