User talk:Kioj156

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Kioj156! Thank you for your contributions. I am I dream of horses and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{Ping|I dream of horses}} to your message. (talk to me) (contributions) @ 01:47, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Steven Watson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Merchant Taylors' School. 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) 06:09, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Principal of the University of Aberdeen is a very good page. Well done! BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 02:50, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Chancellor of the University of Aberdeen is a very good page. Well done! BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 06:20, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Economic status

Hi, I have noticed that you changed the wealth figures on the British Indian page. The problem with a "household" figure is that it can be misleading. Certain cultures tend to have larger families, with numerous generations living under the same roof e.g. parents, son and daughter in law, their kids etc. This means they tend to have a larger household income than smaller families. That is why the Resolution Foundation stated that it's fairer to do it on a per adult basis. And that's why i initially input the per adult figures. That gives a more accurate picture. Just like to get your views on that. Thanks Koppite1 (talk) 20:54, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Koppite1:, thank you for leaving a message. Would you be able to provide the page/sourced used in the Resolution Foundation report in which I can find the exact figures? That was my primary concern as the numbers quoted could not be backed up and seemed to be guesstimates which I was concerned may violate WP:NOR. I have seen exact figures in page 16 which show financial assets per adult but they do not match the figures you provided.

I am now aware that the make up of Asian households in particular may skew figures: Ethnicity facts and figures: Families and households so perhaps adding another column may be the preferred option. If exact figures can be quoted, I am happy to do so. Kioj156 (talk) 21:25, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is a chart on page 6. From this, it's possible to get median (as opposed to mean) approximates. That's what i previously used. Your idea of adding another column may indeed be the best solution. As you can see, on a per adult basis, White Britons have the highest median wealth (Indians have the highest household wealth) and groups like the Chinese fair a little better when looked at on a per adult basis. I think per adult is a fairer metric as it overcomes differences in certain cultures having larger/multigenerational families under one roof. Thanks Koppite1 (talk) 00:37, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I had thought that this was the chart you used. I would be against using approximates in that case as they can be prone to bias and are not figures which future readers can find for themselves using the quoted source. I do not think it is appropriate to include figures because it may help certain ethnic groups fair better, even if I agree with you on the merits of using the per adults figure. This is just my opinion though, and it may be better to open a discussion on the Talk page for British Indians to seek the opinion of others. Kioj156 (talk) 08:01, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

TBF, these are not approximates from the Resolution Foundation. I'm saying that because the chart doesn't give precise figures, they can be input as approximates and it made clear as such. Also, the converse of your argument is that merely quoting household wealth may help certain ethnic groups fair better. For instance, White Britons are wealthier than Indians but because they tend to have smaller families, we get this skewed perception that Indians are the wealthiest. Many of the wealth comparisons are now starting to do it on a per adult basis because it's a more accurate metric. For instance, the Civitas Report, which, like the Resolution report, found that White Britons are the wealthiest per head. Personally, i think it would be better to revert back to the more reflective per adult chart, or at least, add another column. Thanks Koppite1 (talk) 09:36, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I quote the household wealth figures because they are the exact figures given by the Resolution Foundation report, not to skew data any favour of any groups. You are welcome to include caveats or limitations of the data in the text above the table.

I am against inserting your own approximates based on what you interpret them to be because they are not the exact figures given by the report since the report itself does not provide exact figures. Any future reader looking at the source will not be able to find the data given in the Wikipedia page because they are based off of subjective interpretation of the chart. Regardless of how accurate the approximates provided may be, they are still approximates. The figures you provide have not been published.

I've said before I would be in favour of including per head wealth, but the core premises of WP:V, WP:NOR, and WP:NPOV trump either of our opinions. Kioj156 (talk) 10:13, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

TBF, there isn't much "personal or subjective interpretation" of the figures. The chart bars clearly give a good indicator. For instance, we can clearly see that the White British yellow bar is at the 200k mark. I really don't see the issue. Per adult gives a far more accurate picture. Koppite1 (talk) 19:35, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please familiarise yourself with the core content policies of Wikipedia. You use figures which are not published and cannot be verified. You can try to replicate the chart (though this may be subject to copyright) on Wikipedia, but you cannot quote figures which have not been published.

I would like to add that this is nothing against you personally or your ability to provide approximates. Figures quoted on wikipedia need to be published and easily verified, without subject to personal interpretation. Kioj156 (talk) 22:28, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not gonna push this any further but just wondering whether using the CIVTAS figures would have been a better option instead. That at least gives precise figures and it's done on a per head basis, which is a fairer/more accurate metric. Thanks. Koppite1 (talk) 10:10, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Resolution Foundation is a well-cited and respected think tank, I would refrain from using Civitas given its links and potential for bias. I have found this link from the ONS which quotes individual wealth: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/distributionofindividualtotalwealthbycharacteristicingreatbritain/april2018tomarch2020. I believe that 'Table 10: Average total individual wealth by ethnic group (15-category)' is the dataset you are looking for. It contains the most recent data for 2018-2020. Kioj156 (talk) 14:32, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

England versus the UK

Hello. Can I ask whether you saw my message at Talk:Black British people#England (and Wales) versus UK? I note that you're still adding England-only statistics to articles about ethnic groups in the UK, without making clear that those statistics don't apply to the whole country. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:59, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2024

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one or more pages into Islam in the United Kingdom. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. NebY (talk) 14:44, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Thanks for updating all of the census figures!

Tweedle (talk) 14:25, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Great work improving the article Muslim grooming gangs in the United Kingdom, and thanks for your helpful contribution to the title change discussion. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 18:38, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	I also say: great work improving the article Muslim grooming gangs in the United Kingdom. That it was completely emasculated directly afterwards is very, very sad. Here is a link to your final version. Wishing you all the very best in everything. Boscaswell talk 03:40, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]