User talk:Ecrusized: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 12:25, 4 November 2023

Welcome

Hello, Ecrusized, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! CommanderWaterford (talk) 13:24, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started

Finding your way around

Editing articles

Getting help

Frequently asked questions
Cheatsheet
Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse
The Help Desk, for more advanced questions
Help pages
Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles

How you can help

Community Portal
Join a WikiProject
Follow Wikipedia etiquette
Practice civility
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

May 2021

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at 2021 Jersey dispute. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges on that page. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:14, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Important 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 discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes. 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.

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.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:27, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Jersey Wiki" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Jersey Wiki. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 21#Jersey Wiki until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:22, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DS information on Kurds and Kurdistan

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 the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed. 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.

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.

Paradise Chronicle (talk) 14:11, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Ecrusized. Thank you for your work on Operation Claw-Sword. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:17, 21 November 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) 01:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DS information on Armenia-Azerbaijan

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 Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts. 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.

Curbon7 (talk) 18:23, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Ecrusized. Thank you for your work on 22 September 1980 Iraqi airstrike on Iran. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:25, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for 2023 Sudan clashes

On 21 April 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2023 Sudan clashes, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Curbon7 (talk) 17:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey.

I noticed you left a note at Talk:2023_Sudan_conflict#Wagner_or_Russia? about @NYMan6 that may be seen as not assuming good faith. Your name also isn't in the signature.

May you please further explain what you meant by it?

- L'Mainerque - (Disturb my slumber) - 21:06, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Ecrusized I would like to inform to you that both the edits that you listed were of reliable sources I had gathered (I was never affilated to the Russian government nor the Wagner Group, in fact I'm pretty much neutral in the conflict) This is disturbing of you mentioning it especially on my comment regarding changing the name having nothing to do for what you've said, I am a 6 month account on the platform, before not having an account I was a person that just used the platform frequently now I am a article creator and editor.

Thank you, NYMan6 (talk) 01:15, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support

It seems that you are persistent in reinstating the vague or even irrelevant supported by claims. It's your onus to get consensus for addition of challenged material, since there is no consensus for that on the talk page yet, reliable or not is decided by consensus, not you. There are at least 3 other editors who don't agree with the claims, that's enough to remove the claims for now and wait for consensus if that is to be reinstated. There is literally only one source about support and that's barely enough, the rest is about support before conflict, which is totally irrelevant. RCB88 (talk) 12:47, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me...

What software did you use to create File:Wagner Group mutiny.svg? I've been trying for days using Inkscape but I haven't been successful. Nythar (💬-🍀) 11:47, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Nythar: It's a derivative of the file c:File:European Russia laea location map (without Crimea).svg. I have filled the selected oblasts where the clashes are going on with Inkscape. Don't forget to unlock the layers if this is what you're struggling with. Ecrusized (talk) 11:51, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

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. IanDBeacon (talk) 18:12, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

I suppose this would work better coming from somebody who isn't me, but FWIW... and I'm speaking as someone on Wikipedia for ~17 years not the person disagreeing with you at the moment, but in general, waving around 3RR works best if you're not also part of the edit war. Basically, 3RR is a way to tell other editors that they're crossing the line when you yourself aren't participating in the edit war. When two editors in an edit war accuse each other of violating 3RR, the response is inevitably "you're both wrong" from others. 3RR is meant as a bright-line, you should have already stopped sooner deal, especially because counting what the "first" revert is is often tricky. (I had no idea you had written that content when I removed it and wasn't doing so out of an agenda or anything, so as far as I'm concerned, you're the one about to hit 3RR not me... but I'm sure you'd say the same in reverse, and what an outsider would say is "you should both stop.") Additionally, content on the main page has a somewhat softer 3RR rule, although it's best not to rely on this.

The part I am really relying on is WP:BURDEN, for what it's worth. You're making an exceptional claim that I'm saying isn't backed up by the sources you have, and I've also already offered to restore the claim myself if BURDEN is met. This means I am, from a strict procedural perspective, probably in the right. (Whether I'm "right" on the content, we'll see.)

Anyway, I didn't want to distract from the merits of the discussion on the article talk page (and think you probably should have left a comment on my personal talk page if you were genuinely concerned about 3RR rather than the article talk page), hence responding here. And for what it's worth, I hope I don't come across as too hostile here! However, I've dealt with some editors who were... crazy... in the past who'd just claim they had consensus no matter how much overwhelming evidence was against them, so you're (accidentally?) invoking some of that bad feelings. (Like, I'm talking really bad faith stuff, as in sockpuppets and them all getting banned. But they'd try to appeal to passerby by saying "Oh, SnowFire is editing against consensus" despite 5 real editors telling them to stop and 5 sockpuppets telling them that they were fantastic.) SnowFire (talk) 18:53, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SnowFire: As far as I know 3RR automatically makes someone who crossed the line blockable, if that's not the case than I'm wrong. However, in the past when I entered a similar disagreement with editors, administrators would warn whoever had crossed 3RR to self revert or face a block. Also I got the impression that user Alalch E. had agreed with me due to his comments and editing pattern. You aren't hostile in your comments but I would have preferred had you self reverted until others had entered the discussion. Ecrusized (talk) 19:01, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for your efforts

		The Current Events Barnstar
		In recognition of your contributions to the article Nahel Merzouk protests. --Cdjp1 talk 15:59, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. -Lemonaka‎ 11:49, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023 Northern Syria clashes (Question)

Hello. Just curious. What's your reasoning behind changing "Internal Security Forces" to "Asayish" in October 2023 Northern Syria clashes ? CatmanBw (talk) 18:02, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gaza War Map

I'm away from my main computer, so I can't get to this right now, but Palestinian militants have been arrested in Ein HaShlosha and Nahal Oz, so those communities should be added to include the presence of Palestinian militants. -- Veggies (talk) 18:28, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Veggies: Added but I can't find a source for Nahal Oz, do you have a source for this? Ecrusized (talk) 18:48, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry. I meant to include it. [1] -- Veggies (talk) 18:52, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for keeping up with the map. Could you tell me how you got the OpenTopoMap data onto the map? Thanks. -- Veggies (talk) 05:01, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to be so insistent, but I'd really love to know. I can't get OpenTopoMap to export anything and I don't want to try to do it via patchy screenshots. -- Veggies (talk) 21:17, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Veggies: Hi, sorry I didn't notice the message yesterday. I simply create it by taking multiple screen shots and then merging those images together in GIMP. I have already made one for Israel-Lebanon-Syria border in case war spreads to the north. Here is the .png for it. Ecrusized (talk) 21:23, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yeah, I was afraid that was the only way. Oh well. And, yes, I was looking to make one for the same sector. Looks like you beat me to it. 👍 -- Veggies (talk) 22:06, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I created an SVG map for the Lebanese/Northern Israel theater. File:Israel-Lebanon-Syria-border-Conflict-2023.svg Let me know your thoughts. I'll include it in the appropriate section in the war article. -- Veggies (talk) 15:37, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Veggies: Looks good, I was also in the midst filling the same region. You should upload this one on Wikipedia, I'll performs updates when needed. Besides that, one problem I found is that due to the large size of the original .png, the compression results in considerable artifacting. This becomes especially noticeable when zoomed in. I've used GIMP to compress it with minimal quality loss. Another alternative would be to upload the file as .png without any loss but this would prevent users from translating the file. I personally favor having a .svg instead of a .png. Let me know what you think. Ecrusized (talk) 16:34, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is thus far, I've kept the 24bit ratio on the jpeg instead of using 8bit, but brought the quality down to 84, smoothness to 25 and set subsampling to 4:2:0. Ecrusized (talk) 16:53, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where'd you get the spellings and locations of the towns on the map? They're different from the ones I used and the ones Wikipedia uses. -- Veggies (talk) 23:37, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Veggies: I got them from Google Maps. Ecrusized (talk) 07:54, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a little hesitant about that. Google Maps isn't universally considered a reliable source. Beyond that, I think copying place names so directly may be a copyvio issue. Also, I always used (and use) the spellings for places as they're used in Wikipedia (ex: Kiryat Shmona vs Qiryat Shemona). -- Veggies (talk) 13:31, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Veggies: I’ll work to restore Wikipedia names in the next edit. Ecrusized (talk) 15:15, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the names with Wikipedia names. Also there is something I should mention, when editing the file, saving as Inkscape .svg will increase its size to over 10mb, for this reason you should save it as optimized svg, if using Inkscape. Ecrusized (talk) 21:28, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your help. I tried to add the name of a moshav in the original Gaza-area map per a request on Commons talk, but I think I screwed something up. I'm still learning how to work with Inkscape. Someone wanted the name of Yakhini added, which is fine, but when I uploaded the SVG file, it created a mess in the thumbnail, so I quickly reverted. Could you tell me what I did wrong? Thanks again. -- Veggies (talk) 06:44, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Veggies: Translated .svg are a bit problematic when editing with Inkscape. I'm not sure what went wrong with your edit but generally, trying to copy paste location names will cause them to disappear due to being "switches" instead of regular text. Ecrusized (talk) 08:16, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What's the solution? Should I just write the name out in Inkscape and save as optimized SVG? How did you fix it? -- Veggies (talk) 15:06, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Veggies: I created a new text (T key) in the same font and size as the rest. Also saved as plain svg. Ecrusized (talk) 15:59, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that User:Supreme Deliciousness says Gjajar hasn't been evacuated, but it should still be included in the evacuation zone. Israel has designated the town as one to be evacuated even if they're not forcibly evacuating people. After all, many people who live in the evacuation zone also refuse to leave. -- Veggies (talk) 04:58, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from what user Supreme Deliciousness has stated, there is another plus in not having Gajar included in the evacuation zone. It allows the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights to be viewed in full, otherwise it gets divided with the separation color. Ecrusized (talk) 08:05, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Israel war

Could you please somehow differentiate the Israeli figures of losses from the confirmed Palestinian ones, for example draw a line and put it under the 3 points? Onesgje9g334 (talk) 11:07, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Super Ninja2 and WP:NOTGETTINGIT. Thank you. The Kip 22:53, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Off-topic edit summary

Hi, this edit summary doesn't make any sense. The edit I made was unrelated to the topic of the RFC you referenced, which is about how to reference the infobox in terms of notes, in-line attribution, etc., but not related to the content-based edits that I made, which was purely to differentiate military and civilian casualties, as described. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:52, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Iskandar323: You can see in the RfC that many users prefer to keep the details of casualties (civilians, soldiers, police, agents etc.) in the notes as placing them unlisted bloats the infobox and it is against the purpose of the infobox, which is supposed to be a brief summary, instead of an overwhelming list. Ecrusized (talk) 11:05, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ecrusized: Some details could be hidden, but it is absurd to blend military and civilian casualties in an infobox about a military conflict - are you saying that you see consensus for obscuring this basic info? Iskandar323 (talk) 11:07, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It might be better to place a percentage tag, such as 65% civilians etc. As in the infoboxes of former Gaza-Israel conflicts, instead of placing increasingly large figures in the infobox. Ecrusized (talk) 11:09, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally I don't like placing weasel words such as "mostly" or "largely" anywhere in Wikipedia. Ecrusized (talk) 11:11, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The percentages are just as subject to change as the raw numbers surely, and would need updating just as regularly? "majority" was simply the best option in my mind for asserting the known known, which is that upwards of 5,000 going on 6,000 of those killed are discernably not armed men of fighting age. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:21, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If anything, "majority" is conservative. It's minimum 73.9% civilians, which is nearly two-thirds and more than a super majority - and that's assuming (implausibly) that every man is a fighter. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:25, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On both sides of the conflict, civilians seem to make at least two thirds of the casualties. Readers are able to read the exact figure inside the article, infobox should not be expanded more than it already is in my opinion. Ecrusized (talk) 11:34, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, in most military conflict page infoboxes, the combatant sections are usually (and are designed to be) reserved solely for military casualties, with civilian casualties appearing below in the combatant 3 part, e.g. Six-Day_War. Here it's a little more complicated, because, as you say, its mainly civilians that have been killed because it's a totally fucked-up conflict, but military and civilian death should still be clearly split. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:45, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 236: / Line 236: @@
 ::::On both sides of the conflict, civilians seem to make at least two thirds of the casualties. Readers are able to read the exact figure inside the article, infobox should not be expanded more than it already is in my opinion. [[User:Ecrusized|Ecrusized]] ([[User talk:Ecrusized#top|talk]]) 11:34, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 :::::Actually, in most military conflict page infoboxes, the combatant sections are usually (and are designed to be) reserved solely for military casualties, with civilian casualties appearing below in the combatant 3 part, e.g. [[Six-Day_War]]. Here it's a little more complicated, because, as you say, its mainly civilians that have been killed because it's a totally fucked-up conflict, but military and civilian death should still be clearly split. [[User:Iskandar323|Iskandar323]] ([[User talk:Iskandar323|talk]]) 11:45, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
-== [[WP:1RR]] at [[2023 Israel–Hamas war]] ==
-After noticing your canvassing at [[User talk:Veggies]] (see section that {{diff2|1183453800|you deleted}} with the inaccurate edit summary "Do not leave blank template warnings on user accounts talk pages") I had a look through your contributions; you have violated [[WP:1RR]] on multiple occasions within just the past couple of days:
-#{{diff2|1182843589|18:24, 31 October 2023}} - Removed Houthis from the infobox
-#{{diff2|1182942275|09:50, 1 November 2023}} - Removed citations from the restored inclusion of Houthi's in the infobox
-#{{diff2|1182944312|10:16, 1 November 2023}} - Collapsed parts of the infobox, including the aspects about the Houthi's, removed "hostages taken by Palestinian militants" from the infobox
-#{{diff2|1182955451|11:56, 1 November 2023}} - Removed "Clashes erupt at the Israeli–Lebanese border" from the infobox
-#{{diff2|1183031970|20:35, 1 November 2023}} - Changed "1,000+ militants killed" to "1,000+ killed"
-#{{diff2|1183117846|08:11, 2 November 2023}} - Restored "Current extent of the Israeli invasion of Gaza" to the infobox, as part of a broader reinstatement of the contested map
-#{{diff2|1183122245|09:05, 2 November 2023}} - Collapsed parts of the infobox - the same parts you previously collapsed at 10:16, 1 November 2023
-#{{diff2|1183207054|21:12, 2 November 2023}} - Removed Wagner group from infobox
-While not all of these can now be self-reverted, most can be; please do so, to bring yourself as close as possible to compliance with the restrictions. [[User:BilledMammal|BilledMammal]] ([[User talk:BilledMammal|talk]]) 12:23, 4 November 2023 (UTC)