User talk:EternalNomad

Welcome!
Hello, EternalNomad, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! RFD (talk) 11:33, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Your edits in Deaths in 2015
Hello, I'm Silvonen. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Deaths in 2015 because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. --Silvonen (talk) 04:22, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Caleb Logan Bratayley for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Caleb Logan Bratayley 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/Caleb Logan Bratayley 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 notice from the top of the article. Drmies (talk) 23:21, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Deaths in 2015
Eek! I saw my edit history and nearly had a heart attack. I have no idea what I did in there, but I apologize. Damn iPad. sixty nine  • speak up •  03:07, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Your edit to gun control
I understand why you added the content you added to gun control. However, you added it in the "studies and debates" section, despite the fact that this section (despite its name) really only contains scientific studies of gun control, not debates. Also, this page, confusingly, doesn't talk about gun control proposals in the US, which seem to be better covered at gun politics in the United States. Everymorning (talk) 02:38, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Rafet Rama


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Rafet Rama 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 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 removed 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 deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. 2602:306:3357:BA0:C9DE:1D26:778E:AD19 (talk) 04:40, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

UK/EU
For clarification. The referendum is advisory to the government. In practice it can be regarded as binding, no government would survive ignoring one. Once the government decides to act it notifies the EU that it intents to invoke section 50 of the treaty. Until that happens the UK is a fully functioning member of the EU. Once section 50 is invoked the UK enters into negotiations with the EU over the precise arrangements and timing. Only at the end of that period (roughly 2 years) will the UK be finally separated from the EU. It's a bit like a divorce - once notification is given the two parties are estranged. The lawyers though will argue about property and money before the decree nisi. The treaties set a date when the decree absolute comes into force. HTH, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:19, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2016 Summer Olympics torch relay, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sao Mateus. 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) 09:10, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Olaf Sandner
Great job on the Olympian death dates thus far! One question though - are you certain that this is the Olympic Olaf Sandner? Maybe I'm missing it, but I don't see the smoking gun. Keep up the good work! Canadian  Paul  20:10, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The link https://prezi.com/kio6ap-4zonq/copy-of-dr-olaf-sadner/?webgl=0 confirms the birthdate, so I think that is enough evidence that this is the correct person. Also, I've been working on the basketball players in the 1936 Olympics over the past week, some of which may be of interest to your page.  I haven't done any research outside of Sports Reference yet, so any help would be great.  EternalNomad (talk) 02:18, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Oops, I missed that one, so yes, that looks good! As for 1936 basketball players, they are among a group I go over about once a year, and I haven't found anything new in a while - a pair of fresh eyes might be very useful! Canadian   Paul  20:29, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Special:Diff/722530141
Hi EternalNomad. Could you please have a second look at your edit. I do not see a death date in the source you mentioned. --Leyo 22:42, 9 February 2017 (UTC)


 * The death date got removed from the site for unclear reason. It is likely because of a website error related to the upcoming transfer of the data from the site to Olympedia. EternalNomad (talk) 01:07, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * It would probably be good to either find a(nother) source for his death or to remove this statement from the article. --Leyo 07:43, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I do actually expect a reply. While there is no death date given in Hans Dürst's profile, there is one in the profiles of two former teammates . --Leyo 08:26, 15 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I've edited the page to remove the death date until the data gets transferred onto the new site. EternalNomad (talk) 18:16, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Vitaly Churkin edit on Deaths in 2017.
Eek. "CNN source is a MORE reliable source than the Daily Mail" in the edit summary - surely? Ref (chew) (do) 22:21, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Leah Adler
Thanks for your edit. I warned the editor on their talk page twice, but they chose to continue on anyway. Rusted AutoParts 20:32, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * He's blatantly ignored everyone anyway so it didn't work too well. Rusted AutoParts 02:21, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 1
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.


 * Augusto Carvacho
 * added a link pointing to León


 * Franz Josef Land
 * added a link pointing to The Telegraph

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Alberto Balestrini
Hi. Thanks for this - I had my doubts the two people were one and the same, but forgot about it yesterday.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 07:06, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Presumption of death
Hello, EternalNomad. I noticed that you've recently been treating the subjects of certain biographies as being dead, with their years of death not given. But WP:BDP tells us that, absent reliable sourcing, no one under the age of 115 should be presumed dead. And the instructions at Category:Possibly living people tell us that, for persons between the ages of 90 and 115, we generally categorize them as "possibly living" (again, in the absence of reliable sourcing otherwise). Do you see any reason why we should not be following these rules in the articles you recently edited? NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:29, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


 * There has been a general WP:IAR consensus among most admins as well as others that anyone over 110 should be presumed deceased unless evidence indicates otherwise, because there would undoubtedly be a news story about a notable person reaching 110 otherwise. EternalNomad (talk) 01:40, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the prompt response. It's been my experience that editors who go against WP:BDP typically do so only because they aren't aware that it exists.  Can you point me to discussions where administrators have acknowledged the existence of WP:BDP but still agreed to ignore it?  NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:45, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


 * The talk page of the PLP category (Category talk:Possibly living people) contains a discussion, in which at least three users including well-known admin Canadian Paul agree that 110 should be the limit in practice. The standard has also been reaffirmed on CP's talk page, and used by other users as well (see the edit history of Jack William Pithey for example) EternalNomad (talk) 05:01, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Deaths in 2017
Hi, EternalNomad, Thanks for your contributions to the encyclopedia. I've had to revert your recent change to Deaths in 2017, as such facts are governed by guidelines concerning biographies of living people (which includes recently deceased people). Changes to BLPs and articles containing facts about such people require strict adherence to WP:BLPSOURCE, and IMDb does not qualify. For more on this, please see WP:ELPEREN. Cordially, Mathglot (talk) 05:37, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Presidents and Vice Presidents of Palau
In my opinion, it would be a good idea to combine the articles President of Palau and Vice President of Palau. Both are short articles. We could redirect Vice Presidents of Palau to President of Palau. I would like your thoughts on this.Векочел (talk) 02:01, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * My issue with that is that the VP of a sovereign nation is in itself a highly notable position. If we do a redirect, the page Vice President of Palau would redirect to a page mainly about presidents, which could be inconvenient for readers.  I'm fine with listing the corresponding VP's next to the presidents as is what is being done now, but I still think the notability of VP's merits their own article.  EternalNomad (talk) 18:32, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Ri Kun Mo
Hello,

The book about North Korea is from 2005, but Mansourov's essay may be even from 2014. So we have two options, assuming the 2011 source which reports him being still alive is reliable:


 * The essay is from 2005 and Mansurov only presumed Li's death, maybe because he resigned in 19898 due to "bad health". In that case we should mantain Ri is still alive and readd him to the list.


 * The essay is from 2014 and Mansourov had good inside sources from North Korea. Maybe he had fallen out of grace and only got short mentions in local newspapers. That means he would have died either in 2012 or 2013, which would be a good accuracy. If that's the case we should add "2012 or 2013" as Ri's Date of Death and the question will be closed forever.

This is not valid if the 2011 source does not tell the truth, obviously. The quickest way to solve the problem is contactin Mansourov, who is still alive and active, and ask him about Ri. Do you agree? --Folengo (talk) 18:38, 18 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I agree that this would be helpful, but a personal testimony is generally not sufficient for Wiki purposes unless it is verified by WP:OTRS. I'm not entirely familiar with OTRS but I think that it is just a matter of contacting an admin with your information.  But we cannot include him until we have proper and non-contradictory evidence that he is still alive.  EternalNomad (talk) 04:25, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Equal Rights Amendment ITN
With all due respect, I disagree with your comment on my ITN nomination. While the "deadline" for ratification has long since passed, there is a continued effort to ratify ERA. Congress extended the deadline previously and it is not inconceivable that this Congress, or any subsequent Congress, could choose to do the same, if a 38th state ratifies. A common argument of opponents to ratification is just this, that the "deadline" passed 35 years ago, but the issue is still present and is significant. I would like to request that you reopen the ITN discussion on this matter. Striker force Talk 15:25, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I understand that the effort is still there, but I don't think one state ratifying the ERA is appropriate for ITN, because nothing has actually changes except the "possibility" of the ERA becoming law. If the amendment actually entered the constitution, that would be an entirely different story, and I would probably support posting, because that would actually have a huge effect around the nation.  This is similar to why we didn't post the appeals court verdicts prior to the Obergefell v. Hodges case; because the Supreme Court is the law of the land, and appellate cases didn't produce actual ramifications. EternalNomad (talk) 04:30, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

RD: Theo-Ben Gurirab
I want to give my full support. Can you address some of the dead links? I fixed a few myself. I have seen other sources that can be substituted that are better. I would do it myself but I am a little busy and I want to avoid putting my fingerprints on it. I can be very heavy-handed.--- Coffee  and crumbs  00:05, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

ITN recognition for José José
 Spencer T• C 01:18, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, EternalNomad

Thank you for creating Sheth–Tormen approximation.

User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

&maltese; SunDawn &maltese;    (contact)   14:56, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)