User Talk: GlowstoneUnknown

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

February 2026

I fixed the note to clarify it better for next time. Thanks. Happy editing! Altanner1991 (talk) 14:06, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

{| style="background-color: var(--background-color-success-subtle, #fdffe7); border: 1px solid var(--border-color-success, #fceb92); color: var(--color-base, #202122);"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | 100px ↗
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Editor's Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | It's great to see someone helping maintain articles at Democratic Party (United States) ↗. Keep up the great work! Altanner1991 (talk) 14:35, 18 February 2026 (UTC)
|}

Results table

Hello. Re this creation of a results table ↗, if not all the parties receiving votes are listed, you either need to use 'ivotes' (to prevent the percentages appearing) or add an 'Other parties' row with the total of the other parties. Otherwise the percentages (automatically calculated from the votes column) is going to be wrong. Also, all results tables need a source! Cheers, Number 57 ↗ 00:29, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

:Yeah, sorry about that, I had to leave my PC in the middle of creating the table, I probably should've <nowiki>'d it in the meantime. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 00:31, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Source review for Republican Party

I'm trying to do a source review for the Republican Party, but have no clue how. Here's what I found in the meantime ↗. All describe the GOP as "far-right" as far as I can tell. I haven't found anything else besides original research to imply otherwise. Pippa Norris and V-DEM are the most convincing to me. For the moment: the article misrepresents sources calling it "authoritarian populist", "far-right", and describing demographic groups within it as "rignt-wing" to imply that the worke reject the notion the party is far-right. Jollyrime (talk) 17:32, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

:Could you do this, @GlowstoneUnknown? Jollyrime (talk) 00:56, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Incorrect revision

Why are you reverting PSD’s Wikipedia page ideologies and political position? If you view any source, including the Romanian page, they are Pro-European and Socially Conservative. Odurtsf (talk) 15:30, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

:If you have non-Wikipedia sources explicitly supporting the changes made to the infobox parameter, please add them to the page. As for Pro–European, that is a policy position and not a distinct ideology. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 15:32, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

May 2026

30px|alt=Stop icon ↗ '''You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war ↗, according to the reverts you've made to :Restore Britain ↗.''' This means that you are repeatedly reverting content back to how you think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree. Once it is known that there is a disagreement, users are expected to collaborate ↗ with others, avoid editing disruptively ↗, and try to reach a consensus ↗ – rather than repeatedly reverting the changes made by other users.

Important points to note:
# {{strong|Edit warring is disruptive behavior ↗ – regardless of how many reverts you have made;}}
# {{strong|Do not engage in edit warring – even if you believe that you are right.}}
You need to discuss the disagreement on the article's talk page ↗ and work towards a revision that represents consensus among everyone involved. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard ↗ or seek dispute resolution ↗ if discussions reach an impasse. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection ↗. {{strong|If you continue to engage in edit warring, you may be blocked ↗ from editing.}} ''WP:ONUS ↗ is a core policy. I strongly suggest you self revert.'' Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:41, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

:Thank you for self reverting. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:34, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2021 Peruvian general election ↗, links pointing to the disambiguation pages Pasco ↗, Apurímac ↗ and Madre de Dios ↗ were added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 22:42, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Labor Left § Should this faction be considered left-wing? ↗

20px|link=|alt= ↗ You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Labor Left § Should this faction be considered left-wing? ↗.  Qwerty123M (talk) 10:28, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

WP:LLM revert concern

The content you are reverting on Together for Peru ↗ does not look to be in violation of WP:LLM. Please provide reasoning for reverting sourced content. Jsaskeo (talk) 06:29, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

:The references literally say "source=chatgpt.com", it's LLM-generated content, which is prohibited. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 06:31, 7 July 2026 (UTC)