User talk:Newfraferz87


 * 2008-2010
 * 2011-2019

Nomination for deletion of Template:Duan Yu's family tree
Template:Duan Yu's family tree has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:49, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

"B-sharp major" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect B-sharp major. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 31 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 12:06, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Acknowledgement
“Alternative place names with political intonations can be acknowledged but not deliberately promoted.” That's exactly my reasoning man! As I understand it, those words argue for my edit and against yours. Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:24, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Xinjiang is the commonly recognized name. You're free to do a Google n-gram search. Wikipedia doesn't need loads of alternative names in the introduction because of some editors' political biases. It's one thing to note in an article that Xinjiang has been referred to as East Turkestan by Uyghur political activists (for example), but a completely different thing to say Xinjiang is known as East Turkestan when the article isn't talking about the nomenclature of Xinjiang.  No News  !  09:30, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:35, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Like I said, it is an alternative name, but it is not the commonly recognized name. Go check Google n-gram. Based on the article itself you can see it also carries political overtones. These two reasons together, and that's why it is not used in article names on Wikipedia. Likewise, you can mention that the term East Turkestan is used by some sources, but you can't actively promote it in replacement of the commonly recognized name (Xinjiang) because doing so violates WP:POVNAMING.  No News  !  09:40, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to look at this. Please remember that I did use parentheses around the term. China is at negative one out of 100 for political rights according to the 2020 Freedom House report, and anyone in the territory using that name or its symbols is subject to persecution. The CCP is controlling the narrative to some degree on this term via political repression, but everybody who can get out to a country with normal political rights calls it East Turkestan as far as I am aware, and there are some great historical examples of the usage of the term in the wiktionary article. The question is, can Wikipedia totally ignore the name of a place because of the political repression being visited on the inhabitants? During Japanese occupation of Taiwan, English did use Japanese derived terms for the area, but the Chinese languages pronunciations were acknowledged in some circumstances too. Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:57, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia doesn't care about your or mine political standpoint so whatever freedom score you raised isn't relevant in determining nomenclature -- only whether its use is common or widely accepted in media and academia. Right now the majority of English sources use "Xinjiang" so we should stick to that. Your claim on everybody who can get out to a country with normal political rights calls it East Turkestan as far as I am aware is unsourced and disproved by my n-gram search. I'm not advocating for any form of censorship of the term East Turkestan of course, but as an alternative name with political tones it should only be mentioned where appropriate. Lastly, please stay clear of WP:RGW and WP:Activist -- you are entitled to your opinions on Xinjiang issues but Wikipedia is not the place to preach any political or social agendas.  No News  !  10:08, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I do not agree with your opinions and assertions both about my conduct and the words in question. East Turkestan is a totally unknown area of the world in terms of Wikipedia coverage compared to most of the world and China. In my view, there are a lot of uncertainities and questions that we tend to brush over. The East Turkestan term is important for readers to know about, I think you can agree. Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:08, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I have trouble understanding your claim of East Turkestan is a totally unknown area of the world in terms of Wikipedia coverage compared to most of the world and China -- if you mean the territory corresponding to Xinjiang, by all means contribute to the relevant sections on geography, culture etc. at the relevant article. If you mean the Uyghur separationist movement, by all means contribute to East Turkestan and its relevant articles. If you want to raise the issue of formal naming of Xinjiang on Wikipedia, go ahead and say your case at Talk:Xinjiang or WP:MOVE.


 * What I am against is your active use and promotion of alternative names, especially one with political overtones and not actively used in English sources, where it is not necessary on encyclopedia pages. They are also NOT a one-to-one match, because of the additional political overtone East Turkestan connotes (go look at the Wikipedia article, not at your one-lined definition on Wiktionary). It is also against the regulations at WP:POVNAMING -- because you're showing that Wikipedia is taking a political side by promoting the use of the alternative name. Do you see any other article with infobox location that states XXX (also known as YYY) -- where YYY is an obscure/relatively less used and politicized name? If you want to raise it in a neutral or objective way, such as Xinjiang has been referred to as "East Turkestan" by Uyghur independence movements such as ... I would have no issues with it, as long as it makes sense in the contexts of the article. But it's not suitable in the ways which you are doing so currently.  No News  !  11:28, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * The reason I brought up Freedom House is to show that there is a known degree to which free expression is being curtailed in East Turkestan, and the degree could be described as 'utter and total'. I don't know if normal n-gram arguments apply to excluding a secondary term in parentheses in a situation in which the secondary term is known to be being excluded from the discourse by threat of violence. That's part of my argument. I have bolded East Turkestan on the Xinjiang page, and if that is justified, then adding the term in parentheses once in an article seems at least fair. I know you are working hard to keep things in good order and have dealt with trolls before hence I will try to hold off on new ET adding edits for today. Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:55, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * As I said, Wikipedia is not a place for you to promote a political or social cause. It's supposed to be politically neutral. Actively and directly calling Xinjiang East Turkestan or promoting the alternative name for the region is a political agenda, because of the term's political overtone. If you still don't see this point, I can't help you any further. You're free to argue your case with the rest of the Wikipedia community.  No News  !  12:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I have noted your objection, and I don't think WP:OSE is the right metric on this. WP:POVNAMING is more suitable. You can take a look at this discussion earlier today. Feel free to raise this on the talk page, and await your reply.  No News  !  15:08, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Request for article
Hi can you start a article on Military rule in Egypt. Ytpks896 (talk) 08:54, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * sorry, that is not my area of knowledge or expertise. It may be a better idea to ask at the talk pages of WP:EGYPT or WP:MIL.  No News  !  14:28, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Ok thanks for information. Ytpks896 (talk) 15:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Can you please fix this link?
Can you please fix this link, current in your comment at 04:56, 5 April 2021 on Talk:2019–20 Hong Kong protests? --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:20, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Squid Sisters
Hello Newfraferz87,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Squid Sisters for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Hangon_preload&preloadtitle=This+page+should+not+be+speedy+deleted+because...+ contest this deletion], but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

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

Hughesdarren (talk) 10:57, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 30
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of medal sweeps in Olympic athletics, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Wang Nan and Guo Yue.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 17
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kunming–Singapore railway, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mohan and Dali railway station.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:SHM color
Template:SHM color has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 21:43, 25 March 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) 00:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 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 2023 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) 00:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)