User talk:Deva1995

Welcome!

Hi Deva1995! I noticed your contributions to George Simion and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Tacyarg (talk) 09:05, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Tacyarg Deva1995 (talk) 20:47, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Varieties of English

Hello, are you familiar with MOS:RETAIN, about leaving articles in the variety of English that already predominates in them? As far as I can tell from a quick scan, the Venezuela article was written, at least predominately, with US spellings, and you changed them all to Oxford spellings. Largoplazo (talk) 11:45, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Venezuela also had some BE and didn't have a variant template, so just tried to make it consistent and picked Oxford spelling. Deva1995 (talk) 12:05, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Poland

Hi, thanks for your general contributions, especially with punctuation on various pages. Just a word of advice - could you please refrain from deleting/altering images or content related with Polish history? I really did not appreciate you removing the Lady with an Ermine from the article Poland as this painting carries a lot of symbolism, having been in Poland since the 18th century; this may not be obvious to foreigners. It was discussed before on talk page and was included in the caption some time ago. Also, kindly refrain from making images too large. Mulţumesc. Merangs (talk) 14:57, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My thought process was simply "da Vinci? He is not Polish. Delete". I should have thought more about it. I'm sorry. Deva1995 (talk) 15:50, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying. Those were my initial thoughts. Merangs (talk) 00:24, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Deva1995. Thank you for your work on List of international presidential trips made by Klaus Iohannis. Another editor, Drat8sub, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Kindly add atleast one reliable source for each visit with a new column "Reference".

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Drat8sub}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Drat8sub (talk) 10:26, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retaining the existing variety of English

Hello. In many recent edits, you changed articles to use British English against Wikipedia's policy of respecting national varieties of English. For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan, use the variety of English used there.

However, for an international topic, please use the form of English that the first author of the article used. For further guidance, see MOS:RETAIN.

In addition, please make sure your edit summaries are accurate. An edit summary of "short description" when most of the edit is focused on changing the variety of English is not helpful to other editors.

Thank you. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to me on my talk page. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 19:42, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you've continued changing articles to add the {{Use British English}} template to the majority of your edits despite the previous message and without mentioning it in your edit summaries. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason and consensus. Guidelines such as MOS:RETAIN allow Wikipedia to function without continual edit wars. Pushing one English variety against the guideline is disruptive and not helpful. Please stop. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 05:35, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Daniel Quinlan. I will stop doing that. Deva1995 (talk) 08:12, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Something else for you to "stop doing that"

You seem to have a problem with English Wikipedia style, so please review the Manual of Style thoroughly. Not only are you unaware of how editors approach British vs. American English differences in WP articles, you also don't know that complete sentences in captions are always followed by a period; sentence fragments are not followed by a period. Mason.Jones (talk) 22:29, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CAPFRAG in the Manuel of Style reads "Most captions are not complete sentences, but merely sentence fragments, which should not end with a period or full stop. If any complete sentence occurs in a caption, then all sentences, and any sentence fragments, in that caption should end with a period or full stop".

Deva1995 (talk) 08:19, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but any full (subject-predicate) sentence in English Wikipedia still must end with a period. It's such a strong rule that it also applies to sentence fragments in a caption—if there's already at least one complete sentence in the same caption. (This avoids inconsistency and unsightliness.) But the overall rule is: Full sentences always end with a period. Mason.Jones (talk) 14:42, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trump percent edits

Hi. Is there an MOS guideline for that? Are you able to point me to it? ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 11:55, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:PERCENT. Who woulda guessed it? ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 11:57, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on ANI regarding MOS violations

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 00:24, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 2025

Hello, I'm Tgeorgescu. I noticed that you removed topically relevant content from Alliance for the Union of Romanians. However, Wikipedia is not censored. Please do not remove or censor information that directly relates to the subject of the article. If the content in question involves images, you have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide images that you may find offensive. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. tgeorgescu (talk) 17:11, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't go after me. I just tried to restore it to how it was before the drastic changes in the last few days. Deva1995 (talk) 19:45, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:Marginataen per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Marginataen. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Izno (talk) 22:45, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for restoration

Hi. I spent a bit of tim working on the page "George Simion", including sourcing references, adding images, distributing the "Controversies" section throughout the article per CRITS guidelines, and generally improving content and structure. These were not abrupt changes, but gradual edits made from early March onwards, accepted and tweaked by multiple editors along the way.

Unfortunately, the article is now in amuch worse shape, both in terms of sourcing, language quality, and objectivity. As BRV notes, reverting edits is not always necessary or beneficial, particularly when doing so is counter to “core policies such as neutrality, verifiability, and biographies of living persons.” I find this to not have been considered in this case. All I ask is for some editors to look at the current version and the version prior to the reversion and independently assess if they want to restore content. Please note that the ban was due to sockpuppetry, not my edits being bad. Tagging Super Dromaeosaurus as he's been a frequent editor of the page.--Deva1995 (talk) 07:30, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the difference from the version before you started editing the article in early March, and the current version - the only differences seem to be the addition of five sourced paragraphs, two images, and a change from "right-wing ... activist" in the lead to "far-right ... ultranationalist activist". What specifically is it that you think has been wrongly reverted? "Far-right" is not referenced in the article, but is referenced in the article for the party of which he is president. Tacyarg (talk) 08:40, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tacyarg. You should look at the difference between the current one and the one before the reversion on 6 April :) Deva1995 (talk) 08:45, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see your point. There is considerable sourced material removed. I'll have a detailed look when I can, unless someone more expert gets to it first. Tacyarg (talk) 10:07, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]