User talk:Baking Soda

Archives

/Archive 1

Multiverse

Why did you pull the paragraphs relating to a peer-reviewed paper in an international cosmology journal (as cited in said paragraphs)? A paper on the very topic of the page - the multiverse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.53.10.205 (talk) 13:12, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:Notability, WP:UNDUE, WP:PRIMARY SOURCE. Please discuss on Talk:Multiverse. Baking Soda (talk) 13:20, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be claiming that there is no outside source to this material - when I have told you there is, and provided it. please reconcile your saying that that there is no reliable source, with my provision of a peer-reviewed paper in the scientific literature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.53.10.205 (talk) 13:27, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Half Barnstar
		For significant cleanup of Mathematical universe hypothesis, with User:22merlin. Nice job! —swpb^T 13:29, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you report

https://wiki.eso.workers.dev/wiki/User:Vietkingo He do same edits as Kordestani, Sedej and Enxip. Shadow4dark (talk) 18:26, 1 April 2016 (UTC) See more info here https://wiki.eso.workers.dev/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Sedej[reply]

Done. Thank you. Spirit Ethanol (talk) 19:14, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Issuing level 1 warning about removing AfD template from articles before the discussion is complete. (Peachy 2.0 (alpha 8))

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Piramid LGBT Diyarbakir Initiative. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:24, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Useful idiot, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Southern states. 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) 10:59, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Azerbaijani Claims

Could you provide the reason for removing Azerbaijani claims? Agulani (talk) 07:42, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

   My bad did not see the changes properly Agulani (talk) 07:42, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of state leaders in 2016

Howdy. If Neve-selbert were to revert your additions per WP:STATUSQUO? It would be helpful if you would go along with WP:BRD & not restore them. There's no deadline & so waiting to get a local consensus shouldn't be too much of a problem, should it? :) GoodDay (talk) 20:48, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The bolding of Palestine

Having skimmed through this talkpage section, the issue of Palestine being bolded or not remains debatable. To be clear, I am not going to reinstate my edit, although I believe that a {{Disputed inline}} tag is necessary as this issue of sovereignty remains unresolved.--Neve –selbert 17:40, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:April 2016 Kabul attack

Shall I reopen the discussion without relisting it and reverting the name? --George Ho (talk) 10:03, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@George Ho:, hello. No need for this particular case as more attacks likely this year. However, for the future, per WP:PRECISE, it is recommended that titles should be precise enough to uniquely identify title, not recommended higher precision (how I think you understood WP:PRECISE); much like Minimax (minimum num words for maximum precision). Baking Soda (talk) 12:35, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please be careful about changes to your own comments on talk pages

Hi, Baking Soda. Could you please follow WP:REDACT in your change to the RfC being held on Talk:Genocides in history. Simply changing your position to 'oppose' when you hadn't actually adopted an 'oppose' or 'support' position, but had created a definition of your own and had other editors respond to your proposal makes the other editor comments seem nonsensical.

Feel free to strike through your proposal section and add "Oppose" (along with the date of your edit), but don't leave the RfC survey section look like a confused discussion by changing the meaning of your initial comment. Thank you! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:08, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

En-dash script errors

Hi Baking Soda, I believe the script you're using to convert unspaced en-dashes to spaced en-dashes is incorrectly converting en-dashes within number ranges, which should remain unspaced. See your recent edit to Cicero in which p.300–301 was changed to p.300 – 301, alongside many similar edits. Thanks for marking the dead links though :) – Quoth (talk) 21:25, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Fixed. Baking Soda (talk) 21:39, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Syrian Civil War & ISIL sanctions notice

Please read this notification carefully, it contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

A community decision has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Concerning your edits at Mustafa Badreddine on May 14

GreyShark (dibra) 06:25, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Response

Hello, Baking Soda. You have new messages at Forward Unto Dawn's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thank You

Hi Baking Soda, Thanks for your attempts to resolve the edit war at Siege of Fallujah (2016). Highly Appreciated..!! Sanket Edits Wiki (talk) 10:27, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Source for Ramesses II's accession date?

Hi! I see you reverted my change to the May 31 page (I removed the claim that Ramesses II took the throne on May 31). You reverted it and added a link to a source.

My question is, can you find any other source to support this? I actually found the same page you did before I made my change--I googled "Ramesses May 31"--but that page is just a copy of an old version of the Wikipedia page on Ramesses. (Much of the text hasn't changed, so large parts of the Crystalinks page match Wikipedia word-for-word.) The statement that he took the throne on May 31 was removed from the Wikipedia page a couple of years ago; so right now, the only source on offer is a copy of something that was deleted from Wikipedia itself.

Do you have any other sources? If not, I think we should remove it. I think it'll ring alarm bells for a lot of people, especially since the Roman calendar wouldn't be a gleam in Numa Pompilius's eye for another 500 years... ;-) — Narsil (talk) 22:14, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Narsil: Numerous sources document Ramesses II's ascension date to be III Shemu day 27 (Egyptian calendar), which is approximately May 31/June 01. See this source for example. Baking Soda (talk) 22:30, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm prepared to stipulate "III Shemu 27", then! But we don't have a source that lets us nail that to "May 31 1279". To my mind, that implies a level of precision we just don't have (matching the ancient Egyptian calendar to a corresponding date in the Gregorian calendar which wouldn't be finalized for another 2500 years). But if you don't agree, I'll just make a post on the May 31 talk page and let people settle it. But regardless, the Crystalinks source is extremely dubious--it's basically a wacky New Age blog with a lot of stuff copied from old versions of Wikipedia. To my mind, a fact with the source "Stuff that used to be on Wikipedia before we cut it" is worse than nothing. So at the least, if you don't mind, I'm going to flag that source as {dubious} and leave it for the Wiki hive mind... — Narsil (talk) 23:06, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note

Please refrain from reverting my edits. Violating WP:3RR might get you blocked. Thank you. Zakawer (talk) 12:14, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Baking Soda. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Racism of low expectations listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Racism of low expectations. Since you had some involvement with the Racism of low expectations redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 00:47, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]