Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:42, 7 June 2020

This is the talk page for Galendalia. No personal attacks of any kind will be tolerated or you will get ARV'd! Be civil people!

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 1 day

This is Galendalia's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 1 day

Warning Welcome! If you are here to discuss a reversion I made, please post it on the articles talk page and add {{Ping|Galendalia}} to the question so I am notified. If you ask questions here, I will post a link back to the articles' talk page.

 You are invited to join the discussion at ]. - Rich Rich 13:43, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @Rich Smith:. I took a look at Misplaced Pages:Requested_templates#Spoken_Wikipedia_process_wrapper Galendalia Talk to me 15:24, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Archiving Talk:World language discussions

Hi Galendalia, a moment ago you added an archiving template to Talk:World language. Do you know how to delay archiving the discussions Talk:World language#Spanish language map and Talk:World language#Spanish Language Map that I linked to from Talk:World language#Semi-protected edit request on 6 June 2020 today? Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 18:19, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

LiliCharlie, They will not be archived until 30 days after the last edit to that discussion. Galendalia Talk to me 18:28, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Talk:World language#Spanish language map and Talk:World language#Spanish Language Map are much older than 30 days, but my links should still work until the discussion Talk:World language#Semi-protected edit request on 6 June 2020 is closed. Note that this doesn't seem to be the case, despite your answer to the edit request. User:DLMcN who contributed a lot to Talk:World language#Spanish language map just added a their first contribution to Talk:World language#Semi-protected edit request on 6 June 2020. Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 18:41, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

LiliCharlie, You are talking about 2 different things here. The archive will archive the discussions that have not had any edits in the past 30 days. Once an edit is made to them, it resets the timer. The Links you have provided were just created today so they will not be archived. I believe you are asking about your edit request which needs consensus. This will not be archived for 30 days after the last edit to that particular discussion. The maps you have in that discussion are safe as they are part of the new discussion you started today and when they were posted in other discussions has no bearing on the archiving process as it only relates to the discussion itself. The discussions up to, and including, "Old Tamil" will be archived tonight, but will be accessible in the archive link which will be generated by the system. I hope this helps clear it up for you. Galendalia Talk to me 18:50, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't want the old discussions Talk:World language#Spanish language map and Talk:World language#Spanish Language Map to be archived before the current discussion Talk:World language#Semi-protected edit request on 6 June 2020 is definitely closed. Alternatively, I want my links to Talk:World language#Spanish language map and Talk:World language#Spanish Language Map to be automatically redirected to where those discussions are archived to. Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 18:59, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

LiliCharlie, You are still not understanding me. The discussion or any part of it (which includes the maps because they are in the discussion topic) will not be archived until 30 days go by in which no edits to the discussion have happened. Your actual maps are hosted in commons and they are not included in the archive from that site, just the article talk page. One of them with the giant map is over 3 years old so it will be archived as it is out of date and you have created a new map to replace it. The archive cannot pick and choose which ones to archive. Once it is archived, you can add a link to it in the current discussion to that particular discussion. What would be the reason why you would want to keep a discussion that is over 3 years old alive? The entire page is way too long and goes back over 5 years, which is why archiving is being put in place. Galendalia Talk to me 19:11, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Galendalia. I've found the {{Do not archive until}} template which I think does what I was looking for. Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 19:31, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

LiliCharlie, I am advising you not to edit the template as it will leave a lot of discussions on the page that are irrelevant. You can link to the archived discussion that you need in your current discussion instead of leaving all discussions in place that are not needed. Galendalia Talk to me 20:02, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Definition of Hindutva

Hi, with all due respect, the first person to term 'Hindutva' was Savarkar. Just because some people believe it to be 'fascist' without reading the book or worse, without understanding it, they've thought it to be 'fascist' in nature, they're entitled to think of it in a particular manner but they do not have the right to make other people misinterpret the actual meaning of the word. If you've read the book, it talks of harmony and celebration of difference and common love for fatherland and Savarkar does not think of 'Hindu' in a religious manner but a geographical term and goes to the extent of interchanging it with 'Sindhu'. He was an outright atheist which further backs it up. I have no issues with anybody personally but i do not wish for people to misinterpret the beautiful idea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Not Sherlock (talk • contribs) 19:43, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Not Sherlock, Due to the nature of the article and the sanctions imposed on it, it still requires a consensus by the community. I cannot just add it based on one persons opinion. I apologize for this, but this is how Misplaced Pages works. Galendalia Talk to me 20:00, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Nominating a regular-looking user page for G11

This wasn't appropriate. I have removed the speedy. If you objected to his web site being linked there, you should have said that on his user page. I really fail to see how any of it was advertising. Remember that ANI of a week or so ago where you said you would restrict your activities to things you know about? This might be an area that requires some restriction. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 20:12, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

ThatMontrealIP, I did it under Misplaced Pages:User_pages#Personal_and_privacy-breaching_material of which I am allowed to do to bring it to the attention of an administrator. If you have an issue with that, then maybe your own actions need to be under scrutiny. If you want to restrict me, then do so and I will fight it. I am done with all of you playing god against me when I see others doing the same thing. Galendalia Talk to me 20:33, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

The G11 template you put on it is for promotional pages. But you are saying above that it is a privacy breach, which in some cases is a valid reason to get rid of the material. In this case the user intentionally put it there back in 2010. Can you explain how it breaches anyone's privacy? I'm just trying to understand your reasoning.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 20:40, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Also, you have misread Misplaced Pages:User_pages#Personal_and_privacy-breaching_material. It's not a policy for reporting people's emails and web sites when they appear by the user's choice on their user page. Their privacy is not breached here, as they voluntarily posted it. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 20:43, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

”Privacy-breaching non-public material, whether added by yourself or others, may be removed from any page upon request, either by administrators or (unless impractical) by purging from the page history and any logs by oversighters (see requests for oversight).” with the intent of bringing it to the administrators attention. To me it doesn’t matter when they posted it as I just saw it and reported it for an administrator to review and take whatever action they feel is necessary or none, their choice. For you to turn around, mention my ANI, and threaten to restrict me is extremely inappropriate on your part as this was an AGF but none of you admins ever see that. You are all seeking to silence me which is inappropriate. I’m no longer taking part in this discussion. Do what you will I really don’t give a s*** at this point. Galendalia Talk to me 21:04, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, the thing is, there is no privacy-breaching material, as the user posted it. G11 is also the wrong template. Putting a G11 on the user page of someone who has been here for ten years is a bit extreme also. The thing to do next time is just post a little note on their talk page asking about it. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:10, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Then just say that instead of threatening to restrict someone based on an AGF please. Galendalia Talk to me 21:15, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Oh, I think you need to read that sentence again. There was no threat. I was suggesting that you follow your own plan to restrict yourself to areas you are familiar with.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:17, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Galendalia, I noticed the speedy deletion template that you left on DLMcN's user page. It was inappropriate. I can see that you did it in good faith and didn't mean to be rude, but it was a mistake - a faux pas or gaffe - and you might want to consider apologizing to them for the upset it caused.

You misinterpreted the section of the user page guidelines on personal and privacy-breaching material. Generally such material may be removed on request of the person whose privacy it concerns if they were the one who added it. You could politely inform a new user that using their real name, e-mail address, or website, might lead to privacy problems in the future, if it seems like they're not aware of that. But if someone chooses to do it anyway, it's not your place to interfere. I'm baffled as to how this led you to the idea that you should try to delete their user page for "blatant advertising or promotion"; in any case it was certainly not the right course of action.

I saw that you also edited another user's user page yesterday: . These edits surprise me because apparently the main complaint at a recent ANI report about you was "misunderstanding of our userpage guidelines which are pretty clear that "by convention others will not usually edit your user page itself, other than (rarely) to address significant concerns or place project-related tags"; and the first comment it received was "Short copyright problem, BLP problem or some sort of extreme polemic...do not alter user pages". I would suggest that you voluntarily refrain from editing anyone's user page in the near future; if you see a problem discuss it with the user on their talk page or consult an admin, as you are currently on very thin ice in this area.

I'm also somewhat concerned by your reaction to ThatMontrealIP above, as there was no threat or anything inappropriate said. As a new user, if experienced editors tell you that you've made a mistake, please try to be open to the idea that, according to Occam's razor, the most likely explanation is that you've actually made a mistake, rather than assuming that they are attacking you for no particular reason, and attacking them back. Thanks for your understanding, and please let me know if there was something I wasn't clear about. --IamNotU (talk) 01:15, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

@IamNotU: yeah go to hell! No need for you to fill my page with stuff already addressed by someone! As far as the COI I was correcting it so that the COI notice appeared correctly as they didn’t have it and only had a sentence. So again, go to hell! Galendalia Talk to me 02:42, 7 June 2020 (UTC)