User talk:Sunshineisles2/Archive 3

Disambiguation link notification for August 7
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Griffin Newman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Claude Dauphin ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Griffin_Newman check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Griffin_Newman?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Sinema edit.
I’m not allowed to edit her page, but the stuff that was just added today about Sinema’s victory keep referencing her as a member of the Democratic Party. It’s a technicality, but it is the Democrat party, not the Democratic Party. It’s a simple edit and it drives me crazy when it’s used incorrectly. Thanks. Hobberdog (talk) 04:54, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * , considering our article and their website say "Democratic," I'd say you're wrong. --Golbez (talk) 05:55, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Incidentally, Sunshineisles2, I had this on my watchlist from our last discussion, but I want to apologize, I was a bit of a jerk then. --Golbez (talk) 06:04, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I appreciate that. Apology accepted. —Sunshineisles2 (talk) 17:22, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

I have long believed that Democrat was the title of the party and that Democratic is an ideology. I have since done a little research on the subject and discovered I was wrong. Thank you for not accepting my suggested edit.

US incoming governors infoboxes
Howdy, we now use Governor-elect in the infobox, per consensus reached at an Rfc on WikiProject Biography/Politics and government. -- GoodDay (talk) 03:29, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Alterspräsident succeeding Schäuble
Gysi is older then Ramsauer, so he will be Father of the House. Do you have sources? Grimes2 (talk) 17:04, 27 December 2023 (UTC)


 * My understanding is that Father of the House is determined by length of service, not age. Ramsauer has the longest continuous service. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 17:30, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Ahh ok, so the infobox should be fixed. Grimes2 (talk) 17:37, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Willett Advisors
Hello, I work for Steven Rattner, whose article you contributed to significantly several months ago. I recently posted an edit request at the talk page of Steve's investment firm Willett Advisors and thought you might be interested in taking a look - at Talk:Willett Advisors. An editor responded initially to the request, asking for clarification, but he has not followed up since I clarified the request about two weeks ago. I hope you'll consider making the changes I've proposed. Thank you, E at rattner (talk) 18:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello, I have taken a look at the edit requests and added the new location per your sources. As for your other questions, I would recommend reaching back out to that editor and seeing if they might be able to provide further insight on the best way forward. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 18:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your assistance. It looks like the other editor (Spintendo) has been mostly inactive over the past month, which might explain why he hasn't responded in the discussion. So I'm hoping you'll agree to review and implement the other two changes I've proposed, in Spintendo's absence. I would make the edits myself if not for my conflict of interest. Thanks again! E at rattner (talk) 14:54, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I'll have another look at it, but I would prefer to hear more about the original objections, hopefully from Spintendo, before taking any actions. I'm honestly not sure of the right etiquette to reach back out and specifically get in contact on a particular ongoing issue (such as through pinging on the original dsicussion) however. Perhaps it would be worth leaving a message on their talk page? Sunshineisles2 (talk) 20:19, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that Spintendo did not voice any objections to my proposal, but only asked for a clearer explanation of why I believe the COATRACK and verification-failing content should be removed. And, based on Spintendo's recent contributions (a total of 3 edits since Jan. 16), it looks like a user talk page post would be unhelpful. That's why I'm looking for another unbiased editor to implement what I've requested. But I would be happy to seek out a different editor if you still prefer not to get involved. Much appreciated, E at rattner (talk) 14:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think that would be best. Scenarios like these are not my area of expertise as an editor, so I don't know how much help I could be. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 16:55, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

About marking edits as minor
Hey Sunshineisles2, thanks for your contributions to Spirited Away ! I wanted to let you know that you should be more selective about what edits you're using the minor edit flag on, per WP:MINOR. Minor edits are usually only for unambiguously uncontroversial edits like fixing typos or reverting vandalism. Even the small copyedits, like you're doing on this article, should not be marked as minor. Also, consider that some editors have their watchlists set up to filter out minor edits, which further reduces the visibility of your changes if you use the flag incorrectly. When in doubt, air on the side of not using the flag. Let me know if you have any questions! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:54, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 20
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jim Saxton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Moderate Republican.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

"primarily known" as a legislator?
The category "19th-century American legislators" which you created says that it is for "People primarily notable for holding a legislative office in the United States during the 19th century." So.... would you say that if someone was an elected legislator, but is not *primarily* known as a legislator, this category would be inappropriate? I noticed this on the article John P. Ordway, who is primarily known as a composer and music entrepreneur. I asked User:Ser Amantio di Nicolao, who had added a related category, and he seemed to think that anyone who was a legislator should get the legislator category... which to my mind would be wrong with the "primarily" language in the description. And he suggested asking the creator of the category. So, what do you think? Should we remove the "primarily", or should the category get pruned down to career politicians? Brianyoumans (talk) 23:13, 16 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello, my intention with that comment was in reference to political careers primarily defined through notability as legislators. I was mainly thinking that a president who served in Congress shouldn't be moved to the "legislators" category. The goal was to reduce the size of the "x-century American politicians" categories, which Ordway was previously in. I would say that Ordway belongs in the legislators category because his political career was exclusively in a legislature. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 03:25, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah, so you were trying to reduce essentially duplicative categories. But, you see, someone (User:Ser Amantio di Nicolao) has gone around and added in "Category:19th century Massachusetts politician", so we are back to having both a legislator and a politician category. And, of course, they aren't quite duplicates, since one is state-specific. I'm not sure I see an easy fix here. But, about the wording, so what you meant was more along the line of "Persons whose highest or best-known political office was in a legislature." Or something along those lines. Brianyoumans (talk) 17:05, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was referring narrowly within the context of political careers with that comment. As for the state categories, I'm personally not instinctually against having both a state politician and legislator category, since the original intention of the legislator category was to reduce the size of the "American politicians" categories specifically. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 02:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Noam Bettan
Hello, could you give a style orthographic cleaning to the article Noam Bettan that adjusts to the orthographic style convection Acartonadooopo (talk) 04:30, 1 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello, I've had a look through the article and done some copy edits. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 05:56, 1 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks, In this article I have a problem with user that links me, with the musical artist. I do not know Noam Bettan nor do I have a friendship with him. Could you help me tell that user that I don't know Noam Bettan. --Acartonadooopo (talk) 12:36, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not really aware of the situation so I don't know what I could contribute. With regard to the template that was previously on the page, I think that's usually added when someone feels that the article is too promotional in tone, so continued work to expand/refine the page in ways that preserve neutral points of view should solve any concerns. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 19:44, 1 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello Sunshineisles2, The user who template for article Noam Bettan, in an unusual and inconsonant manner, opened a deletion query for the article by the renowned doctor and researcher Paul S. Berry, an article created 17 years ago. and you can see the history of doing the same procedure in many more articles. What action do I take to remove the template from the Noam Bettan article? Acartonadooopo (talk) 20:52, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * A deletion template can't be removed from an article once it's added. The discussion has to play out. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 15:37, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

now they want to delete Noam Bettan's article with a deletion query. --Acartonadooopo (talk) 16:36, 5 April 2024 (UTC)