User talk:PlainWatcher

Welcome!

Hi Ariankntl! I noticed your contributions 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! JarrahTree 01:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Lumut (Paser) moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Mount Lumut (Paser). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Wikishovel (talk) 11:56, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mount Lumut (Paser) (August 15)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Wikishovel was:

This submission seems to be a test edit and not an article worthy of an encyclopedia. Please use the sandbox for any editing tests, but do not submit for review until you have an article that you want reviewed for inclusion in Wikipedia. Thank you.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Mount Lumut (Paser) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Wikishovel (talk) 11:58, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ariankntl! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Wikishovel (talk) 11:58, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 4

I noticed that you deleted multiple RFDs without explanation, including one of my own, which I believe was an accident. Could you please fix it? GilaMonster536 (talk) 02:57, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GilaMonster536: I have fixed it, and initiated the Rfd Ariankntl was trying to start. Mdewman6 (talk) 03:25, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks GilaMonster536 (talk) 23:06, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ariankntl it looks like you were trying to nominate Bandahara for redirects for discussion; I have done that for you. In the future, please pay attention to the steps for nominating a redirect given at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion#How_to_list_a_redirect_for_discussion, and if you aren't sure of something, feel free to ask me or someone else for help. Also, if you have WP:TWINKLE installed, it automates all the steps for nominating a single redirect. Cheers, Mdewman6 (talk) 03:25, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and sorry for my mistake about deleting some RFDs. Ariankntl (talk) 05:08, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Kuta

Hi there. Thanks for reaching out! The reason I disambiguated is described at the standard documentation at WP:PRECISE and WP:PTOPIC.

In case of 'Kuta', it seems this name is ambiguous not only between various topics like places, clothing, people, caste, ... but there's actually another place called Kuta in the same country but on a different island.

Before I made the move, I examined some references to Kuta on Bali in sources and in Wikipedia. The vast majority of those that I found were actually followed with the text immediately explicitly saying it's on Bali. That's why it didn't seem out of the ordinary to append that in the title as well.

When a topic is so popular that it's commonly assumed to be the meaning of a word, we can make a primary topic determination, be it moving the article or setting up a primary redirect. If we apply the WP:DPT guideline, and have a look at some of those indicators, however, it's rather moot: WikiNav shows it to be most popular, but it's not generally clear it was primary-topic-level popular - there were 634 views of the list in November, and we could only identify 74 clicks on that topic, with 30 more filtered. So even if all of these clicks had the intention of going to the same place, we only got ~15% of viewers to click the first item in the list. If ~85% of readers don't follow through, that does not indicate there's a primary topic for them.

If you wish to argue otherwise, please feel free to start a discussion on Talk:Kuta. The WP:RM process is most commonly used to change navigation like this, because it gets the discussion noted in noticeboards where other people are called in to participate.

Note that the idea of talking about a lack of respect for the existing structure should be avoided, because it appears to assume that the change wasn't done in good faith, which it was. --Joy (talk) 08:52, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]