User talk:Chipmunkdavis

Please click here to leave me a new message.

Welcome! If you post on this page, I will respond on this page. If I post on your talk page, I will have it watchlisted for the duration of the conversation (and possibly longer!), but please feel free to ping me if I appear to have missed something.

Season's Greetings

		Season's Greetings
		Here's wishing you a marvellous holiday and the best of 2022 Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:49, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Fowler&fowler! A well-taken collage of a well-decorated tree. I hope it sees you into a better 2022. CMD (talk) 21:32, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome

Thanks for the welcome! :) Vacationer (talk) 19:17, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

One year!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:53, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt a year already? I was not expecting that. Thanks again, CMD (talk) 14:52, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Edits to Russia and Ukraine ‎

Can you take a look at Chidgk1 edits at these two articles. Think they are just new to country articles thinking that all stats need to be from this month or somthing. We are talking about the tagging adding updated sources if posible...but not sure if we can keep up with there pace of tagging . Dont think they are trying to get this article demoted as has been suggested here...I think they belive they are doing good work. --Moxy- 16:34, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome

Proud of my African articles and pleased to see you added them to the 10,000 challenge. My prime driver is gender but its just part of the diversity and equality we strive for. Victuallers (talk) 09:50, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Dili info

I thought I would continue discussion of this topic on your talk page so that you don't need to keep an eye on mine.

I have in fact recently nominated a number of East Timor articles for DYK. The ones that have already appeared as DYKs are acknowledged on my talk page, and two more have recently been approved. I didn't nominate Tibar Bay, because I took too long to write it to my satisfaction. The German Wikipedia article about the history of Dili (de:Geschichte Dilis) seems to be quite comprehensive, although I haven't looked at it very closely yet. I am able to translate German, but most German Wikipedia articles need significant improvement to comply with English Wikipedia expectations relating to referencing, etc.

More recently, I have added more content to National Stadium (East Timor), created Cape Fatucama, and upgraded Ombai Strait and Wetar Strait. The Stadium article needs some more refinement, but the basic factual material in it is already now pretty much all I have been able to find on the internet. I also intend to expand the two Strait articles further, and an improvement of Timorese Resistance Archive and Museum will be my next task. Bahnfrend (talk) 10:17, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

No problem, whichever venue works. I agree on the German Wikipedia, it has great East Timor articles. They have more OR so they can't be translated directly, but I do forgive them given the impossibility of finding a source that says something as simple as "The Bay of Dili extends from the Comoro River to Cape Fatucama". (That'd add really good context to the current Geography section, and it's obviously true from a map, I just can't find it in anything remotely high quality.) CMD (talk) 14:13, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the source I used for the statement in the Bay of Dili article in English Wikipedia to that effect is a map that doesn't actually name the bay. So it doesn't really go quite far enough. For some reason, maps of East Timor seldom, if ever, name bodies of water or rivers. Maybe that's because East Timor is an impoverished country, and such names are not really important in the overall scheme of things. But like you, I will keep my eye out for a better source. Bahnfrend (talk) 14:40, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Dili

Hi CMD

Sorry for not replying yet to your request at my talk page... unfortunately my Wiki time has been dwindling considerably recently, and I'm about to go on vacation. So if you're still interested in my thoughts then, I can hopefully have a look at it in late April. I think your thoughts may be generally sensible from a very brief look. If you do decide to split out History into its own article, don't forget to leave a decent self-contained summary of appropriate length in the parent article. Its a bug-bear of mine when people just leave a section empty with a link to "main article", that's not how summary style is supposed to work, and why we have e.g. Rwanda#History and History of Rwanda as separate entities. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 17:46, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

@Amakuru: No problem, as could be guessed this is quite a slow burn. Fascinating that that's your bugbear, mine is the opposite, too much expansion on the summary while the main article is ignored. CMD (talk) 02:33, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi CMD

If you're still interested in nominating something for DYK, you might want to consider Comoro River, which I started expanding on 6 April. A possible hook might be: "... the Berloi Waterfall forms part of a minor tributary of the Comoro River?" I intend to expand the river article a little bit further, by including some information to the effect that its lower reaches are flood prone. I will do that in the next day or so. Bahnfrend (talk) 04:19, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

@Bahnfrend: How about adding a small bit of history, such as the very recent date of the second bridge? I think a hook on something like "...that the Comoro River, which cuts through the East Timor capital of Dili, had only one vehicle bridge until 2018?". I have a QPQ done so otherwise ready to go. Also added a link to the CPLP Bridge article from Dili. Best, CMD (talk) 15:55, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: Done. In the next 24 hours, I'll add some brief content about the 2020 and 2021 floods, but you don't need to wait for that content to nominate the article for DYK. Bahnfrend (talk) 13:58, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Timeline of Philippine political history

Hi. Heads-up. Some time ago, you merged the old Timeline of Philippine political Sovereignty article into the Timeline of Philippine political history article. I've proposed some fairly major changes in part of that article. If you're not following the discussion of that here, please take a look and comment if needed. Thanks. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:23, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Reaching out in good faith

Hey Chipmunkdavis, I know you had a problem with my recent AfD nominations but I just wanted to say I feel like the quote you have on your page is great and pretty relevant in our disagreement:

"There is a habit among editors to look at how the text of an article changes, rather than what the text says. There is a presumption that if text moves from one POV then it must be moving towards another POV (and so we see opposing POVs waxing and waning rather than seeing it for what it is: a settling at a NPOV)."

That's not meant to be snappy or sarcastic. I just genuinely feel like my WP:BOLD edits are helping build a WP:NPOV and add WP:VERIFIABLE information. Much of the information on the Ora (currency) article was incorrect and not supported by sources. I also personally believe, and you may disagree, that Orania Representative Council fails WP:GNG. I appreciate the engagement but I will say I was a bit perturbed by the immediate suggestion that I be topic banned or worse. If this message feels inappropriate, I understand and feel free to delete and ignore. Just wanted to reach out in good faith to explain why I am doing what I am doing. Desertambition (talk) 10:23, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I am sure you are working in good faith, but that does not meant there is no issue. I have no opinion on whether the Orania Representative Council meets or fails GNG. I have not looked into it at all. The problem is, your deletion rationale leaves me none the wiser. It reads as entirely disconnected to GNG, and that is problematic. On the Ora article, you have removed the note of the peg, removed the etymology behind the name claiming that this was inappropriate in Wikivoice, added the assertion that the digital version is a cryptocurrency, among other problematic edits. As with the deletion rationale and notability, your expressed reasoning does not match the actions taken. I cannot understand the reasoning behind this disconnect, and I suspect from the AN/I other users cannot either, but so long as this disconnect remains you're editing is going to continue to run into issues. CMD (talk) 10:45, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I did remove those things from the article because they were not supported by the sources. The articles I read almost always said "Orania spokesperson says..." or "According to Orania..." but the central claims were not supported by the sources provided/other reliable sources. The etymology was in fact a statement by an Orania spokesperson who said Ora "sounds like" the latin word for gold. That is not the same as a reliable secondary source stating the etymology authoritatively. The peg statement is refuted by the Reserve Bank of South Africa and other reliable sources. The dOra is a cryptocurrency and that was supported by sources already present but I could add more if you would like. I truly believe I explained these things in my edit summaries and have edited honestly. I personally do not understand how we came to separate conclusions based on the cited sources. This following statement is meant earnestly as well, it puzzles me as to why you would characterize my edits as vandalism or disruptive when I have stuck by reliable sources, detailed edit summaries, and have been ready and willing to discuss issues on the talk page if they may arise. I believe it's clear many users have a problem with my edits but I make sure to stick by WP:VERIFIABLE information and try to remain WP:BOLD in doing so. Desertambition (talk) 10:58, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

It does feel a bit like you are not assuming WP:GOODFAITH. Hopefully you at least understand my perspective a bit more. Desertambition (talk) 11:02, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

A group that names something is a reliable source for why it is named something. The currency is pegged to the Rand, no source disputes this. There is no source stating it is a cryptocurrency, and it is not a cryptocurrency, by definition. I feel you do not understand the topic at hand. The assertion I do not assume good faith is bizarre, given the conversation so far. I note in the AN/I you have apparently asserted similarly with others, so sadly this does appear to be a pattern. CMD (talk) 11:52, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

misleading edit summary and unnecessarily pointy language

Really? Where exactly? Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:44, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

The opening sentence. CMD (talk) 09:46, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Please give explicit example. I see no issue with my edits. Expand on how the edit misleads. Expand on how it is pointy vs what was there before the edit. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:51, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

For a start, deliberately changing "independent" to "independent sovereign", which reads as redundancy to make a point. CMD (talk) 09:53, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Redundancy is a very different thing to misleading. I submit that there is nothing misleading about "independent sovereign" as opposed to "independent". And if it was making a point, what was that point? I fail to see the point that you seem to see. Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:05, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Misleading was the edit summary which asserted the edit was about date formatting. If you fail to see a point to the change, why make the change? CMD (talk) 10:33, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

So the edit to the article itself was not misleading; it was just the edit summary that was misleading. Is that your position? Why would you revert an edit if it was not inherently misleading or otherwise erroneous? Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:37, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Because it adjusted the wording to a much pointier form, while also not adding any information or clarity for a reader. CMD (talk) 13:40, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

So if I change it to read as follows, you will have no objection? "Today, Artsakh is a de facto sovereign state" Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:27, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Of course I object, that is exactly the same sort of uninformative jargony change. You have so far not answered the question of why you want to make such a change. CMD (talk) 16:54, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I have so far not answered the question of why I want to make such a change because so far it has not been asked. Since you now ask, I think that it's best to avoid WP:EasterEgg surprizes. Such as clicking on "independent" and landing on "Sovereignty". Laurel Lodged (talk) 08:51, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

It was asked above, but if that is the case then the easiest solution is to remove the wikilink. Readers understand what independence is. CMD (talk) 09:08, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

What's your beef with bluelinks? Readers understand better when a term is linked. No extra cost involved in bluelinks. If you know what it means, don't click it. It you don't know, click it. That's how Wiki works. What's your beef with this bluelink: "Today, Artsakh is a de facto sovereign state" / Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:30, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

No beef outside of standard guidelines. CMD (talk) 23:55, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

June 2022 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive

On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!

You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

No objection re Armenia

No objection: [1]. Largoplazo (talk) 02:12, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

About 113.210.116.130 (The person who's vandalizing Malaysian-related articles.)

He is most likely a vandalism-only IP. I'm keeping a close eye on him and his contributions. I'll report him if he starts doing it again because I'm confused if it's good faith or bad faith (I want to be sure, he's most likely bad faith), Thank you! Dinosaur TrexXX33 (chat?) 17:01, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Henley & Partners

Hi CMD! I noticed that you're a member of WP:COUNTRIES and you've also been somewhat involved in the past at Henley Passport Index (which is produced by my employer, Henley & Partners), so I'm hoping you might have some familiarity with the subject matter and would be willing to help out with a content issue.

In short, I initiated a discussion at Talk:Henley & Partners#Major changes made without consensus after an editor made several sweeping changes without discussion in mid-March, most of which I considered either WP:COATRACK additions, additions that relied too heavily on a WP:BIASED source, or arbitrary removals of sourced content. Another editor, User:15, wrote that they largely agreed with me and said they would revert the bulk of the undiscussed changes. But then 15 abruptly stopped editing (their last edit was Apr. 5), so the article since then has remained basically unchanged in the non-consensus version - I have not done the revert myself due to my COI. Since then I've been in touch with an editor (Wtmitchell) who is active in articles about the topic of citizenship, who also agreed with 15's approach, but said he was too busy to get involved.

I'm hoping you can read the talk page discussion and, if you agree, revert the disputed changes (1, 2, 3) to whatever extent you feel is appropriate, to allow consensus to be reached properly. Thank you, Sarah Nicklin (talk) 12:50, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Responding on the article talkpage. CMD (talk) 14:05, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for taking action on this. Would you mind taking a quick look at this edit to the article on the company's founder as well? It was done by the same editor at around the same time as the other edits. Similar removal of sourced content, plus addition of multiple paragraphs of coatrack/POV fork material. Much appreciated, Sarah Nicklin (talk) 12:32, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Sarah, I'm afraid BLPs are not an area I go to often. If it helps that page does not appear that negative. Best, CMD (talk) 13:54, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

OK. I reached out to you in the first place because of your connection to the subject matter, but at this point the situation really just requires a level-headed, unbiased editor who knows how to apply WP:NPOV - not necessarily a BLP expert. Plus, you are by now already familiar with the context of the situation and the nature of the edits to both articles. So if you could take a moment to review the Christian Kälin edit despite your reluctance, I would greatly appreciate it. But I certainly understand if you still prefer not to get involved. Thank you, Sarah Nicklin (talk) 07:03, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

User:TAKA Michinoku

Not sure where to ask about this, but since you welcomed the user, I thought I'd start with you. Is this a valid username? I ask because Taka Michinoku (often stylized as TAKA Michinoku) is the ring name of an actual wrestler. I seriously doubt that we would allow a user to call themselves Ric Flair or Hulk Hogan or CM Punk, and this seems just as odd and prone to misinterpretation as the user being the wrestler in question. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:08, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

@Khajidha: We would not, per WP:IMPERSONATE. I have dropped a note on the talkpage. CMD (talk) 16:14, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Would you consider becoming a New Page Reviewer?

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. () Hi Chipmunkdavis, I've recently been looking for editors to invite to join the new page reviewing team. Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; the new page reviewing team needs help from experienced users. Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision (if it looks daunting, don't worry, most pages are easy to review, and habits are quick to develop). If this looks like something that you can do, please consider joining us. If you choose to apply, you can drop an application over at WP:PERM/NPR. If you have questions, please feel free to drop a message on my talk page or at the reviewer's discussion board. Cheers, and hope to see you around, (t · c) buidhe 17:37, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wildlife of North Macedonia

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wildlife of North Macedonia you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 17:01, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Storm of IPs

Hi, Chip. You revert fast, but you might also find Writ Keeper's mass rollback script makes life easier. Bishonen | tålk 11:21, 18 June 2022 (UTC).

@Bishonen: Thanks, I happen to already have that for precisely these situations. It really does smooth maintenance. However, it breaks down when competing with Sinebot, so perhaps a (short) semi of Talk:Germany wouldn't go amiss. Best, CMD (talk) 11:24, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

I've already semi'd a number of the targeted pages. Talk:Germany, you say? OK. Bishonen | tålk 11:27, 18 June 2022 (UTC).

I wonder what it is that trips Sinebot up about that, as there is a signature present. CMD (talk) 11:44, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wildlife of North Macedonia

The article Wildlife of North Macedonia you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Wildlife of North Macedonia for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 09:41, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Nomination—no movement?

Hello, I notice that the issues I raised in my review have yet to be addressed. Please note that the nomination will probably be failed on 27 June if the review is not completed by then. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:05, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@Amitchell125: You actually caught me right near where I had the space to attend to this (the weekend is here). Should be done before the deadline. I am fiddling with the topographic map as suggested, I may take you up on your offer of assistance at a later point. CMD (talk) 15:50, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks, happy to help with the map.Amitchell125 (talk) 15:52, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

2022 Core Contest

Hi. Congratulations on your win at the 2022 edition of the Core Contest. Please get in touch with me at [email protected] to coordinate your prize. Thank you. Karla Marte(WMUK) (talk) 09:20, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Privet

Privet comrade. The Russian page content you deleted had been agreed by consensus on the talk page of the article. If you want to remove content do not just delete it, in the future start a discussion on the talk page. If you are a paid Wikipedia editor you should not be editing this type of content either... conflict of interest. Colinmcdermott (talk) 10:10, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Colinmcdermott (talk) 11:26, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Edit Request Tool changes

Hello, I just made some significant changes to User:Terasail/Edit Request Tool. Since you have the tool active, I am informing you of this since it may affect you. To open the tool you will now have to click the "respond" button. The tool will load a similar interface as before. There is now a live preview of the response. These changes might have introduced some bugs so if you have any concerns / suggestions or run into problems please leave a note at User talk:Terasail/Edit Request Tool Thanks, Terasail^[✉️] 15:40, 30 June 2022 (UTC)