User Talk: Pol098

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

{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo = old(365d)
| archive = User talk:Pol098/Archive %(counter)d
| counter = 4
| maxarchivesize = 150K
| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}
| minthreadstoarchive = 2
| minthreadsleft = 5
}}
{{Archives}}

Guidelines

Wikipedia has many guidelines, some contradictory, which are not to be taken as rules. In case of doubt I use WP:BRD ↗ and WP:BOLD ↗, sometimes WP:IAR ↗.

Thanks for being a top WP medical contributor!

<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr">
:''please help translate this message into the local language''
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | 100px ↗
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Cure Award'''
|-
| style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | In 2013 you were one of the top 300 medical editors ↗ across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you so much for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date medical information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do!
|}

We are wondering about the educational background of our top medical editors. Would you please complete a '''quick 5-question survey ↗'''? (please only fill this out if you received the award)

Thanks again :) --Ocaasi ↗, Doc James ↗ and the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation ↗
</div>

Addition to Savile's death section

https://www.scotsman.com/news/uk-news/sir-jimmy-savile-the-medallion-man-with-a-heart-of-gold-1655782

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/pneumonia-alert-as-sir-jimmy-admitted-to-hospital-1920193

https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/jimmy-saviles-chilling-comments-big-26648447

I wonder if you can add the following to the death section, something worded along the lines of “In late September 2011, Savile went into hospital with pneumonia. Although he was initally reportedly recovering (second source), two weeks later, Savile was not feeling well (first source). In an interview he conducted four days before he died, Savile acknowledged his health had worsened, “I've got a bounce back-ability, but this time I don't seem to be bouncing back” (third source). He was found dead on October 29. This was discussed on the talk page of the article but I think it could elaborate as to when Savile grew ill and died. 78.150.15.34 ↗ (talk) 18:16, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

:You can do this yourself, even without a Wikipedia account. You need to make sure that what you say is supported by the sources. To insert a a reference, add <nowiki><ref>details of the reference</ref></nowiki> after the text supported. The URLs you list become, in a form you can copy and paste:

<nowiki><ref>{{cite news| last=Ferguson | first=Brian | title=Sir Jimmy Savile: The medallion man with a heart of gold | newspaper=The Scotsman | date=29 October 2011 | url=https://www.scotsman.com/news/uk-news/sir-jimmy-savile-the-medallion-man-with-a-heart-of-gold-1655782}}</ref></nowiki>

<nowiki><ref>{{cite news|author=| title=Pneumonia alert as Sir Jimmy admitted to hospital | newspaper=Yorkshire Post | date=1 October 2011 | url=https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/pneumonia-alert-as-sir-jimmy-admitted-to-hospital-1920193}}</ref></nowiki>

<nowiki><ref>{{cite news| last=O'Sullivan | first=Kyle | title=Jimmy Savile's chilling comments in Big Brother house that won't air again | newspaper=Daily Mirror ↗ | date=6 April 2022 | url=https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/jimmy-saviles-chilling-comments-big-26648447}}</ref></nowiki>

:Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 18:34, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;flex-basis: 40px">40px ↗</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''2025 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2025|end}}-1 day}}. 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 2025 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2025|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 18 November 2025 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>

Yasser Abu Shabab ↗

Hi {{u|Pol098}}, you didn't write in your edit summary that you reverted my edit tidying up citations. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yasser_Abu_Shabab&diff=prev&oldid=1325876093 ↗ Achmad Rachmani (talk) 00:09, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

:Sorry, inadvertent and unintentional. My purpose was to do with ambush and killing wording, and your edit, which was fine, got caught up. Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 11:53, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about Emerald Expositions, which you started

Hi Pol098. Thank you for your work on Emerald Expositions ↗. Another editor, Ceyockey, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol ↗ and left the following comment:

{{Bq|1=I'm proposing this for deletion via the PROD pathway based on insufficient independent support. --User:Ceyockey (<small>''talk to me''</small>) 01:19, 6 January 2026 (UTC)}}

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{code|<nowiki>{{Re|</nowiki>Ceyockey<nowiki>}}</nowiki>}}. <small>(Message delivered via the Page Curation ↗ tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)</small>

:{{code|<nowiki>{{Re|</nowiki>Ceyockey<nowiki>}}</nowiki>}}I merely created the page as a redirect and have no interest in it, or knowledge about the company. It could maybe be reverted to a redirect, or deleted; I have no opinion. Pol098 (talk) 14:23, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Flat White

Firstly, thanks for finding a reliable source for the origin of the term Flat White ↗ (to refer to an espresso-based coffee drink) in England. A couple of editors, including me, have tried to add this previously, but it has always been deleted by others as "original research". You are probably also aware that the British Film "Danger by my Side"(1963) includes a scene where a character goes into an espresso bar, orders a flat white, and we see a character playing staff member make the drink with an espresso machine and milk. I'm not sure why you deleted my addition of the retrieval date in the source though. My understanding is that this is required for technical reasons. It would also be wise to archive the page because OED may well change their webpage and no longer include the relevant detail. Adding the detail in invisible text won't help in verification if the webpage is altered. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 10:20, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

:I don't know much about flat white coffee, went to the article to find out. Regarding retrieval date: it is {{Em|not}} required for technical reasons. It is often useful to the reader to know when a changeable source was retrieved, but is pointless for a stable source. Guidelines do not recommend a retrieval date for a stable source for which a publication date is stated - you can find this somewhere in the documentation for the {{tl|citation}} or other cite templates. To add my personal opinion, the date that someone happened to look up a stable source is just adding clutter to absolutely no purpose to the reader, particularly so if an archive date is also given. Citations that give a (useless) retrieval date but not the (useful) known publication date are particularly obnoxious. OED is extremely unlikely to remove the first date the term is attested, though they might find an earlier date - I personally see no point in providing archived links to dictionary definitions, they are just clutter for the user. Anyway, you're free to disagree with my opinions and edit accordingly, I don't see any point in going to war. But I do recommend, if you choose to add the retrieval date, that you also include the (not very useful) date that the term was added to the OED. I often add non-obvious information on sources in hidden comments to help future editors, in the same way that Wikipedia suggests "author=<nowiki>"</nowiki> to save editors from having to look up information. In summary, we disagree, which is OK. But I do state as a fact that guidelines do not always require a retrieval date, and the reasons for using it when recommended are not technical. Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 17:34, 15 January 2026 (UTC) (added later) I've looked into the film, and added it to the flat white article, edited the film's article, and told the OED about it - I don't know if mention in a film qualifies as attestation. Pol098 (talk) 22:08, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
::I have slightly changed your wording in the lead. There is no evidence that the flat white referred to by Schaeffer or shown in the film is the same drink as the modern flat white: ie "a double espresso (50 ml; 1.8 imp fl oz; 1.7 US fl oz) and about 130 ml (4.6 imp fl oz; 4.4 US fl oz) of steamed milk with a 5 mm (0.20 in) layer of microfoam." Nor is there any evidence that the term was in continuous use in England since the 1960s. The term wasn't in use when I lived there in the 1980s and I went to a lot of coffee shops. You could get a cappuccino, a café latte or a café crème, but not a flat white as we know it today. The term in the 1960s probably just referred to an espresso with warmed milk (ie, flat, not frothed like a cappuccino.) Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 13:40, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

UCKG edits

The Universal Church of the Kingdom of God ↗ page appears to have been edited to make the organization look more positive, possibly by someone with connections to the subject (and a repeat editor, judging by similar grammar and spelling in edit reasons of the editor and two others). The main description in particular appears to have ben heavily affected. I am notifying you as you have edited the page in the past, and would like some help reverting these edits. Burgerolivealpha1 (talk) 20:00, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

:I've noticed that, and intended to do something about it, though haven't got down to it because it looks like a big job. Maybe, rather than getting into detailed editing, the best thing is to revert to a previous version and re-add any of the reverted material that is supported? Having several people involved without agreeing on methods is a recipe for chaos, though. Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 20:11, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

::Thanks. I also believe the page should have some sort of temporary lock applied until the problem (at least temporarily) subsides. --Burgerolivealpha1 (talk) 20:21, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

:::I agree with your reversion. I've added a link, in relation to UK politics, that has a lot of material relevant to other sections. Pol098 (talk) 22:13, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of match-fixing incidents ↗, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Consumer watchdog ↗ was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Pretium Partners assistance please

Hello {{u|Pol098}}, pleasure to meet you.
I am {{u|B for Pretium|the declared paid editor}} for Pretium Partners ↗. I noted your previous contributions and involvement on articles within the financial industry. Might you be willing to review my edit request ↗ on the Talk page of Pretium's article? My suggestions are crafted to add more detail to the Background section of the article and expand that content. If you approve of these changes, I am happy to implement and save you some time. Looking forward to hearing from you. Thank you, B for Pretium (talk) 15:20, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

":Magnesium aluminum silicate ↗" listed at Redirects for discussion ↗

30px ↗
The redirect <span class="plainlinks">[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Magnesium_aluminum_silicate&redirect=no Magnesium aluminum silicate]</span> has been listed at redirects for discussion ↗ to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines ↗. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{section link|1=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 June 2#Magnesium aluminum silicate}}''' until a consensus is reached.  <span style="font-family:Segoe Script"> Jay</span><span style="font-size:115%"> 💬</span> 03:49, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Nomination of :Funga ↗ for merging into Mycobiota ↗

<div class="afd-notice">
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0;">48px|alt=|link= ↗</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article :Funga ↗ is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗ or whether it should be merged ↗ into Mycobiota ↗.

The article is being discussed at '''Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Funga  (2nd nomination) ↗''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines ↗.

Users may still edit the article ↗, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the AfD notice from the article until the discussion is closed.</div> Kirby123456 (talk) 14:34, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

July 2026

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Please do not remove content or templates ↗ from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at :Folarin Balogun ↗, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary ↗. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted ↗. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Giant Snowman 19:51, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

:This is nonsense. My edit was intended to delete a reference duplicated in a string of consecutive references, and to merge a repeated references, a minor edit done correctly, which was carelessly reverted by you ↗. Afterwards, and with intervening edits, I think I managed accidentally to revert correct edits in other places because the situation was getting complicated.
:In detail: the original text was "most recently by Zinedine Zidane in 2006.[75][76][77]" References 75 and 77 were identical, duplicates for the same text; I deleted the second one, trivially and quite correctly. I see you have, to berate me, rather sneakily reinstated this reference, but moved away from its first incorrect, duplicated invocation, now to support "outrage by American fans and caused a media campaign of 'Free Flo'", which it doesn't support well, and is better supported by the existing [77]. which indeed says "He pumped a fist as the fans cheered. 'Free Flo!'" (numbers may change with later edits, of course). In my opinion the second invocation of the Borden reference [75] is at best unnecessary, at worst wrong, but can be left in.
:Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 21:05, 8 July 2026 (UTC)
::The fact remains that you are making changes without explanation, removing references and marking them as minor, and accusing editors of not engaging brain! <span style="font-family:Segoe Script"> Jay</span> 02:11, 9 July 2026 (UTC)
:::Minor changes, such as merging references, or minor choice of words, I tag as minor without necessarily summarising; I try to summarise anything non-minor. In this particular interaction, I did not remove anything except repeated consecutive references which were identical, something I always do and which has zero effect and is truly minor. I rarely suggest that editors have erred, but in this case not noticing that references are consecutive and identical - repeated - although I actually pointed it out does not suggest that any care has been taken. So none of these facts remain. I am quite happy to have errors pointed out, and try to correct - but there's nothing to correct in this case, what I did (save for possible errors inadvertently reverting valid changes to text) is what I will continue doing. If you want to cite a case of, for example, a reference I have incorrectly removed, provide a diff. I do of course make mistakes, but not here. Best wishes Pol098 (talk) 11:04, 9 July 2026 (UTC)