User talk:Idell/Archive 1

July 2014
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Firefox OS has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.


 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Firefox OS was changed by Idell (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.931919 on 2014-07-05T12:50:34+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 12:50, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

April 2015
Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the page Nitrous oxide, because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 11:34, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Citation needed tag
Regarding this? A source is there. So why did you add that tag?

If you reply to this, please reply here on your talk page, not on mine. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 20:49, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The reference only supports the first part of the sentence. The part which talks about generally held views of the society (not the religion) needs referencing. I’ve also highlighted that text using . Idell (talk) 03:27, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Help me!
Please help me with... take a look at User:Idell/Trash. I have included a userbox template for my previous account but I don’t want this page to be included in Category:Wikipedians with alternative accounts. How can I prevent such pages using templates from being included in their categories? Idell (talk) 11:35, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * According to WP:NOCAT, add parameter  on that userbox template.  – Majavah talk &middot; edits 11:47, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Divisional Public School and College, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gujrat ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Divisional_Public_School_and_College check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Divisional_Public_School_and_College?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) 06:17, 11 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks you for pointing out the error. I have already fixed it. Be advised that I’m unable to access the ‘check to confirm’ and ‘fix with Dab solver’ pages, they seem broken to me. Idell (talk) 13:23, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Infoboxes
Please have a look at MOS:INFOBOXUSE: That one was added without consensus, as you can see on article talk. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  06:09, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Tip or birth
Thanks for correction but why is 'tip' better than 'birth'? Tip is an english word [tʰɪp], [t] here is alveolar not dental as in /t̪ʰ/.It would clearly sound like tʰ sound(ट or ठ) not dental t̪ʰ (त or थ)..please answer. I can't read Arabic or urdu script, maybe which is why I couldn't understand. Lastly, if. ث is distinct from تھ in urdu, why not make separate pages for hindi and urdu? Kushalpok01 (talk) 07:12, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * ⟨تھ⟩ is a dental aspirated stop pronounced as [t̪ʰ]. Help:IPA/Hindi and Urdu lists approximate English equivalents and the /t/ in ⟨tip⟩ [tʰɪp] is more closer to it than the /θ/ in ⟨birth⟩. It’s not a hundred percent accurate but that’s a limitation of the English language, and that is why we refer to IPA for an accurate transcription. It is mentioned in the notes that stops transcribed as such are pronounced as dental stops; IPA allows this simplification. I’d like to make it clear that in Urdu ⟨ث⟩ is transcribed as /s/; I suppose ⟨स⟩ is the Hindi character for it. It does not warrant the creation of separate help pages for Hindi and Urdu IPA. However there are other pages such as Urdu alphabet and Devanagari which deal with such subtleties more closely and separately for each system. Idell  (talk) 07:55, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Chevrons
First, I agree that "angle brackets" is the correct name for the grapheme notation. I admit some responsibility for the rise of the Chevron term, though not all. I didn't make it up, my encounter with chevrons is fairly recent (I had always used the term angle bracket in the past and I believed chevrons to be horizontal, not vertical), so you probably have more hunting down to do.

Anyway, you say that "chevron and angle bracket are not the same thing". Chevron is a disambiguation: there is no chevron (typography). So how are you defining chevron? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:34, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I thank you for your approval of my work.
 * I choose to think of ‘chevrons’ as a redundant cover term for angle brackets and guillemets (both of which are well-defined technical terms), just as both of them are listed under Chevron. There surely is a lack of reliable information about the word in this context. To avoid any confusion, the precise technical terms should be used. Don’t quote me on this but:
 * "All angle brackets are chevrons but all chevrons are not angle brackets."

- Idell


 * I’m sorry if my edit summary caused further confusion. I simply wanted to stress how unclear it is to refer to angle brackets as chevrons at its every instance on a page that is supposed to explain these closely related terms.
 * However, explanations of guillemets suggest that they are ‘double chevrons’. A cite note at International Phonetic Alphabet also agrees with the ‘chevrons are half-guillemets’ idea. Thus, I’ve called ‹ › chevrons. I hope it clears things up! Idell  (talk) 19:19, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah, so you are just making it up as you go along too! :-) Maybe it would be best to leave it to the disambig article and avoid getting charged with WP:OR/SYN. Half chevrons are valid (nested) quotation marks in some countries, the equivalent of ' v. ", so you can't hijack them, sorry. Best just to say that it is not a valid typography symbol. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:55, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 * And for that reason, I agree with U|Spitzak's correction (at Bracket) of your good-faith but incorrect co-option of them. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 20:01, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with the aforementioned edit. As I implied, it’s best to stop using the word ‘chevrons’ altogether. I was very much in the right to use the actual, defined symbols and their names at Bracket, except for the part, which has been removed, where I called half-guillemets chevrons. Thanks to for the correction.
 * Be advised that you have wikilinked ‘Spitzak’ above to the article U. Idell  (talk) 21:10, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020
Hello there,

You have left a message on my talk page regarding List of largest mosques. It just made me surprised that as a person like me who has been trying to protect the accuracy of the information on that page, is accused of making unconstructive edits. Really disappoint ting. In the past few weeks a biased user named Anas Sami has been constantly changing the order of the list based on mere and pure prejudice. I have undone his revisions just because they are totally inaccurate. According to many sources, the largest mosque in the world is the Imam Reza Shrine. I have mentioned one of these sources as a citation for this particular thing on that page, but the mentioned user tries to deny the truth and put the mosque he likes the most on the top of the list. So what you have accused me of is exactly what that user is doing. Unbelievable!

Given this explanation I would change the order of that list based on reliable information a part of which will be cited on the list.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editor.Eqbal (talk • contribs) 13:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


 * List of largest mosques ranks mosques by their total worshipper capacity. I have updated the lead section of the article to make it clearer. I have been unable to find any sources that claim Imam Reza Shrine to be largest mosque in the world in terms of capacity. Most sources quote its capacity at 500,000 people but one could argue that they are not up to date so I have updated the number to 700,000 people and added a reference to support that claim. Furthermore, the list doesn’t offer numbered ranking so before my latest revision it was a little unclear as what order to sort them in and it wouldn’t really mean too much to change their order. Be advised that out of the 50 latest edits on the article, at least seven are reversions made by you, probably without trying to reach consensus. Please familiarise yourself with WP:EDITWAR.
 * "An editor who repeatedly restores their preferred version is edit warring, regardless of whether those edits are justifiable: "But my edits were right, so it wasn't edit warring" is no defense."


 * I’ll once again ask you to stop trying to force your point of view. Please also familiarise yourself with WP:RELIABILITY.
 * Use four tildes  at the end of your messages to sign and date them on talk pages.  Idell  (talk) 14:17, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


 * You are just resisting against accurate information. Take a look at this link and see the real capacity of the largest mosques in the world. I have added this link as a reference for the capacity of the Imam Reza Shrine. 7 Largest Mosques in the World — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editor.Eqbal (talk • contribs) 14:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I urge you to assume good faith per WP:GOODFAITH and take a look at all the Wikipedia namespace pages I’ve previously linked to. The content at 7 Largest Mosques in the World does not agree at all with the content on List of largest mosques and the individual articles for the mosques mentioned in it. That alone is enough to suggest the weakness of the source. Idell  (talk) 15:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Your argument against the source I mentioned is weak and not firmly acceptable. More importantly, the source you have replaced is way more disputable. It is surprising to me that you instruct other users to refrain from editing (even if they think they are right) to avoid from edit warring while you yourself is evidently practicing an edit war. I urge you to stop making revisions based on your taste and wait until you find a new source that is legitimately superior in terms of reliability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editor.Eqbal (talk • contribs) 15:42, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Your source is, in no way, reliable. I’ve added the only fair source available that claims the capacity to be greater than 500,000. More reliable sources put the capacity at 500,000 only. Performing reverts after having started a discussion is very bad etiquette and it would be hypocrisy to then blame others for doing the same, who still haven’t breached the three-revert rule, by the way. You seem to not be grasping anything I say. Following the procedures for preventing disruptive editing, I’ve taken the issue to Administrators for dispute resolution. Idell  (talk) 16:32, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

 has been blocked indefinitely because CheckUser evidence confirms that the account's owner has abusively used multiple accounts. (Account information: [ block log] · confirmed sockpuppets · sockpuppet investigations casepage)

Computer Science in Islamic University of Madinah, Madinah Al Munawaroh Saudi Arabia
Assallamualaikum Warahmatullah Wabarakatuh

I am interested in Islamic University of Madinah, Madinah Al Munawaroh Saudi Arabia for Computer Science. 180.252.161.198 (talk) 18:47, 5 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Wa’alaikumussalam Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh! That’s great but why are you telling me this. I have no connection with the Islamic University of Medinah. Idell  (talk) 19:50, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Template:char
I notice that you have used it so FYI,

Template:Char has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 11:46, 7 July 2020 (UTC)