Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 08:56, 21 January 2025

Hello!!

Click here to post a message to me

This editor is a Senior Vanguard Editor and is entitled to display this Duranium Editor Star with the Neutronium Superstar hologram.

This user received the Editor of the Week award for the week beginning April 24, 2022.

This editor is Supreme Gom, the Most Exalted Togneme of the Encyclopedia and is entitled to keep the floor plan of The Great Library of Alecyclopedias, including its cardboard carrying tube.

This user has been editing Misplaced Pages for more than 15 years (19+).

This user is not an administrator and has no desire to be one.

.

Topik terhangat Iin12 (talk) 05:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Mount Edziza

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I've nominated Mount Edziza for FA if you're interested in participating. Volcanoguy 19:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Will give my input as soon as someone opens up the review. Don't feel qualified enough to review this topic... but can review sourcing and general protocol adherence. Moxy🍁 19:59, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Reviewing sourcing and general protocol adherence would be fine. Volcanoguy 23:45, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Three users have commented so far. Volcanoguy 16:38, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for The Citation Barnstar Moxy! Dasomm (talk) 08:14, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

November music

story · music · places

greetings from a trip -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:21, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for coming over! - I uploaded pics of a trip that was a 10-day celebration of a 16 November event, but the day was also when a dear friend died. We sang Hevenu shalom aleichem at his funeral yesterday, and it was good. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:54, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello

Hello,I'd like to meet you. Can we be friends, please? Where are you from? Has Misplaced Pages been an audience for you? Thank you. Happy editing! r Abduvaitov Sherzod Wiki 88 (talk) 17:18, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Edit summary

Can you please make sure to add an edit summary in all your edits? Thank you for your contributions though! Apenguinlover<talk>() 17:21, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

I dont bother for vandalism Edits with summaries 80.4% Moxy🍁 17:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you, have a good day! Apenguinlover<talk>() 11:02, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Please revert my edits.

@Moxy hello, Why did you delete what I had written in the articles on Persian literature and culture of iran?!! This content is now available in other Misplaced Pages languages. Please revert my edits as I have properly researched them carefully before making them. Thank you, good luck. Hamedjavan (talk) 10:32, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

see WP:PROMOTION ...more info at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/DarvishanpourbamiMoxy🍁 14:26, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

"Communist state", "Socialist state, "List of socialist states" and "List of communist states"

Hi

I am back! :) I won't edit war with you or anything else, really!

But I want to collaborate. You reverted my edits on "Communist states" for the simple reason that there was a "Lots heres doing best to restore to before puppet edit... retaining 7 edits".. But you didn't say anything about the quality of my edits. All those edits were made by reliably third party sources. I am wondering if you are interested in going through those edits together to see what you actually disagree with? The same goes for the "List of communist states".

As for the "socialist state" article, you wrote, "Last good copy i can see", despite my whole text being referenced by tertiary sources. I can also source primary sources, showing that Marx and Engels never used the term "socialist state" and the fact that Lenin said that the USSR was not a socialist state. Again, I would like to go over the edits with you and find out what you disliked soooo much.

I won't make a single edit without you, and without consultation with the wider community on those pages. However, its important to note that this time you actually have to discuss because I am not going anywhere :)

Have a nice day, hope to hear from you! TheUzbek (talk) 07:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes any mass removal of content or whole article change will need a talk Moxy🍁 14:51, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that is why I messaged you here. Are you interested in a talk?

Secondly, my edits on "Communist state" was not a "mass removal of content or whole article change".... Most of the information was retained, but the article restructured. I would like to hear you're opinion on this. TheUzbek (talk) 14:58, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

The article was certainly restructured, but it doesn't appear to be correct to say that most of the information was retained - for example the revision seems to omit discussion of Trotskyist theory. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:46, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

You are mixing up articles. The "Communist state" article, as it is now, does not have any information on Trotskyist theory. As for the socialist state article, it presents Trotskyist theory wrongly. Trotsky did not articulate a different conception of socialist state from that of Stalin, but he believed that Stalin's policies degenerated/deformed the communist state.

So please, if that is you're only objection to the revert then please change you're objection. TheUzbek (talk) 11:49, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

@Vif12vf: @Nikkimaria: Context Moxy🍁 15:00, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

But why are you reintroducing this discussion? Why can't we all agree that we want to improve Misplaced Pages? As for the communist state article, you reverted on the grounds "Lots heres doing best to restore to before puppet edit... retaining 7 edits"... That is, you don't really have a reason for reverting it. You have not written one specific reason for why my edits on communist states were bad. Not one single one. Can't you, at the very least, give me that? What was worse? What changed?

I feel that instead of actually telling specifically what is wrong Moxy, you are intentionally vague. I mean, I am about to send in articles on the communist form of government and the highest state organs of power in communist states do the Communist and Post-Communist Studies. I am not a fool on this topic; and my submittion has been written under the supervision of specialists in the field from the University of Oslo. This is not to say that all my opinions are correct, and I should be treated any different from any other users. But you could at least show me some respect by saying specifically what is wrong with the article. Reverting texts on the basis of "Last good copy i can see" sounds like bullying to me.

So please come up with something specific. But to make the following clear

1. Marx and Engels did not articulate a theory of "Socialist state"; they never used the term "socialist state". If they ever mentioned a new form they used terms like "Republic of Labour", the "Social Republic" et. cetra. I can say this because I have read most of Marx's works.
2. Lenin did not have a different conception of the state than Marx and Engels, theoretically. That is, Lenin did not have a different conception of the state from Marx and Engels. All three believed the state to have a class character, to be the executive committee of the ruling class. This is not to say that Lenin did not have different ideas from Marx and Engels, he did, but he did not have a different state conception. Lenin, unlike them, used the term "proletarian state", "socialist state" et cetra but never defined them. Despite naming the new state the Union of SOviet Socialist Republics, Lenin wrote, "Nor, I think, has any Communist denied that the term Soviet Socialist Republic implies the determination of the Soviet power to achieve the transition to socialism, and not that the existing economic system is recognised as a socialist order" Trotsky more or less agreed, he believed the USSR had created the condition for socialism in 1925 writing that the establishment of a state “monopoly of foreign trade" "is the necessary condition of socialist state structure in a capitalist environment.” At last, Marx only defined the first post-capitalist period as a transitory period, "Between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat" Lenin agreed, and despite using the term socialist and workers' state, Lenin never drew the line that Stalin would later make. He believed that the SOviet state was unique, noting, "It follows that under communism there remains for a time not only bourgeois law, but even the bourgeois state, without the bourgeoisie!". This is unlike Stalin that talked about "a new type of state"
3. Trotsky did not have a different conception of the state from Marx, Engels or Lenin, but he vehementely objected to Stalin's policies. He believed the USSR to be a degenerated workers' state, but his understanding of state was no different from Marx, Engels and Lenin. I have never read anywhere that Trotsky had a different theoretical conception of what a socialist state was from Stalin either. He opposed Stalin's dictatorship, but he believed in the planned economy and the nationalisation of industry. His objection was that a socialist state could not be achieved without democracy.

When treating these topics one must understand the essence of Marx's theory of the state, which is that the state is a product of specific material relations and the ruling class of the state is a byproduct of these (elementary Marxism). One must also understand that the term workers' state is not necessarily synonymous with socialist state. Its a term that denotes the goal of representing the working class but not what Marxists call the material circumstanes. That is why Lenin wrote, "A workers’ state is an abstraction. What we actually have is a workers’ state, with this peculiarity, firstly, that it is not the working class but the peasant population that predominates in the country, and, secondly, that it is a workers’ state with bureaucratic distortions." The clearest definition Lenin ever gives of what socialism, and indirectly a socialist state is, is the following, "For socialism is merely the next step forward from state-capitalist monopoly. Or, in other words, socialism is merely state-capitalist monopoly which is made to serve the interests of the whole people and has to that extent ceased to be capitalist monopoly."

As for other glaring missteps, why does an article on the socialist state have a section on "Reform and revolution"? Bernstein, Kautsky et cetra never really used the term socialist state in their articles or books. The disagreement between them and the Bolsheviks was not socialist state, but how to take power on behalf of the working class. Unlike Marx, Engels and Lenin they believed they did not need to destroy the bourgeouisie state to succeed in their socialist aims. I say Marx because he wrote, "But the working class cannot simply lay hold on the ready-made state-machinery and wield it for their own purpose. The political instrument of their enslavement cannot serve as the political instrument of their emancipation"

As for the section, "Criticism within left-wing movements", nothing is referrened by third party sources.

"A people's republic is a type of socialist state with a republican constitution". A people's democratic state is, by definition (according to Marxist-Leninist teaching), a state that has an organisational form of state power that is communist, but still has not established the pure leadership of the dictatorship of the proletariat. That is why Laos constitution states "people's democratic state. A people's democratic state does not constitutionally enshrine a socialist economy; a socialist state does. THis is important because the ruling class is a reflection of material circumstances.

I have written long now, and only used primary sources: my tertiary sources are the ones you reversed Moxy. None of these articles have been written by people who have read Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin, and obviously the basic lack of understanding of Marxist-Leninist theory is way obvious. I have read these; you clearly have not: I have also read the academic literature on these topics, as my edits you reversed prove.

As far as that goes that means you should at least bother to discuss things with me, say specifically what is wrong and come with constructive feedback on how to improve these articles. You have failed to do so, and instead come with vague sentences to defend what is (but failing to them the actual content in the current articles). TheUzbek (talk) 12:26, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Wondering if this is the difference between western education vs not. Dont have time for a wall of text with no source nor cotent suggestions, but on point 2 "Marxism predicted that the working class, or proletariat, would rise up in a spontaneous revolution. However, Leninism argued that this revolution needed leadership from a vanguard party made up of professional revolutionaries. While Marxism foresaw a temporary dictatorship controlled by the proletariat, Leninism resulted in a lasting dictatorship led by the Communist Party. Additionally, Marxism mainly focused on revolutions in industrialized nations, whereas Leninism also recognized the revolutionary potential of peasants in mostly agricultural countries like Russia." Moxy🍁 12:41, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

1. I have a Western education; I'm from Norway. If you want references, see my versions of communist state and socialist state articles; I mean, it is there and you know it. :)
2. Marx was vague, but he said a transitory period, you are correct. Lenin's aim with the Russian Revolution was to start a revolutionary wave and transform Germany into a communist state (the Munich Revolution). This was important since Russia was, as Lenin repeated time and again, a backward country that had barely developed capitalism. Notice that Lenin did not negate Marx's theory that revolutions should occur in advanced states; his theory was that capitalism was weakest in the periphery (like Russia and China), and that revolutions there would instigate revolutionary waves in the advanced capitalist states. So Lenin agreed with Marx, but he foresaw that the revolutionary wave would not start in England. However, Lenin never negated Marx's central claim. Lenin also had problems dealing with the state; when would the state begin to whither away? Immediately during the transition or at the end? That is why Lenin also failed to articulate a theory of law/legal system. If the state would whither away why have a legal system? Stalin was the man that dealt with these questions.
3. Because of the failure of the Munich Revolution, Lenin and the Bolsheviks had a big problem.... Russia was a backward state and could not foreseeably construct socialism without advancing capitalism. Lenin then began to theorise that the communist party should take responsibility for implementing "civilisation" (that is, capitalist and socialist policies) in Russia. By saying so, Lenin admitted that Russia was both ways; it had a non-capitalist ruling class but a feudal-capitalist economy. Stalin, however, believed one could "skip" capitalism, " we do not regard our country as the base of the revolution, we have not got what is needed to build socialism, and we cannot build a socialist society—in which case, if the victory of socialism in other countries is delayed, we must resign ourselves to the prospect that the capitalist elements in our national economy will gain the upper hand, that the Soviet regime will decay, and the Party will degenerate." Lenin, of course, increased the transition, but he never said that Russia was socialist (he also opened up for the possibility having two or three stages; a lower, middle and advanced stage). It was Stalin that made the transition a very long affair, which he made clear in his speech to the Joint Plenary Session of the Central Committee and the Central Control Commission of the 16th Congress on 7 January 1933;

“Some comrades have interpreted the thesis about the abolition of classes, the creation of a classless society, and the withering away of the state as a justification of laziness and complacency, a justification of the counter-revolutionary theory of the extinction of the class struggle and the weakening of the state power. Needless to say, such people can not have anything in common with our Party. They are either degenerates or double-dealers, and must be driven out of the Party. The abolition of classes is not achieved by the extinction of the class struggle, but by its intensification. The state will wither away, not as a result of weakening the state power, but as a result of strengthening it to the utmost, which is necessary for finally crushing the remnants of the dying classes and for organising defence against the capitalist encirclement that is far from having been done away with as yet, and will not soon be done away with.”

Important to note here is that Stalin introduced two amendments to classical Marxist doctrine: firstly, he postponed communism, and secondly, he answered the vexing question of how communists should deal with the state. However, Stalin had still not been able to articulate why the Soviet state represented a new form of state. And, in fact, he never did. Instead, on 5 December 1936, the Soviet Union adopted a new constitution that defined it as a “socialist state of workers and peasants”. This is an exceedingly vague term, and Stalin only mentions in passing in his speech, “On the Draft Constitution of the U.S.S.R”, that “we now have a fully formed multinational Socialist state”.

And yes, its a long "wall of text", but this is a complicated topic and I'm trying to show you a modicum of respect by actually representing what actually happened instead of simply writing "wrong". TheUzbek (talk) 16:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

TL;DR stop after seeing " I mean, it is there and you know it. :"...for the 4th time Article talk page so others can be invovled. Moxy🍁 16:47, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Why? I don't stop reading you're text despite you always repeating that im a sockpuppeter or referring to a mistake I made.... Show some class; I am only trying to establish a level of trust between us.

As for the talk page; you are the main obstical; you are the one that reverted the changes, and you seems to single-handedly fail to actual write why my changes are bad. Either accept you did wrong, or plainly write it down. TheUzbek (talk) 17:02, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

@TheUzbek, I agree that this kind of thing belongs on an article talk page, and since this is the "bury everyone in walls of text until everyone gives up or you all get blocked" is the kind of thing I mentioned being worried about in the unblock discussion. If you get really stuck with someone, you can try getting a WP:3O to break the deadlock. But otherwise it's probably best to just move on to a different article. There are all kinds of things that need doing, many of which are articles that don't even exist yet. -- asilvering (talk) 18:31, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

I will leave be; I really just wanted to get a fresh start with Moxy; that was my sincere wish. Let bygones be bygones and get a functioning working relationship. It was not as easy as it seemed.

Moxy, I will always be open to working with you. If you ever change you're mind you know where you'll find me! TheUzbek (talk) 13:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Canadian genocide of Indigenous peoples, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CBC.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Timothy O. E. Lang

Hi there. I know you do a lot of edits on Canadian topics. Would you have a moment to look at Timothy O. E. Lang. I'm getting the sense this is a failed political candidate (but accomplished individual), and have not found significant coverage to support notability. I'd appreciate your opinion. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:01, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Agree not much out there to make a cese for notability. Moxy🍁 17:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

I'll see if I can find some sources. Maybe AFD but I'll look around first. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 17:44, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Australia Page

Thank you. Over the thing I said about “the land down under” redirect, I just want to let you know that it is a new redirect just created recently Servite et contribuere (talk) 05:46, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

See Talk:Australia#Hatnote spam. Moxy🍁 15:39, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

December music

story · music · places

Listen today to Beethoven's 3rd cello sonata, on his birthday - it was a hook in the 2020 DYK set when his 250th birthday was remembered. I picked a recording with Antônio Meneses, because he was on my sad list this year, and I was in Brazil (see places), and I love his playing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:58, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

I come to fix the cellist's name, with a 10-years-old DYK and new pics - look for red birds --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Omg so many.... bloody fantastic User:Gerda Arendt/Stories Moxy🍁 19:56, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

I am honestly just confused, because you are saying the data is incorrect with no evidence

Every single edit I have put matches the links you have provided. Not a single person has had a problem with my edits other than you, as you clearly seem to always want to revert them.

First you said "it's incorrect, you wrote 6.9% when it's 4.9%". When you realized I wrote the EXACT same number that you provided and said was correct instead, you still undid my edit... when it clearly is correct data. You have not provided a real reason to undo these edits.

Please discuss this with me. I would like to cooperate. What is the problem with the edits I have put in? C.monarchist28 (talk) 17:37, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Been waiting Talk:Canada#Ethnic Origins Moxy🍁 17:39, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

You have not provided one SINGLE example of what does not match between the information in the link you provided (The Daily article) and the source I used for population groups. They seem to all be consistent and no one has had a single problem with my edits apart from yourself. Can you please provide, either here or on the Canada talk page what "information doesn't match" (as you have written), because I am dying to know! I am confused. C.monarchist28 (talk) 18:08, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Again.....copy paste

Change of stats... South Asian (6.9%), Indigenous (4.9%), Chinese (4.5%), Black (3.8%) sourced to the raw data (that I assume was self calculated).

Old stable version...South Asian (2.6 million people; 7.1 percent), Chinese (1.7 million; 4.7 percent), and Black (1.5 million; 4.3 percent). The Indigenous population representing 5 percent or 1.8 million individuals sourced to an analysis of the raw data by those who published it saying Racialized groups in Canada are all experiencing growth. In 2021, South Asian (7.1%), Chinese (4.7%) and Black (4.3%) there were 1.8 million Indigenous people in the country in 2021, representing 5.0% of the total population. Moxy🍁 23:10, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Just reverted stating It clearly says 4.9% Indigenous not 6.9%, which corresponds to the first link you provided....yet source says "According to the 2021 Census, there were 1.8 million Indigenous people, representing 5.0% of the total Canadian population, up from 4.9% in 2016.". Moxy🍁 17:37, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

I see you have stated on the Canada talk page "close but different", but the difference between 4.9% and 5.0% is simply rounding. If you want to be academic as you have stated, please work with me! :)

Here is the link I am working with. Scroll to the very bottom. You will see "Indigenous peoples 1,772,025". Statistics Canada may round it to 1.8 million - they tend to just round when writing. For example, the Latin American population in that same link I provided is 579,010 but in this link that you provided, it is rounded to 580,000. If your concern is just 1.8 million vs 1.7 million or 5.0% vs 4.9%, this still makes the data consistent! The total Indigenous population, 1,772,025, over 36,328,475 people is 4.87%. 4.9% is the best rounding. Also, try to keep in mind this is government data, it is consistent when they post numerous articles! All from the same data source - the census.

Please let me know if you have any other concerns, I would genuinely like to clear them up, learn more, or discuss them! C.monarchist28 (talk) 18:20, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Every number is different not just the Indigenous one. The Indigenous one is the one i noticed first because your number is from 2016 that has incresed since then. Best go back to main tlak so other can explain all the problems. Moxy🍁 18:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Hmmm not sure I follow to be honest. Can you provide links with specific examples? Still failing to see any mismatch, everything looks consistent as far as I can see. Please provide specific examples "every number is different" is a bit less work than I have put into explaining your concerns. It does kind of feel like you just want to revert my edits for no reason. Everything is consistent man! C.monarchist28 (talk) 18:26, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

"Best go back to main tlak so other can explain all the problems" the problems which you yourself seem not to even see, and which no one else had a problem with either? C.monarchist28 (talk) 18:31, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

If you know how to bring attention to or bring people to the talk page, that would be awesome. I just need some validation because clearly neither one of us two sees any problems with my edits... just need people to find the talk page. :/// Unfortunate, honestly C.monarchist28 (talk) 18:35, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

You have also stated "That said....I think I agree we should stick with statistic Canada group's over Misplaced Pages made up groups such as European Canadians", so I see you're not fundamentally against my edits as I initially thought but just want accurate data written. I hope you can see that it is accurate and if you agree, since no one else was against my edits, let's get the StatsCan groups back up over arbitrary groups like "European Canadians"!

Let me know. C.monarchist28 (talk) 18:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Problem I have is your calculations not with the groups being presented. Back to tlak pls. Moxy🍁 18:28, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

I am calculating the percentages exactly as they are provided. Can you give any more examples? What do you mean with my calculations?

It says clearly the total population. It says clearly the white population. I can divide these two together to get a percentage? I would like to understand...

moving to talk page shouldn't be a priority because too much text wall there will prevent people from reading it and what is on the talk page is already both of our main points. But what is wrong with my calculations? C.monarchist28 (talk) 18:30, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

My calculations... I clearly stated "The total Indigenous population, 1,772,025, over 36,328,475 people (total population) is 4.87%. 4.9% is the best rounding". First you had a problem mismatched data, then a problem with my calculations... honestly... no basis. You make these claims like mismatched data and problems with calculations with ZERO explanations. C.monarchist28 (talk) 18:41, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

But our source being used says 1,807,250 ....so why a difference when you do the calculation? Moxy🍁 22:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

To be honest, what you wrote (the first paragraph on the Canada talk page) is such non-sense which is why no one is commenting on it. What you wrote and what you are concerned about just makes zero sense.

Unless you are actually going to defend your points ("problem with calculations", after you found out the first argument of "mismatched data" didn't live up), I am going to be re-inserting my edit. Because it is accurate government information with a valid government source that is correctly calculated. You are making such nonsensical claims!

What you wrote, "simply because the percentages don't match the statistical analysis that has been published by the Daily", has been addressed. It DOES match up. Therefore, it has been discussed in the talk page, and I am more than justified in re-inserting my edit WHICH NO ONE OTHER THAN YOU HAD A PROBLEM WITH TO BEGIN WITH, as I have addressed your concerns and you have not brought up a single legitimate concern since then. First you stated it is mismatched, then you switched to a problem with calculations for which you have provided zero examples. Fin. C.monarchist28 (talk) 21:11, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Your free to ask for input from others Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution, But till you have Misplaced Pages:Consensus best not to editwar back in your version that is contested. My position is simple.... think it's best we regurgitate the source that has analysed the raw data over your calculation of the raw data. This would also reflect how other sources present the information.... that is verbatim because of Statistics Canada Open Licence..like

• Meadus, R.J. (2023). Communication for Nursing and Health Care Professionals: A Canadian Perspective. Canadian Scholars. p. 76. ISBN 978-1-77338-365-1. Retrieved December 19, 2024.
• Khosa, F.; Ding, J.; Tiwana, S. (2024). Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Healthcare: From Knowledge to Practice. Academic Press. p. 106. ISBN 978-0-443-13252-0. Retrieved December 19, 2024.
• Little, William (September 7, 2023). "Chapter 11. Race and Ethnicity". BCcampus. Retrieved December 19, 2024.
• Marif, Diary (December 19, 2024). "Vancouver, Surrey, Calgary, Toronto, Brampton, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Montreal". South Asian Post. Retrieved December 19, 2024.
• "South Asians (7.1%), Chinese (4.7%), Blacks (4.3%) represent 16.1% of Canada's total population". Indo-Canadian Voice. October 27, 2022. Retrieved December 19, 2024.

Moxy🍁 21:33, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

It is contested by not a soul except for yourself, because it is clearly raw government data. You are disputing it for no reason then saying not to enter it because it is disputed. LOL.

Please bring people in to the discussion on Talk Canada. C.monarchist28 (talk) 21:50, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Are you a troll? What you are saying does not make sense. The data you would like to regurgitate perfectly matches the raw data. Like 100%. The raw data is easily calculated. You are providing beyond zero substance, I honestly because you cannot be serious. C.monarchist28 (talk) 21:54, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Seasonal greetings:)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello Moxy, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, — Benison (Beni · talk) 18:28, 22 December 2024 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

— Benison (Beni · talk) 18:28, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Same to you thank you very much. Moxy🍁 18:34, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

President of Canada

Moxy, who created this absurd re-direct? Just delete! Rwood128 (talk) 21:05, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

People have tried in the pass to no avail.... that could be one of our topic discussions. Moxy🍁 21:07, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

But this was a joke, surely. Why take it so seriously? Rwood128 (talk) 22:28, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Help:Dummy edit

it is called FANDOM not wikia for a few years now... if youre gonna revert my edits at least EXPLAIN WHY ZacharyFDS (talk) 11:38, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

January music

story · music · places

Happy new year 2025, opened with trumpet fanfares that first sounded OTD in 1725 (as the Main page has). -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:49, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Liebster Immanuel, Herzog der Frommen, BWV 123, my story today 300 years after the first performance, is up for GAN. Dada Masilo will be my story tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

My story today is about a composer who influenced music history also by writing. Did you watch Masilo talk and dance? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:10, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

... and today, pictured on the Main page, Tosca, in memory of her first appearance on stage OTD in 1900, and of principal author Brian Boulton. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:04, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Today, between many who just died, Tobias Kratzer on his 45th birthday who was good for an unusual DYK mentioning a Verdi opera in 2018, - you can see his work in the trailer of another one that I saw, and my talk page has a third (but by a different director). 2025 pics, finally. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:50, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Copyright problem on List of counties in Mississippi Crime in Canada

Some of the content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/11-627-m/11-627-m2024030-eng.htm, which is not released under a compatible license. Webpages of the Government of Canada are protected by copyright. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, some content had to be removed. Please let me know if you have any questions. Diannaa (talk) 23:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't think the article named in the subject line is the one you mean: I don't see any Canadian content there. Newimpartial (talk) 23:30, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes wrong link ...but @Diannaa can you restore this please as per permission=https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/reference/licence and https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/reference/copyright ... Forgot to do attribution I only did it for the images my bad...it come from this page that is licensed under the Statistics Canada Open Licence.Moxy🍁 01:18, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi Moxy. The StatsCan license is different from the general license for the other Govt of Canada stuff. This looks like a compatible license to me. I will bookmark that page in case it comes up again. Sorry for the autofill error in the header. Diannaa (talk) 14:56, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

All good thank you...you are the best!!!! Moxy🍁 15:21, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Please add the following to your citation when copying from StatsCan webpages: "Text was copied from this source, which is available under the Statistics Canada Open Licence." Thanks, Diannaa (talk) 14:42, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Will do...just FYI ... even though it's open license.... I still try my best to paraphrase that i asuume you have noticed...but sometimes just cant like "Chinese (40%), Japanese (35%), Southeast Asian (35%), South Asian (33%) and Black (32%)" . but can leave the note eitherway to be safe. Moxy🍁 18:32, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

@Diannaa: ....should we make a template somewhat like {{CIA World Factbook}} for this to add to articles? Moxy🍁 18:36, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

On Canadian values, the overlap was substantial enough that I felt that attribution was required. You can see for yourself via Earwig's tool. A template would be nice. In the meantime I have a handy copy of this blurb in a sandbox, ready for copypaste. Diannaa (talk) 00:36, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Quebec edits

My guess is that the editor is a francophone; the edits look like the simple past, if it existed in English. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:57, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Agree.....lets guide them to French Misplaced Pages. Moxy🍁 16:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

3RR

You've just violated WP:3RR, you know the basics. Stephen 00:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Looking for a productive conversation..... is there a reason you don't want to follow the manual style other than other articles exist? Moxy🍁 01:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

There's nothing in MOS:BIO that suggests that your way is the style. Now please self revert your 3RR violation. Stephen 02:34, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

There is no violation this is something you should know as an administrator. I will not self revert based on a threat. As for the comment about BIO page not listing this very specific topic ... is because we have a wider general manual of style for all articles in relation to accessibility for our readers... be it based on disabilities or purely for ease of reading. Is this something that is really worth your time? Moxy🍁 02:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Mortal Sin (humor)

(To be read as humor and sarcasm)Per the XfD at Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 January 6 § Template:Mortal sin in the Catholic Church surely if ever there was a sin worthy such a template, it must be both Modesty and Malware. How could these be so obviously overlooked... Cheers and good work on the nom. TiggerJay (talk) 01:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

LoL 😅. and thank you. Moxy🍁 02:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Learning every day

Thanks for the {Help:Contents}, just started to be active and try to learn every day. Question: Is the Everest summit in general not notable to mention in Iraq or do you have an issue with the tone? Tbqh i didnt saw any issue since Zaha Hadid (1950–2016) was named under the section Architecture Ayohama (talk) 18:52, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

This is a very specific issue. As in different types of articles have different types of presentations and expectations..... and among those same types of articles there's also variations. Specifically talking about an article about a country pls refer to WP:COUNTRYSECTIONS .... Basically,

Caution should be taken to ensure that the sections are not simply a listing of names or mini biographies of individuals accomplishments. Good example Canada#Sports

Moxy🍁 18:58, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick feedback! Could you suggest how to appropriately integrate the Iraqi Everest summit? I used the culture section (Sports) of Poland as a reference.

"Mariusz Pudzianowski is a highly successful strongman competitor and has won more World's Strongest Man titles than any other competitor in the world, winning the event in 2008 for the fifth time."

"Poles made significant achievements in mountaineering, in particular, in the Himalayas and the winter ascending of the eight-thousanders (e.g. Jerzy Kukuczka, Krzysztof Wielicki, Wanda Rutkiewicz). Polish mountains are one of the tourist attractions of the country. Ayohama (talk) 19:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

On this very specific person WP:Notability would apply.... in an overall sense when it comes to what will historically be known for the country.... explained generally at WP:PROPORTION. Moxy🍁 19:12, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Regarding the mention of Wanda Rutkiewicz in the culture section of the Poland article under sports, I believe it would be appropriate to include Dadvan Yousuf's Everest summit as the first Iraqi to achieve this feat in Iraq’s culture section as well.

I think the following version aligns with WP:Notability principles:

"In May 2024, Dadvan Yousuf, a Kurdish-Iraqi entrepreneur, became the first Iraqi to summit Mount Everest, an accomplishment that stands out as a significant event in Iraq's modern history.https://almasra.iq/83728/ This achievement, especially as Yousuf's first mountaineering expedition, highlights the growing involvement of Iraqis in international sports, an area historically less associated with the country."https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q6i9J_Dg5g

If you agree, I would like to add it in Iraq :) Ayohama (talk) 19:21, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Don't agree..... you'll have to seek consensus on the articles talk page. Moxy🍁 19:42, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Done, Talk

Please feel free to help me creating a neutral, non promotional content. Ayohama (talk) 19:52, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Moxy, I see you've reverted the edit again. I also read through WP:BRD

I will try to find consensus on the talk page now but what if i dont get feedback in general? Should i just leave the edit idea and dont touch the article in general? Not trying to get into edit war. Best case would be if you could help me with this edit tbh, I spend a long time trying to write it as neutral as possible lol Ayohama (talk) 06:40, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

see WP:STATUSQUO Moxy🍁 06:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

I see and I appreciate your input. Direct question to you: Should I just leave it? Cause i dont think there is a more neutral wording possible and I dont think editors care enough to enter the discussion. Was actually hoping for some advice from you, rather then anything else Ayohama (talk) 06:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

I dont see how this is nothing more then an individuals accomplishment and has almost no historical reference to the country. Moxy🍁 06:51, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Again, I do understand your point but the references i am looking at, are Nepal, China, Poland, India, Pakistan, United States and many other countries that mention the first person from that nation to summit Mount Everest and nearly all country WP Articles mention other notable people in general in mini bio way. So I guess its not really a wording issue at this point. I guess you just dont see value of mentioning it at the iraq article? which i respect too- just trying to understand why. Ayohama (talk) 06:58, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

RFC Notice

Hello, this notice is for everyone who took part in the 2023 RfC on lists of airline destinations. I have started a new RfC on the subject. If you would like to participate please follow this link: Misplaced Pages talk:What Misplaced Pages is not § RfC on WP:NOT and British Airways destinations. Sunnya343 (talk) 01:25, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Disagreement on edits/reverts

@Moxy, This is the fourth time a user has reverted updated information i've provided to the "Indigenous peoples of the Americas" and "Peopling of the Americas" pages.

So what gives? How many sources are required to update these pages with the latest information? MiguelRamirez77 (talk) 07:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Will write a section shortly - but basically the 2020 conclusion has not gained wide acceptance. Moxy🍁 07:40, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

For decades, it was believed that the first Americans arrived around 13,000 years ago, linked to the Clovis archaeological culture. But then came Monte Verde in Chile, where archeologists unearthed solid evidence of a human settlement dating to 14,800 years ago, well before Clovis. After Monte Verde broke the 13,000 barrier, even more pre-Clovis sites emerged: Paisley Caves in Oregon (14,400 years ago), the Debra L. Friedkin Site in Texas (15,500 years ago), and Cooper’s Ferry in Idaho (16,000 years ago). The most popular idea is that people entered the Americas through the Pacific coast around 25,000 to 15,000 years ago. David J. Meltzer states there are no archaeological sites in the Americas older than 16,000 years. He questions claims of sites being 20,000, 25,000, or even 130,000 years old. Moxy🍁 08:57, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Have done a quick overview at Peopling of the Americas#Scholarly debateMoxy🍁 22:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

RFC in head of state

Thank you for closing the rfc in head of state. Please now notify the closure at top and bottom of the Talk section. All the best. Errantios (talk) 00:58, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

I'll be honest I didn't close it.... as I'm involved. There is simply no need for a formal closure as per Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment If the matter under discussion is not contentious and the consensus is obvious to the participants, then formal closure is neither necessary nor advisable. Written closing statements are not required. Editors are expected to be able to evaluate and agree upon the results of most RfCs without outside assistance. Moxy🍁 01:03, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. I've asked for a non-involved editor to formally close this RfC - since there has been recalcitrance. Errantios (talk) 01:21, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Sounds good it can't hurt. Moxy🍁 01:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Excellent: your addition of that advice (we are cross-posting) is now guidance for the recalcitrant. Over and out. Errantios (talk) 01:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Mass Deletion of Holocaust Survivor Quotes & Images from Witness: Passing the Torch of Holocaust Memory to New Generations

 Fixed - article redone -Moxy🍁 05:53, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Witness: Passing the Torch of Holocaust Memory to New Generations

I have a few important issues to raise with this latest deletion. I'm addressing this post both to the author of the deletions as well as to any neutral observers will be viewing this at a later date.

1. This page has been up for many years (since 2015) with no objection to the quotes and images that were up prior to January 2, 2025, despite having been seen by thousands of people, including Misplaced Pages editors.

2. The editor who deleted over 13,000 words claims these quotes were mass copied and pasted. This is untrue. Each quote was sourced and excerpted from a different review and was pasted individually.

3. The editor who deleted the 13,000 words also deleted all the references below (under "See Also"), including the references to the USC Shoah Foundation, among other references. This organization is intimately tied in with the book because every picture of a Holocaust survivor or Righteous among the Nations in the book is linked to the testimony to be found on the website website of the USCSF. That is one of the major features of the book is that the testimony on the printed page becomes alive when one uses a smart phone (hovering over the image in the book) to access the testimony on the USC Shoah Foundation.

4. All the quotes and images from the Holocaust survivors (Elie Wiesel etc.) and other individuals (Steven Spielberg (Founder, USC Shoah Foundation), Pres. Barak Obama etc) mentioned in the book have been removed.

One of the stated goals of the book is to keep the memory and stories of the Holocaust survivors alive. So it is indeed ironic that whoever is removing these images is doing the exact opposite of the purpose of the book.

The title of the book is: Witness: Passing the Torch of Holocaust Memory to New Generations. By deleting these important testimonies to the Holocaust, the editor is in fact extinguishing the "torch of Holocaust memory" for current readers and generations to come, if these deletions are allowed to stand.

To put this put this point as succinctly as possible - directly to the editor - why would you or anybody else want to remove a picture of a Holocaust survivor from the book whose entire family was murdered in the Holocaust? To end and to what purpose does this serve?

As someone whose own great grandmother was deported to Auschwitz in 1944 at 84 years of age, this is not just a question of academic knowledge but deeply personal to me as well.

My last point:

This is not the first time that Holocaust pages have been unfairly targeted, even after the pages were up for many many years on Misplaced Pages - seen by thousands without objection.

One has to wonder if there is a political agenda at play or if some individuals are simply intent upon disrupting the flow of human understanding of significant events in human history, and this case the history of the Holocaust.

It is beyond frustrating when one is trying to educate the public with pure knowledge and help people understand the enormity of events like the Holocaust when individuals come along, randomly, for no apparent reason - or perhaps even worse - and delete these important sources of history of humanity. Write this now.

As this is becoming a worrisome trend, especially in this hyper politicized environment, I am wondering if there's a way we can get protection for this page to forestall these kinds of unjustified mass-deletions. Uiaeli (talk) 19:47, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

The mass copy and paste of quotes should be summarized..... this isn't grade seven. Should try to make the article appear academic at least. Moxy🍁 19:49, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

An experienced contributor would not delete 3/4 of historical content or testimony without leaving a note first on a users wall or a page wall with some suggestions, before taking that sort of action. especially one that has this type of historical content.

I am worried that the actual content was someway targeted. It seems an aggressive move to erase a decade worth of content in seconds without any type of communication, especially during today's climate where antisemitism is rising. Reehabmail (talk) 20:46, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

It's still in the history..... decades of copy pasting does not take much time. A few small quotes here and there is good..... what we're looking for is analysis see Mein Kampf. Moxy🍁 21:04, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply.

I note that it took you less than two minutes to read and compose your reply to my post.

May I politely suggest that you take a little more time reading my post and also address the other issues that are noted there before replying so quickly?

“A carpenter measures twice and cuts once.”

I should also note that this page obviously involved dozens of hours of work and research for both the quotes, photos and links, by those who deeply care about the subject.

Surely you could've made some suggestions on the wall for improvement before so blithely deleting the vast majority of the page - en masse.

Now here are my responses to your specific points, which I've carefully considered.

1. You wrote: "The mass copy and paste of quotes should be summarized…..”

As I noted above, this was not a mass copy and paste of quotes. Each quote was taken individually and excerpted from much longer reviews. Misplaced Pages's own guidelines are explicit that quotes are allowed - even encouraged - if they are brief and are not overly lengthy. These quotes included in the Misplaced Pages page for Witness conform to Misplaced Pages’s own criteria.

Please note these quotes have been up for years without any objection from thousands of other users or other Misplaced Pages editors. This includes the Holocaust survivors themselves.

2. You you wrote:

"this isn't grade seven."

A flippant remark like this is highly inappropriate for these kinds of discussions. I note below that you complain about the article not being academic, but your “grade seven” comment is completely out of bounds when discussing topic as serious as the Holocaust. As someone who lost untold numbers of family members during this unprecedented genocide, this is not the kind of gravitas and sensitivity the subject demands.

3. You wrote:

"Should try to make the article appear academic at least.” Moxy🍁 19:49 11 January 2025 (UTC)

I am not sure what you mean by this. Quoting Holocaust survivors, Nobel prize winners, and Presidents, does not make the work “unacademic". Quite the contrary. Neither does quoting excerpts of reviews from respectable sources.

As someone who has spent significant parts of his life working with academics and students in Canada, the US and other parts of the world, I think I'm qualified to make this judgment.

Finally, I note at the top of your page you write: Civility, Maturity, and Responsibility. Please assume good faith. Remember, everyone makes mistakes.

Indeed, beautiful sentiments that I wholeheartedly subscribe to, and I believe you do as well.

I look forward to you fulfilling all of these noble ideals. Uiaeli (talk) 21:18, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

I think this page warrants protection. The subject of Holocaust, although a dark an horrific part of history, is important and factual. I see a reply below, but I don't see how anyone could summarize a direct quote form someone who has survived the murder of their entire family line. Each witness contributed something historical. The response you got below does not seem academic in nature. I am sorry this page is being targeted. Colinwhite613 (talk) 19:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Mass quoting has been contested multiple times... everyone has access to the history. Moxy🍁 21:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Who is everyone? 99% of general Misplaced Pages readers would have no idea how to look up the history of the page. Please note that I'm still waiting for your reply to my earlier query..... Unsigned (talk) 22:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

On talk page. I suggest we invite all the others who have removed these quotes as well. Moxy🍁 22:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

sure no problem. The facts here are that the "others" you are referencing got me to work within the WIKI guidelines for using templates for quotes etc.., which was fine. they only removed 3 paragraphs before contributors seemingly worked on it. since eveyrthing here is public, its easy to track who has done what.

those others you are bringing in actually helped contributors to contribute in a better way.

You, on the other hand, deleted almost the entire page, picutres, and other sections too, along with all the references with no explanation or any note prior to doing it. No suggestions or help or guidelines for a user to go and read. It looks like you have erased years of many contributors work and verified citations from books with ISBN numbers and other sources. I don't take sides on outside issues, this is just objective observation and reporting here. if a user has an issue about the Holocaust itself, I do not think they should have the power to simply erase its history. With everything happening outside, I understand people take sides. This book has nothing to do with any current war happening. Erasing facts and comments from notable people, all who are referenced as notable, as well as their words through verified references should not be an option that can be done without some sort of oversight. especially during this time. People pages are vandalized often here, and this seems to be the same case here. Reehabmail (talk) 23:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Think best all read up on WP:CRONY. Moxy🍁 19:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Western world

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Preceding undated comment added 03:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Moxy stop reverting my changes to Romania page please

I've done what you've asked, I made an article on the talk page, I've talked with you and you didn't respond the second time round. I have nothing against you and no offence but I probably know more about Romanian history then you do, stop reverting my edits since they are all factually correct, if you're gonna revert them, at least give a good reason, not "not a good change to lead" Napoli0079 (talk) 18:34, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Rockawaypoint

Any suggestions. I’ve tried to make my views clear about him on his talk page. Doug Weller talk 21:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

I will look into this.....set something up for tomorrow. Moxy🍁 21:27, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Doug Weller talk 09:49, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

I've warned him. I also reminded him I commented on bludgeoning 12 days ago but his behavior stayed the same. Doug Weller talk 13:57, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

I am not at all encouraged by this reply. Doug Weller talk 15:51, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

AI - will make a receipt this evening ---i hope Moxy🍁 16:00, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Been advised to wait a week or so because no edit war.....told let it dieout if possible. Moxy🍁 17:44, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

Ok. Doug Weller talk 20:14, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

January 2025 Southern California wildfires

Your edit here was reverted here. I started a discussion a few days ago here. Cheers. --Magnolia677 (talk) 11:34, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Tennena Cone

Hi, I've nominated Tennena Cone for FA and it still needs a source review if you're interested. Volcanoguy 20:55, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Please explain to me why you don't feel qualified enough to review these topics? I know you're probably not someone who knows a lot about the topics, but like you told me on my talk page about a year ago, you have many mountains and volcanoes on your watchlist. You must have interest in such topics if you have them on your watchlist, no? With that being said, most users who have reviewed my FACs aren't mountain or volcano experts either, but they still give helpful feedback regardless. Volcanoguy 21:36, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

I will take a look in a few days I will ask someone else to review what I do to make sure I'm doing it properly. Never been on the reviewer side of fa articles. Moxy🍁 22:01, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Have you ever been on the reviewer side of GA articles? Volcanoguy 23:30, 17 January 2025 (UTC)