User talk:Χ/Archive 2016

File:Travels of User Abjiklam.svg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Travels of User Abjiklam.svg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:58, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Greek Letter Organization templates.
I have reverted your changes to the various Greek Letter Organization templates. I believe an appropriate discussion location would be Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities. Do you agree?
 * Thanks for wanting to start a discussion. Frankly I'm not active in that project at all so if you think my edit is not appropriate I won't fight it :) Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 19:27, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not thrilled with Template:Fraternities and Sororities either, but in that case, the template was a much larger wall of text before you changed it.Naraht (talk) 20:14, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Question
I see you doing quite a lot of work with templates. I just wondered if the template editor user right would be of any use to you? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:30, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually I would be interested in getting the template editor right. The only problem is I may not have enacted 5 significant edits to protected templates. If you think I still have a shot at it, I could request that right after my newest edit request is accepted. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 23:23, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You can now make the required changes yourself! &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:17, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Your account has been granted the "template editor" user permission, allowing you to edit templates and modules that have been protected with template protection. It also allows you to bypass the title blacklist, giving you the ability to create and edit edit notices.

You can use this user right to perform maintenance, answer edit requests, and make any other simple and generally uncontroversial edits to templates, modules, and edit notices. You can also use it to enact more complex or controversial edits, after those edits are first made to a test sandbox, and their technical reliability as well as their consensus among other informed editors has been established.

Before you use this user right, please read Template editor and make sure you understand its contents. In particular, you should read the section on wise template editing and the criteria for revocation. This user right gives you access to some of Wikipedia's most important templates and modules; it is critical that you edit them wisely and that you only make edits that are backed up by consensus. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

Useful links:
 * All template-protected pages
 * Request fully-protected templates or modules be downgraded to template protection

Happy template editing! &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:15, 2 March 2016 (UTC) &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:15, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! That was a pleasant surprise :) Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 13:58, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

US presidential election
US Territories are not allowed to vote in general election and they are not among 50 main state contests in US presidential election primary! So that is one reason reason we should mention them separately.

The second reson is that the Wikipedia template should give a clear view to the reader that how many US states each candidates won. If we combine the state wins with territories wins, it doesn't make sense.

And finally why you are trying to change the way that is used in Wikipedia in US presidential election for many years!?

Koorosh1234 (talk|contribs)             10:38, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The fact that territories don't vote in the general election has nothing to do with the primaries. All contests lead to delegates, and there are absolutely no distinctions between delegates representing states and those representing territories. As to why I'm making changes, it's simply because, just like everyone, I'm trying to make things better. I was very open about the changes I made and I invited everyone to comment on them. Instead of reverting everything I do, it would be nice if you commented on, for example, the WikiProject for elections or the election Infobox. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 10:45, 8 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I still believe keeping them separately (as used in Wikipedia for many years) is a better solution. But I do not like to discuss more about that and of course do not change it agian. Koorosh1234 (talk|contribs)             11:03, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:
 * Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. Widr (talk) 19:43, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Nationwide polls
How do you make these charts? https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/Nationwide_polls_for_the_2016_Republican_Party_presidential_primaries.svg I would like to complement the other articles of the same. (Денис_П. · talk) 22:27, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I left the source code here. You need to run R. I personally use RStudio. In a few days, I will update the code with some comments to make it easier for others to understand. The good thing is, once the code is finished, you can update the graph automatically by simply running the code when someone updates the table of polls. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 23:10, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Graphs for primaries
Hello, would you have some time to update your graphs for the US primaries, following April 26 results? Many thanks in advance! — JFG talk 08:23, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Was just going to ask the same thing here and here - Jesseschulman (talk) 15:49, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * My code doesn't work on the Republican result table anymore because other editors changed its layout. I'll eventually fix it but I've been short on time lately. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 18:21, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Your help desk question
You didn't get a response, but I've never seen what you described. I don't know if it violates WP:OWN but I would suggest WP:VPP. I'm not certain whether that's the right place, but it's a situation I wasn't aware could be allowed.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  21:40, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the suggestion. I'll write on WP:VPP. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 23:01, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Your reversion of edits on 'US Presidential Election 2016'
Responding to your description of reversion edits, it is a matter of consensus. There is no general consensus that Secretary Clinton is the Democratic Party's nominee. As for "Reliable Sources", you failed to mention any that have said that Clinton is the nominee. The reversion of your edits, and the ceasing of your editing war would be appreciated.

Thanks, AvRand (talk) 21:45, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I never claimed she's the nominee, nor has any reliable source to my knowledge. But what is undeniable is that she is now considered the presumptive nominee by a large majority of our sources. Consensus cannot go against reliable sources. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 21:50, 7 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Again, you have failed to mention what reliable sources do consider her to be the presumptive nominee. Few do that I am aware of AvRand (talk) 21:58, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I suppose if I link you to AP you'll tell me it's not a reliable source? I don't want to have a second discussion in parallel to that on Talk:United States presidential election, 2016. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 22:07, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * NY Times
 * NBC News
 * NPR
 * NPR again
 * USA Today
 * ABC News
 * LA Times
 * Washington Post
 * BBC
 * Fox News
 * CNN
 * MSNBC
 *  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 22:09, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Reverting linking to presumptive nominee
How come we can link to New York and TBD twice then? Jzema 11:36, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * TBD links to two different article for the Dem and Rep VP nomination. As for New York, I'm not against removing the second link but I think other contributors might misinterpret the intention. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 11:40, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * OK to also leave both links up in the infobox to not favor one over the other. Many congressional districts have multiple links for party affiliation on the same page....Pvmoutside (talk) 12:27, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you! Glad you appreciate it :) Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 19:42, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Please Vote
I invite you to vote here for whether or not Ralph Nader should be included in the info-box,. Yuri Alexeyevich Gagarin (talk) 23:01, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I suggest you invite the people at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States presidential elections for discussion. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 23:30, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Is there some pre-coded way to invite or do I have to individually ask? Yuri Alexeyevich Gagarin (talk) 00:03, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Just leaving a note on some key article and project talk pages should be enough. You can also invite people individually, but be careful not to target only those who you know agree with you (see WP:Consensus and WP:Canvassing). However in this situation, I guess William S. Saturn is right in that this discussion is bigger than one article and should be placed elsewhere. Tempers are high at the moment. I myself would wait a couple of weeks before trying to change the infobox inclusion criteria, but don't let that stop you from trying. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 00:18, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

2016 US prez article.
Howdy. I'm trying to match the bottom of that article's infobox, with all the others. Why are you resisting that attempt? GoodDay (talk) 21:57, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not resisting an attempt, simply correcting an error. Trump is President-elect until the Electoral College votes. Afterwards, we will change the infobox so that it reads "Elected President". Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 22:06, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * He'll continue to be President-elect after the EC votes as well. President-elect means he was elected President. GoodDay (talk) 22:11, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Quoting the first two sentences of President-elect of the United States:

President-elect of the United States is the title used for an incoming president of the United States in the period between the general election on Election Day in November and noon Eastern Standard Time on Inauguration Day, January 20, during which the president-elect is not in office yet. Since the election for U.S. president is an indirect election, the title is used for the apparent winner and is finalized when votes of the Electoral College, cast in December, are counted by a joint session of Congress in early January.
 * Trump will be elected president when the Electoral College elects him. Until then he is president-elect. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 22:15, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * He'll continue with the title President-elect even after the EV votes. He holds that title until he takes office in January 20, 2017. Please take this discussion to the article talkpage. GoodDay (talk) 22:18, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Archiving
Hi. If you're interested in archiving threads, I suggest using User:Technical 13/Scripts/OneClickArchiver. It's very simple to use. I have archived discussions on the 2016 US election talk page. Threads around 12-14 days old are archived as well as answered edit requests. Just thought I'd let you know. Callmemirela 🍁  &#123;Talk&#125;   &#9809;  14:13, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for telling me. I'll check out this tool. :) Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 14:20, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

IQA European Games 2017
It was confirmed by IQA on their facebook page: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1264169206955193&id=136730119699113 Arielslytherin (talk) 18:12, 27 December 2016 (UTC)