User Talk: Isaidnoway

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

{{WikiGnome topicon}}

{{Talk header preload|noarchive=yes}}
{{Quote box
|align= center
|border = 3px
|bgcolor = #f3f1f1
|quote = {{font|text=It is more fun to talk with someone who doesn't use long, difficult words but rather short, easy words like: "What about lunch?" {{Spaces|2}}— A. A. Milne ↗|font=Times New Roman|size=17px}}
|source =
|width = 75%
}}



{{bots|deny=DPL bot}}
{{clear}}
{{hr|3}}
{{Archives|collapsed=yes|image=none|search=no|box-width=10em|style=}} 80px ↗{{Spaces|8}}40px ↗{{Spaces|8}} 80px ↗
{{hr|3}}

Barnstar

{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" | 100px ↗

|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Barnstar of Good Humor'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For an on point sock description that made me laugh Sariel Xilo (talk) 02:05, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
|}

Orphaned non-free image File:Way out west pansy clip.ogg

{{atopg}}
35px|text-top|left|⚠|link= ↗ Thanks for uploading ''':File:Way out west pansy clip.ogg ↗'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free 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) 03:48, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
{{abot}}

Golden Girls merge

Hi there, I had my eye on the strange merge situation at The Golden Girls ↗, and was hoping someone smarter than me would come along and fix it. Thank you! I notice that the same user ↗ has set up some redirects that also look odd/wrong - this is out of my wheelhouse, so I'm hesitant to undo them myself, but would you mind taking a look? Cheers, Jessicapierce (talk) 21:28, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Proposed deletion ↗ of :List of urban areas in Norway by population ↗

left|link=|alt=Notice|48px| ↗

The article :List of urban areas in Norway by population ↗ has been proposed for deletion ↗. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process ↗, but other deletion process ↗es exist. In particular, articles for deletion ↗ allows discussion to reach consensus ↗ for deletion based on established criteria ↗.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion ↗ of the article at any time. Logoshimpo (talk) 12:09, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

:{{u|Logoshimpo}} - No idea why you are notifying me, I did not create the article.— ''Isaidnoway'' ''(talk)'' 12:32, 24 January 2026 (UTC)
::it's now at a.f.d. Logoshimpo (talk) 12:40, 24 January 2026 (UTC)
:::{{u|Logoshimpo}} - OK, that's great, still no idea why you notified me in the first place, like I said, I did not create the article.— ''Isaidnoway'' ''(talk)'' 12:52, 24 January 2026 (UTC)
::::i notified all the authors.. Logoshimpo (talk) 07:13, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
:::::I am not an author of the article. I fixed a cite error in the article, so there was no reason to notify me.— ''Isaidnoway'' ''(talk)'' 07:22, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Maria Kulikovska

Hi Isaidnoway. Would mind taking a look at :Maria Kulikovska ↗ once again? You draftified it the other day, but it's creator has moved it back to the mainspace. More citations have been added but many of them just appear to be gallery/exhibition notices mentioning Kulikovska among other artists or citations to the Kulikovska's own website. I'm not seeing anything that might be considered critical secondary reviews of her work. The article is a formatting mess too but that can be cleaned up; it's :WP:NARTIST ↗ which might be a problem. An article can't really be draftified more than once per :WP:DRAFTOBJECT ↗; so, I guess that leaves AfD if there's really nothing to indicate the subject is Wikipedia notable. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:18, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Outlawz ↗

25px|alt=|link= ↗ Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have '''automatically detected''' that this edit ↗ performed by you, on the page :Outlawz ↗, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A URL ↗ error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters contains an invalid URL. Please edit the article to add the valid URL. ([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Outlawz&action=edit&minor=minor&summary=Fixing+reference+error+raised+by+%5B%5BUser%3AQwerfjkl%20(bot)%7CQwerfjkl%20(bot)%5D%5D Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:Qwerfjkl%20(bot)/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F1341434295%7COutlawz%5D%5D Ask for help])

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive ↗, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/Botpreload&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/Boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20Isaidnoway&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d={{FULLPAGENAMEE:Outlawz}}&preloadparams%5b%5d=1341434295 report it to my operator].
Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 05:31, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

A message from ThatTrainGuy1945

Hello, what do you think about the European Union Ethics Body article? I'm still not sure it's not AI generated by the editor who claims to be a researcher. Cheers,

🚂ThatTrainGuy1945 Peep peep! 12:56, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

A message from MurdoMondane

Thank you for your clarification on why two sections of the Maurice_Benyovszky ↗ article were removed. It is a shame that ''Nikkimaria'' did not think to provide any reason for the initial deletion – that would have saved a bit of trouble.

In my defence I can only say that I was not aware that '''geni.com''' had been deprecated last year, and the editing process did not alert me to it.

I do find it surprising that neither you nor ''Nikkimaria'' thought to simply remove the citation to '''geni.com''', and leave the stated facts as they were? That could so easily have been done with an editorial comment “''Citation needed''” or similar? If all factual statements without proper citations on Wikipedia were dealt with in such a baby-and-bathwater manner, then there really would not be much left. Worse, the removal of these two paragraphs rendered nonsensical a point made in the subsequent paragraph (about "two sets of siblings").

Do you have any views on this? Happy to discuss.

In any event, I have now re-instated the two paragraphs, but this time with different citation sources, which I trust will be acceptable.

MurdoMondane (talk) 15:45, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Changes you reverted

Hello @Isaidnoway, I hope this message finds you well. I noticed you reverted my recent edits to the Asmau Ahmed Wikipedia page (made from a template account before I set up this one) back to an earlier version. I wanted to reach out to explain the context and see if we can work together on improving the article. I was attempting to update my biographical page with current, well-sourced information. The existing article contains several factual errors (incorrect educational background, wrong expertise and employment, and outdated career information) that I was trying to correct using reliable sources that I sited in my edits. I have come to understand that large-scale edits to biographical articles can trigger anti-vandalism systems and that's valid. Would you be open to discussing the best way to incorporate these factual updates? Thank you for your time and for helping maintain Wikipedia's quality standards. Best regards, Ozohu Ozohu (talk) 07:28, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

:I left a message on your talk page. Wikipedia's guidelines strongly discourage COI editing. The safest way to avoid it is simply to never make direct edits to live articles. That doesn't mean your contributions are unwelcome. Instead of direct editing, propose changes, get editors to review them, and ''let others make the changes''. A simplified guide to making these types of requests can be found here ↗. Best of luck.— ''Isaidnoway'' ''(talk)'' 12:40, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the cite fix on the Seat of government page

Thanks for doing that. Was juggling some editing and supper prep and missed it.

Now that I've read your User page, I've got a question: is there a warning template for tables that don't contain text to give their info? In a lot of articles relating to government policy choices (new legislation, new policies, etc.), elections/referendums, and so on, I've noticed that there's often a table that just uses check marks and X marks, no text. Based on your helpful explanations on your user page, I assume that's a problem for people who rely on visual reading apps? For example, check out the summary table in this article: LGBTQ rights in Canada ↗, where some of the entries are just a check mark or an X mark.

Is there a template that you know of that could be inserted in the article, requesting that text be added?

For example, I've found a warning template for colour-blind issues, for maps and sections of articles that rely on colour alone to convey information. I've inserted it in a couple of articles; the one on capital punishment is one of the worst offenders, because it uses green for abolitionist countries, and red for retentionist countries: Capital punishment by country ↗. Just wondering if there's a similar template to alert editors to the problem of using symbols alone, not words?

(There's another problem with using check marks and X marks, and that is that I think they carry a value judgment, which is contrary to NPOV. When I got tests back from a teacher, a red X was clearly not a good thing. I don't think we should use those icons to report on elections, referenda, government policies, etc.)

Best wishes, Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:51, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

:{{U|Mr Serjeant Buzfuz}} - sometimes you can just change out the check marks and X marks with another template from this list ↗, which include text. In another example, for instance, this table ↗ just uses text. Hope this helps. Thanks for reaching out.— ''Isaidnoway'' ''(talk)'' 14:10, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Flags on Draft:Section_63_of_the_Bharatiya_Nyaya_Sanhita

Hey. I noticed that you recently flagged moved my article Draft:Section 63 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita ↗ to draftspace due to cite errors, unsourced paragraphs, machine-generated text and potential copyright violations. While I have added multiple new sources and solved cite errors, I was not able to solve the last two flags as the LLM was used to modify the text for encyclopaedic tone and grammatical corrections. I was under the impression that it was legal to do that. And I would like if you could point out the paragraph that has potential violation of copyright. I would like to know your opinion before resubmitting. Milan Zacria (talk) 17:10, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

:Please have a look at Wikipedia:Writing articles with large language models ↗ - Editors are permitted to use LLMs to suggest basic copyedits ↗ to their own writing, and to incorporate some of them after human review, provided the LLM does not introduce content of its own. Caution is required, because LLMs can go beyond what is asked of them and can change the meaning of the text such that it is not supported by the sources cited ↗.
:And here is the copyright violation ↗ report where you can compare for yourself the similarity between your content and the sources.— ''Isaidnoway'' ''(talk)'' 04:31, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on St Fechin's GAA ↗

25px|alt=|link= ↗ Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have '''automatically detected''' that this edit ↗ performed by you, on the page :St Fechin's GAA ↗, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL ↗ and missing title ↗ error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=St_Fechin%27s_GAA&action=edit&minor=minor&summary=Fixing+reference+error+raised+by+%5B%5BUser%3AQwerfjkl%20(bot)%7CQwerfjkl%20(bot)%5D%5D Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:Qwerfjkl%20(bot)/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F1350755722%7CSt%20Fechin's%20GAA%5D%5D Ask for help])

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive ↗, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/Botpreload&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/Boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20Isaidnoway&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d={{FULLPAGENAMEE:St Fechin's GAA}}&preloadparams%5b%5d=1350755722 report it to my operator].
Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 20:57, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Consensus discussion on List of suicides ↗

Hi. Editors have having a discussion on whether to split this article into separate articles or keep it as one. Me and the other editors presented some arguments for and against in a section that isn't too big here ↗, and then the "surevy" of editors voicing their opinions is in a section below that, which is here ↗. Can you participate? I've been working very hard on this article since 2009, and would appreciate a wide swath of opinions. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:27, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

Reverted changes

Hi @, you recently changed my edit on my village Chadra Lebanon by re-puttting the references back to 2010 while i updated it from the latest news source may 2025. As for The History and religious page, I mentioned that those are not 100% accurate but that's talks in the village. I was born in thie village and I Know the traditions and the talks. Please before making any further edits reply here. User:Zivagoo|Zivagoo (talk) 17:04, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

:{{U|Zivagoo}} - Facebook is not a reliable source, so I will be removing that content sourced to Facebook, and all the other unsourced content you added will be removed to.
:{{tq|As for The History and religious page, I mentioned that those are not 100% accurate but that's talks in the village. I was born in thie village and I Know the traditions and the talks.}} - you are not a reliable source of information, and original research is not allowed on Wikipedia. I suggest you familiarize yourself with our polices and guidelines, before you edit that article again, or any other article.— ''Isaidnoway'' ''(talk)'' 03:20, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
::As I already mentioned, I didn't say they are true I said "according to local traditions" witch doesn't need citations because their isn't any reliable source other than the people of this village. As for the politics feel free to see the sites of the free patriotic movement and the site of Chadra or Facebook for yourself. My source for the history is chat gpt. And as for the politics, it's mentioned in https://old.lcps-lebanon.org/publications/1613726724-lcps_elections_north_1.pdf for after 2025 and https://x.com/elebfpm/status/1983622559896891422. I will be restoring the politics part and will be waiting for your answer for the religious part Zivagoo (talk) 13:44, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
:::{{tq|I said "according to local traditions" witch doesn't need citations because their isn't any reliable source other than the people of this village.}}
:::Wikipedia's content is determined by published information rather than editors' beliefs, experiences, or ''"the people of this village''". Even if you are sure something is true, '''it must have been published in a reliable source before you can add it.''' So yes, you are required to add inline citations to any content you add and/or change. Facebook is not a reliable source. If you continue to add unsourced content to articles, after being warned not to, it may result in a loss of your editing privileges.— ''Isaidnoway'' ''(talk)'' 17:52, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
::::You didn't answer to the politics one and please stop threatening that I may lose editing privileges because I'm doing my best relying on Google and chat gpt to update pages in Wikipedia I'm interested in and basically I'm helping and there's no harm with a simple mistake! Zivagoo (talk) 17:57, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
:::::Look, I've already told you that any content you add and/or change '''requires an inline citation to a published reliable source'''. If you disagree with that policy, then change the policy.— ''Isaidnoway'' ''(talk)'' 21:03, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

We are, as we've stated...

former major university faculty, likewise having formerly registered here, with—at time of WP:retiring ↗ (and not counting thousands of edits since)—more than 105 edits while registered, tens of pages created, edits on a number of unique pages numbering in the low thousands, with edits lacking edit summaries numbering less than 4%, and the number of blocked hours very small (given the decades of our work since Sanger and Wales migrated us here from [[Nupedia ↗).

The only conflict of interest we have to disclose is that our editorial interests conflict with any editor that does not have high standards in applying WP:RELIABLE ↗, WP:INDEPENDENT ↗, WP:PRIMARY ↗, WP:VERIFY ↗, and WP:OR ↗, e.g., any who believe that an article's appearance is more important, fundamentally, that warning readers and other editors regarding the content independence and reliability problems that exist, at any moment, within our articles.

Likewise, our interests conflict with any that actively edit in support of the notion that use of primary sources for information is generally non-problematic (e.g., not WP:OR ↗, contrary to that guideline), or, in BLP articles, that using self-generated/disclosed information by a title subject—regardless of whether that autobiography is directly or indirectly accessed, disguised or undisguised—constitutes rigourous submission to WP:VERIFY ↗ (in contradiction to the plain reading of that WP policy document). In that latter category we include all of the various ways that the successful promote themselves, by providing their own perspective of themselves (e.g., to their interviewers, publishers, employers, those inviting them to speak, etc.).

We retired from here (WP) so as to waste no further time in contentious contexts. If consensus were to rule here, it would be bad enough; but generally, in our experience, no real attempt is made to reach (or even seek) consensus when editors do not agree. What we perceive generally rules here (our experience, granted) is the will of the most attentive, adamant, and forceful digital, editorial persona. And against such, we will not fight (in edit summaries or otherwise). We will state our case, and let the inevitable winner, win. Cheers, last from us. ~2026-27024-39 ↗ (talk) 17:14, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
:Postscript. We love Lou Reed ↗. ~2026-27024-39 ↗ (talk) 22:08, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Help for an article?

Hello there. Sorry to bother!

I found you through looking at the revision history for CTO ↗ and was wondering if you could improve an article I've re-written? Article in question is this one ↗ which if you see in the talk page, heavily used AI in their contents. I did the best I could to keep the good sources intact while also folowing other c-position articles. I just think I've left too much for such a "important" role?

It's just a very broad topic. y'know?


PeepeeDino (talk) 13:56, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

A message from ~2026-28564-53

~2026-28564-53 ↗ (talk) 14:16, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
Hello,
I noticed that my recent edits to the Franzi page were reverted, and I would appreciate understanding the reason so I can better align future contributions with Wikipedia guidelines.
The intention was simply to improve and expand the historical information regarding the company and its products, using a more neutral and encyclopedic tone. If the issue concerns sourcing or wording, I would be very happy to revise the content accordingly.
Thank you in advance for your time and guidance.

:According to the reason in the edit summary ↗ left by User:Justlettersandnumbers, it was reverted for --- massive addition of WP:promotional ↗ content, poorly sourced and badly translated without attribution from it.wp. Maybe you should take some time to review Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines ↗, before making any further edits. Thanks.— ''Isaidnoway'' ''(talk)'' 19:03, 11 May 2026 (UTC)