User talk:Emir of Wikipedia/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

rubbish photo

see and comment at chat - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Steve_Bannon#rubbish_photo

Govindaharihari (talk) 16:15, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Your Graphics Lab request

Hello, Emir of Wikipedia. Greetings from the Photography workshop. A reply has been made to your request. You may view the reply here.
If you are satisfied, please copy/paste the following code and add it to your request: {{resolved|1=~~~~}}

Regards, --AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 02:50, 7 February 2017 (UTC).

You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{GL Photography reply}} template.

@AntiCompositeNumber: Thanks. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

unsigned

You forgot to sign your words at Spicer. SPECIFICO talk 03:24, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

@SPECIFICO: Thanks for informing me. I have signed now. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Abdul-Muttalib

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Abdul-Muttalib has been completed. It required only very minor changes in my opinion.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 13:56, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Sheikh Rashid bin Mohammed Al Maktoum

Hi ! Thanks for writing ! I am new to editing in Wikipedia so I am unaware of many things. I have read several posts on Tumblr talking about the correct death date of the late Sheikh Rashid bin Mohammed Al Maktoum & precisely they were saying there was a mixup in the community between his real death date & his burial date so I felt it had to be cleared up & tried to do so. I did not know about these requirements you have told me. I will try to do my best to find these sources & post them. I do not know how but I will learn. Wow can you believe I dreamed this week about this? I dreamed on my sleep "someone" was checking my edits on wikipedia & Was going to contact me about it. Amazing ! I recently visited Dubai for 10 days because I wanted to know more about the life & culture of UAE so I got immersed into knowing all about its Royal Family. That is why I get into being an editor of wikipedia. Thanks a Lot ! - glad to knowing you! I am Sol from Puerto Rico. Macarrero (talk) 14:55, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

@Macarrero: Can you send me a link to any of the Tumblr posts please? And that is cool about your dream. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:22, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Sure ! I am doing some work. On lunch break now. It is 1:48 pm here. I will send them after I return home from work at 5:30 pm. Macarrero (talk) 17:51, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi again ! The blog where I read about it is named : crown-prince-fazza-of-dubai . I do not know how to send you this link as I am also new to Tumblr. I took snaps of the Two mentions of the correct death date of the Sheikh Rashid bin Mohammed Al Maktoum but I cannot send photos format here. You have to scroll down all the way on the blog of crown-prince-fazza-of-dubai until you reach the posts before Sept 20, 2016. There you will find the 2 posts I am referring to. Macarrero (talk) 00:35, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

@Macarrero: Could you please upload the pictures to http://imgur.com/ and send me a link? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 11:26, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

https://imgur.com/gallery/2BYXK Macarrero (talk) 12:29, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

@Macarrero: Thanks for the link. I'll try and see if I can get a WP:RS. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 12:52, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for welcoming me :) Matt11235 (talk) 12:34, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Betsy DeVos reversion

Hey, I saw you reverted the claim regarding the first tie-breaking cabinet confirmation. You may want to review my fellow admin, Neutrality's, notes at Talk:Mike Pence#Tie-breaking vote... and then reassess whether the edit should stand. If you have any questions, just give me a {{ping}}! — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 01:14, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Heads you win, tails I lose?

First you blamed me for removing content without explanation. So I added it back and you then accused me of "edit warring". You have now done what you said I shouldn't do - removed content without explanation. If you continue to violate WP:TPO the one who will end up being blocked is you. 78.145.17.138 (talk) 11:42, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Emir. You can freely revert the person using this IP without worrying about WP:3RR as it's a banned user. Just revert and report. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:12, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Emirate of Nejd infobox

Hello Emir of Wikipedia,

You changed the infobox of the article “Emirate of Nejd”. You changed the religion from “Sunni Islam” to “Wahhabi Islam”. May I ask you do you have a reliable source that “Wahhabi Islam” was the official religion in the “Emirate of Nejd”?

I would be happy if you reply.

Best regards,

Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.34.242.63 (talk) 17:00, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Dear Tom. Here you go.

References

Hello Emir of Wikipedia,

Thank you very much for your reply and the source. The source says: “The fragile second Sa`udi-Wahhabi emirate (1824-91) coexisted with a new regional power to the north of Riyadh.”

The source calls this emirate “Sa`udi-Wahhabi emirate“. The source doesn`t mention that this emirate identifies oneself as a “Wahhabi emirate“. I think this emirate identifies oneself as a state with the official religion “Sunni Islam”.

Best regards,

Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.35.178.128 (talk) 10:20, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Discretionary Sanctions

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Ad Orientem (talk) 14:01, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

about Descendants of Ibn Saud.

The pages contain members of Al Saud dynasty or family. The grandsons is sorted by their birthdate. Prince Faisal bin Thamir bin Abdulaziz Al Saud's father Thamir bin Abdulaziz Al Saud has died in 1958 or 1959. Thats why Faisal bin Thamir cannot be born after 1960. Thats why I placed it under born 1960 and above born 1962.

Thanks, Shahriar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.200.10.98 (talk) 14:04, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 14:08, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

WP:1RR

Thank you for your self reversion. You are of course free to discuss the challenged material on the article talk page and seek consensus. Best regards... -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:43, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Betsy Devos Reversion

You recently removed my edit on Betsy Devos section. I cited a credible neutral source, but I will try to add more of her past experiences that make her qualified for the position. Do you think that would make it a better edit? I want to try and provide as much content as possible to users, and I think that her controversies are necessary for users to have as complete of a picture as possible, so I'm hoping that they can be put back in (albeit with a section talking about her positives as well). If you could re-implement it, I would appreciate it and I can add to it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick.aus96 (talk • contribs) 15:28, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I did revert your edit with this edit. You must not reinstate any challenged (via reversion) edits without obtaining consensus on the talk page of this article, as per the "post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people" sanctions. The source you cited was credible and neutral, but you just stuck it at the end of a paragraph you wrote where it was not supporting what you said. There is no need to add experiences that make her qualified for the position if they do not exist, but you could help keep the page up to date and write she actually does in her role. If you are not sure if you can make the best edits then please ask for help, do not just test the waters on biographies of living people. Thanks for trying provide as much content as possible to users, this is an encyclopaedia so do not add trivia. Her controversies should be included if notable and covered by the reliable sources, but having a specific section is not needed if it can fit into other sections chronologically. A section titled "Scandal" with no reliable sources mentioning the term is not neutral. A complete picture is good, however if no positives are present then their is nothing to mention. I will not re-implement it sadly, but I think you will be grateful that I taught you this instead of you just getting blocked. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:59, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

@Nick.aus96:,@Emir of Wikipedia: Wouldn't it be better if this discussion occurred at the talk page of the article? Some of this is a question of editor judgment. Emir: I agree and disagree with some of your assertions and we need to find consensus. --David Tornheim (talk) 16:27, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Badlanders (TV series) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Badlanders (TV series) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Badlanders (TV series) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:03, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you!

Dear Emir of Wikipdia, thank you very much for your helpful replay! Yes, I'm fairly new and would like to get more familier with the tools so I picked some articles to develop based on self interest and knowledge, my main focus is on Syrian women and Arab personality in Wikipedia English, if you have any other advice to me I will be more than happy to receive. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by HanadiAslan (talk • contribs) 19:09, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

@HanadiAslan: You may wish to take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Syria. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 23:09, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Photo copyright compliance policy question

Dear Emir of Wikipedia,

I noticed that you reverted the image I added to this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sireen_Hamsho may I ask you for the reason? I took the picture from the person's offical page, should I not?

Can you also please advise how to correct the spelling of the title name as there is no evidence for such spelling provided.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by HanadiAslan (talk • contribs) 16:46, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Discussed on the questioners talk page. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:09, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you!

After about a decade, I've finally decided to go "registered" with my edits, as opposed to just an IP address. And only the second time I get an edit reverted - I'll need to fix that!

Factually... (talk) 21:18, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

@Factually...: No problem. I suggest you look at what I posted on your talkpage, but thanks for deciding to register. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 23:08, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Kumayl ibn Ziyad

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Kumayl ibn Ziyad has been completed.

I spent quite a bit of time trying to make the layout easier to read. You will see that I broke up the text in the Du'a sections into sentences - again for ease of reading. I hope this is acceptable to you.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:18, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

@Twofingered Typist: Thanks for your copy edit. I especially appreciate your layout changes. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:52, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome - glad you're pleased with it.Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:57, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Power Rangers (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:02, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

re: Stephen Blackehart bio page

Thank you for your recent message.

I respect the work you've done on Wikipedia elsewhere, and hope that my differing view will be regarded as academic rather than personal.

Regarding your impartiality question, I think you will find there is no need for concern. My edits here aimed at two things: redundancy and potentially discriminatory information.

To the first point, the information you've inserted into the text box is already spelled out and cited quite clearly in the opening paragraph of the page, making your additions unnecessary and redundant. The addendum of (disputed) in both cases you've used it carries connotations of conflict which I don't know that you intend, and will doubtless lead to mistaken inference on the part of readers.

As to the second point, inserting age-identifying information into the biography of a living person, especially one who currently works in the entertainment business, is troublesome. Age discrimination and ageism (particularly in Hollywood) being endemic, the state of California has enacted legislation forbidding exactly this sort of age-identifying information online. This is not without reason, as it directly costs performers the opportunity for work - a form of discrimination in hiring that Wikipedia (perhaps unwittingly) implicitly endorses whenever it publishes this sort of information about living actors. Additionally, dates of birth are a key component in identity theft, which this type of publicly-posted information will only make easier for those of dubious intent.

I would therefore ask, with all the deference that is due to you and your judgment, that you reconsider and revert your edits to the page.

Thank you,

Blackehart (talk) 10:28, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

@Blackehart: Even if I don't find any need for concern I think that you should add the Template:UserboxCOI to your userpage, officially clarifying that you are Stephen Blackehart. If you don't know how do this then I will be happy to assist you. I understand the aim of your edits, but some users on here on not as welcoming as I am, and so I strongly suggest you officially declare the conflict of interest.

I accept your point about the information in the text box (we call them infoboxes here), and so I have replaced it with an image as per Wikipedia:Disinfoboxes. However I noticed that you uploaded the image. In order to prevent the image from being deleted could you please email permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, so they have formal permission.

As to your second policy I somewhat agree and respectfully disagree, but I will keep it off as per WP:BLPPRIVACY. However it is worth noting that it shows up on Google, so you may wish to contact them and remove it from there too. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 10:54, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

@Emir of Wikipedia: Thank you very much! I will do my best to follow the steps you've outlined for COI and the image, and have already been working on the Google listing. I appreciate your time and attention in this.
Best Regards
Blackehart (talk) 20:00, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Emir of Dubai

Hiya. It's not the biggest deal in the world, but MBR is ruler of Dubai (in Arabic, 'hakem'). None of the UAE's rulers style themselves as emirs - in all official communications (including the Dubai government website cited in the sentence) they are styled rulers. His own official biography, used in his books, styles him ruler of Dubai. If the British press decide to get it wrong (which they do with bone-crushing regularity), the official UAE record surely stands as paramount? Quite apart from that (and risking a charge of OR!) in 24 years' living and working in the UAE I have never, ever heard the word emir used once in relation to any of the ruling families in either present or past usage. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 07:57, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

@Alexandermcnabb: Which doesn't imply they are not emirs. --Yomal Sidoroff-Biarmskii 07:28, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

@Alexandermcnabb: Have you never seen "Emiri Diwan" in Yellow Pages? --Yomal Sidoroff-Biarmskii 07:39, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of tourist attractions in Dubai, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Women's World. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

AN3 reports are not always closed

Hello Emir of Wikipedia. I would suggest that you undo your recent change to a 3RR archive file. You said 'No conclusion reached.' That's not a reason to remove a post from the archive. If the person causes trouble in the future, people can find that they have been previously reported. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 02:53, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Surah Ibrahim

Hi Emir of Wikipedia, I wanted to tell you why I had removed her version of the lesson from Surah Ibrahim, it was because the person who said it was not an islamic scholar and gave an inaccurate interpretation. It was a personal thing with god, meaning you can't hide anything god, it doesn't mean it is how you deal with other people according to their intentions. Hope this clears it up. I am very experienced in the Quran and use Islamic sources such as Ibn Kathir, a very famous scholar, to intrepret the Quran. If you want, you can follow up on the page in a couple days, I will add the correct interpretation. I had forgotten to do it for a while. AbdullahwaMuhsin (talk) 15:56, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

April 2017

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Saudi Arabia. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Ad Orientem (talk) 19:22, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Jared Kushner/Sr Adviser

I’m fine with (temporarily) withholding identifying Kushner as a Democrat on the Senior Adviser list, but I’m not OK with idenifying him as an independent when there is little to no evidence that supports that claim.--Sunshineisles2 (talk) 19:52, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

I have provided a citation. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:18, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. However, that still doesn't disprove multiple references stating that he is a Democrat. The next step, of course, is proving that one claim is more valid than the other.--Sunshineisles2 (talk) 20:50, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

I can accept that but I think that Talk:Jared Kushner would be a more appropriate location to discuss, than before here and the Senior Adviser list. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:27, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Tsang (surname) (disambiguation) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tsang (surname) (disambiguation). Since you had some involvement with the Tsang (surname) (disambiguation) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

April 2017

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to List of people from Idaho. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. John from Idegon (talk) 20:27, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

WP:EL

You may see from Wikipedia:External links. You could not add social links as external links. You may read it carefully

Links normally to be avoided

Social networking sites (such as Myspace, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Instagram), chat or discussion forums/groups (such as Yahoo! Groups), Twitter feeds, Usenet newsgroups or email lists. Blogs, personal web pages and most fansites (negative ones included), except those written by a recognized authority. (This exception for blogs, etc., controlled by recognized authorities is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities who are individuals always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people.)

.--Egeymi (talk) 14:56, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

@Egeymi: It states Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject. The Instagram account is the verified account of the person who the article is about. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 14:58, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

See it rightly it is about plain website, not social media urls. You could not put it. --Egeymi (talk) 14:59, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

@Egeymi: The tenth item in the list reads Social networking sites (such as Myspace, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Instagram), chat or discussion forums/groups (such as Yahoo! Groups), Twitter feeds, Usenet newsgroups or email lists. This means that we can use social media, unless I am reading it wrong. I a really doubt I am reading it wrong as one of the most popular articles, Donald Trump, includes includes social media in the EL. It is possible that I am wrong, but that would be a major oversight on such a popular article. If you accept my line of reasoning then please self-revert. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:05, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

You are most assuredly reading it wrong. That means that you can use a (singular) social media link if an individual is using a social media page as their ONLY official website. If they have an actual website, do not add social media links. Also be advised that WP:EL is a guideline. Actual article content is ruled by consensus. If there is a really good reason, guidelines can be overridden with consensus. Perhaps that's why twitter is on Trump. There is certainly plenty of reason to have Trump's twitter listed as every third story about him involves his blathering on twitter. John from Idegon (talk) 15:36, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

@John from Idegon: The person who the article is about only has social media pages at official websites. Am I still reading it wrong if I want to include a singular link? The article in question is Manal bint Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:44, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Unless you can reach a consensus, which I would suggest you attempt to do on the article's talk page, you should not replace it. Another editor has objected by removing it. If you can come to a meeting of the mind on the article's talk page, then and only then can you replace it. I won't participate in that discussion. External links are supposed to be reasonably reliable sources, which social media never is. We provide links to official websites primarily as a courtesy. Adding social media links is pushing towards WP:PROMO and WP:NPOV. The reason I'm commenting here is because I've reverted your addition of social media links from other articles. I'd suggest strongly you find something else to do. Social media is not really very helpful in an encyclopedia. John from Idegon (talk) 18:52, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

@John from Idegon: Would you like to clarify which articles you have reverted my addition of social media links? If you are on about the article Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, then I removed the social media links with this edit (not added them). However if you are on about Mike Cernovich, then it was Calton who removed a second official website link (not a social media link). Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 11:30, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Descent categories

Hello, and fair enough about this edit, if you say so. The editor who added the category has been going round adding a variety of completely inappropriate descent categories, and this looked like just one more. What caused the problem is that there's nothing in the article to indicate the subject's ethnicity or descent, whether sourced (as required by WP:CATEGRS) or even unsourced. The MoS says, at WP:CATEGRS#General bullet point 4: As to the inclusion of people in a category related to ethnicity, gender, religion, sexuality, or disability, please remember that inclusion must be based on reliable sources. It'd really help, if you think the category is important/relevant enough to warrant inclusion, if you'd add a reliable published source to the article that confirms the subject's Cypriot ancestry. Thanks, Struway2 (talk) 15:21, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying the reason for the removal, and raising your concerns with me. I have now sourced the article. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:29, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

"Disambiguation needed"

Not to disparage your tagging efforts, but might I suggest that you solve a few more of these rather than just tagging them with "disambiguation needed"? In many cases (two random recent samples: lens in Microscope, Komodo in Komodo dragon) it is entirely clear which meaning is intended. The balance of probability is that tagged disambs are just going to remain like that for a long time... --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 10:06, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Respectfully disagreeing with @Elmidae: - adding a {{dn}} tag is absolutely the right thing to do if you're uncertain of the correct solution. Tagging an ambiguous link doesn't create a problem, it identifies an existing one; and a tag makes it more likely it will be fixed, and soon. Complaining about {{dn}} tags doesn't help readers; but fixing them does. I've fixed a whole pile of yours, EoW, precisely because they turned up in Category:Articles with links needing disambiguation. I found some of them rather easy - but like any WP:DPL regular, I'd much rather that someone add a {{dn}} tag than have a guess. A bad fix could well remain a bad fix for ever.

(I once had a {{dn}} tag reverted because "it made the article look untidy", LOL. I reverted it straight back, with a link to WP:INTDAB in my edit summary - and a more clear-headed editor quickly solved the problem.)

{{ping}} me, or post on my Talk Page, if you would like some handy WP:DPL-type links. I happen to know that you've fixed 1155 links (including 1072 on the Bonus List) so far this month, and are #3 on the leaderboards - did you? Narky Blert (talk) 23:18, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

@Elmidae: In the case of microscope I was confused between an optical lens and camera lens, but thanks for helping with the disambiguation. That case was somewhat clear, however the other case was not. The disambiguation on the Komodo was a caption to an image of a Komodo. You changed this to an island, however the image states in its description that is on the island of Rinca. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 17:51, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

@Narky Blert: Could you please share me with me the WP:DPL-type links. I did fix quite a few disambiguation links last month. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 17:51, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Yes, you did fix quite a few DAB links last month - and, indeed, in the month before that...

My saying "rather easy" was unfair: every disambiguator has different areas of knowledge. Some links which I've {{dn}}-tagged have been rapidly fixed by others, who were very likely thinking "What on earth was the problem?" I've solved problems from 2012 because I knew either the answer already, or how to find it. It's a team effort. (BTW props for looking at the text on the image page in that Komodo problem, that's one of my tricks too; as are looking at bluelinks on the same page near the problem link, and at non-English Wikis. I don't trust them without question, but they're often right.)

You've probably got some of these already, but here goes:

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation. You might want to sign up, there's a list at the foot of the page.
• Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links. The Talk Page can be a useful discussion forum.
• Wikipedia:Disambiguation; on which WP:INTDAB can be a useful shortcut to give to editors who don't understand why you've added a {{dn}} tag.

Several reports and tools are listed on those pages. These are ones which I like:

• Category:Articles with links needing disambiguation. The horror! the horror! (When I gave up with March 2017, there were 1,204 articles listed there. It's now down to 867, which shows what I know.)
• Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links/The Daily Disambig. (The headline number in the leftmost column of Table 1 was 40,000 when I joined the WikiProject. You can take a lot of the credit for helping to get it down from 29,000 to 19,000.)
• DAB Challenge. See who the active disambiguators are.
• Articles With Multiple Dablinks. Refreshed daily, you can often find and solve problems which just about have your name on them.
• Dablinks. A really useful tool if you know or suspect that a page might have more than one bad link (see the link just above).
• Disambiguation pages with links. I stay away from the top of the list - there are other editors looking at it, and some of the problems are best fixed by undoing a page move or similar. I've been systematically working my way since last September through the DAB pages with one bad link. They're piling up behind me, but I hope to get to the end of the list this month; when all the ancient bad links should have been looked at.

If you find Fizzboz redirecting to Fizzboz (disambiguation), see WP:MALPLACED.

Purely for fun, some user page tags:

• {{DPL topicon}}
• {{WikiGnome topicon}}
• {{User:J04n/Userboxes/Disambiguator HoF}}

If you've got your own method of finding bad links, go for it! Avoiding duplication of effort is a really good idea. Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 20:03, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Abdullah bin saad page

Hi dear Mr. Emir

there is a page of Prince Abdullah bin saad if you could link it to the english one... created by arabic

: https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/عبد_الله_بن_سعد_بن_عبد_العزيز_آل_سعود

for more references, I will put more links from saudi news paper

Thank you so much sir

@TariqMadrid11: I have merged the Wikidata items, linking the articles at the side. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 17:04, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Power Rangers (film) copyedit

Just want to confirm whether or not you still want the copyedit to go ahead. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 12:36, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

@Skamecrazy123: I have done some work on the article so there might not be that much to copyedit, but I would be grateful if you go ahead with the copyedit assuming you think that there is anything left to copyedit. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 14:03, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Not a problem. I will take a look over it and see whats what. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 14:07, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

I had a look over it and it certainly complies with all the main points. If you want me to give it a more thorough going over I can, but it looks like you've done a good job on it --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 15:27, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Could you please take a thorough looking over. The article should be fairly stable now, and you are unlikely to be interrupted by another editor with the exception of edits to numerical data and the access dates associated with them. Emir of Wikipedia (talk)

Be precise please

Would you mind telling us your precise opinion regarding the disputed "Islamic fundamentalism"? You may do that by responding to this edit of mine. Thanks. --Mhhossein ^talk 14:34, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

The disruptive IP thinks your edit is vague! He's covering almost all the TP surface area. Could you please be a bit more precise? Considering this explanation by me, can fundamentalism be mentioned as one of the reasons? --Mhhossein ^talk 18:06, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

May 2017

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to Alternative facts does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

• User contributions
• Recent changes
• Watchlists
• Revision differences
• IRC channels
• Related changes
• New pages list
• Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Also, you removed information that is contextually important to understanding the subject. If you disagree, I would be happy to discuss it with you on the article talk page. - MrX 22:11, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

May 2017 response

Hey Emir of Wikipedia. I received your message but I've never heard of "Sammy2220 (talk · contribs)" so I'm unsure of what you're talking about. This is my only account and I don't coordinate with 3rd parties.

Editor22022 (talk) 11:29, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

@Editor22022: That is not a problem then. It was just that you had both edited the page Ahmed bin Fahd bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, and had a similar number scheme in your username. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 11:57, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Unexplained removal of content

• Alternative facts (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

The history of the article makes it quite clear that the content removal was both recent and challenged. I have reverted you, restoring the status quo of the article, as you offered absolutely no explanation for the removal of content. You need to make your case for removing that section of established content on talk. Thanks. Murph9000 (talk) 18:20, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

@Murph9000: I am not questioning that the content removal was recent or challenged. I reverted you in order to restore the status quo, but I did write in the edit summary discuss on talkpage before reinserting. I am not making a case for removing a section of established content, but rather reverting the material that was under dispute between Trendmeister and yourself. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:31, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Look more closely at the history. The content in question had been there for a while, and is sourced. The other editor removed it with what seemed to be an unconvincing explanation, so I challenged. They then repeated the removal with an equally unconvincing explanation, instead of making their case on talk. So, I restored the status quo and addressed the only concern expressed. You then went against the status quo without explanation, so I restored the status quo and challenged you to explain the removal. My primary issue here is the unexplained or inadequately explained removal of sourced content which does seem to relate to the topic of the article. There may be valid reasons to edit it, or even to remove it, but I've not heard any up to this point. The responsibility to justify the removal is yours, if you want to remove it. Murph9000 (talk) 19:37, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

I notice that you have pinged the other editor to this discussion. I suggest we all move this to the article's talk page, if we're to discuss reasons for removing that content. Either of you, please open a thread there with your case against the established content. Thanks. Murph9000 (talk) 19:42, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Even if the content in question has been there for a while and sourced its relevance to the article can be questioned. I have not seen a valid reason yet to permanently remove it, and as I clarified above I only removed it as it was in dispute between you and the other editor. If they have failed to provide a valid reason for its removal then it should be left in the article unless another editor provides a valid reason. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:46, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Dear editors. I modified the content following Murph's revision of it (Murph added an explanation tying the content to the article subject, which I had requested he do, so thank you Murph). I do not seek to remove the content. At this stage I only seek to modify it to reflect the relevant facts. Do we still need to move this to the article's talk page, or is this discussion sufficient. Thank you.Trendmeister (talk) 01:56, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

May 2017

Hi Emir, thanks for the advice, i will do as you say next time when i'm removing or editing contents from pages. Unknown 0987 (talk) 14:34, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Edit undone

Hello, why did you undo my edit here? The section I deleted consists mostly of a quote by Taleb about himself, thus doesn't belong into a section on outsiders' praise or criticism. It is generally hard to justify why it would belong to Wikipedia at all (as opposed to Wikiquote), let alone in this unreflected and uncritical way ("gave a memorable commencement"- said who?). It violates the principle of a NPOV and should be deleted, and I would like to ask you to do so again please. --SEM (talk) 12:44, 17 May 2017 (UTC) PS: Oh, I just realised that I wasn't logged in when I edited. Apologies.

@SEM: This type of conversation should be started on the talkpage of the article in the future. I restored the content as it has the source for the honorary doctorate. An unreflected and and uncritical comment like "gave a memorable commencement" can easily be deleted and leave the source in the article. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 12:49, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Fair enough, I hadn't seen that the link also confirms the honorary degree, apologies for that. Admittedly I still don't really see the merit of having such a long quote in there. --SEM (talk) 12:55, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

I can understand that you think that, but please start a discussion on the talkpage then so we can gain consensus from other editors. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 13:03, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Guess I am more used to the more edit-based approach of the de-wiki in this respect ;) --SEM (talk) 13:36, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

@SEM: No problem editing in different language Wikis, but each have their own rules and customs. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 14:06, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox royalty/embed

Template:Infobox royalty/embed has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 11:31, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Power Rangers

Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Power Rangers has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:15, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Sayyid Ali Akbar

Dear Emir of Wikipedia. One more time you show the Wikipedia community how intellectual you are, disturbing and threatening editors. You show your obsession to seek a mistake on my edits, in order to block me from editing. But you neglect and ignore truth and threaten me for what I have not done. I recommend you to think and control twice, when you want to threaten an editor for "copyright vandalism" and plagiatism. There are more editors than myself, who have inserted more information in the side than myself. I would be grateful when you look what edits I have done, so that you may see how blind you are to accuse myself, doing an act I have not done. My edits are all substantiated by source disclosures as it has to be in an intellectual scientific edit. I have not inserted the information about Ahmed Amiruddin. Therefore it would be more just, when you take the true editors into account. You are truly a shame for the Wikipedia community, since you are expurging valuable information for your own dictatorical sense of hedonistical vengeance. As I see many people are lamenting on your edits. I would be grateful, when you take our criticism into account. Sincerely Imamzadeh1901

@Imamzadeh1901: If you wish to discuss the issue then please mention it at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2017 May 23. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:30, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Declined speedy deletion

I declined your speedy deletion nomination of Oneplus 5 as the rationale did not suggest a speedy deletion criterion listed in the criteria for speedy deletion. I didn't nominate for deletion myself as it didn't seem an obvious case of WP:CRYSTAL given that OnePlus confirmed that the phone will exist with certain specifications; feel free to nominate it for deletion discussion yourself after conducting a check for ways to improve the article. Appable (talk | contributions) 17:14, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Not sure if you're following the page, but Chrissymad redirected the article to OnePlus - which seems like the best option. Thanks! Appable (talk | contributions) 17:22, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Smoke generators

These are a little outside the had grenade category; here's a modern version. (Ignore the sales language.) Anmccaff (talk) 17:31, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Osman Ali Khan, Asaf Jah VII

[1] - The editor's right. — Tyler Durden (talk) 14:53, 8 June 2017 (UTC)