User talk:The Cheesedealer

Hi The Cheesedealer! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 05:58, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

You can't make comments like this .

To edit in the Israeli-Palestinian topic area on Wikipedia accounts must be at least thirty days old and have at least 500 edits. This includes editing talk pages, with the sole exception being for very specific edit requests, which should be in the form of "change x to y for reason z". IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 19:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I got the impression that only some bits of the article are covered by ARBPIA — 🧀Cheesedealer ^!!!⚟ 20:01, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello Cheesedealer. I saw your username and remembered the edit request you made about the Gaza genocide infobox back in August 2024. At some point I wanted to do this myself, but couldn't find that many suitable CC images. Let me know if you are aware of any that became available since your post; I would be interested to see. Thanks. Bitspectator ⛩️ 20:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

There's nothing new suitable yet, I'm planning to approach some journalists to convince them to upload their pictures under a license suitable for Commons tho — 🧀Cheesedealer ^!!!⚟ 20:11, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

That would be incredibly useful. Please let me know as soon as you do. Bitspectator ⛩️ 20:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 17:51, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Hey, I like this chart. Can you also make a non-cumulative version of it to better illustrate scholarly opinions by time? VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 18:55, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Also, did you weight the entries? For example, one of the entries says "1,600 academics", which presumably should not be considered the same as a single professor.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 20:06, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

@Vice regent, I updated the file per your request. As for how i did weight the entries; Someone - I forgot, ig it was @Cdjp1 - in some comment said that he didn't split the entries with each academic having his own because not all of them are relevant, the entries were only worthy of inclusion because of some specific academics and not all of them, I thought this was reasonable — 🧀Cheesedealer ^!!!⚟ 22:46, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

For my own curiosity what are you using to plot and export the graph? -- Cdjp1 (talk) 12:36, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Excel (after counting the entries by hand) + Copyicon (online tool, I'm sure there is a better alternative) + Illustrator

It's really a convoluted process that could be simplified with better tools — 🧀Cheesedealer ^!!!⚟ 13:20, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

lmao actually you can create graphs in Illustrator with no need for Excel and Copyicon — 🧀Cheesedealer ^!!!⚟ 13:45, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Not much added the past month (I've had other priorities for reading academic papers).

-- Cdjp1 (talk) 17:22, 1 November 2025 (UTC)

I've started adding more entries to the list. I'll drop the new number break down in February, if you wouldn't mind doing an updated graph then. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 15:17, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Looking forward for it! — 🧀Cheesedealer ^!!!⚟ 19:42, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

-- Cdjp1 (talk) 19:09, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Do you have a count ready of the scholars whose opinions are obsolete? (Switched their "no" to "yes" or vice versa)? — 🧀Cheesedealer ^!!!⚟ 21:21, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

No sorry. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 22:00, 1 February 2026 (UTC)