This user has created a global account. Alalch E.'s main account is on Meta. This user has changed the username of this account. It used to be Twsabin. This user previously used another account: Alalch Emis. This user has new page reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia. (verify) This user contributes using Notepad++.

Welcome to my talk page!

I like to keep things compact, and don't have any great ideas for my user page yet, so my signature directs here.

I was a long-time reader and lurker (since 2003). I appreciate the Five pillars and the idea of open knowledge, and want to give something back; this is why I began editing in 2021. I'd like to receive your feedback on anything I've done. Expect a reply! :)

By the way:

• I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you start a new talk topic here, I will respond on this same page, as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there, using the ping template like this: ((ping|Alalch E.)). If you want to initiate a conversation with me anywhere else, simply ping me there—no need to notify me here.
• If a discussion here is about a specific article, I may move the discussion to that article's talk page. Were one to disagree I would tell them to treat it as my removing comments on my talk page and my quoting them on the target page. The Moved discussion to/from templates are useful here.

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 30.5 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 10 sections are present.

I'd also rather avoid three hatnotes in a row, but I'd do it by putting businesses, schools, and sports orgs back within Organizations, where they were before Clarity found the page. The hatnotes were a compromise. These three topics are, simply, organizations, and if they aren't listed there, then there must be hatnotes for the reader's sanity. —swpb^{T • beyond • mutual} 00:15, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I get what you are saying and tend to agree on a first look. I'm better able to see now that there's a deeper dispute underneath between you and another editor. But... is there really something wrong with a custom hatnote as opposed to three hatnote rows (could be, real question)?—Alalch E. 00:20, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, a single hatnote for all three sections would be a fine solution, if they must be split out at all. Yeah, thanks for your careful assessment of the situation. —swpb^{T • beyond • mutual} 00:24, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's Template:Hatnote group as an alternative (to the custom hatnote) to make them render inline. WP:HNR seems to recommend against multiple rows of hatnotes of the same type. You're welcome. —Alalch E. 00:25, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, Bkonrad beat us to it. —swpb^{T • beyond • mutual} 00:30, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya I just wanted to say thanks for working on the lead at Zainab Salbi. I'm happy it's improved and the length is better again. I do still think that if you need to take 150 words to explain the word salad of someone else's edit summary means, and that edit did very disparate things, then it is difficult to really understand what the edit was about. Particularly if it's on the lead of a article promoted to GA the day before. But that's water under the bridge for me, I just wanted explain where I was coming from. I also agree with Wikipedia:Every edit must stand on its own feet which I see you posted above. Cheers and happy editing. Mujinga (talk) 12:08, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I completely understand where you were coming from, and I'm glad that I could help.—Alalch E. 12:10, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Please review WP:RS and WP:V before continuing to attempt to edit-war WP:GUNREL sources into the encyclopedia. Imamul Ifaz (talk) 13:55, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You copied this warning that David Gerrard left on your talk page onto my talk page baselessly. I have informed editors of what you have been up to, in the ANI thread that I started (archived).—Alalch E. 18:05, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I just noticed your recent vote in a deletion discussion. I haven't voted, but I probably agree with you on deleting this article! However, you didn't really state why you personally think the article should be deleted. Closers are directed to ignore "per nominator" arguments. In order for your opinion to have weight in the outcome, would you consider giving a bit more information on your reasoning? Thanks! — Jacona (talk) 13:16, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That isn't necessary. WP:ATA is a nice essay with much good content but I disagree that closers "are directed to", that they should, or are allowed to, discount such comments, as long as it's clear which argument is being referenced, and as long as the argument points to a relevant WP:DELREASON. "Per nom" here clearly means "I agree with everything that the nominator said". I don't have any more information to give. I have watched this page since creation and it should be deleted exactly for the reasons stated by the nominator. Thanks for the feedback.—Alalch E. 13:28, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At Talk:Bangladesh#Images, Imamul Ifaz accused you of being a sockpuppet of Solomon. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:00, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...—Alalch E. 21:43, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are you being paid by Mladen Adamović to make edits on Numbeo on his behalf? You've been making significant and enthusiastic edits on the article over the past few weeks, many of which trying to "explain" how the website works. John Yunshire (talk) 09:21, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@John Yunshire: No. You're asking me this in tandem with your reverts in the Numbeo article. One of these two reverts' summaries is ...as claimed by Numbeo, and using a citation that leads back to the Numbeo website with said claim. Seriously?, but you should see WP:SELFSOURCE. Yes, seriously. In my opinion, the material is not self-serving, not an exceptional claim, does not involve claims about third parties, claims about events not directly related to the subject, and there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity. And no, the article is not based primarily on such sources. This information is also conveyed in secondary sources, but, yes it does trace back to the Numbeo website. By only saying that it is a crowdsourced database we are not describing it accurately, because the data also comes from manual gathering. I stand by my edits.—Alalch E. 09:54, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 21, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 19:21, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for tagging me on the userbox. I actually created that one and @CorbieVreccan moved it to the project page :) Indigenous girl (talk) 21:20, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome :) —Alalch E. 21:23, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thank you for your work on this. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 21:31, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Template talk:AI-generated § Revert

 – —Alalch E. 14:49, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alalch E.!

• The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
• We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
• Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
• Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
• If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:45, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Civility Barnstar

I'd rather call this the "surpasses my wildest expectations barnstar." Two years ago I was frustrated with your work on Wikipedia, but you seem to have changed crystals in your lightsaber and act like you want to be on our team now. I often read commonsense in your talk page edits and process assertions. Best of all, you're not manic anymore, or at least your behavior doesn't seem to demonstrate a maniacal aspect today. Sorry for the rub. Proud of you. You've come a long way. Still don't know if I trust you, but I AM starting to like you. Does that count? All the best. BusterD (talk) 19:05, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]