User talk:Toddy1/Archive 8
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Toddy1. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
Uran Islampur
Hi, could this article use WP:INCITIES guidelines? Thanks for updating it by the way. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:12, 11 February 2026 (UTC)
- I do not mind if it is changed to that. All I tried to do was to try to find out information about the place and record it in a reasonably sensible way. As you would expect, by finding and adding some information, it made it easier to find more information.
- One of the confusing features of the article was that someone had created an article on the Islampur in Ratnagiri district (complete with a citation to the census for Ratnagiri district), then editors had confused it with the Islampur in Sangli district, and ended up trying to merge them as if they were the same place. I have fixed that.-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:20, 11 February 2026 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
 |
The Original Barnstar |
| Appreciate your patience with newcomers — Longewal (talk) 21:30, 25 February 2026 (UTC) |
The Bugle: Issue 238, February 2026
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:03, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue 239, March 2026
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:07, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
User:Darklightsd
I recall you taking the time to guide User:Darklightsd on how sourcing works on Wikipedia, but they are indulging in a pattern of WP:SYNTH on the page Fitna (film). I don't think they fully understand Wikipedia's key pillars. Also, they have removed all previous warnings and messages re: Aisha from their user talk page. Can you step in? Thanks! — Longewal (talk) 15:39, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
- firstly hello. secondly: i literally talked with user tony and explained the sources are LITERALLY IN THE SAME ARTICLE AND I JUST COPIED THEM. for other things i added tafsirs and added sources.
- 3: if thats illegal in wiki, i didn't know. i just wanted to clean up old messages. at the same time you guys did not change anything as we reached a consensus in aisha talk page regarding ahmed.
- can you please stop being accusative and actually read my conversation with tony when you stalk my user page? i don't want to be rude but i don't like someone accusing me with something without actually investigating. Darklightsd (talk) 16:00, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
- I still don't think you are getting it. Using primary sources like the surahs to demonstrate that the film is cherry-picking is a violation of WP:OR - please read it. As editors, we cannot connect the dots or provide our own analysis. To include a claim about cherry-picking, you must cite published secondary sources, such as film reviews or expert commentary, that explicitly make that exact critique about the movie. Tony also highlighted this guideline on your talk page. Please review WP:OR before making further additions. — Longewal (talk) 16:10, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
- dude you just deleted the literal chapters section used in the movie to support your claim. this is the insincerest thing i ever seen, what is the problem with the verses used in the movie have a section where full verses are provided? you basically taking side and not being neutral or secular Darklightsd (talk) 17:03, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
- primary source was not necessarily used for the chapter. actually there is a source that say they are distorted. the source 60 say so Darklightsd (talk) 17:19, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
- i have provided sources in the edit. done Darklightsd (talk) 17:35, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
- I give up. Do your thing. — Longewal (talk) 19:04, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
- I have written a Subject in the talk page, by the way Tony didn't revert anymore when we talked and you supposedly agreed in the last comment and didn't wrote anything regarding my words. Don't do brigard and put words in Tony's mouth when we talked respectfully and didn't revert.
- You keep having a snide tone and generally not respectful to people putting effort with citations. You once yourself used got and accused me and calling it bad back then when you yourself did use it. Darklightsd (talk) 01:45, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
- Read this https://journals.openedition.org/mideo/571 Darklightsd (talk) 01:58, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
- Do you accept this as a source ? Darklightsd (talk) 01:58, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
- other sources: https://quran.com/8:61/tafsirs/en-tafsir-maarif-ul-quran and also for 8 60 which talked regarding the movie: https://abcnews.com/Blotter/Story?id=4544952&page=1 Darklightsd (talk) 03:44, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
- Do you accept this as a source ? Darklightsd (talk) 01:58, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
- im willing to reach a compromise if you still don't care about my sources or tafsirs i provided. how about we put the quranic chapters back? Darklightsd (talk) 02:57, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
- after all it was just a section containing the verses used. no problem in that Darklightsd (talk) 03:02, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
- in reality. i don't have problem anymore at all if its done Darklightsd (talk) 05:03, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
- and won't put my edit Darklightsd (talk) 05:03, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
- in reality. i don't have problem anymore at all if its done Darklightsd (talk) 05:03, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
- after all it was just a section containing the verses used. no problem in that Darklightsd (talk) 03:02, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
- I give up. Do your thing. — Longewal (talk) 19:04, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
- I still don't think you are getting it. Using primary sources like the surahs to demonstrate that the film is cherry-picking is a violation of WP:OR - please read it. As editors, we cannot connect the dots or provide our own analysis. To include a claim about cherry-picking, you must cite published secondary sources, such as film reviews or expert commentary, that explicitly make that exact critique about the movie. Tony also highlighted this guideline on your talk page. Please review WP:OR before making further additions. — Longewal (talk) 16:10, 25 March 2026 (UTC)
I'm giving up on keeping up with the requests. Godspeed to you and @Day Creature if you are continuing. meamemg (talk) 16:57, 30 March 2026 (UTC)
Reverting edits
Bro just sees one edit with a bad summary and decides to reverse all the GOOD changes I made. That’s really taking the piss Muneebfr (talk) 09:26, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue 240, April 2026
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:51, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
Bengaluru infobox image
@Toddy1 that Bengaluru infobox image has been there for a long time. The panorama image is more than 16 years outdated. Vijaydanny (talk) 11:33, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- @Vijaydanny: If you think that the buildings in File:View from Visvesvaraya Industrial and Technological Museum (2025) 02.jpg are significant, perhaps you could write a caption for the image saying what they are. You can also use alt text to provide a more detailed description. If you do not know how to do this, write what you want to say here, saying which is the caption, and which the alt text. I can then fix it for you.
_02.jpg){kind=link}
- "Unknown buildings near the Visvesvaraya Industrial and Technological Museum" or "View from Visvesvaraya Industrial and Technological Museum" are not useful captions.-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:52, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- @Toddy1 can the perrow be changed back to 1321. Vijaydanny (talk) 11:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- File:View from Visvesvaraya Industrial and Technological Museum (2025) 02.jpg has a width to height ratio of 1.33.
- File:Bangalore Panorama.jpg has a width to height ratio of 4.4.
- If the image was displayed as 300 pixels wide, this meant that the panorama was displayed as 68 pixels high, whereas the newer image would be displayed as 226 pixels high.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:04, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- but the perrow has been like that for many years sir. Vijaydanny (talk) 12:07, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- The perrow was like that because it had File:Bangalore Panorama.jpg as image1, and the width to height ratio of that image is 4.4.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:10, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- sir please check the page history the perrow has been like that with this same image for many years. Vijaydanny (talk) 12:12, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- That statement is misleading. The 1321 perrow was used when image1 was an image with width to height ratio of that image is 4.4. You are now using it with an image with a width to height ratio of 1.33, which has the effect of making that image totally enormous compared with the other images in the infobox.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:16, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- sir the infobox has been like that for many years there are many other cities worldwide that are using similar formatting. Vijaydanny (talk) 13:05, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- That statement is misleading. The 1321 perrow was used when image1 was an image with width to height ratio of that image is 4.4. You are now using it with an image with a width to height ratio of 1.33, which has the effect of making that image totally enormous compared with the other images in the infobox.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:16, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- sir please check the page history the perrow has been like that with this same image for many years. Vijaydanny (talk) 12:12, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- The perrow was like that because it had File:Bangalore Panorama.jpg as image1, and the width to height ratio of that image is 4.4.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:10, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- but the perrow has been like that for many years sir. Vijaydanny (talk) 12:07, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- @Toddy1 can the perrow be changed back to 1321. Vijaydanny (talk) 11:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- "Unknown buildings near the Visvesvaraya Industrial and Technological Museum" or "View from Visvesvaraya Industrial and Technological Museum" are not useful captions.-- Toddy1 (talk) 11:52, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
- @Toddy1 why did you change the perrow just let the infobox be the way it has been for years. Vijaydanny (talk) 11:47, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| I appreciate all that you do here. You seem extremely patient and methodical. That's pretty cool. — Longewal (talk) 04:17, 22 April 2026 (UTC) |
I have requested review of my TBan
Hello @Toddy1, I have requested review of my TBan at WP:AN as per your direction. Thank you. Shaan SenguptaTalk 13:39, 26 April 2026 (UTC)
Umar
I believe that providing a scientific-critical perspective on historical topics is far more important than the content itself. Telling people long stories as if they were entirely true, and then leaving the weak points for last, would be misleading. Many people probably won't read the article to the end. NGC 628 (talk) 08:05, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
- I have replied at Talk:Umar#Historical reliability.-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:10, 27 April 2026 (UTC)