User talk:GlowstoneUnknown

Although some prefer welcoming newcomers with cookies, I find fruit to be a healthier alternative.

Hello, GlowstoneUnknown, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.

• Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
• Check out some of these pages:
  • Contributing to Wikipedia
  • Introduction to Wikipedia
  • How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
  • The five pillars of Wikipedia | Cheatsheet of WikiCode

• If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out the Teahouse, ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! Rasnaboy (talk) 01:35, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Why can't I edit some particular pages?

Some pages that have been vandalized repeatedly are semi-protected, meaning that editing by new or unregistered users is prohibited through technical measures. If you have an account that is four days old and has made at least 10 edits, then you can bypass semi-protection and edit any semi-protected page. Some pages, such as highly visible templates, are fully-protected, meaning that only administrators can edit them. If this is not the case, you may have been blocked or your IP address caught up in a range block.

Where can I experiment with editing Wikipedia?

Use the main sandbox or create your own personal sandbox to experiment.

How do I create an article?

See how to create your first article, then use the Article Wizard to create one, and add references to the article as explained below.

How do I create citations?

1. Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for.
2. Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for.
3. In a new tab/window, go to the citation generator, click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found.
4. Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button.
5. Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like <ref> {{cite web | .... }}</ref>, copy the whole thing).
6. In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied.
7. If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories:

==References==
{{Reflist}}

What is a WikiProject, and how do I join one?

A WikiProject is a group of editors that are interested in improving the coverage of certain topics on Wikipedia. (See this page for a complete list of WikiProjects.) If you would like to help, add your username to the list that is on the bottom of the WikiProject page.

CS1 error on United Australia Party (2013)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page United Australia Party (2013), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 08:15, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited 2002 Tasmanian state election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Independents. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 05:49, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

regression plots on 2024 Belgium poll page

Hello, I just saw that you updated the plots on the "Opinion polling for the 2024 Belgian elections" page and was just wondering how you made them since I like the way they look a lot more than the ones I was making previously for the page and would like to continue using the same style next time there would be a need to update them. Please let me know if you're willing to share the code you use or give me some info about it, no worries if not. Timsmsmsm (talk) 12:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Oh yeah, sorry about that, I forgot to link the code on those like I normally do, here's the link to the code I used. It's in R, and I like to use RStudio for this job. You just need to change the colours and amount of parties to match however many you're trying to do, swap out the DE.csv file for one that contains the polls for whatever election you want to generate a graph for, and change the dates for the specific election. I like to make copies of the ggplot file each pre-set-up for a different country/state. I'd be happy to send you a copy of those as well (if you'd like, I can give you the ones I already made for each of the Belgium graphs). I'll be honest, I felt a little bit bad replacing your files because it's clear you put a lot of work into them, but Gbuvn's opinion-polling-graph just looks better and more consistent with other opinion polling pages. Out of curiosity though, what did you use to make your versions of the graphs? GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 12:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello @GlowstoneUnknown, I would love to have your files for Belgium to update the French Wikipedia page. I tried to redo images myself with code from @Gbuvn but got errors. I am not comfortable using R. Cuspysan (talk) 15:15, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Alright, I'll prepare those files now, is there a preferred way for me to send them to you? i.e. email, Mega.nz link, etc.? GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 04:20, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, a mega link is good. Please mention me so that I can be notified. Thank you Cuspysan (talk) 08:34, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Cuspysan Here's the link, I also supplied the CSV files I used, feel free to practice with the R files, and I can't recommend RStudio enough as an IDE for the programming language, it's been incredibly useful for me. MEGA GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 22:10, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I tried ggplot-BE-WA.R and I have errors, I'm having trouble solving the problem

+ legend.text = element_text(size=16, margin = margin(b = 5, t = 5, unit = "pt")))

Error: object 'col7' not found

In addition: Warning message:

`aes_string()` was deprecated in ggplot2 3.0.0.

ℹ Please use tidy evaluation idioms with `aes()`.

ℹ See also `vignette("ggplot2-in-packages")` for more information.

This warning is displayed once every 8 hours.

Call `lifecycle::last_lifecycle_warnings()` to see where this warning was generated.

> graph + theme()

Error: object 'graph' not found

> ggsave(file="polls.svg", plot=graph, width=18, height=8)

Error: object 'graph' not found

> # workaround since svglite doesn't properly work in Wikipedia

> aaa=readLines("polls.svg",-1)

Error in file(con, "r") : cannot open the connection

In addition: Warning message:

In file(con, "r") : cannot open file 'polls.svg': No such file or directory

> bbb <- gsub(".svglite ", "", aaa)

Error: object 'aaa' not found

> writeLines(bbb,"polls.svg")

Error: object 'bbb' not found Cuspysan (talk) 22:46, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I foud the error. There was too much parties here.

scale_color_manual(name="",

breaks = c('col1','col2','col3','col4','col5','col6','col7','col8','col9'),

labels = c(party1,party2,party3,party4,party5,party6,party7,party8,party9),

values = c('col1'=col1,'col2'=col2,'col3'=col3,'col4'=col4,'col5'=col5,'col6'=col6,'col7'=col7,'col8'=col8,'col9'=col9))+ Cuspysan (talk) 23:04, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Update File:2024_Portuguese_Assembly_Of_The_Republic.svg

Hello, could you please update the file 2024_Portuguese_Assembly_Of_The_Republic.svg? We already know who got the last 4 seats (votes from the Portuguese abroad). Democratic Alliance got a total of 80 seats (+1), the Socialist Party got 78 (+1), Chega got 50 (+2). The others remained the same. Total seats = 230. Many thanks. Human Transistor (talk) 16:40, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Oop sorry, didn't see this until just now, but it looks like someone with patrol/autopatrol rights already did it GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 22:59, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Changes

Hi! I would like to propose some changes I'm confident are necessary to the 2024 Croatian Parliament diagram
1) SDSS should be positioned to the right of, at least SDP if not also Our Croatia. They're not more any more left-wing than Rijeke pravde (if looking purely the "positions" on their Wiki pages that's the case, but SDSS is primarily a Serb minority party, who doesn't show their socdem ideology often & is pretty insignificant). But even disregarding that, the more important point is the norm that Minorities are always grouped together, in the centre of the spectrum, like also in 2020 parliamentary election diagram.
2) The Focus colour should be changed to the   light blue/cyan that is actually 1 of their colours (see their page) and not the weird one used for them in the party color template as it's too similar to HDZ. The light blue is also used in the election map.
I also wrote in the discussion page for the file, but here as well just in case you're more likely to see this. CroatiaElects (talk) 18:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Ah thanks for the feedback. Sorry, slipped my mind to move SDSS to the centre, I was in a bit of a rush when I last edited it, also thanks for the heads-up about the colour, that looks a lot better. GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 23:02, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi! If you'd be so kind, I ask u to update the same diagram again, a few small changes happened since in the results table: Bosniaks together! article is created, now the party has its colour, also NPS is now presented separately from the Our Croatia coalition, so each have 2 MPs. CroatiaElects (talk) 17:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

2024 Croatian parliamentary election

Hello. Just wanted to apologise that it looks like I keep undoing your changes to this article. On the seat changes, the whole series of articles (and almost all national election articles) uses +/– rather than the icons.

Re the minority seats, the total votes can't be calculated yet as the party identification of all the candidates (i.e. Franjo Horvat and Ivan Komak) isn't clear. Happy for the vote figures to be readded when it is clarified. Cheers, Number 57 19:31, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I wasn't aware the candidates that weren't listed as being party members weren't Independents.

Re the +/-, I knew that the Croatian election pages have all been using it up till this point, but wasn't aware that it was the de facto standard for national parliament elections, I've mostly been working on subnational/regional/etc. election pages lately and my go-to for them is usually the //.

Don't worry about the undoing changes lol, it's fine as you've had good reason every time, I appreciate your fact-checking me and fixing the mistakes I've made, it's just unfortunate that I made said mistakes in the first place. GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 00:26, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, and I've just realised that totalling the minority seats' vote totals is meaningless, as Serb voters can cast three votes, so the percentages of the minority vote totals (comparing the Serb parties with the non-Serb ones) would be nonsense numbers. I think it's best to leave the party vote totals blank and just have the seats listed, as was done for the 2016 election article, or to remove them again and have a row with 8 seats (as done for all the other election articles), with 'National minorities' linked to the section below where their vote figures are (as I've just done for the 2015 article). Cheers, Number 57 01:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Ah right, that's annoying, well yeah maybe best to just leave the total votes and leave out the party votes GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 01:35, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2024 Belgian government formation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rainbow coalition.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:27, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Results of the 2024 French legislative election in Bouche-du-Rhône moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Results of the 2024 French legislative election in Bouche-du-Rhône. 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. C F A 💬 15:54, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Melis Sekmen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christian Democratic Union.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Results of the 2024 French legislative election in Bouche-du-Rhône (July 4)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Twinkle1990 was: 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:Results of the 2024 French legislative election in Bouche-du-Rhône 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.

Twinkle1990 (talk) 08:44, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, GlowstoneUnknown! 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! Twinkle1990 (talk) 08:44, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Factions of the Liberal Party

Hi, I noticed that on the page Centre Right (Liberal Party of Australia) you changed "three major factions" to "four major factions" (despite the next sentence saying "It holds the middle position between the three factions"). I was just wondering who the fourth faction are???

Thanks Viatori (talk) 13:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Oops, forgot to fix that, since the 2022 federal election, a new "Centrist" faction emerged (to my knowledge, they aren't extremely organised, but that's par for the course in terms of LPA factions) from dissidents leaving the Moderate and Centre-right factions. I'll fix the mistake I made on that page though, thanks for bringing it to my attention. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 13:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Diffusing your cats

Hi GlowstoneUnknown, regarding your French election pages, they should not be in high-level categories. See WP:DIFFUSE. Instead, Category:Results of the 2024 French legislative election by constituency itself is part of Category:2024 French legislative election, which in turn is a member of a number of categories and so on. Best, CMD (talk) 07:46, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for NSW Members of the New South Wales Legislative Council graphs

Thanks for the graphs you made on NSW Members of the New South Wales Legislative Council from the 1988 electons to 2019. I notced you made one graph for the 2022 South Australian state election on the South Australian Legislative Council. I was wondering if you have the time, could you make South Australian Legislative Council graps for the 2014 South Australian state election to 2002 South Australian state election. Muaza Husni (talk) 07:09, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Yeah sure, no worries, I'll get started in an hour. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 07:34, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

CCP

Hi, I reverted your edits to List of political parties in China because Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is the common name. See also this discussion. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 13:11, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Ah forgot about WP:COMMONNAME, sorry bout that. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 13:13, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

No worries. I was reverted for the same thing when i was a new editor too. Happy editing. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 13:15, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

My apologies

I apologise for what I said and how I said it. I did mean what I said when I said it, which makes it worse. But I have reconsidered my behavior as it doesn't lead to any improvement. You don't have to respond if you don't want or accept it. -- Svito3 (talk) 16:24, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Renaissance

This edit is a complete mischaracterization of what was said in the discussion you quoted. There was NO consensus to write "centre-right" in the infobox. In FACT, at the end of that very discussion, you said that "centre with a footnote to represent fr.wiki's descriptive positions" (or something similar) is fine. Don't misrepresent the truth, please. Other editors also agreed that it is a centrist political party and centrist by European standards (such as Checco). You need to stop, GlowstoneUnknow. What you have been doing recently veers into disruptive editing. Paul Vaurie (talk) 18:07, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I double checked the discussion to see if I misinterpreted the consensus, but as far as I can tell, Myself, IP user, Encyclopedisme, Blaise, Helper201, and even Checco stated they were willing to accept "centre-right" (in Checco's case, as opposed to "centre to centre-right". Helper201 initially reverted my edit but after clearing up confusion on their talk page, they said that they would allow me to restore my revision. If you want to establish a new consensus, you're welcome to open a new discussion, but it isn't disruptive to implement an edit based on consensus on the talk page. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 23:27, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

This is getting serious. You are blatantly mischaracterizing the discussion at this point. Checco said they preferred "centre" over "centre-right" even if they said they could compromise, and throughout the discussion they called Renaissance centrist by both French and European standards. Their preference was never to use centre-right. Helper201 said they favored "centre to centre-right", which isn't centre-right. The IP user never stated their opinion on the overall position, they just said that the economic ideology was centre-right, which it might be, but that doesn't effect the overall position. Checco strongly opposed "centre to centre-right". Then, you went on Helper201's talk page and stated If so, would you support removing "centre-right" from the footnote if the main position was changed to "centre to centre-right", as consensus seems to support on the article's talk page? So you yourself SAID consensus was to say "centre to centre-right" (which it was not, but nor was it to write centre-right). Lastly, Encyclopédisme is a banned sockpuppet who abusively used multiple accounts; we shouldn't their take input (and even then, they did not support the "centre-right" proposal). Finally, Blaisethebest NEVER suppored just "centre-right" but was for "centre to centre-right", which in the end wasn't agreed to in the talk page after all of the discussion. In short, you are straight up lying (yes, this is serious accusation). Neither the IP user, Encyclopédisme, Blaisethebest, Helper201, or Checco supported just "centre-right" for the infobox. Not even YOU! (See your last comment on that discussion). You are contradicting yourself. If you go back and add the position "centre-right" one more time, I will escalate this as disruptive editing. Paul Vaurie (talk) 00:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I made a mistake and I misinterpreted the consensus of the discussion, I misread a few of the messages sent there as supporting "centre-right", when in fact they supported "centre to centre-right", so I believed that the discussion had two potential consensus interpretations ("centre-right" or "centre to centre-right"), when it was actually just one. Would you accept a version of the page that says "centre to centre-right", as discussion consensus shows, in the infobox while keeping the footnote with the detailed description?

Thanks in advance – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 00:59, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for recognizing the mistake you made, I accept your apology. What I think you need to do is
A. Leave "Centre" in the position for now, which was the status quo for about a month after the discussion ended (and for longer than that before).
B. Restore "centre-right" to the footnote. Keeping radical centrist in the footnote wouldn't be inappropriate, if it's properly sourced.
C. Go back to the talk page and either reinitiate the previous discussion by tagging all previously involved editors (except the IP and banned user), OR start a new discussion. In either case, restate the three potential options and arguments for each.
D. Or, do nothing.
Ping me if you start a new discussion. Paul Vaurie (talk) 02:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Headcount

Hello GlowstoneUnknown. Although I think your proposal to move forward with "centre to centre-right" is fine, I just want to warn you about this. "Headcounts" aren't how we establish consensus. In a hypothetical discussion, if one user said "support XYZ because XYZ reason and therefore XYZ", but five users said "support ABC because it's better", the former would "win", since they brought forth a coherent argument, which far outweighs the votes that had no argument. See WP:NOTADEMOCRACY and WP:NOVOTE. Just a heads up for the future. Paul Vaurie (talk) 05:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Warning!

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits while logged out. Please be mindful not to perform controversial edits while logged out, or your account risks being blocked from editing. Please consider reading up on Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts before editing further. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you.

Nohorizonss (talk) 19:51, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Oh dear, have I? Would you mind pointing me to said logged-out edits? I always try to stay logged in, but sometimes (particularly on mobile) my browser signs me out and I don't notice, I tend to pick up on it before pressing "publish" though. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 13:11, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

While edit warring in the freedom party article, I won't pinpoint the exact edit coz it will tie you to it Nohorizonss (talk) 15:02, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Yeah I'm not sure which edit you're talking about, but none of those ip edits are mine. You've got the wrong editor. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 15:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

2024 French legislative election

About your edit of this page (French legislative elections 2024): you have cancelled my revision (Attal replacing Séjourné).

1. What you said to justify it would have been welcome in the talk page, I can't debate with all the users who don't understand the difference between a party and a coalition.

2. "Stephane was the party's official leader at the time, this isn't a Presidential election" -> this is false, since Ensemble is a coalition (basically EPR-Horizon-MoDem) and some Horizon candidates chose to run alone. This would therefore be a "collective leadership", as for the NFP. But in addition, France is a semi-presidential republic, so there are two types of legislative elections in France: normal elections (following the presidential election) in which Parliament is the only issue; and the elections following a dissolution of the National Assembly: in this second case, it is the head of government (who "conducts the policy of the Nation" according to the Constitution) who is the main issue, and the candidate for Matignon is not necessarily the leader of the party. The RN candidate was Bardella, there was no official left-wing candidate, and the Ensemble candidate was Attal, not Séjourné.

3. Finally, as I said in the talk page, the General Secretary of a party is not always the true leader of a party : the one who tooks part in the three debates was always Attal, never Séjourné. 2001:861:5602:2180:805C:7304:73E6:44AB (talk) 22:16, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:User:GlowstoneUnknown/GenderError

Template:User:GlowstoneUnknown/GenderError has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:14, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:GlowstoneUnknown/Userboxes/GenderError

Template:GlowstoneUnknown/Userboxes/GenderError has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:17, 8 November 2024 (UTC)