User talk:Yngvadottir
 Archives (Index) |
Trøndelag arms
You said that the Trøndelag arms were inaccurate. Can you explain? Giltsbeach (talk) 12:56, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- Trøndelag uses a very slim variant of the cross pattée (probably has a designation, but I was unable to find one). The file we were previously using was uploaded from a recognized source, and see the web presence for the county. I was unable to find any that looked like your version, but I've placed your version in the same Commons categories in case it's an unofficial or obsolete variant. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:52, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- There's no such designations for the cross patté, which is why you can't find it. They're all considered one and the same. It's similar to how lions, eagles, oak trees, et cetera can vary in appearance from one emblazon to the next, but they are counted as the same coat of arms. If you would prefer the version closer to the one found on the county website I can go ahead and edit the arms to match. Giltsbeach (talk) 21:07, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- You should have conformed your new version to the appearance in the official sources in the first place. But why not just continue to use File:Trøndelag våpen.svg, whose file description indicates that it is from official sources (and which is in use all over the projects, as I found when looking for a Norwegian article on the arms). Why are you seeking to replace the existing files for all these arms? This is the only one that appears to be inaccurate, but I don't understand why you wish to replace all these files in the first place. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:24, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- I should have? My version matches the official blazon of "På sølv bunn et gull utbøyet kors", and it's quite common to have multiple versions of a coat of arms on Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. I would invite you to look here [1] for an example. I don't really understand your aggression. Giltsbeach (talk) 21:45, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, you should have. Please stop deflecting questions by attributing emotion to others. It is uncivil. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:18, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- I'm sorry I "attributed emotion" to you, whatever that's supposed to mean. Please link the policy covering coats of arms and we can go from there. Giltsbeach (talk) 22:48, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- That's a start, thank you :-) You shouldn't deviate from an official coat of arms by reinterpreting it from the baseline heraldic description just because no explicit Wikipedia policy forbids it. That goes for many things not explicitly forbidden, including replacing existing files with your own without a good reason, but in this instance it can be compared to making your own version of a trademark. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:07, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
- If there's no policy to reference then there's nothing to discuss. Have a good day. Giltsbeach (talk) 00:27, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
- That's a start, thank you :-) You shouldn't deviate from an official coat of arms by reinterpreting it from the baseline heraldic description just because no explicit Wikipedia policy forbids it. That goes for many things not explicitly forbidden, including replacing existing files with your own without a good reason, but in this instance it can be compared to making your own version of a trademark. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:07, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
- I'm sorry I "attributed emotion" to you, whatever that's supposed to mean. Please link the policy covering coats of arms and we can go from there. Giltsbeach (talk) 22:48, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- You should have conformed your new version to the appearance in the official sources in the first place. But why not just continue to use File:Trøndelag våpen.svg, whose file description indicates that it is from official sources (and which is in use all over the projects, as I found when looking for a Norwegian article on the arms). Why are you seeking to replace the existing files for all these arms? This is the only one that appears to be inaccurate, but I don't understand why you wish to replace all these files in the first place. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:24, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- There's no such designations for the cross patté, which is why you can't find it. They're all considered one and the same. It's similar to how lions, eagles, oak trees, et cetera can vary in appearance from one emblazon to the next, but they are counted as the same coat of arms. If you would prefer the version closer to the one found on the county website I can go ahead and edit the arms to match. Giltsbeach (talk) 21:07, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Tom Cruise
Here is proof: https://www.google.com/search?q=tom+cruise%27+children&rlz=1C1CHZN_trTR973TR973&sxsrf=APwXEdc9TPNtLBptFnzJ4nEoJ_PtSWurrw%3A1682536159748&ei=33ZJZL_LLPiNxc8P1baTwAQ&ved=0ahUKEwj_tv3Qn8j-AhX4RvEDHVXbBEgQ4dUDCA8&uact=5&oq=tom+cruise%27+children&gs_lcp=Cgxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAQAzIHCCMQsAMQJzIHCCMQsAMQJzIKCAAQRxDWBBCwAzIKCAAQRxDWBBCwAzIKCAAQRxDWBBCwAzIKCAAQRxDWBBCwAzIKCAAQRxDWBBCwAzIKCAAQRxDWBBCwAzIKCAAQRxDWBBCwAzIKCAAQigUQsAMQQzIKCAAQigUQsAMQQzINCC4QigUQ1AIQsAMQQzINCAAQ5AIQ1gQQsAMYATINCAAQ5AIQ1gQQsAMYATIPCC4QigUQyAMQsAMQQxgCMg8ILhCKBRDIAxCwAxBDGAIyDwguEIoFEMgDELADEEMYAjIPCC4QigUQyAMQsAMQQxgCSgQIQRgAUOwDWMAOYI8VaAFwAXgAgAEAiAEAkgEAmAEAoAEByAESwAEB2gEGCAEQARgJ2gEGCAIQARgI&sclient=gws-wiz-serp ErceÇamurOfficial (talk) 19:09, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
- I'm afraid that search only shows that he's commonly referred to as Tom Cruise. To say it's his legal name, we would have to have a reference saying that he officially changed it from his birth name. (I looked for one before reverting you.) Especially in abiography of a living person, we have to make sure we have a source for everything we say, and in this case you seem to have got confused; he uses "Tom Cruise" professionally, but that's not the same thing as it being his legal, official name. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:34, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
- wait, the link I sent you doesn't prove it? ErceÇamurOfficial (talk) 13:53, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- Exactly. It shows only that he is normally referred to as "Tom Cruise". Yngvadottir (talk) 20:49, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
- wait, the link I sent you doesn't prove it? ErceÇamurOfficial (talk) 13:53, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
WikiCup 2023 May newsletter
The second round of the 2023 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to have scored 60 points to advance into round 3. Our top five scorers in round 2 all included a featured article among their submissions and each scored over 500 points. They were:
Iazyges (1040) with three FAs on Byzantine emperors, and lots of bonus points.
Unlimitedlead (847), with three FAs on ancient history, one GA and nine reviews.
Epicgenius (636), a WikiCup veteran, with one FA on the New Amsterdam Theatre, four GAs and eleven DYKs
BennyOnTheLoose (553), a seasoned competitor, with one FA on snooker, six GAs and seven reviews.
FrB.TG (525), with one FA, a Lady Gaga song and a mass of bonus points.
Other notable performances were put in by 
Sammi Brie, 
Thebiguglyalien, 
MyCatIsAChonk, 
PCN02WPS, and 
AirshipJungleman29.
So far contestants have achieved thirteen featured articles between them, one being a joint effort, and forty-nine good articles. The judges are pleased with the thorough reviews that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:15, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Giltsbeach (talk) 11:00, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
i started a discussion about your edits that had no consensus. Giltsbeach (talk) 11:00, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Accuracy
In this edit [2] the source does not support your claims. Do you have another source you're pulling from? If so, please cite that source. Otherwise, please do not add your own opinions into the article. Giltsbeach (talk) 05:56, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Poetic meanings
Is there any rhyme or reason why you specifically focused on jewels, plants, and flowers? What about the other methodologies? Are you planning on expanding these? Giltsbeach (talk) 05:59, 4 May 2023 (UTC)