User talk:Spotty's Friend

List of Solar System probes#Proposed
Hi, I have a comment for your recent edit at List of Solar System probes regarding listing the probes in the order of their launches. The page generally lists the spacecrafts chronologically by the order of their visits to the respective celestial body, instead of when they are launched. Take Rosetta vs Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter for an example. While the former was launched earlier (in 2004), it flew by Mars in 2007, so is listed after MRO which arrived in 2006. Now, as covered in WP:CRYSTALBALL, any future event must be treated with caution. Alphabetical order is used in places like Template:Future spaceflights which lists all planned spacecrafts indiscriminately, as LEO satellites are prone to delays, some times by the months. For List of Solar System probes, as the spacecrafts concerned are mostly planetary probes, their launch can be narrowed down physically due to orbital mechanics. Furthermore, the list in the page is separated by the celestial bodies, so they aren't listed 'Earth-centric', but from the celestial body's perspective. For planets like Venus, which is prone to visits by the same probe multiple times, a listing based on the probe's launch dates can be quite confusing. So for practical reasons, the probes in the page are listed by the order of their arrival dates. Kind regards, Hms1103 (talk) 23:20, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Comparison of orbital launcher families, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Safir ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Comparison_of_orbital_launcher_families check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Comparison_of_orbital_launcher_families?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) 13:05, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Mars Global Remote Sensing Orbiter and Small Rover (2020).png
Thanks for uploading File:Mars Global Remote Sensing Orbiter and Small Rover (2020).png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text  below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 廣九直通車 (talk) 03:36, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Mars Global Remote Sensing Orbiter and Small Rover (2020).png listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mars Global Remote Sensing Orbiter and Small Rover (2020).png, 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. Ə XPLICIT 23:40, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

List of Countries GDP Nominal
You have arbitrarily decided that West Bank and Gaza be denumbered even though this territory is the same as Palestine and the alternative would have been to number Palestine which is a UN recognized state whose level recognition is not dissimilar to the level of recognition of Israel. In fact both of these countries are included in the list of states with limited recognition. Your edit is therefore NPOV, fails to address the talk page discussion of the issue or the article tags relating to it and may therefore be considered disruptive, in particularyour declining to continue the existing talk page discussion. Thank you for your attention.Selfstudier (talk) 21:30, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

If you don't mind, I will copy the subsequent convo from my page to here as it is customary to continue a convo where it is begun.Selfstudier (talk) 09:54, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Response to your message to Spotty's Friend on 15 September, 2020
Dear Selfstudier, your rather curt message to me just makes no sense. Most of my edit was regarding non-controversial entities: Puerto Rico, Macau, Albania, Cuba, Tajikistan, and Uruguay. Even regarding Kosovo there's little dispute. I understand you've been having a rather heated disagreement with respect to Palestine/West Bank-Gaza with other editors, but the situation was that one column (World Bank) gave a rank to West Bank + Gaza but the other two columns (IMF and UN) did not, meanwile no rank was given to Albania; this is rather bonkers. I think regardless of whether there's consensus on the status of West Bank + Gaza with regard to the List of nominal GDP, at the very least the three exisiting columns should treat all eneities the same. If you feel strongly that the existing Wrold Bank column should contiue to assign West Bank + Gaza a number rank (while the other two columns do not) you'd get no argument from me, but you should leave all the other state entities' ranks (or non-ranks) as is; in other words, Albania, Cuba, Tajikistan, and Uruguay should have number ranks while Puerto Rico, Macau, and Kosovo should not.

cheers, Spotty&#39;s Friend (talk) 04:04, 15 September 2020 (UTC)


 * My particular interest is West Bank Gaza (Palestine). You said that you agreed with my position so I would prefer it if you would return the numbering there, it's not a question if I feel strongly about it, it is WP consensus, see eg List of countries and dependencies by population where Palestine is numbered and correctly treated in accordance with the existing WP consensus that Palestine is a sovereign state (it's also in List of Sovereign states. The problem with this particular page and a few others is that one editor is determined to try and impose his view that Palestine is not a state and without getting a consensus for his position and you appear to have taken the same position whether you intended to or not.Selfstudier (talk) 09:08, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Restoring Status Quo
To save you the trouble and since you are in agreement, I have restored the status quo re West Bank Gaza/Palestine. Selfstudier (talk) 10:15, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Mars Global Remote Sensing Orbiter and Small Rover (2020).png
Thanks for uploading File:Mars Global Remote Sensing Orbiter and Small Rover (2020).png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text  below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Hank2530 (talk) 20:51, 19 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi. Please check the talk page of the referenced PNG file.
 * I uploaded the original image in January 2020; other users then cropped it and reduced its size to better comply with Wiki's fair use policy. Later, but still in early 2020, this image survived a challenge with respect to the adequacy of its fair use rationale via a user vote. As a result, this image should not be subject to the preremptory decision by a single user more than two years later to mark it for deletion based on his or her personal opinion regarding the adequacy of its fair use rationale. Cheers. Spotty&#39;s Friend (talk) 05:39, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mars Global Remote Sensing Orbiter and Small Rover (2020).png
Thanks for uploading File:Mars Global Remote Sensing Orbiter and Small Rover (2020).png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:29, 22 August 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) 01:43, 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) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

False claims of vandalism
Thank you for trying to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism. However, one or more edits you labeled as vandalism, such as the edit at Type 093 submarine, are not considered vandalism under Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia has a stricter definition of the word "vandalism" than common usage, and mislabeling edits as vandalism can discourage editors. Please see what is not vandalism for more information on what is and is not considered vandalism. .

Merry Christmas!
 Timothytyy (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Timothytyy (talk) 02:12, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Improvements to Shanghai Micro Electronics Equipment
Hi. I have been working lately on creating articles related to Chinese technology companies and I see you have created the article Shanghai Micro Electronics Equipment. Although the article is almost 3 months old, it has still not been marked as reviewed. I have sent it to John B123 who is one of our most experienced new page reviewers. He has the following comment:

"Having a quick look at the article, a lot is referenced to SMEE's website, I'm not sure that Toms Hardware would be considered a reliable source as some of their content is in 'collaboration' with their advertisers. The article needs more independent source. The list of products taken from the company's website seems unnecessary."

Articles should follow WP:NCORP which means we need independent sources that go in-depth on the company. If you need to use Chinese sources, you can but again the content must still meet NCORP standards. In addition articles per WP:PROMO are not to be promotional. We don't need to advertise their list of products since they have their own website to do so. Some like its supposed milestone of having a 28-nanometer chip machine can be included since it is notable enough to have Bloomberg etc reporting on it. But generally we don't want to make a brochure.

See if you can adjust the article to fit the required standards so this can get marked off as reviewed. - Imcdc  Contact  15:14, 15 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi Imcdc. Thanks for you and your colleague's input. I agree that the list of products on the SMEE page is a bit unsightly and smacks of an advertising brochure; when I added it I was tired and just wanted to get something regarding their product lineup onto the page, and meant to get back to it later...then laziness overtook me. I'll try to edit this section into a shorter, more concise, and general description of SMEE's products, soon.


 * Regarding more independent sources, I really have little access to Chinese sources; as you know, the US efforts at curtailing Chinese tech developments has driven the Chinese tech community to a much greater level of reticence than before and so it's a bit hard to find public sources on recent developments, other than in the occasional US news reports with their attendant political slant. The business analysis note that you added as a source is good; if you have more such sources please add them to this page. In addition, I think in this case the Tom's Hardware articles (three different articles by the same author) should be OK since it's fairly unlikely that SMEE or any other Chinese entities associated with them has any monetary relationship with the website or the author, nor is there any likely motive on the part of SMEE to promote itself in the US media given the existing political climate. The question of whether the publisher Tom's Hardware constitutes a 'reliable source' per se does not appear to me to be directly relevant to whether the three articles should be cited in the SMEE Wiki, especially since the 'reliable source' moniker itself has been rendered a bit amorphous, in my opinion, since even sources which have long been considered by the general public to be 'reliable', such as WaPo, the Grey Lady, BBC etc. appear to publish material with questionable provenance on occasions; sign of the times. Cheers Spotty&#39;s Friend (talk) 06:33, 16 March 2024 (UTC)