User talk:Goszei

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

thank you for your contributions!! :) xRozuRozu • teacups 04:32, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete picture of the Sunset Fire? I will upload it again and I ask you to please not take off this contobution again.

it alighns with all wikipidia policies and it was taken from my work and it is very relevant so please dont take it off again, thank you. YisroelB501 (talk) 04:57, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That was by mistake, perhaps as the result of an edit conflict. I have edited it back in. — Goszei (talk) 04:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While it seems clear to me that you have good intentions, your recent edits to the article summary (lead) of Operation Barbarossa were reverted. Just so you know, that article is in GA status and has been thoroughly worked (content and citations, as well as summary) by a host of experienced and academically credentialed editors. In the future, I would advise you to discuss your planned content edits to a lead and justify them accordingly for all articles already in GA status. This generally means getting some consensus from the main contributors on the Talk Page first. Obenritter (talk) 19:49, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At a minimum, it is a major oversight that the current lead contains basically no detail on military movements like dates and cities, which are obviously highly relevant to the operation and should be included in any summary of it. I think you will agree that the current lead is not perfect, and will perhaps agree that there were at least some improvements in my edits. I will take it to talk soon. — Goszei (talk) 20:25, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, the irony! Do you think I could manage an equivalent phrase with a smaller footprint for that template? Nothing immediately comes to mind. Remsense ‥ 论 03:34, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Either "ibox clutter" or just "clutter", I presume. — Goszei (talk) 03:37, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I was worried previously that merely "clutter" was too vague, but I suppose it's evocative enough for editors, and perhaps the general readership too. Remsense ‥ 论 03:42, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]