User talk:1RightSider

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:56, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Your Bautzen changes

Your changes let the foreign names appear much further down, thus making them appear unimportant in contrast to including them in the lede. Additionally, the whole name section doesn't give any additional information. It is a non-section cause it just lists the names. Tibesti1 (talk) 23:24, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't see that your changes are of any good intention. Deleting the foreign names from the lede just because you think they are not important enough. Tibesti1 (talk) 23:32, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Furthermore it annoys me cause i wrote the whole lede practically on my own. Another thing is your logic with the two names. You keep deleting the "Upper Sorbian: Budyšin" and instead replace it with : Bautzen or Budyšin (Upper Sorbian pronunciation). However: note that the English name is Bautzen only, and not Bautzen or Budyšin, and although both the German and Upper Sorbian names are official, it has to be made clear that Budyšin is the Upper Sorbian version, and therefore it has to read: Bautzen (Upper Sorbian: Budyšin). Note that Bautzen is the English version of the name. You did the same at Cottbus, also a lede that i wrote practically on my own. It doesn't shine a good light on you, just running around here "improving" someone else's work instead of writing something essential on your own. Tibesti1 (talk) 23:46, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Such rude, aggressive and ignorant messages are not how people address each other on Wikipedia. You've made several major errors here, and you seem to misunderstand some simple tenets of the collaborative encyclopedia. You tried to start a similar fight on Intforce's User Talk page.
If you speak that way to an admin, they'll give you a warning, at least. You should familiarize yourself with Wikipedia. I've put some info on your Talk page. - 1RightSider (talk) 05:12, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

There is always the danger that answers like that are just diversions from the actual points of contention. Just out of interest, which words of my above messages exactly are "rude" or "aggressive"? And yes i remember this memorable other discussion concerning Hamburg, when a user stopped me from mentioning Felix Mendelssohn in the lede. I still think that he is Hamburg's most famous son, and find it quite strange that he may not be mentioned in the lede. Also, i still think that my photo collage was a bit nicer than the current one, but decide that for yourself. What you also didn't mention is that i didn't revert your edits, although i obviously think they are not good. Because i kept waiting for your reply. But there did not come any reply, but just a reprimand. Now that you've made all that (un)clear, you might want to reply to my first point. You inserted: Bautzen or Budyšin. But Budyšin is not the name used most often to refer to Bautzen in English. And as far as i know, the articles are named after the name a city is most often referred to in English, so the two names Bautzen and Budyšin can not be equalized. They are not equal alternatives, but Budyšin is the Upper Sorbian name. Hence ithas to read: Upper Sorbian: Budyšin. And because Budyšin is also official, it also has to be written in bold. Tibesti1 (talk) 00:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

March 2024

Hello, I'm Trlovejoy. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Top of the Pops Saturday—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. TRL (talk) 04:24, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Trlovejoy: - the edit was a reversion to something someone wrote in 2005, it was a mistake. My subsequent edit undid the error and redirected Top of the Pops Saturday to the article Top of the Pops Reloaded, as it should be, and it is made very clear in the first sentence of the article that it redirects to, but you've reverted that too. How did you not notice the subsequent edit? - 1RightSider (talk) 04:34, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Cottbus

In the English Wikipedia, the name which is most often used in English is the title of an article. As you can see at Bolzano, not even there the German name "Bozen" is written in bold, although "Bozen" is probably far more used in English than Chóśebuz. If you can't provide a source stating that it is allowed to write titles like "Cottbus OR Chóśebuz", and also a source that it is allowed to even write the less used name in bold, then it has to be Cottbus (Lower Sorbian: Chóśebuz). The same applies to Bautzen and Cottbus Hbf by the way. Can you even provide any example of other articles than the Sorbian-related ones that you changed yourself, that use the pattern Cottbus OR Chóśebuz? Tibesti1 (talk) 11:08, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, Corfu or Kerkyra, Ordu or Altınordu, Tangier or Tangiers, it's common usage in English in encyclopedias. Maybe it doesn't exist in German encyclopedias and that has confused you. It is a shorter synonym for "also known as". Yes, the English Wikipedia guidelines (which I cited about 10 times) approve of alternative names in bold. "Bozen" would actually be a good example – it is known as a secondary name in English, but maybe no editor has thought of doing that.

This reply is out of courtesy, but I can't accept your conduct here, Tibesti. You've been on Wikipedia for 2 years, still with very poor knowledge of its policies, and your approach is still to try to browbeat others into agreeing with you. (That isn't allowed, and it isn't what Talk pages are for.) In your message, you confuse an article's title with its introduction, and confuse a source with a guideline. Those are two different things. Unless you have something radically more civil and better-informed to share, I won't be chatting further. - 1RightSider (talk) 05:27, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

You must have been searching very long for those examples. At Corfu it is also Kerkyra because Corfu is the most used name in English and Kerkyra is the most used indigenous name and probably sometimes also used in English. Chóśebuz is neither most used in English nor most used as indigenous. Strange that you didn't find any examples of the typically bilingual regions in Europe. It is not done in all of South Tyrol, nor at Brussels, nor at Aosta. Neither at Transylvanian-related articles (Brașov, Sibiu). It is, however, done at Trier, because Trèves and Triers are traditional old English names for that city, taken from French. And that is probably also the case with Tangier. All of this makes me assume, that it is only done when there are traditional, other names for the respective places, which are still sometimes in use. But not when there are different official minority designations for cities, which are sometimes also used in English sources (Chóśebuz as only name for the city is probably used very rarely in English sources, and probably only in especially Sorbian-related texts). And as you can see at Brussels-South railway station, bilingual stations also don't follow your pattern. Unlike your version:

Cottbus Hauptbahnhof (German) or Chóśebuz głowne dwórnišćo (Lower Sorbian)

it is done there like this:

Brussels-South railway station (French: Gare de Bruxelles-Midi; Dutch: Station Brussel-Zuid)

Something tells me that the second version is how it's done at Wikipedia. So it would be nice if you could cite the exact sentences of the respective guideline that allows the "Cottbus or Chóśebuz" version because i couldn't find it. Tibesti1 (talk) 07:35, 24 October 2024 (UTC)