User talk:ChemTerm

Your contributed article, Member states of the Venice Commission


Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Member states of the Venice Commission. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Venice Commission. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Venice Commission – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Vacation9 (talk) 00:19, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Number format
Hi, any reason why you changed the number format in this edit? - DVdm (talk) 07:20, 10 October 2012 (UTC) DVdm (talk) 07:20, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I thought it was against policy to use the comma, but now see it is not: MOS:NUM. Sorry. ChemTerm (talk) 15:42, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, no problem. Keep up the good work! - DVdm (talk) 19:01, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Flag of the United Nations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Light blue (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:58, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Sollentuna Parish for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sollentuna Parish is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Sollentuna Parish until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. The Banner talk 00:59, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

October 2012
Hello, I'm The Banner. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sollentuna Parish that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it’s one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. The Banner talk 11:59, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors, as you did to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sollentuna Parish. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. The Banner talk 00:08, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Was you who said "shut up", not? ChemTerm (talk) 01:10, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Bromma Parish for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bromma Parish is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Bromma Parish until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. The Banner talk 00:10, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Sollentuna Kontrakt for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sollentuna Kontrakt is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Sollentuna Kontrakt until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. The Banner talk 00:12, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Canvassing
Hello. It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on biased users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. ''See the talk page for the AfD over Sollentuna Parish for more information. Canvassing is not allowed here and will result in blocking if continued.'' gwickwire &#124; Leave a message 01:05, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Where did that occur? ChemTerm (talk) 01:08, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Do not make things smaller on your talk page just to try to avoid people seeing them. Also, the diffs are posted at the AfD for the Sollentuna Parish. By the way, even if you remove the canvassing, it is still permanently linked in the diff links. gwickwire &#124; Leave a message 01:21, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't. But maybe you have the courtesy to tell me where "leaving messages on biased users' talk pages" did occur? ChemTerm (talk) 01:28, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * These things don't jsut get small by themselves. I told you to go look at the AfD. Last reply here. gwickwire &#124; Leave a message 01:31, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Of course not, I did it. At ANI you don't mention a user's talk page where canvassing did happen. ChemTerm (talk) 01:34, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Neither of you are providing diffs on this and should either do so or drop the stick.--Amadscientist (talk) 01:37, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I have provided the diffs in multiple locations now. gwickwire &#124; Leave a message 01:42, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * For an admin hopeful, you sure don't seem to understand canvassing very well gwick. But you need not respond here. This is not the appropriate venue for discussions of other user conduct. ChemTerm, please provide diffs at ANI to support your claim or, if you wish you can strike out the claim as unfounded after consideration.--Amadscientist (talk) 01:54, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:The Banner. Thank you. gwickwire &#124; Leave a message 01:18, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I do apologize, this was supposed to be a and not a notice. Sorry! But still, please view the page. gwickwire &#124; Leave a message 01:20, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Fine with me. Maybe you can have a look why Swedish parish articles should be deleted, whilst for other countries the articles exist for years. ChemTerm (talk) 01:29, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Not stalking from what I can see...
You may wish to retract the accusation. I don't see that The Banner has followed you to areas he was not already involved in.--Amadscientist (talk) 02:39, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sollentuna Köping


A tag has been placed on Sollentuna Köping requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Dengero (talk) 07:03, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Re: Parishes
Well, thanks. But as I have pointed out elsewhere, I'm not keen on retaining articles on församlingar. Hundreds and socknar I think are fine, but I'm just not convinced that tiny ecclesiastical units carry any notability as far as Wikipedia is concerned. WP:Existence ≠ Notability. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 21:15, 23 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, the longer you stick around, the more you'll come to understand the role of essays in the community's decision-making. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 21:40, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
'''Hello, ChemTerm. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Speedy.''' You can [ remove this notice] at any time.

Disambiguation link notification for October 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of capitals of regions of Ghana, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Capitals (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 01:17, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Follow up
May I ask you to consider my reply on Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_October_28. Debresser (talk) 07:20, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Rugby union in...
Hi, the discussion over [the] Ivory Coast is balanced 3-all, not heading towards any consensus; and ending up with no consensus would be the worst result. I found something that points the other way, so rather than have no consensus I'm thinking of switching sides... what would you do? – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:39, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that link. My "something" was the overall balance on Google books; but the Ngram tells a story which leans the other way anyway. – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:02, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

ROTA and talkback
Hi, I noticed that you added a redirect ROTA, but as another organization claiming this acronym was listed at Rota (disambiguation), I added a hatnote at the target, and added the target to that dab page. – Fayenatic  L ondon 19:52, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Puerto Rico (proposed state)
Chemterm, there is now a move discussion about Puerto Rico (proposed state) at Talk:Puerto Rican statehood movement Ego White Tray (talk) 13:36, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Also, your revert of my merge was against a very clear consensus - and you did so without posting at either talk page. I've restored the merge. Please comment at Talk:Puerto Rico statehood movement before attempting to revert again. Ego White Tray (talk) 13:38, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Former country subdivisions of Algeria
Category:Former country subdivisions of Algeria, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:47, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Your AN/I submission
You failed to notify User:Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars of your notice, and at any rate I see no sign that you've engaged him on his talk page. Please discuss your concerns with him and others on the article talk pages and his talk page first. Mangoe (talk) 13:55, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, no time, not really my area of interest. I thought some process-people at ANI could help. ChemTerm (talk) 14:00, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Crimean Khanate (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Ulus


 * Zadar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Territorial

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:31, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Your contributed article, ROTA


Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, ROTA. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Rota. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Rota – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Jhortman (talk) 20:01, 21 November 2012 (UTC)


 * AFAIK, disambiguation pages should normally serve both upper and lower case occurrences; there's no need for a separate one for the acronyms. – Fayenatic  L ondon 19:31, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Where is the policy that prohibits more specific dab pages? ChemTerm (talk) 23:30, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I was thinking of some of the examples at MOS:DABINT, but it's not a specific prohibition. There is also WP:2DAB and WP:TWODABS. As long as there are only two articles that could be intended by ROTA, then it's better just to have one combined dab page for upper and lower case. – Fayenatic  L ondon 14:50, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Sounds like WP:ILIKE. If someone looks for ROTA why bother him with "Rota"-items? To have ROTA is more concise. ChemTerm (talk) 17:13, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Just offering my advice from experience. If you've read those three sections and you still think it's justified, I won't revert you if you reinstate it; but it's likely that somebody else will merge it back on grounds such as these. I'd only bother splitting a disambiguation page, or setting up a sub-section as a separate page, if it it was more strongly justified on size. – Fayenatic  L ondon 21:36, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Caste system of Nepal
re Category:Caste system of Nepal to Category:Nepalese caste system – Fayenatic  L ondon 19:31, 23 November 2012 (UTC)


 * This is now at Categories for discussion/Log/2012 November 25. I have not pasted in a copy of the Speedy discussion, because it seems confusing, and we might as well start afresh to set out our thoughts as clearly as we can. – Fayenatic  L ondon 21:36, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

CfD
You have rather massively missed the point at Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_November_27, I fear. - Sitush (talk) 19:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Categories
You are not allowed to jump the gun by immediately creating new categories that you first proposed for renaming just yesterday. You must let the WP:CFD discussion run its proper course of seven days to establish consensus for your proposed changes — until those seven days are up, even if it's wrong you have to let it stand while the discussion is still open, because that is how Wikipedia's consensus process works. And if the final consensus goes against you, further, then you have to accept that and cannot just arbitrarily go ahead and do it anyway.

Secondly, there is not, and never has been, any consensus on Wikipedia to somehow divide "Argentine media" and "Media of Argentina" into separate things — there is no article on Wikipedia that could ever belong in one category but not in the other. You're well within your right to propose that the existing category be renamed from one format to the other — but they are not two distinct things that require two separate categories, but one thing about which there's a legitimate reason to suggest that maybe its name should be changed. But you're still not entitled to impose that change while the CFD discussion about it is still underway.

Again, I'm not opposed to your reasoning in principle — but you need to follow Wikipedia's proper processes for actually getting this stuff done. Bearcat (talk) 21:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi, I just want to re-state what Bearcat has said above. I'm coming from the outside seeing these discussions and the way you are behaving, and I am a bit concerned. Just be patient and let the system play itself out. There is no rush. Don't make changes that haven't been OK'd by consensus yet (ie, when the underlying issue is still being discussed at CFD). Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:16, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Aragonese Empire people
I made a new proposal at the discussion of this category, since I just realized that Aragonese Empire as an article redirects to Crown of Aragon.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Proposal for category:Translator stubs
Hi ChemTerm. Hope you are doing fine. I have just published a proposal to create a new category:Translator stubs. What do you say? Regards from Montevideo, --Fabio Descalzi, aka Fadesga (talk) 18:10, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Republic (country subdivision)
Hello ChemTerm,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Republic (country subdivision) for deletion, because it appears to duplicate an existing Wikipedia article, :.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks, Emayv (talk) 16:04, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Ways to improve Lomami Province (former)
Hi, I'm Skamecrazy123. ChemTerm, thanks for creating Lomami Province (former)!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Lomami Province (former) has no sources at all.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Category:Subdivisions of the Duchy of Warsaw has been nominated for discussion
Category:Subdivisions of the Duchy of Warsaw, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:08, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Category:Former territorial entities by continent has been nominated for merging
Category:Former territorial entities by continent has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:04, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of List of traditional regions of Slovakia for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of traditional regions of Slovakia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of traditional regions of Slovakia until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Thesixthstaff (talk) 18:49, 14 February 2024 (UTC)