User talk:Nice4What

Archives

April 2018 – April 2019 May 2019 – August 2019 September 2019 – March 2020 April 2020 – June 2020 July 2020 – present

If blank, this talk page was recently archived.

As in the news channel? That's interesting 2600:1700:1681:9AA8:3CD1:234F:C605:E17A (talk) 02:58, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

uh nevermind 2600:1700:1681:9AA8:1543:F5C9:FA78:4154 (talk) 03:59, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed some edits on a similar manner, on the pages like South Ossetia and Northern Cyprus. Is there a specific discussion for making such changes? The edit summary was empty, and I did not quite get how the current status is better than the former. The insertion of "occupation" word itself would be enough to introduce an unintended bias/misrepresentation, as an occupation is usually temporary (nowadays also used for illegal usurpations regardless of the duration especially for Ukraine, but still) and enforces martial law — unlike the examples listed above, which have (semi-)independent law systems, police and customs enforcement, even army. I also think that "x out of 193" would provide a valuable insight because of examples like Kosovo or Taiwan.

I do not plan to chase this around, I've just stumbled across the edits and wondered about the rationale because the former seemed just close to perfect for me. Of course this depends on person, being bold is also perfectly valid.

Best regards, ahmetlii ^✉ _{(Please ping me on a reply!)} 22:07, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ahmetlii: Hi! Stating an occupation is usually temporary might be a misunderstanding on your end, you can see for example the Golan Heights or Western Sahara which have been occupied for decades. The definition of occupation doesn't require martial law either. The de facto states at hand can still have semi-independent systems while still being considered under occupation, which is explained in their articles. There are some respective articles about the occupation too: see Russian-occupied territories in Georgia, Russian military presence in Transnistria, Israeli occupation of the West Bank.

I am not opposed to the idea with the "x out of 193" idea for non-member states though! Combining the ideas could look like:

Abkhazia: "State with limited recognition^[a] under Russian military occupation, claimed by Georgia"

South Ossetia: "State with limited recognition^[b] under Russian military occupation, claimed by Georgia"

Northern Cyprus: "State with limited recognition^[c] under Turkish military occupation, claimed by Cyprus"

Please let me know what you think. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 15:48, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO definitely better than previous. Sorry for the late reply. ahmetlii ^✉ _{(Please ping me on a reply!)} 21:37, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moved discussion to WikiProject Limited recognition to achieve consensus. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 18:00, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have recently noticed your high-quality valuable edits to articles related to Western Sahara, my beloved homeland. I just wanted to thank you for them and I remain at your disposal for further contributions if you may need my help! Tidjani Saleh (talk) 20:27, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tidjani Saleh: Thank you for your message, it's very kind of you! Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 17:05, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Hauskasic. I noticed that you recently removed content from 2025 New York Peace Conference on Gaza without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Hauskasic (talk) 16:08, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was a mistake, hence the "(ec)" comment indicating the override. Sorry. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 16:09, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hauskasic:: I mixed up your edit with another. Please provide reliable sources for your Final Comminque subsection or it will be removed again. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 16:15, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are many countries indicated with a dot but can be seen without zooming in (e.g. Luxembourg, Cabo Verde, Mauritius, and Trinidad and Tobago). Can you remove the dots for them and other countries that can be seen without zooming in? Sorry for the link not working. If I let it it would be ginormous. 2600:1700:1681:9AA8:3CD1:234F:C605:E17A (talk) 03:07, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why restoring "sodipodi/inkscape" stuff in Palestine recognition only.svg? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiForMen (talk • contribs) 10:30, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit readded non-existent policies such as the Donestk and Luhansk republics, with the claim that they recognized Palestine. It made sense to revert to a stable version. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 16:03, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong in your accusation! In the version dated 10:28, 24 September 2025, I only removed sodipodi/inkscape stuff, which is easy to verify. In the version from 11:30, 24 September 2025, I merely defined CSS classes. I deliberately uploaded my changes in several steps so that all changes would not be lost in a single revert. Apparently, you can only justify your brutal revert with unfounded allegations. In any case, I have nothing to do with the ‘Donetsk and Luhansk republics’. These elements were already present in the version you restored (for whatever reason). I did see them, but did not consider myself authorised to remove them. Despite your complaints directed at me, these elements have still not been removed. IMHO, your action therefore makes no sense.--WikiForMen (talk) 10:44, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and thanks for your recent participation in AfD. I would like to hear your thoughts about the process. Please check this survey if you are willing to respond. FYI I found your participation via XTools.Czarking0 (talk) 02:40, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you keep adding a citation needed tag to Graham Platner? As I explained here, the statement is supported by the citation at the end of the paragraph. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 23:51, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will fix, but you should have a citation by that sentence too then. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 00:01, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@GorillaWarfare: Done, but I removed countries not mentioned in the source. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 00:04, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If a citation supports two or more consecutive sentences, it's standard to just place the citation at the end, rather than after each sentence (see Wikipedia:Inline citation#When you must use inline citations). The source does support the other countries; see the picture. I've added a second source that spells it out in-text, though it seems like overciting to me. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 00:11, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for expanding on the dissolution of Democratic Party (Hong Kong)! I am very much a new editor, so I wasn’t exactly sure what to add based on the news stories, so i appreciate the support and your work on the article! SirPhilippines (talk) 16:59, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nice4What! I noticed that you recently made an edit at Portal:Current events/2025 December 28 and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. On Wikipedia, "minor edit" refers only to superficial edits that could never be disputed, such as fixing typos or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not minor, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. _signed, Pat ^talk 00:48, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thank you for your concern regarding MOS:OL on Portal:Current events. Regarding your request for a "link to an ITN policy allowing for this exemption," it's important to clarify certain things:

1. ITN is different from the current events portal. While they may function similarly, they are different Wikipedia features and thus have different guidelines (Wikipedia:How the Current events page works vs. Wikipedia:In the news). As such, ITN policies do not necessarily apply to the current events portal.

2. MOS:LINK targets article prose, not news digests. It is written as a policy for regular mainspace articles, whose job is to explain a topic in depth. In those articles, linking countries often adds no value. The current events portal has a different goal: navigation, not definition. This portal is explicitly described as a navigation and background-building tool, not a prose encyclopedia page. This makes linking a core function, not a stylistic extra.

3. In the current events portal, country links are used as context anchors, not definitions. The Setting the context section of Wikipedia:How the Current events page works says, "It is customary, if possible and appropriate, to indicate the context for a story at the start of the line... This is ideal but not always possible," and provides an example of an Israeli–Palestinian conflict event where such linking is "not always possible" (and thus, the country Israel is linked). The setting the context section provides an explicit instruction that country names are meant to be linked when they serve as the contextual anchor of the event.

4. The current events portal values breadth of navigation over link minimalism. MOS:LINK warns against overlinking in mainspace articles because dense links hurt readability in long articles. However, current events entries are already capped at 30 to 40 words and are meant to act as gateways, not self-contained explanations. From the portal guidelines: "Short entries… For more information, links are given to one or more Wikipedia articles." So instead of minimizing links, the portal prioritizes linking readers outward to pages that provide background or context, including country articles.

With that, I think that item 3 best addresses your request regarding a policy that allows for such exemption. Thank you. _signed, Pat ^talk 04:28, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Patrick Cristiano: I appreciate your well-written reply. However, I still believe the phrase "South Korean girl group NewJeans" conflicts with MOS:SEAOFBLUE. Many entries would likely benefit from complying with MOS:GEOLINK as well (your example including Israel doesn't seem to provide an exemption here). Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 05:20, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Nice4What: To reduce clutter while preserving context, let's just use "South Korean girl group NewJeans." This keeps the country link for context, as required by the portal (and also for consistency with other entries where countries are linked), and keeps the group name link, which is undeniably essential, but avoids a sea of blue while respecting both MOS and current events guidance. Hope this helps. Thanks and happy new year! _signed, Pat ^talk 07:01, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@XYZ1233212: Please read above and review MOS:SEAOFBLUE. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 14:24, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I was wondering if you would be willing to go into more detail about why you moved this page. There was just a RM discussion a few days ago to move it to the former title. Thanks, - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 15:59, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Illusion Flame: Could you please link the RM? All I see is the page was moved today with no discussion. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 16:00, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha, I completely missed that one. There appear to have been quite a few moves of this page recently. Here’s the RM move (1) and the discussion is on the talk page. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 16:03, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion here was to just flip the country names around, in alphabetical order. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 16:04, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Would you like me to move it to the original title of Proposed United States invasion of Venezuela? - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 16:06, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Proposed invasion of Venezuela under Donald Trump is more precise, but without a formal discussion, I'd be okay with reverting back to the original title — both work. Thank you! Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 16:07, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. I’ll revert back to the previous title for now, and you are welcome to open a discussion as you see fit. Thanks! - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 16:09, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Did you still want to have a discussion on the talk page about it? You deleted your comment, and I am not sure if that means you changed your mind about the image or if you are waiting on me to start a discussion. I am not intending to edit war. The page is updating quickly. Catboy69 (talk) 16:23, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Catboy69: I personally don't like that edit war template because it can come off as too aggressive, so I self-reverted to be respectful to you. I personally don't believe the Israeli flag is useful and per MOS:IMAGEREL, "images must be significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative". I think the flag here is decorative; I am not oppose to including Machado's photo as its her reaction / opinions on Israel that are being discussed. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 16:31, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Article reads "The ICE agents at the scene were equipped with body-worn cameras, but that footage has not yet been released to the public."

But the video is already out, showing how the woman attempted to run over the law enforcement office.

Update the article ASAP. ~2025-35113-26 (talk) 16:03, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:SPNC: For minor spelling variations (capitalization, diacritics, transliteration, punctuation and spacing after initials, etc.): when a consistent and unambiguous self-published version exists, it is usually followed: Example: Milena Kitić → Milena Kitic. This quotation would probably make the request more persuasive. ~2026-20897-8 (talk) 17:56, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi mate The Board of Peace is showing Morocco Map incomplete. Please use a version with the full map of Morocco. Thank you Medimo1986 (talk) 12:40, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you're talking about Western Sahara, it is a disputed territory, and Morocco's claim to the territory is not recognised by a majority of UN member states. It is currently administered by Spain following a ceasefire agreement in 1991. Aydoh8^{[what have I done now?]} 12:49, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Not recognized by Majority of UN members? Have you seen the latest UN council vote? Full recognition of Moroccan autonomy plan over entire Sahara territory. Clearly you are misinformed or Algerian! Medimo1986 (talk) 13:13, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Western Sahara is not part of Morocco. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 14:59, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Buy yourself a flight to Morocco and I would drive you all the way down to western sahara to witness Moroccan flags all around with your own eyes! You guys get into shit you don’t understand. You shouldnt be writing WikiPedia articles. You’re misleading Medimo1986 (talk) 18:51, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You can also see Israeli flags in parts of the West Bank, does that make it Israel? Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 19:02, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I appreciate you putting up the blurb, but would actually make the suggestion to add that it would pave way for the next phase of the ceasefire such that others are aware of it being a significant step.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 02:31, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]