User talk:Chanc20190325

Status bias moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Status bias, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 07:51, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Why do Linux file managers and other applications sort list items with numbers in reverse?
So while I was answering your question, another editor removed it as off-topic. I agree about that, but I'd still like to answer. Here's your question again, and my reply to it! Digital Brains (talk) 13:37, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Windows Explorer and other applications such as task managers sort files/items like this: Linux file managers actually do it in reverse, except for A-Z: It seems intuitive that a triangle pointing downwards (larger edge on top) means that items with larger values and more recent items come first. But Linux applications often apply reverse logic to this.
 * ▼ = First: Larger, Newer, A-Z, higher CPU usage, higher memory usage.
 * ▲ = First: Smaller, Older, Z-A, lower CPU/memory usage.
 * ▼ = First: Smaller, Older, A-Z, lower values first.
 * ▲ = First: Larger, Newer, Z-A, higher values first.

Is this intentional? What is the logic behind it? --Chanc20190325 (talk) 13:01, 27 May 2019 (UTC)


 * You know, that's intriguing! It's not really on-topic for here, though, but because of my fascination I can't help but respond. I've never noticed this difference, but to me the Linux way is the intuitive one. I do not view the triangle as something where, for ▼, it starts large at the top and ends small at the bottom. Rather, I view is as a compact downwards arrow, meaning the sorting is from top to bottom. And the natural alphabetic sort is from A-Z, so if you sort alphabetically from top to bottom, A is at the top and Z at the bottom. Conversely, ▲ means you sort from bottom to top in the direction of the arrow, i.e. A at the bottom and Z at the top. So what's one person's intuitive can be another person's counter-intuitive! I don't know if my arrow-explanation is the reason, you'd have to ask the people who decided it should be like this, but it is a possible explanation. The Talk page for an article is to discuss improvements to the article, though, not a general area for questions. Digital Brains (talk) 13:37, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I have just checked that for file names, ▼ means A→Z in Linux and Windows, which makes more sense to me. But for file sizes and dates, ▼ means large to small on Windows but ▼ means small to large on Linux. For CPU usage, ▼ means higher CPU usage first. So most of them have been corrected. Maybe there has been an update? But they should also make size ▼ large first and ▲ small first.   --Chanc20190325 (talk) 15:25, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * For me, a natural sort order of file sizes is from small files to large files, so that seems intuitive to me. Perhaps the CPU usage is the odd one out (larger first) because people will generally be interested in the processes that occupy most of it, so the natural sort order puts them first. I don't really understand the reasoning behind the meaning in Windows; it seems inconsistent to me. Since the use of the indicator more in general is inconsistent, I usually just look at the order and if it's in reverse from my intention, I switch the order, rather than looking at the indicator. Digital Brains (talk) 09:06, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * For me, ▼ is more intuitive for large to small and ▲ small to large, because the long edge of ▼ is at the top and ▲ at the bottom. I have also forgot to mention that Linux treats ▲ as newer files first while Windows treats ▼ as newer files first (creation date, last modified, last accessed file attributes). But “I usually just look at the order and if it's in reverse from my intention, I switch the order, rather than looking at the indicator.” is a good point. For me, the indicator is just a bit quicker than looking at the data order. --Chanc20190325 (talk) 11:37, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * If you asked me what the natural sort order for dates was, I would sort them from old to new, so that seems to make sense. The only odd one out if you interpret it as "▼: natural sort order, first at top" and "▲: natural sort order, first at bottom" that I see is CPU usage, but this is equally well explained by noting that people are generally interested in the process using the most. So it can certainly be interpreted as natural to put the large users first: you treat them semantically, rather than simply as numerical. But I'm just second-guessing the motives of the designers. This can be helpful though, since it's easier to remember something if you have a story explaining it, even if that story is wrong :-). PS: What GUI tool is sorting CPU usage like that for you on Linux? I only use terminal tools to inspect processes. Digital Brains (talk) 11:48, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I also use terminal tools often, but for GUI, I use GNOME and KDE system monitor. GNOME system monitor was pre-installed. –Chanc20190325 (talk) 13:42, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Musical aging


The article Musical aging has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "I cannot find evidence that this term is used in this way."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ... disco spinster   talk  02:24, 28 May 2019 (UTC)


 * I suggest moving it into the draft namespace or my user namespace. I have no moving privilege yet, therefore I ask you to do it. --Chanc20190325 (talk) 11:39, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * OK I have moved it. ... disco spinster   talk  13:29, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --Chanc20190325 (talk) 13:39, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Your help desk question
You have [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2019_May_27#Why_“Fewer_than_30_watchers”_instead_of_exact_number? a response].— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  • thank •  20:23, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks,.

June 2019
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Ethics of circumcision are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines, not for general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics, or statements based on your thoughts or feelings. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Alexbrn (talk) 14:36, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gerascophobia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Stevens ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Gerascophobia check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Gerascophobia?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). 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) 14:27, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 16
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gerascophobia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thievery ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Gerascophobia check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Gerascophobia?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:27, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia:Sandbox/20190522


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Wikipedia:Sandbox/20190522, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DannyS712 (talk) 06:36, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 23
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gerascophobia, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Genetic and Hydration ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Gerascophobia check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Gerascophobia?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 22:01, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Babel:Rationalist


The article Babel:Rationalist has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unformed and unreferenced article on a not notable aspect of internal WP culture"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Chetsford (talk) 08:26, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * --Chanc20190325 (talk) 12:55, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Userbox:Rationalist


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Userbox:Rationalist, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Chetsford (talk) 15:09, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

your userbox
Hi. I moved your userbox to here, which is where I think you were trying to put it. Chetsford (talk) 15:13, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

June 2019
Please do not add or change content, as you did at It's Everyday Bro, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 13:33, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Then I will cite the song lyrics. --Chanc20190325 (talk) 16:12, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:27, 13 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Getting silenced by (mutilation-supportive) authorities again! Hooray! But I am not Prager University. --Chanc20190325 (talk) 00:15, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * This is a serious academic project, not a platform for you to push your views, nor a forum for you to play a martyr. There are additional issues with you adding unsourced content as well. And egregious personal attacks are never acceptable. It does not appear that you are here to contribute to an academic project in good faith, and thus, I've blocked you indefinitely. --Swarm (Subsequently added signature.)
 * Hello, . I am sorry that you decided to suspend me indefinitely. --Chanc20190325 (talk) 18:11, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * As am I. I am open to unblocking you on the conditions that you will be banned from the topic of circumcision, you will not add unsourced content, and you will abide by WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA, WP:AGF and WP:5P4. ~Swarm~  {sting} 04:52, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello again. I would like to inform you that I have learnt from my mistake back then. And I also will pay more attention to avoid making another botched edit like the one I have made after watching this video. I will also be as formal and sincere as possible in future discussions. I am ready to be unblocked now. --Chanc20190325 (talk) 21:46, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

July 2019
Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Talk:Murder of pregnant women. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.  Acroterion   (talk)   16:36, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello, there. Chris Watts is a known case that went viral on YouTube, on a channel called Derek Van Schaik. Additionally, you have confused the talk page with the actual article. What I wrote was on the talk page. Sorry for making you that paranoid. --Chanc20190325 (talk) 23:55, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * No, I haven't confused anything. You may not post unsourced defamatory information on any page on Wikipedia. You will need multiple reliable sources in major independent media if you're going to make allegations of criminal activity against any living person, even by insunuation. If you do anything like that again, you'll be blocked.   Acroterion   (talk)   00:02, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * That was not an allegation, but a fact. He does already have his own article, see Chris Watts (murderer). It also includes the sources. --Chanc20190325 (talk) 00:09, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * And our article on Chris Watts, who hasn't killed anyone, has nothing at all to do with that. You need to be extremely careful - casually linking a name to a crime is not acceptable, nor is casually mentioning names on talkpages without accurate sourcing and links. And no, he doesn't have an article, just a redirect, as is appropriate.  Acroterion   (talk)   00:13, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I should have checked the article name, you're right. While typing in  Chris Watts , I didn't have the thought that the article could be about an unrelated person. But I fortunately have not harmed the reputation of this innocent Chris Watts, because at the top of that article, there is:, or something similar, and because of the high media relevance of the evil Chris Watts. But yes, I should indeed have paid attention, because death is not a joke. Totally agreed. --Chanc20190325 (talk) 00:20, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that clears it up.  Acroterion   (talk)   00:39, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Notice
 Acroterion   (talk)   02:04, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

God Church listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect God Church. Since you had some involvement with the God Church redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed,Rosguill talk 14:25, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

About 2600:1700:B7A1:9A30:81E4:8B8:66A4:1164.
Is it possible that this user has an account? Why is he editing through IP? Isn't that against the rules? See: WP:SCRUTINY. --Chanc20190325 (talk) 19:14, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Anything is possible. Do you have any actual evidence of misconduct, or is this just speculation on your part? Cullen328  Let's discuss it  05:03, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Status bias concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Status bias, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:44, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Status bias


Hello, Chanc20190325. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Status bias".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! HasteurBot (talk) 07:01, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Musical aging


Hello, Chanc20190325. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Musical aging".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Lapablo (talk) 12:49, 30 November 2019 (UTC)