User talk:Lembit Staan/Archive 8

DYK for Rumcajs
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Citation needed tags
You appear to have placed several "citation needed" tags on the article Stereotypes of animals with the date February 2019. This might come as a surprise to you, but we're living in February 2020 by now. =) J I P  &#124; Talk 00:57, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Science fiction
Hi,

As for Science fiction: I'm definitely interested in reading sci-fi, but I'm not that proficient with wikitext to create complex navboxes.)) I guess that the current box looks complex but still understandable. I have just added several items to it.

Cheerz from sunny Moscow! Lamro (talk) 09:49, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Raróg and CD Projekt logo -- new evidence
Hi! Back in 2018 (User_talk:Staszek_Lem/Archive_6) we discussed your removal of my mention of Raróg as CD Projekt RED logo, claiming that the article naming Raróg "podstawą nowej identyfikacji wizualnej studia" ("the basis for the studio's new visual identification") published on their own site was written by a person whose opinion did not reflect the band's opinion. (Which is odd, why would they publish wrong info about their logo on the site they own?) I did not want to fight on it longer, but today I've found new evidence: a tweet published by the studio's official profile naming their bird Raróg: https://twitter.com/cdprojektred/status/1103673666028650497

Combining both the article on the studio's official site whose author you accuse of mistake without actual proof and this tweet on their official Twitter profile, I think it's identification is no longer in question. It is a northern cardinal, yes, but it is a raróg too. SMiki55 (talk) 20:06, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
 * No, it is not Rarog. It is Project RED's vision of Rarog. I restored the text in question and fixed it properly. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:39, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

"Hеpi ТV" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Hеpi ТV. Since you had some involvement with the Hеpi ТV redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

File:A snapshot of Krzysztof Rau&#39;s play Czy Pan istnieje, Mr Johnes.png listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:A snapshot of Krzysztof Rau&, 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. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 00:53, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

File:A snapshot of Krzysztof Rau& listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:A snapshot of Krzysztof Rau&, 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. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Re: Morana
We already had such discussion about Marek Hapon. As long as Morana is worshipped today, there is no reason to exclude her contemporary imaginations. I added note to the description of this image, that it's contemporary art. --Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 09:10, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Polish student ID for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Polish student ID 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/Polish student ID 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. Rathfelder (talk) 10:58, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Carnival of São Paulo
Hi, I came across the Carnival of São Paulo article that you created. I was going to nominate for PROD but wanted to touch base with you first. My thinking was that the content in Brazilian Carnival might be sufficient. Regards, Alan Islas (talk) 07:26, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Since you mentioned
Socks recently, you may want to check this proposal. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:06, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Polish invasion of Russia
Moved to article talk page. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:00, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

grammar
Hi Staszek, you have reverted an edit of mine which corrected three points of grammar and style, so I hope you will consider what I write here. This was the text that you have reinstated: "a 2018 find of a yet another lost Lem's work". First, you've got two indefinite articles, "a ... an". Perhaps you can do that in Slavic languages, but you can't in English: "*he's a an idiot". Secondly you have "a lost Lem's work", i.e. you have Lem as a genitive substantive. But Lem here, though a noun, is adjectival and adjectives in English do not decline, i.e. they never reflect gender, number or case. Thus "a horserace" or "horseraces" and "a Shakespeare play". Perhaps in a Slavic language horse would be plural and Shakespeare genitive, but not in English.

The third point concerns "yet another" and is a question of exophora. Your "yet another" refers to things that are not contained in the text and which the reader has no way of knowing about, and which may even not be true. Yes, The Hunt is linked to, so that's "another", but "yet another" means there are more rediscovered works, so that's exophoric and needs to be given a context.

So thank you for adding content to the English Wikipedia, but please be willing to defer on points of language to native speakers. I note that there are a lot of stylistic issues in articles related to this one, but I have no interest in checking to see who is responsible. If you feel you would like mentoring on any content you are adding, then I'm happy to help. Spicemix (talk) 09:44, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for keeping an eye on the grammar, which is rather thankless gnomish work. In this particular case I am afraid you are mistaken: "yet another" refers to the third "lost" work. Please search the article for the word "another".
 * Where do you see two indefinite articles? "a ... another" is definitely my problem
 * I do not see the change "Lem's work" into "Lem work" as necessary, removal of the article 'a' would do. If you are willing to point me at the particular English grammar rule, I will be grateful.
 * And no, I will not uncritically defer English to native speakers. I understand that some noinsence may slip thru my keyboard because I do not have an automatic language instinct, but in my 40 years I've seen plenty of nonsense "copyedited" into my software manuals by native speakers. Even better: I have an example right in this article.
 * Once again, I do respect your work, but in this particular case my objection was the incorrect change of the meaning ("yet another").
 * In the future, please discuss article content in article talk pages. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:19, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Lalbagh
Moved to Talk:Lalbagh, where it should have been in the first place, my bad. Staszek Lem (talk) 16:45, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Interesting reading
I stumbled upon something you might enjoy reading:. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:57, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Requesting expansion and update edit support
Hi,

Season's greetings

I am looking for proactive expansion and update support/input help the following (So far neglected but important topic) articles, if possible. Even if you feel your focus area bit different still contribution of few line may help bring in some different perspective and also help Wikipedia goal of neutrality. If you can't spare time but if you know any good references you can note those on talk pages.


 * Islamic advice literature

This has been posted on your talk page since, one of article review suggested to have more diverse editor participation to have more inclusive, neutral and balanced worldview

Your user ID was selected randomly (for sake of neutrality) from related other articles changes list related to Secular.

Thanks, warm regards and greetings

Bookku (talk) 09:28, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

His Master's Voice
Hey, I moved His Master's Voice (film) back to the English title from the Hungarian. If a film uses a common English title in festivals or otherwise, we tend to use that title in the article. See WP:NCF for more info. BOVINEBOY 2008 10:58, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Join the RfC to define trust levels for WikiLoop DoubleCheck
Hi , you are receiving this message because you are an active user of WikiLoop DoubleCheck. We are currently holding a Request for Comments to define trust levels for users of this tool. If you can spare a few minutes, please consider leaving your feedback on the RfC page. Thank you in advance for sharing your thoughts. Your opinion matters greatly! María Cruz

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:59, 22 August 2020 (UTC) If you would like to modify your subscription to these messages you can do so here.

Polish joke
Regarding your recent move discussion at Talk:Polish joke, are you Polish yourself? If you are, it only strenghtens my vote in support for your nomination. J I P &#124; Talk 00:35, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Danielewicz
Hi,

How in earth could You tranfer of name Danielewicz to Danielwicz family? Hey, are you out of Your mind? There is no ONE Danielewicz family, there are dozen of them and by "Danielewicz" we give shelter for all of them. I will revert this and if there will be any issue later i will bring it all on the Board. Second, before changing, You should first write the Author and ask, communicate. Instead, what You did was vandalizm. Shall I then report You for vandalizm? I think most of the society on Wiki would agree. Then, I sipmly ask to to stop doing stupid things. Only that. Dont do anything that is far of Your knowledge. In this, Im feel very diplopatic what I write. I then kindly ask You to revert what You did and then we can enjoy life and also help each other in subject when we can? Camdan (talk) 02:32, September 2020 (UTC)


 * Ok, now I will report this action. You have no right to change anything without communicating first with the author of the art. Learn the rules and stop messing with others work. Mind the WP:3RR rules. Camdan (talk) 10:10, 9 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Please discuss articles in article talk pages. Staszek Lem (talk) 16:03, 9 September 2020 (UTC)


 * First, I have to appogy for what I wrote above - I was just "pissed off" that You did not notify me before changing. Neverless, i would like to forward some thoughts here on Your page as I understand that You are familiar with Polish language. In my opinion, we should cooperate by using specific knowledge that You have and I also possess. Instead of wasting time, we could help each other. I can support You with any scientific issue in the field that I can say about and that can be confirmed by best scolars, professors. I will be soon back on en:wiki translating from pl:wiki - even if You are not so familair with subject, You can help a lot. My answer on subject we discuss might be hard but it is also adequate to what You wrote. Lets be friends and support each other. I think that is the best we can do. I see that what Your posts is very good, then in such issues that You are really good at, I would be very gratefull for Your support, i will need it on with future art. In subjects where I spend so much time with scolars, please trust me that I can back You up with statements of professors or scolars. We can back up each other, knowing different issues and to support - and its truely so I feel. Why waste time to argue in the field that we dont know about?. I kindy ask You to concider and I really hope that we can cooperate and support each other. In my mind, it would be a win-win. Camdan (talk) 01:27, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Polish heraldry

 * Hello Staszek, can You check this article? I did some imporevments some years ago and fixed inline citations + some corrections down to section "Peculiarities". I can't improve or source this section since I dont have access to publications right now (tied to Stockholm). Also section shield could have use of more inline citations and sources. I asked colleague that have all the sources to contribute but his english is not so good. If you can help, I would appreciate a lot. Also, please check it all and if you find something controversial, please let me know. Also, I wish to thank You for valuable corrections You made (on my own errors), its much appreciated. Thank You! Camdan (talk) 18:55, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Lem's Law
New declined draft, maybe you want to rescue it? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:37, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Lem's Law
Dzień dobry,

bardzo dziękuję za edycję mojej próby dotyczącej Prawa Lema. Dzięki Panu wpis nie tylko został opublikowany, ale też nabrał rąk i nóg, nie mówiąc już tym, że znalazł Pan dodatkowe odnośniki.

Mam tylko jedną uwagę: Juliusz Łukasiewicz, o którym mowa w tekście, to nie *ten* Łukasiewicz, do którego podał Pan link. Chodzi o Juliusza Łukasiewicza inżyniera i pilota RAF. To on napisał "Eksplozję ignorancji" (której zresztą był żywym przykładem, bo Lema nie czytał :-)...). O ile wiem, biogram Łukasiewicza-inżyniera jest tylko w polskiej Wikipedii. Czy pozwoli Pan zatem, że zmienię odsyłacz przy nazwisku Łukasiewicza?

Dziękuję za uwagę i pozostaję z szacunkiem, Maciej Janowicz Maciej Janowicz (talk) 09:40, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Przepraszam pana, panie Macieju, widzialem to, lecz zapomnialem. Poprawione. A propos, nie musisz pytac o zezwolienie zeby edytowac. Staszek Lem (talk) 15:13, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

No True Scotsman Fallacy - Undo makes no sense by your own reasoning
The page initially reads: Rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any specific objective rule: "no true Scotsman would do such a thing"

I added a few words: "new", "or criterion": Rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any new specific objective rule or criterion: "no true Scotsman would do such a thing"

Your reason for rolling it back was that "true" was in fact a rule. But by the standards of the version you upheld, the preceding line clearly indicates that the example must be "without reference to any specific objective rule: "no TRUE" Scotsman would do such a thing". So if you are correct that "true" is a rule, then the example that "no TRUE Scotsman would do such a thing" contains a rule (namely: "true"), making that example invalid. But clearly this example is in fact an example of a No True Scotsman fallacy, and thus your reasoning must necessarily be incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.159.178.187 (talk) 16:25, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

"Rachel Botsman" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Rachel Botsman. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 21 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:22, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Precious
You are recipient no. 2468 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:41, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Non-magnified optic&#32; on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 19:32, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Sylwester Zawadzki
Which Sylwester Zawadzki are you pointing to? This is a link to a disambiguation page. The Banner talk 17:23, 9 November 2020 (UTC) Yes it is. And I am pointing to it; See similar items in the page Zawadski. Lembit Staan (talk) 21:49, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * There is absolutely no need to add the info twice: once in de disambiguation page and again in Zawadzki. The Banner  talk 23:53, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

WP:BOLD
Please stop edit warring. Your bold moves have been reverted, and need to be discussed first. I was actually in the process of writing a note here explaining this, but you decided to edit war instead. I'll be reporting you to AN3 if this continues. See Talk:Sikorsky for a fuller explanation, as requested. Cheers. BilCat (talk) 20:41, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

November 2020
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Sikorski; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. BilCat (talk) 20:44, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
 * Answered in Talk:Sikorsky. Your reverts without any ma\eaningful explanation is just the same edit war you are acccusing mne of. I hope now the conflliuct will be resolved. Lembit Staan (talk) 20:45, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Sikorski for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sikorski 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/Sikorski 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. BilCat (talk) 21:00, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

"Sylwester Zawadzki (disambiguation)" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Sylwester Zawadzki (disambiguation). The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 14 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The Banner talk 21:33, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Taler (cryptocurrency)


The article Taler (cryptocurrency) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "notability not established, no reputable sources are cited, all sources are government propaganda from either Russia or Belarus. The only reliable source, dsnews, mentions Taler only in the last paragraph, and does not cover it in depth, as required by WP:CORPDEPTH."

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. Ysangkok (talk) 00:34, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Question about the source to make some changes in an article
Hello Lembit Staan, Can you please confirm if this article: http://biznes.pap.pl/en/news/recommended/info/3003953,premiera-nowej-gry-ci-games-w-i-kw--przyszlego-roku is the reliable source to make changes in article about CI Games?

I would like to ask to change a number of employees: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CI_Games - now it's mentioned 62 and in the interview at biznes.pap.pl is information that curretly it's more than 100.

Best, Izefoa Izefoa (talk) 16:44, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Since the info in question is not related to politics, the source may be considered reliable. By the way, when reporting changeable numbers like this one you have to indicate the date, e.g., (as of November 2020) Lembit Staan (talk) 18:37, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help and confirmation. Izefoa (talk) 14:02, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Superstitions in Muslim societies for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Superstitions in Muslim societies 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/Superstitions in Muslim societies 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. Bookku (talk) 05:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

You've been unsubscribed from the Feedback Request Service
Hi Staszek Lem! You're receiving this notification because you were previously subscribed to the Feedback Request Service, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over three years.

In order to declutter the Feedback Request Service list, and to produce a greater chance of active users being randomly selected to receive invitations to contribute, you've been unsubscribed, along with all other users who have made no edits in three years or more.

You do not need to do anything about this - if you are happy to not receive Feedback Request Service messages, thank you very much for your contributions in the past, and this will be the last you hear from the service. If, however, you would like to resubscribe yourself, you can follow the below instructions to do so:


 * 1) Go to the Feedback Request Service page.
 * 2) Decide which categories are of interest to you, under the RfC and/or GA headings.
 * 3) Paste  underneath the relevant heading(s), where limit is the maximum number of requests you wish to receive for that category per month.
 * 4) Publish the page.

If you've just come back after a wikibreak and are seeing this message, welcome back! You can follow the above instructions to re-activate your subscription. Likewise, if this is an alternate account, please consider subscribing your main account in much the same way.

Note that if you had a rename and left your old name subscribed to the FRS, you may be receiving this message on your new username's talk page still. If so, make sure your new account name is subscribed to the FRS, using the same procedure mentioned above.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask on the Feedback Request Service talk page, or on the Feedback Request Service bot's operator's talk page. Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 18:02, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of True Pole
Hello! Your submission of True Pole at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:49, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi again. We are about to close this nomination because the hook fact lacks an inline cite in the article. If you can take care of this, this week, it would be appreciated. Yoninah (talk) 17:17, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Controversial moves
The rule you were looking for is here. "Do not create a new move request when one is already open on the same talk page." Selfstudier (talk) 18:10, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Sussi cloth
, Greetings! As per our discussion yesterday on my talk page. The subject article is posted. Kindly review. Thanks and regards RAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 05:35, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

New Page Patrol December Newsletter
Hello ,



It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to and  who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to, , and who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.
 * Year in review

has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.
 * Reviewer of the Year

As a special recognition and thank you has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.
 * NPP Technical Achievement Award

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here 18:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Proposed Signpost article
I tool a look at the article you proposed for The Signpost. It looks good. I did a first pass at copy editing it and added some suggestions at User:Smallbones/Signpost draft, because I think with a little work it can be much better. Feel free to ignore my suggestions (and improve it in other ways!) One thing - I like to keep that "Signpost draft" page to myself so I can more easily copy it when needed, so please just copy (without credit!) whatever parts you'd like and continue your draft at User:Lembit Staan/My experience with women in Wikipedia. Hope this helps. Smallbones( smalltalk ) 19:21, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I am not sure I like this "WP:FORK" work. Also, I know nothing else about women and I don't like the idea of displacing my personality; I don't think I was shoving it "into your face". Lembit Staan (talk) 23:56, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, we always try to make articles better. It does help to have an editor make suggestions. And we always copy edit. Smallbones( smalltalk ) 01:48, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I meant I don't like the idea of painstakingly copying your copyedits from your page into my page. I responded to your suggestions, other than that it is all yours. Lembit Staan (talk) 16:50, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * P.S. Probably I was not clear: the suggested article title was "My experience with women in Wikipedia". The whole writing was kinda joke (ha ha only serious). Lembit Staan (talk) 17:03, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Taler (cryptocurrency) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Taler (cryptocurrency) 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/Taler (cryptocurrency) 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. H iddenL emon //  talk  02:47, 15 December 2020 (UTC)