W
Active Editors
Back to Profile

User Talk: Ponor

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

{{bots|deny=DPL bot}}

Welcome


Hello, '''Ponor''', and welcome ↗ to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions ↗. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the '''Wikipedia Teahouse ↗''', where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type '''<code><nowiki>{{helpme}}</nowiki></code>''' and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian ↗! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;. If you have any questions, see the help pages ↗, add a question to the village pump ↗ or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! <!-- Template:Welcome2 --> Cheers, '''<span style="color:#191960">Baffle☿''gab''</span>''' 03:13, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy


{{GOCEtb|article=Angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy|sign=Cheers, '''<span style="color:#191960">Baffle☿''gab''</span>''' 04:58, 7 July 2020 (UTC)}}
Hi Ponor; I've done my best to c/e this article but I found it quite confusing because of the mathematics and the technical jargon so feel free to correct my edits if I've messed anything up. I've tagged it with {{tl|jargon}}} and {{tl|refimprove}}. Good luck with your planned GA nom. Cheers, '''<span style="color:#191960">Baffle☿''gab''</span>''' 05:05, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
:Hey Baffle gab1978, I really appreciate your help. I had fun reading your commit comments, and I hope you'll recover from the pain I've caused you :D soon. It's hard to avoid being too technical for a general reader in these things, but then - what are the chances that someone out of the field would even be reading all this. Thanks for pointing out that some sections are missing citations, I'll see what I can do about it. I'll also try to find proper links where they're now pointing to missing pages. Once again, many thanks, you did a great job. Ponor (talk) 05:34, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
::No worries; it does seem unlikely a non-expert would read such an article but we don't know; students and amateur scientists might not have the expertise and mathematics skills of a professional. Photoemission spectroscopy ↗ is an easy-to-read article without much reliance on mathematics, as are plenty of other science articles. Good luck with the article; I'm glad you enjoyed my silly edit summaries. :) Cheers. '''<span style="color:#191960">Baffle☿''gab''</span>''' 06:46, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
:::Hi Baffle gab and ponor! I can confirm as a very amateur student it takes quite a while to understand what is going on but I am trying my best! im out of my depth here lol Elwynn04 (talk) 14:52, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Graphene and PAHs



Hi, you claimed that there is no relation between graphene and PAHs. In fact there is more than just a relation. There is no rational distinction between the two concepts: a graphene flake is just a large PAH, and the PAHs of chemists are just tiny graphene fragments. The atomic structure and the bonding are exactly the same -- apart from edge effects that '''gradually''' become less important as the size of the molecule increases. The "single-double bond resonance" is not real, in either case: it is just a pedagogical/formal trick that chemists use to "explain" the bonding of aromatic structures in terms of the simplistic "covalent bond" model.<br/>Likewise, graphene and nanotubes are very closely related concepts, with basically the same bonding and local structure, and many common properties. And it is useful to view fullerenes and glassy carbon as graphene with structural defects...<br/>All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 16:56, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
:Hi Jorge, thanks for reaching out to me. I think there's a huge difference - graphene is "infinite" (in quantum world, infinite equals grater-than-13 nm), it has a well defined momentum/wave vector quantum number, Bloch theorem is valid for graphene and not for PAHs. PAHs are molecules and have all energy levels quantised, graphene's energy levels form a band. I don't see how this "infinite PAH" analogy can help, because all our experience with PAHs is for finite, small PAHs. What electronic properties of a 5-ring PAH can extrapolated to an infinite PAH? Do PAHs have Dirac electrons (that's what makes graphene famous)? Calling graphene a PAH is also misleding, as it makes it a hydrocarbon, which graphene is not. I must say (which proves nothing) - I've never in my 14 years of dealing with graphene seen it considered a giant PAH. Not sure I understand how graphene, a 2d crystal, and glassy carbon are related either. Glassy_carbon ↗ here has no mention of graphene. Nanotubes are more similar to graphene nanoribbons, but are not graphene. I left a mention of this similarity in the intro. I thought the first section is not the place to discuss this any further. I've just started editing the article, there's still lots to do. To begin with, the article is way too long. There's a lot of advertising, meaningless sentences, paper summaries that are out of context, false or overhyped claims... So please, stay tuned, and correct me wherever you like. Ponor (talk) 18:31, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
::Hi again. I have no intention of editing graphene ↗ anytime soon, but I would ask you to reconsider the connection to PAHs.<br/> Chemists have synthesized PAHs much larger than the "classical" 7-ring coronene ↗ (that occurs pure as a mineral). IIRC, the record a few years ago was over 100 rings, namely a roundish graphene nanoflake some 10-15 rings across; and it showed the expected progession towars graphene properties. If you are interested in graphene, you definitely should check that out.<br/>The continuous electronic bands of infinite graphene are the result of multiple splitting of the discrete molecular levels of PAHs, the same way that "continuous" bands of metals and semiconductors arise from the splitting of discrete atomic and molecular levels. In a 100-atom PAH the gaps between those levels should be so small that they can better be treated as a band.<br/>While "theoretical" graphene is infinite, every physical sample will be finite, and its edges will be inevitably terminated by various chemical groups -- like those large PAHs. Some potential application of graphene, like microelectronics and composites, will require flakes that are only a few hundred rings across -- that is, well in the range of chemist's PAHs.<br/>And I bet that infinite graphene has some properties strikingly different from those of any finite flake, no matter how large. For example, an infinite sheet can be moving parallel to itself at a fixed finite speed, and that motion would be very stable. Would the speed and direction of motion be quantized, say in a magnetic field or under monochromatic radiation? What would be the electronic properties of this "kinetic graphene"?<br/>The same questions could be asked of theoretical (infinite) nanotubes, that can be translating and/or rotating at constant speed. And those "kinetic isomers" may be observable in fullerenes and large toroidal nanotubes...<br/> All the best,--Jorge Stolfi (talk) 16:12, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
:::Hi @Jorge Stolfi. I don't mind having PAHs mentioned in the article, especially if there is a chemical way of making them... big (10 nm perhaps?), but I don't think they should be in the lead. Few reasons for that: they are not mainstream and are invisible in the graphene market (production, publications); saying graphene is the same as a large PAH may lead to the wrong impression that graphene is a hydrocarbon; a 100 atom PAH (this is only a few nm big) has some 30-40 atoms around its edges, a typical micron-sized graphene is at least 20M atoms, but only 0.02M are around the edges (2d-bulk obviously dominates in response to physical probes) - until we see how their physical properties compare, we can't say they are equal or extrapolate from PAHs to graphene; regular few-ring PAHs are more like graphene nanoribbons ↗ (no mention of PAHs in that article), but too small in both directions to attach electrodes and measure e-transport; there is no mention of graphene in Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon ↗ (I'd expect some reciprocality). I was working on some other articles, but will keep them in mind when I come back to graphene again. Feel free to remind me again. Best wishes, Ponor (talk) 17:13, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
::::@Jorge Stolfi
::::@Amitchell125
::::@Bosnia (Džanić Surname )
::::@Wik - The PF Archivist
::::Ponor, thanks for your feedback; I believe you are in Chechnya, or Bosnia. I am in America. It is a country in North America. Have you ever visited? A lot of companies that I have worked for, outsource our operations to the Ukraine!
::::Anyways, you indicated the image of Ed Ricketts on my page is a copyright violation. Thanks for pointing that out. In the form, I suggested it is my own work. I hope we can work together, again! Jorge, I recommend Ponor for anything .png or gif or even image based.
::::The other thing to consider, is to recommend what the other person can do as "a workaround." I pointed out on my own page the image is currently used by Wikepedia on Ed Ricketts page. Since copyright is about ownership, its important to point out that no one owns the image on the internet, however, the hard copy, could be owned. I do not own it. So again,
::::Thanks,
::::My best,
::::Windwardroad. Equestrian Windwardroad (talk). 15:09, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Your GA ↗ nomination of Angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy ↗


Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy ↗ you nominated for GA ↗-status according to the criteria ↗. 20px ↗ This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. <!-- Template:GANotice --> <small>Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125</small> -- Amitchell125 (talk) 20:40, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Your GA ↗ nomination of Angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy ↗


The article Angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy ↗ you nominated as a good article ↗ has failed 20px ↗; see Talk:Angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy ↗ for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. <!-- Template:GANotice result=fail --> <small>Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125</small> -- Amitchell125 (talk) 20:02, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

ARPES


Hi Ponor, I have put a request in to amend the name of the article, see ARPES's '''talk page ↗''' for details and where you can add a comment. Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 13:38, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Question


Hi {{ping|Ponor}} Hüfner on p. 4 states the photoelectric equation (<math>E_k=h\nu-\phi-E_B</math>), but this differes from the Principle section in the article (<math>E_k=h\nu-E_B</math>). Have I misunderstood something here? Amitchell125 (talk) 14:14, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
:Hi @Amitchell125, thanks for your question. I was unsure what to do about this myself. I even left a comment in the article for those who might want to challenge it. When photoemission is done on atoms and molecules, <math>E_k=h\nu-E_B</math>. That's what I found in Photoemission spectroscopy ↗ and decided to keep it. Solid state physicists like to define <math>E_B</math> with respect to the Fermi level (because they can read it off their spectra); but if you add that much energy to a bound electron in a solid, it won't be freed, it'll still remain bound. I believe Huefner has a long footnote about this convention. In the end it doesn't matter. The formula <math>E_k=h\nu-E_B</math> helps avoid discussing the surface work function too early in the article, and is more general. Later on we do explain the other convention. More and more people label their axes in terms of E-E<sub>F</sub> instead of E<sub>B</sub> to avoid this confusion. Ponor (talk) 14:40, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
:: Thanks for that, and I understand now. Perhaps a quick note at this stage in the article would help those readers who know about work function (all British 18-year-olds studying physics). Amitchell125 (talk) 16:15, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks!



Oof thank you for your diagram in the page ionization energies ↗. Bruh I've been merely inferring the exceptions, and have you tried to count repeatedly and alternately? Tis hard work. Anyways thank you very muchhhh :>>>! Ice bear johny (talk) 14:44, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
:Thanks for your hard work on the article, @Ice bear johny, that's how this diagram caught my attention. You'll see me making some other changes here and there. For example, when specific elements are mentioned, it'll be good to have their atomic number listed so it's easier to look them up in these diagrams. If there is something you dislike we can discuss it and I'll revert. Ponor (talk) 14:54, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok. I agree too. Plus you are a chemist, whereas I'm just a high school student hahaha. Really appreciated your edits tho. Thanks! Ice bear johny (talk) 15:18, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Woah I can't help but commend your painstaking edits in ionization energies! Thank you really. Ice bear johny (talk) 16:41, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

About lead's IE



To be honest, after tirelessly working for 4 days about that blasted topic, i wonder really what caused lead's sudden rise in IE. I've already stated reasons as to why that's extremely weird, but if you have suggestions, feel free to edit that part/whichever part you want to improve. Like bruh, no research has any leads whatsoever. And my parents are grinding me to move on ;-;. Thanks po! Ice bear johny (talk) 15:38, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Wait, I've read an answer in quora tho, which states that lead's IE is caused by 4-hedral symmetry. I kinda believe him, as he's a hitherto physics researcher and made a book. Ice bear johny (talk) 15:42, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Anyways, imma move on first to another topic. Cheers professor! <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding unsigned ↗ comment added by Ice bear johny (talk • contribs ↗) 15:43, 13 September 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:{{Ping|Ice bear johny}}I don't get the "former independent physics researcher" (?!) argument; whatever that is, he's more likely talking about orbital symmetry of a single atom than about crystals. Quora is not a reliable source, nor are any other forums, so please be careful when citing them. I will, for now, leave those references, but we have to try to find better ones: books, review papers, peer-reviewed research. The first answer on Quora is actually much better: the rules are not something set in stone, they don't really explain anything because the order of filling the orbitals is inferred from ionization energies, and not the other way round. You know there's an interplay of many factors, and in these big atoms some may play bigger roles than they do in the atoms in the same group above. I think all discussion after my comment should be removed; this is not about the crystal structure.
:Please also note that you're not allowed to copy or take screenshots and upload images from other sites. They will all be removed because you don't hold the license. You can only upload your own work. If you're graphics-inclined, I suggest learning to use Inkscape ↗. Best wishes, Ponor (talk) 16:12, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes i put copyright only for the images. Forgot i copied those verbatim. Anyways imma remove po the uh lead argument because it's all rubbish and pure inanity. Thanks for the help sir! Ice bear johny (talk) 16:47, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for thee



{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" | {{#ifeq:alt|alt|100px ↗| File:CopyeditorStar7.PNG ↗}}
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Copyeditor's Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Thank you for helping me edit Ionization energies ↗! Really appreciated your help :))) Ice bear johny meowy123 16:38, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
|}
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" | {{#ifeq:alt|alt|100px ↗|100px ↗}}
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Editor's Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Here's a second one, for good measure :))) Ice bear johny meowy123 16:38, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
|}

Community Wishlist Survey 2021



Hello! I think I haven't reached out to you regarding your idea Text layout on desktop that is not like www of 1990s ↗, which is a bit odd, because I've noticed that right away... Never mind, though. I'm glad you've shared that. This is a great idea and at first glance, it was well received by the Web ↗ team. 🙇 for that!

Have you read about the Desktop Improvements ↗? Not only you can turn the new Vector on ↗, but also (and this is actually what I'd like to ask you for) write down and share exactly what you like and what you don't. The frames of the project ↗ (to be executed in 2020-Q1&2 2021) are set now and we can't promise we'd definitely put images in the margins ''soon''. But maybe that could be taken into consideration in the more distant future (Q3&4 2021/2022?) So... share your feedback! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion ↗ nomination of :Template:X24/styles.css ↗


You aren't supposed to create subpages of sandboxes for testing purposes; these are explicitly included by the G2 ↗ speedy deletion criterion. The correct venue for experimental TemplateStyles stylesheets is Template:TemplateStyles sandbox ↗ or your userspace. * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun...</sub> 20:42, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Italians of Dubrovnik



Hi, Ponor. I should have read the source more closely before reverting. If the ref does indeed mention the exodus of Italians in 1920 (which it looks like it does), this should be mentioned in the article in the first paragraph of the Yugoslav period section. I don't think the sentence should be removed entirely because it incorrectly alluded to the post-1945 period. Your thoughts? Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 19:04, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

:Hey {{ping|Amanuensis Balkanicus}} I've noticed someone was pushing the very same sentence in a few articles on Dalmatian towns, using different sources. It's hard to tell how reliable this no-author newspaper article is, as it is hard to tell whether the ''population exchange'' following the 1920 treaty ↗ was a major event in the history of Dubrovnik. How many Italians left, were they forced to leave? Why, what led to those events? Were Croats also leaving nearby Italian territories? There are some big gaps in the 1918-1991 section, and adding parts of the sentence I removed will just open up a new one. Unless someone comes with more complete sources that can help establish notability of the events and tell the other side of the story, this should not be re-added. Ponor (talk) 20:16, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Citation style: date v issue



Thanks for the thanks but tbh it would be more useful if you would say something at the discussion, because right now mine appears to be the only dissenting voice. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:33, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Standard Model



Ok, but the other webarchive citation is dead, help add a new one thanks. Ffffrr (talk) 04:48, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Template:Cite Q



Hi, You were mentioned today as a Lua coder who might be interested in working on the {{tl|Cite Q}} template. If that is of interest User:Mike Peel and I can brief you. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">Andy Mabbett</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits ↗</span> 18:48, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Re: VTE



Absolutely, go ahead and fix it up, I've fiddled with it a bit but don't really know how to improve it further offhand. I just wanted to make sure there's a link to the page element for clear traceability of text, just like there is for other transclusions. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 13:55, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

EFH



The granting criteria for edit filter helper ↗ are a little strict here, but let me know if you'd be interested — you clearly have proficiency in filter syntax {{p}} — TheresNoTime (talk • she/her) 10:07, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

:@TheresNoTime, thanks for your offer. Sure, I wouldn't mind helping (and studying other editors' work). And of course: if it matters, I did get to practice filter editing on another Wikipedia ↗. Best, Ponor (talk) 10:17, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Study Invite



Hello! I saw your post ↗ about how ORES was trained on the mediawiki. I thought you might be interested in our ongoing study, which aims to develop a tool that facilitates the curation of data that can train or evaluate existing or prospective machine learning models used in Wikipedia. If you're interested, please find more information on our recruitment page ↗. Thanks for your consideration! Tzusheng (talk) 03:36, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Fourier Transform



Hello Ponor, You hastily closed my edits to the Fourier Transform page without any reasonable discussion (Latest revision as of 16:21, 27 September 2023 ↗ (edit ↗) (undo ↗). I am new to Wikipedia and don't know all the features available and I had not bee on the site for about 2 years... The edits I had put in were about the applications of the Fourier Transform with reference to scalar field theory and specifically in the context of the wave equation ↗. It is true that there is a common author in all four references but it is important to note that these are in four different fields of applied physics and the works cited are over a relatively large span of time, as the references show. Moreover they were all published in peer-reviewed prestigious journals and I had carefully put my edits under the “Applications of Fourier Transform” not the theory section. Furthermore those papers were published before the age of internet and it is important for the readers to be aware of pre-internet literature. They do add value to the article and it is unreasonable to remove my edits because, evidently, in your mind you don't seem to like the authors! You say there are 100s of similar papers but you have not cited even one! I emphasize that the papers I cited were from the era before the internet and they deal with original work and even if now one were to find similar material, the papers I cited would predate all of them. I want to work with you to see what would be a good solution and/or compromise before resorting to dispute resolution or arbitration on this matter. One way I would yeild would be if you were find something in the literature that predates the papers cited. Thanks.
(thank ↗)'''. Writingking (talk) 23:57, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

bot vs ambiguity



Maybe add some generic sanity checks for disambiguation and set indices? Can you have it access wikidata perhaps? I see you had to revert a fair bit with the same pattern. --Joy (talk) 01:04, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

:@Joy, I'm done with those. It was only a few municipalities where the municipality name does not match the core settlement name or some that (for various reasons) didn't go through in the first run. Instead of re-programming the whole logic I let the bot use the Croatian name, which in most cases worked. Also, there were some moves since the time I collected the data. The bot IS using hrwiki-Wd-enwiki mapping. I hope I didn't upset too many people with those last edits.
:BTW, I was surprised to see so many one-sentence articles, and I don't mean only the ones the two Dutch users added recently. What's the policy here, since about 3000 are still missing? I could (probably, haven't tried yet) help those users by creating pre-filled links for article creation (infobox+some), that'd be a few lines of code for me. Ideally, they'd just add some 'meat' to the article itself. Ponor (talk) 06:46, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
::Generally, most settlement articles were made by a handful of editors who were just adding stubs, and it looks like they were doing it manually, even if en masse, so the coverage is spotty. They used to not even have the basic census reference :) It would be completely fine by me if you let the bot fill out the entire gazetteer tree. --Joy (talk) 08:44, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
:::@Joy Hm... now that you said it... maybe we *should* do that. I have enough material for some good stubs (example ↗). I will need to apply for another bot job, so let's switch to Wikipedia:WikiProject Croatia ↗ again. I'll ping you from there. Ponor (talk) 14:41, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Smišljak



Was this edit ↗ meant for the one near Vrbovsko or the one near Brod Moravice? --Joy (talk) 08:55, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

:@Joy: all interwikis are for Smišljak, Vrbovsko. Ponor (talk) 13:18, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
:I moved the page, both need some attention. Categories etc. Ponor (talk) 13:55, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

User:Ponor/inline-diff-inline-patrol ↗



Hi Ponor, above script doesn't show the diff button on recent changes and the watchlist on enwiki for me, is that intended or a bug? Thanks <span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;background-color: #4D4DFF;color: white">Nobody</span> (<span style="color: #4D4DFF">talk</span>) 07:57, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

:@1AmNobody24, I've heard from one user that it didn't work on his iPhone, though it did when I tested on one. The only other reason that I know of might be because you have "Group results by page" option turned on (little frame on the right where you choose the number of changes and days shown); currently, that's not supported because of a completely different design of the list by MediaWiki. Thanks for using (trying to use) the script, btw! Ponor (talk) 14:34, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
::Deactivating "Group results by page" made it work on Recent Changes, for the Watchlist i additionally had to clear the cache. Thanks for the help and making such a great script! <span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;background-color: #4D4DFF;color: white">Nobody</span> (<span style="color: #4D4DFF">talk</span>) 15:12, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Edit warring


Attention: "we've had too much of that from your side already" is a personal attack, and this message doesn't just apply to you. Then you see. LukeWiller (talk) 16:10, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

:@LukeWiller what I meant is the warning on you talk page by someone other than me, and my recent report of your behavior at Talk:Šibenik ↗. Also, if there's a discussion on a topic, like at Talk:Dalmatia ↗, and you're aware of it, as you are, given your summary on today's Dalmatia ↗ edit, it's better to discuss the issue than to just declare it 'resolved', especially if you're an involved editor. You called someone a sockpuppet at Special:Diff/1262885825Split ↗ today, with no evidence whatsoever, while I can provide enough evidence for your behavior. I do apologize if I hit too hard. All I want you to realize is that edit warring and not WP:Consensus ↗ building is a bad thing. The latter starts with sources that say exactly what's in the article, only paraphrased. I'm seeing to much WP:OR ↗. Ponor (talk) 16:24, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 26



<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#606060; background-color: var(--background-color-neutral-subtle, #f8f8f8); color: var(--color-base, #202122); border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:7px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow:0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">
Hello everyone, and welcome to the 26th issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter ↗, covering all our favorite new and updated user scripts since 1 August 2024. At press time, over 94% of the world has legally fallen prey to the merry celebrations of "Christmas", and so shall you soon. It's been a quiet 4 months, and we hope to see you with way more new scripts next year. Happy holidays! <span class="skin-invert" style="color:#0645ad">Aaron Liu</span> (talk) 05:06, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

20px ↗ <small>Got anything good? Tell us about your new, improved, old, or messed-up script here ↗!</small>

{{columns-start|num=3}}

20px ↗ Featured script


:Very useful for changelist patrollers, '''DiffUndo''', by '''Nardog''', is this edition's featured script. Taking inspiration from WP:AutoWikiBrowser ↗'s double-click-to-undo feature, it adds an undo button to every line of every diff from "show changes", optimizing partial reverts with your favorite magic spell and nearly fulfilling m:Community Wishlist/Wishes/Partial revert undo ↗.

20px ↗ Miscellaneous



{{column}}
frameless|center|upright=2 ↗
frameless|upright=1.1|center|Scripts++ Newsletter ↗
{{column}}

20px ↗ Improve a script



20px ↗ Requested scripts


We need scripts that...

{{columns-end}}

20px ↗ Updated scripts



20px ↗ Newly maintained scripts



20px ↗ New scripts


<!--The current convention is to use the Example/ScriptName ↗ notation for scripts added by someone other than the script author and Example ↗: SciptName ↗ for scripts the author adds themselves. Of course, you are always free to ignore all rules.-->
----
{{center|{{flatlist|
}}}}
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Queen of Hearts@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Scripts%2B%2B/Subscribe&oldid=1265112842 -->

Warning



Sorry for the disturbance... I would like to point out to you the falsified data in the articles "Dalmatian Italians", "Dalmatia", Kingdom of Dalmatia, Demographics of Croatia etc. about the number and percentage of Dalmatian Italians as well as the total population. The Italian editor (LukeWiller) falsifies numbers before 1865, when there was the first official census by language in the Kingdom of Dalmatia. If you look at the sources he published, you will see that there are no such numbers before 1865... The Dalmatian Italian from Split, Francesco Carrara, wrote in his work "La Dalmazia descritta" in 1846 that there were ~16,000 Italians in Dalmatia out of ~360,000 inhabitants, or 4.4%. The Italian editor wrote that there were over 60,000 Italians at the time and that they made up almost 20% of the population. He goes so far as to write that in 1803 Italians made up as much as 33% of the population, which is an unprecedented lie. This man obviously uses his editorial capabilities to spread Italian irredentist propaganda. Do you have the ability to edit these topics and remove falsehoods? Visaches 37 (talk) 03:08, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

:@Visaches 37: thanks for reaching out. I see you're new here, and the first thing I am going to ask you is to be ''extremely patient''. Be polite and do not call people names, no matter how wrong you think they are.
:I've worked on most Croatian settlement articles and I have them on my watchlist. So I've seen all the edit warring, and I myself had a few questions for the author – for example, at Talk:Zadar ↗, at Talk:Dalmatia ↗, and at User talk:LukeWiller ↗. I will have a few more, regarding his sources. Please wait a few more days till I prepare them and <u>avoid any edit warring</u> – that will get us nowhere.
:Is there an online copy of your ''La Dalmazia descritta'', you know? Can you please help me find it (archive.org, nsk.hr, other libraries perhaps)? Thanks, and talk to you soon. Ponor (talk) 06:04, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
::Thank you for reply and sorry if I was rude. Here it is (page 121-123) https://books.google.hr/books?id=eVxcAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=hr&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false Visaches 37 (talk) 07:22, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
:::No worries, @Visaches 37, we all know how easy it is to get upset at Wikipedia. I've started a discussion at Talk:Dalmatia ↗, let's see if we can get <u>the real</u> sources there, then we can decide how to incorporate Carrara. Stay tuned, and be patient! Ponor (talk) 16:08, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Re: Sources discussed at Talk:Dalmatia ↗


Is it mandatory to participate in discussions? I don't know from the policies of Wikipedia in English. LukeWiller (talk) 22:53, 11 January 2025 (UTC).

:To answer your question on my talk page ↗: it is highly desirable to discuss material in building a consensus, especially if you're the one returning improperly sourced one over and over again, claiming that it's "sourced". Wikipedia is a collaborative community, so it's expected from everyone to act in good faith and have interest in working collaboratively ↗. Ponor (talk) 05:41, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Dalmatia ↗ as possible evidence for this noticeboard report



There is currently a noticeboard incident ↗ regarding a user you may be familiar with. The Dalmatia ↗ article and its talk page can be potentially used as evidence, if you would like to contribute there. Soidling (talk) 23:18, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Velike Drage



Any idea why Velike Drage ↗ is spelled as Vele Drage in other languages? JTtheOG (talk) 05:44, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

:@JTtheOG The name may have changed, or the local name might be different from the official (standard Croatian language) one. The official data from 2021 does say "Velike Drage": {{Croatian Census 2021|S}}. The 2006 Croatian law (cited) has them under "Vele Drage ↗". Maybe we should mention both, and make a redirect page? Ponor (talk) 05:54, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
::Yes, that probably seems best. Keep up the nice work. JTtheOG (talk) 05:56, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
:"Vele Drage" is "dialectally correct" but in the standard language, "Velike Drage" is seen as a "full form" and thus more correct. Both are legally acceptable. Ivan (talk) 06:46, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sveta Marija na Krasu



Hello Ponor,

I'm AstrooKai, and I patrol new pages ↗ here on Wikipedia.

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged a page that you created (Sveta Marija na Krasu ↗) for deletion because it is an unnecessary disambiguation page ↗ per one of the criteria at WP:G14 ↗.

If you feel that the page shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the {{Querylink|Special:Log|qs=type=delete&page=Sveta+Marija+na+Krasu&subtype=delete|deleting administrator}}.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with <code><nowiki>{{Re|</nowiki>AstrooKai<nowiki>}}</nowiki></code>. And, don't forget to sign your reply with <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code> . Thanks!

<small>Message delivered via the Page Curation ↗ tool, on behalf of the reviewer.</small><!-- Template:Db-disambig-notice-NPF -->

<span style="border-radius:7px;background:#dc143c;padding:4px 6px 4px 6px;color:white;"><span style="color:white;">AstrooKai</span></span> (Talk) 06:58, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Fiume



Hi!
Why did you remove the Italian/Venetian name from this city with zero explanation,?
The article says 20,000 inhabited speak Venetian & it is normal to give the name of cities in the local languages in the first line.
It is also normal to give an edit summary. 80.187.121.224 ↗ (talk) 18:06, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:Rijeka has only one official name, that's also said in the article. Since this is the English language Wikipedia, only what's found in modern English sources is relevant. You can see that Moscow ↗, for example, does not have the native name written in the first sentence either.
:Other than that, MOS:LEADCLUTTER ↗, and all the current and historical names are written just 3 inches down.
:Calling people chauvinist is also of little help on Wikipedia. It's actually against :foundation:UCoC ↗. Ponor (talk) 18:11, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
::What are you talking about?
::That Policy says "Only the first occurrence of the title and significant alternative names"
::Fiume is found in modern English sources and is the historical name of the city.
::Look at Bombay or Aachen.
::It is not normal to revert edits without explanation. 80.187.121.224 ↗ (talk) 18:26, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
::Are you an extreme Nationalist?
::Why do you misquote Wikipedia policy to make Wikipedia hard for native English speakers to use ?
::It's very irritating. 80.187.121.224 ↗ (talk) 18:39, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Please log in again and we'll talk. Ponor (talk) 18:39, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
::::The user politly asked you a question.
::::Can you please give me a source that Rijeka wasn't called Fiume before? Slovojed Silabski (talk) 20:22, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

The World Destubathon ↗


Hello. You're invited to participate in The World Destubathon. We're aiming to destub a lot of articles and also improve longer stale articles. It will be held from Monday June 16 - Sunday July 13. There is over $3300 going into it, with $500 the top prize and $300 top prize for most Science and Tech destubs and improvements. If you are interested in winning something to save you money in buying books for future content, or just see it as a good editathon opportunity to see a lot of articles improved for subjects which interest you, sign up on the page in the participants section if interested. Even if you can only manage a few articles they would be very much appreciated and help make the content produced as diverse and broad as possible! ♦ <span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#aba67e">''Dr. Blofeld''</span> 19:33, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Croatian population data



Hi Ponor. Thank you for your message. I am glad to hear you'll be adding the data from the 2021 census at some point as this is a time consuming task and I am also trying to add short history sections to some pages and add the administration of every municipality. Also I would love to join your WikiProject about Croatia. Thanks a lot and I will see you around. Moon1238 (talk) 16:39, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 27



<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#606060; background-color: var(--background-color-neutral-subtle, #f8f8f8); color: var(--color-base, #202122); border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:7px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow:0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">
Hello everyone, and welcome to the 27th issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter ↗, covering all our favorite new and updated user scripts since 2025! Boy, does it feel good to kick off the year with an issue. Yep, it's been a year since we cleared out the 2022-2024 backlog with issues 23 and 24! Good times. <small>Though in this case "a year" just means... 6 months? 😯 The salience of whatever joke I was planning to make here has vanished speedily.</small> <span class="skin-invert" style="color:#0645ad">Aaron Liu</span> (talk) 21:00, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

<small>20px ↗ Got anything good? Tell us about your new, improved, old, or messed-up script here ↗!</small>

{{columns-start|num=3}}

20px ↗ Featured script


: '''WikiTextExpander''' by '''Polygnotus ↗''', is this edition's featured script. At the click of a configurable hotkey, this script will find and replace or link a configurable list of phrases within the selected text in all source editors (even in the comment/reply field!). Besides allowing the quick insertion of templated messages, this script greatly mitigates the WP:WTF? ↗ problem by providing both the legibility of familiar words and the convenience of shortcuts. And to those asking, the capitalization of "Wikitext ↗" as "WikiText" was a necessary sacrifice for far-more-memorable acronymy.

20px ↗ Updated scripts



20px ↗ Newly maintained scripts



{{column}}
frameless|center|WikiTextExpander with a truncated list of default expansions ↗
frameless|upright=1.1|center|Scripts++ Newsletter ↗
{{column}}

20px ↗ Improve a script


{{safesubst<noinclude />:WP:Scripts++/Improve}}

20px ↗ Requested scripts


We need scripts that...


20px ↗ Miscellaneous


In breaking m:Tech/News ↗, {{tq|Gadgets can now include <code>.vue</code> files. This makes it easier to develop modern user interfaces using Vue.js ↗, in particular using Codex ↗, the official design system of Wikimedia. Codex icons ↗ are now also available. The documentation ↗ has examples.}}

{{columns-end}}

20px ↗ New scripts


<!--The current convention is to use the Example/ScriptName ↗ notation for scripts added by someone other than the script author and Example ↗: SciptName ↗ for scripts the author adds themselves. Of course, you are always free to ignore all rules.-->

No, this is not going to be the enduring tradition of S++ for the future. This was meant to be a joke for the special occasion on the first day of the fourth month but was delayed by four months because I'm lazy.
----
{{center|{{flatlist|
}}}}
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:TechnoSquirrel69@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Scripts%2B%2B/Subscribe&oldid=1296961065 -->

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) 00:32, 18 November 2025 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2025/Coordination/MM/03&oldid=1322758647 -->

Happy New Year, Ponor!


<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em; height:auto; min-height:173px; border-radius:1em; box-shadow:.1em .1em .5em rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.75); box-shadow:.1em .1em .5em light-dark(rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.75), rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.75));" class="plainlinks">
left|x173px ↗x173px|right ↗
{{Paragraph break}}
{{Center|{{resize|179%|'''''Happy New Year ↗!'''''}}}}
'''Ponor''',<br />Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year ↗, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
<br /><span style="color:orange">'''''Volten'''''</span><span style="color:lime ">'''001'''</span> <sup><b style="color:red">☎</b></sup> 03:40, 1 January 2026 (UTC)<br /><br />
</div>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;''{{resize|88%|Send New Year cheer by adding {{tls|Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.}}''
{{clear}}<!-- From template:Happy New Year fireworks --> <span style="color:orange">'''''Volten'''''</span><span style="color:lime ">'''001'''</span> <sup><b style="color:red">☎</b></sup> 03:40, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

A token of appreciation



{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:top;" | {{#ifeq:|alt|100px|border ↗|100px|border ↗}}
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Template Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: top; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Got help at Template:Use English variant ↗ quicker help than 99.9% of customer service. Szmenderowiecki (talk · contribs ↗) 02:21, 12 January 2026 (UTC)
|}

Split, Croatia - infobox population



Hello, I've noticed you undoed my edit from the other day. Please elaborate. I am not sure I understand how the Urban pop. can be lower than the City pop. then, what is the City pop. here. The way I see it, City is Split and it's population in administrative borders that include areas like Slatine, Žrnovnica etc. Urban would be area of continuous urban developed areas such as Solin, Kaštela, Podstrana. Metro area is still ok. Cheers! Grga01010 (talk) 17:38, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

:@Grga01010 That's the decision we made for all Croatian cities ↗, municipalities and settlements and applied it consistently in all 3000+ articles. The City of Split consists of the "settlement of Split" and a few other naselje ↗s. The settlement of Split is the City of Split's urban core ↗, with its urban population ↗. All settlements together make up the City of Split's total poulation. The areas are from https://dgu.gov.hr/registar-prostornih-jedinica-172/172. Ponor (talk) 17:48, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Tražim deblokadu


Admine Ponor, vi ste meni (pored trajne blokade uz obrazloženje "nije ovdje radi stvaranja enciklopedije (WP:NIJEOVDJE): ne prihvaća savjete, postavlja se napadački, kršeći foundation:UCoC") zabranili da uredjujem svoju szr kao da sam neki vandal, iako sam solidan broj članaka napisao. Naveli ste da sam kao nekoga uznemiravao ili da zloupotrebljavam svoju "moć" kao razlog trajne blokade, što je preterano. Nikoga nisam uznemiravao niti sam imao neku moć da bih je zloupotrebio. Meni je bio cilj napredak hr.wiki i itekako sam spreman za suradnju sa bracom Hrvatima. Marco Mitrovich Sugarski (talk) 08:15, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

I zelim se izviniti sto sam hr.wiki nazvao "srbofilskom", preterao sam ali treba uvijek pretpostaviti najbolju namjeru jer nisam htio vredjati. Marco Mitrovich Sugarski (talk) 21:56, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Bice kao sto si napisao, dodavanje vjerodostojnih izvora, navodjenje vise misljenja, bez ratova izmjenama i etiketiranja. Marco Mitrovich Sugarski (talk) 02:51, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

:Sinoć sam otvorio tvoju stranicu za razgovor pa bih te molio da tamo odgovoriš, @Marco Mitrovich. Ponor (talk) 15:04, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
:Koje vjerodostojne izvore ima hrvatska Wikipedija da je Zrin bio ustaško uporište?
:Koje vjerodostojne izvore ima hrvatska Wikipedija da je Tito osvojio demokratske i višestranačke izbore?
:Koje vjerodostojne izvore ima hrvatska Wikipedija da je pobjeda antifašizma, pobjeda demokracije?
:Ako pobjeda antifašizma nije pobjeda demokracije, može li hrvatska Wikipedia slijediti navode koje okarakteriziraju pobjedu antifašizma kao svojevrsno oslobođenje?
:Diktatura Komunističke partije je oslobođenje!?
:Povijesni izvori koji navedeno navode su objektivni i vjerodostojni?
:Zasigurno hrvatski administratori nisu zlonamjerni te će ostvariti kompromis sa mnom, slijedeći smjernice Wikipedije, te će izmijeniti članke u vezi Drugog svjetskog rata i staviti izvore koji govore o negativnostima antifašističke borbe.
:Siguran sam da Ponor, Runolist, Neptun i ostali imaju dobre namjere i služe smjernicama Wikipedije.
:Ne znam je li ponižavanje Marca Mitrovicha u skladu sa smjernicama Wikipedije. Slovojed Silabski (talk) 19:07, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Admin policies of Croatian Wikipedia



Dear Ponor,

Why are there growing criticisms of how the Croatian Wikipedia is administrated?

Where are sources that dictador Tito won a democratic election?

Why is Croatian Wikipedia biased regarding the Second World War?

Why does Croatian Wikipedia ignore authors and books which are not issued during the socialist totalitarianism ?

How habitants of Zrin were ustaše?

If Zrin was a "ustaško uporište"/ "ustaša stronghold" why many majority Serbian villages in Croatia are not described as "četničko uporište/ četnik stronghold"?

Was the antifascist victory, victory of the dictatorship of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia?

When Socialist Yugoslavia had a free multiparty election?

Thanks for the responses, surely you will respond me, cause I know you do not have any bad intentions and that you are not biased, as I assume neither is Runolist or Neptun.

Have a great day! Slovojed Silabski (talk) 18:29, 29 June 2026 (UTC)