User talk:Usernamekiran/Archive 4

Dear Usernamekiran, I see that you've closed the discussion for a move from Sexual surrogate to "Surrogate Partner Therapy." I'm new to wikipedia and still figuring things out, so I appreciate your patience. I do believe there is cause for more discussion. I know that this evening This Is Life with Lisa Ling will be airing an episode about surrogate partner therapy (and using that terminology). I believe this will generate more conversation and provide more information that may sway the discussion. What criteria is needed/appropriate to reopen the discussion? Thank you for your involvement. I am so amazed by wikipedia and its community. Emikokoyo (talk) 00:56, 2 October 2017 (UTC) emikokoyo

@Emikokoyo: Hi. I apologise for a delayed reply. I was preoccupied with other things. Also, I did not want to make comments without any background info, so it took a little time. Even though the name you proposed is not wrong, the current name was chosen because of a policy WP:Common name. It is like "William Gates" vs "Bill Gates", or "William Jefferson Clinton/William Jefferson Blythe III" vs "Bill Clinton".

If we choose these correct, but uncommon names, then most of readers will get confused. Like, "no, founder of Microsoft is Bill gates, this William must be another guy". Talking about this article in particular, the article is about the person/therapist, so correct names would be "surrogate partner", or "sex surrogate therapists". But again, the second name would cause confusion in most (if not all) of the regards. I hope this answers your doubts. If not, please free to ask. :)
—usernamekiran(talk) 12:33, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Dear Usernamekiran, Thank you so much for your response. I have a couple of thoughts. One: There is actually a controversy as to whether or not "sexual surrogate" (or "sex surrogate") is an accurate name for practitioners in this field. ^[1] It has also been stated that "sex surrogate" was a previous name for what is now referred to as "surrogate partner." ^[2] Two: Would you recommend adding a section in the "sexual surrogate" page that discusses these contentions? And three: Do you think it would make sense to start another page titled "Surrogate Partner Therapy"? In this case, we wouldn't be addressing the practitioner, but the modality itself. Let me know your thoughts. Thank you again so much. Emikokoyo (talk) 19:07, 5 October 2017 (UTC) emikokoyo

@Emikokoyo: Hi. I apologise for a delayed reply again. Even though there are arguments over which name is the most accurate one, the current title seems to be most common name used by the reliable sources. That was the point presesnted by few editors at the move discussion. Your second point is a good idea. I will explain it further at the end of this reply. For your third question: I think it will not be a good idea. Even though your intentions are obviously good here, the newly created article will get deleted according to content forking policy.

I think your idea for adding a paragraph about different terminologies is a good one. But these arguments/controversies should be covered by reliable sources as per WP:RS. Once there is this section in the article, a few days/weeks after that you can initiate another move request for "surrogate partner" or some other name. I cant give any guarantee what would be the result of that discussion, but the newly added section will definitely have an effect on the view-point of the participators. —usernamekiran(talk) 19:37, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Just as an FYI, I reverted your edit to WT:NPR. While I thank you for trying to get the word out, I think its better to just let it be advertised through the standard venues (Watchlist, CENT, RfA page). That way no one group sees anymore than anyone else and its fair to everyone :) TonyBallioni (talk) 19:28, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni: lol. Yup you are right. I had similar doubts while posting it, thats why i mentioned there that anybody should remove it. Did you see my vote btw? —usernamekiran(talk) 19:36, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes. Thank you for your kind words :) TonyBallioni (talk) 20:00, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

//Hi, Shall I add A. Srinivasa Murthy article again with Newspaper Ref? Please suggest.--Nandhinikandhasamy (talk) 06:32, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

@Nandhinikandhasamy: Hi. Instead of creating an article directly, I would suggest creating a draft first: Draft:A. Srinivasa Murthy, and go through process of WP:AFC. It will be lot more convenient. If you have any more doubts/questions, please feel free to ask me. —usernamekiran(talk) 10:49, 1 September 2017 (UTC)//

Hi Usernamekiran, As discussed earlier I have created Draft:A. Srinivasa Murthy, Could you please verify now? --Nandhinikandhasamy (talk) 05:57, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

@Nandhinikandhasamy: Hi. I moved two external links inside the article as references. I didn't see the video, but most of the article is unsourced, and it needs more references. I also added two "citation needed" tags on the statements that looks too far-fetched. You can get more answers about anything related to enwiki at Wikipedia:Teahouse. It is question-answer forum. If you post a question there, an experienced editor from that particular field will answer it. Back to the article, it needs more reliable sources to become an article. —usernamekiran(talk) 12:16, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello Kiran,

Hope to clear up the "Unclear citation style" banner you put on the 741st Tank Battalion article. The problem most likely lay with the last previous "editor" before you (Colton.brown) vandalizing the article and typing in "Cprl. Odell Mize Sr." instead of the reflist|group=note line that was in the Footnotes section. I noticed first the odd insert, then it took me another 20 minutes to track down when the change was made and who did it, then fix it. Of course, Colton.brown doesn't exist with an actual User page, so no reprimands can be proferred.

Once I undid that, the citations are easy to follow. The footnotes hold their own as incidental information to the article. The reference citations are abbreviated, following the Chicago Manual of Style, using its format for duplicate notes. The full citations are then listed in the Bibliography IAW the Chicago Manual.

Hope this clears it up and you can remove the banner. Thanks. Greg Bilhartz (talk)

@Bilhartz: Hi. I apologise for the delayed reply. Generally anybody except the page creator can remove the maintenance tags once the issue has been resolved, in certain cases even the page creator can do it. Thanks for contacting me regarding this. I have removed the tag, and please feel free to remove any maintenance tag from any page if it is not required anymore (ie, if that particular issue has been resolved). In case you cant be sure, you can always ask it on the article's talkpage, or if the talkpage isnt watched by many/not kuch active, you can consult the editor who added the tag, or any experienced user. I apologise for the delay. Thanks again. See you around. :)
—usernamekiran(talk) 19:15, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. First time I've had that issue pop up, so thought it best to let you remove your own flag. Appreciate your help. Regards, Greg Bilhartz (talk) 15:36, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Not_receiving_pings. The bug is being addressed in Phabricator, but making a tweak in your settings should fix the problem for you immediately. I received your ping in regards the wayward editor and the WikiProjects merger. Chris Troutman (talk) 06:55, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

@Chris troutman: Hi. Thanks for letting me know about that. Tony Ballioni had provided me link to that phabricator discussion, but I couldn't understand it much lol. (his RfA feels like going on forever.) I also got a notification that my ping to you was sent. That is happening rarely recently.

About our editor, his talkpage has a few gentle warnings regarding some other issue(s). I am on mobile for ~30 hours more, and extremely busy with my work. I will start making changes once my work is over, and then I can use my computers for non-work stuff. But what do you think: how should we handle the situation? What should we do in general? —usernamekiran(talk) (pings not coming in, not going out) 07:15, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

I had been following those WikiProjects but never noticed the discussions he started, probably because I have thousands of pages on my watchlist. I'm generally opposed to the un-informed enthusiasm of new editors. Creating hullabaloo around dormant or new WikiProjects is usually a telltale sign of more motivation than direction. Often I discourage these editors but this time I decided to un-watch the project and let this new editor screw stuff up, get disillusioned with Wikipedia, and leave. I wasn't a member nor was I contributing so I don't feel like I have much ground upon which to oppose someone else's poor ideas. I voiced my disapproval only to register dissent so it was on the record. Do as you will but I don't see myself getting involved with it further. It's just not a hill I want to die on. Chris Troutman (talk) 07:26, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

When this got created: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Intelligence_task_force There was still this (albeit without any sign of acknowledgement on the milhist that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:WikiProject_Intelligence the body and or framework was still there, then there is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SPY sigh oh well lots of possible discussion points I suppose, like it was discussed at project council some time viz - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Intelligence/News - no date but... trying to dig in project council archive is never a lucky dip just head banging nowhere land from my experience JarrahTree 14:37, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

@JarrahTree: Hi. Yup, there are too many possible interpretations/loose threads out there everywhere regarding that wikiproject. Since long, I have been working in the background to help the project. I am very much welcoming to improve the project, but I would like to see it heading at a target. Currently, all the changes look like they don't have any particular target. They are random. And there was no clear discussion/consensus about anything either. What I would like to do is, to see a discussion, and systematic planning to improve the project; as I mentioned on the talkpage of the project. I am not sure if I am putting my thoughts in words correctly. :)
—usernamekiran(talk) (pings not coming in, not going out) 14:59, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

nah, as coherent as Adamdaley and I conversed in the very silent project space talk pages over the years after the Hong Kong Wikimania which I attended ... loose ends and entrails imho. Needs a focus and direction - and consensual collaborative agreement 'not to mix projects inside projects - imho - project space should be unitary or (oh dear my sense of humour might mess all this up) something that does not conflate three projects inside a project - there seems to be a delusion that multiple projects can cohabit... (my sense of humour requires me to probably cease my drivel at this point) - I am sure we will all enjoy the ongoing discussions immensely... JarrahTree 15:06, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Usernamekiran, what exactly is happening here? The operation looks incomplete. I think you inadvertently moved a large number of subpages that possibly weren't supposed to be swapped, and you exited the swap operation early, leaving a bunch of pages in the Draft talk namespace. — Andy W. (talk) 19:43, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi, just following up. The subpages of Draft talk:Move/ should generally always be empty, so I took the time to move the displaced subpages in the Draft talk namespace that you left back into the Wikipedia talk namespace. The operation wasn't complete, so I completed the moves of the displaced subpages to the best of my ability. — Andy W. (talk) 19:59, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

@Andy M. Wang:Hi. Thanks a lot for your help. I apologise for creating the mess in first place. Before moving the page(s), I went through Special:PrefixIndex, I think moving all the subpages was a good call. In the past I have made booboos thrice (first mistake was my first robin move/swap ever), and two more in later days; so I am usually cautious about checking for post move clean-up. As there were 40+ pages moved, I must have got confused, and I thought everything was fine. Honestly speaking, I didn't look for inconsistencies carefully, as I am soon going to work on every page individually that was moved (general assessing, merge/redirect/soft-redirect/delete). So I thought I would correct the inconsistencies at that time, if there were any. I apologise again, and thanks again for handling it. I went through my move log, I think you corrected everything. Also, the project is not much active, and I will work on these pages soon, so if there is anything wrong, I will sort it out. Thanks again. It is very much appreciated :)
—usernamekiran(talk) 09:22, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

That's fine, no problem, glad this is resolved :) It's possible my script might be a bit at fault (latency when many subpages are involved), or even the database (I've gotten an error once when many many subpages are to be moved), so no worries. Cheers and happy editing! — Andy W. (talk) 15:44, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Usernamekiran:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:55, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

@Northamerica1000: Thanks a lot. It is very much appreciated. You too, enjoy the Halloween :)
—usernamekiran(talk) 17:46, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for creating Joanne Isham, Usernamekiran!

Wikipedia editor Megalibrarygirl just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Reviewed. :)

To reply, leave a comment on Megalibrarygirl's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:56, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

I posted the requested talk page message.-K-popguardian (talk) 04:20, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Usernamekiran:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – Adityavagarwal (talk) 16:04, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Thanks a lot Aditya! And same to you. :) —usernamekiran(talk) 17:36, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, when you make a merge proposal, you need to open a discussion about it. I was going to agree with your proposal, but when I clicked Discuss in the merge template, there was nothing to respond to at Talk:Ishqbaaaz. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:26, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Hi. I apologise for the confusion. I did not realise the formal merge proposal/discussion was necessary. I mean, I thought it was similar to ProD. I thought, if nobody objected to merge tag, then it would be okay to merge the article after a week (or more time). After getting your message above, I was going to start the discussion, but somehow it skipped my mind completely. I remembered it again after you pinged me at the AfD. initiated the discussion on the talkpage, and notified the original creator about it. Thanks for letting me know. :) —usernamekiran(talk) 17:01, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

I appreciate your response. Thanks for considering my points. I don't know that there's a set-in-stone rule for the merge templates, but the only way to really get consensus, or at least try to, is to open a discussion. Also, I hope my notes to you here and at the AfD didn't come across as overly pissy. Wasn't my intention. Thanks and have a good weekend. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:29, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: lolol no. your comments were very good, precise, and non-bitey. I apologise if my response gave you that impression. It wasnt my intention. :) —usernamekiran(talk) 17:34, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Didn't at all. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:46, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I don't know what do you exactely mean with providing links to the articles in Italian Wikipedia, by the way the pic of Cassarà results to be on pubblic demain, according the Italian law after 20 years. In the English Wikipedia I didn't find that option, if I don't declare that I own the copyright then I cannot insert the pic. Anyway, so far I didn't receive any complain and the pic hasn't been removed yet. Charlie Foxtrot66 (talk) 13:18, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

@Charlie Foxtrot66: Hi. By links, I meant this: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninni_Cassar%C3%A0
On that article, I found the image, it is in public domain. I moved it to wikimedia commons. You can find the transferred image here: File:Antonino cassara.jpg. After posting this comment, I will upload the image to the article. —usernamekiran(talk) 20:01, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

I have left a comment on the talkpage (here), I think it should be okay. I also transferred Montana's image from Italian wikipedia to commons, just in case if the image you uploaded gets deleted. File:Giuseppe Montana.jpg
If there are any questions or doubts about anything regarding wikipedia, please feel free to ask. —usernamekiran(talk) 20:14, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, what I need more is to find out the techical way to insert pictures without violate any rule. It seems I'm learning, also with you help  :-) Charlie Foxtrot66 (talk) 19:24, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi there Kiran. I'm glad to see that you have become a member if Women in Red and that you are interested in women spies. You recently created an interesting article on Nancy E. Bone. I hope this is the first of many more. Let me know if ever you need any assistance and feel free to contribute to the WiR talk page. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 08:46, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello:

I ran through the article for you and made a few minor changes to clean it up. As I am in the middle of a GOCE drive to reduce a large backlog of articles that need a copy edit, that's all I have time for. Regards. Twofingered Typist (talk) 13:13, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi Usernamekiran, the source I posted is from the Italian ministery of Justice, sure that is not enaugh? Charlie Foxtrot66 (talk) 07:44, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion of Hunt's writing on the Talk Page: Talk:E. Howard Hunt Your input would be greatly appreciated. BuffaloBob (talk) 12:48, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

I'm perplexed about this relist. The only opposition is from a Hong Kong guy who can't communicate in English. This should have been done as a technical, but there was a question so we left it open for a week to talk about. It still needs to be done. Dicklyon (talk) 03:46, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks; I see you "rectified" that. Dicklyon (talk) 04:08, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

@Dicklyon: Hi. I apologise the confusion regarding the relist. I got a little confused over the RfC. I misunderstood that the RfC's outcome was against the proposal. So to achieve more discussion, and broader consensus; I relisted it. Also, sorry for the delayed reply here. When I saw your comment here, I visited the discussion, and then the RfC. I thought you weren't online, so I moved to correct my mistake. Thanks a lot for pointing it out. —usernamekiran(talk) 04:17, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Longhair. An edit that you recently made to Niš (boat) seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Longhair\^talk 03:02, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

@Longhair: Nice to see you back on the field! :) And no, I actually undid the possible vandalism in which the user deliberately inserted a spelling mistake. special:diff/811664401. —usernamekiran(talk) 03:17, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

A little friendly fire never hurt to keep ones wits about themselves. Oooops. I did wonder why you magically appeared on my watchlist. Happy traveling, you got the problem sorted without my help :D -- Longhair\^talk 03:23, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

@Longhair: My talkpage is on your watchlist? :D —usernamekiran(talk) 03:24, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

It wasn't, but when I slap a notice upon a talk page, I automatically watch for a short while in case the receiver responds. I knew you did nothing wrong as such, which had me puzzled why you were on my watchlist at all. -- Longhair\^talk 03:28, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

@Longhair: lol. See you around. :) —usernamekiran(talk) 03:32, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

I believe your (well, your) most recent addition there needs diffs. CityOfSilver 03:03, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

@CityOfSilver: Hi. I think the diffs are optional when the vandal is a pro. In case I find a non-pro vandal, I will include the diffs. :)
This one has already been taken care of by Paul Erik. —usernamekiran(talk) 03:21, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

I kind of figured as much; it wasn't like you needed to bend over backwards to get that goofball blocked. It just read funny: "vandalism, including:" and then your username. No big deal. CityOfSilver 03:45, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

@CityOfSilver: yeah, that would be cuz it was reported automatically through Huggle. Twinkle usually drops out the "including" part. —usernamekiran(talk) 03:53, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I understand your good faith in asking questions of the candidates, but I think you have missed the fact that I resigned very loudly nearly a year ago from managing NPP. Perhaps you would like to consider making any updates to your questions. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:58, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes, you did. But you are like a legend when it comes to NPP. Imean, everybody knows you, and your work regarding NPP. I will see what I can do about the questions. :) —usernamekiran(talk) 19:39, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Usernamekiran. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of S. C. Rai, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Does not redirect to a different or incorrect namespace. Thank you. —Kusma (t·c) 22:25, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Do not create linkrot. Speedy-deleting past page titles, with a few exceptions, is harmful and expressly prohibited by CAT:CSD. Nyttend (talk) 23:46, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi Usernamekiran, I've completed the deletion of your user page - I hope this isn't a sign of you wishing to no longer be active here! If there is anything I can do to help, please feel free to get in touch -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 12:14, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

@There'sNoTime: erm... No, you didn't delete the userpage. —usernamekiran(talk) 12:16, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

You tagged it for CSD. Either way, no drama -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 12:17, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

@There'sNoTime: lol. I was kidding. You are fast! You deleted it, and then I created it again. I just wanted to clear some personal data from the history. —usernamekiran(talk) 12:20, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

My bad glad it's nothing major though! -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 12:22, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

@There'sNoTime:
Do you remember me though? You once gave me a barnstar. It is one of the three barnstars that I actually deserve. I even have an admin's barnstar. It is more shiny than yours —usernamekiran(talk) 12:26, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Following your past note to me (joflaher), I created a new page, Eosinophilic myocarditis, on my sandbox, as you suggested, and submitted it two days ago. I then learned that its review may take over two months. However, I hope to make this page a foundation page for further pages that are closely related to it and that I wish to start creating now. I am an extended confirmed user, pending changes reviewer and autopatrolled. Perhaps I should of submitted this new page directly to you but I did not know how to do that. Would you speed up the review of Eosinophilic myocarditis or allow me to directly add this page? In all events, thank you for your past and, I hope, future help. (talk) 10:31, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi. I apologise for delayed reply. I will post a detailed message on your talkpage. :) —usernamekiran(talk) 17:14, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Moved to User talk:Joflaher § Sandbox help

—usernamekiran(talk) 17:24, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Usernamekiran. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

I voted as soon as the voting was open [[File:|18px]] —usernamekiran(talk) 17:13, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello,

I noticed you added a notability tag on an article I created. That being said, I have added reliable sources that mention this film from the Detroit Free Press and the Daily Herald (Arlington Heights) to the article to pass WP:NFSOURCES. I encourage that you please remove the notability tag as I cannot per WP:WTRMT. Thank you. Hitcher vs. Candyman (talk) 18:29, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ireland. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Greetings Usernamekiran. You made a comment in the discussion about my request to move the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yellow_Dog_Updater,_Modified to "Yellowdog Updater, Modified". That request has been pending for many weeks now, and I've responded to all objections (I hope) to other editors' satisfaction.

But the discussion seems to have dried up and is still unresolved. Now I see the discussion has been "preserved as an archive" but I don't really understand what that means for my request.

So I came to your Talk page hoping to get an answer. Is there something else I need to do to get that page title corrected so that it accurately maps to the acronym (YUM)? I'm doing this at the request of the original developer. Thanks for any info you can provide. I've been an editor for some time but have never gone through this extended process. Heimhenge (talk) 16:51, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

@Heimhenge: hi. Apologise for the delay. I will answer your doubts in 24 hours. Sorry again. See you around. :)
—usernamekiran(talk) 00:24, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

@Heimhenge: Hi. The request was closed as "no consensus". That means there was not enough clarity to what name the article should be moved, or if it should be moved at all. "Preserved as an archive" simply means that the discussion has been closed, and there should be no more changes to that particular discussion; for future references. But it doesnt mean that there cant be another discussion again. But I would recommend to wait for few weeks (maybe a month or two), before making the new request; as in most of the times there are oppose votes with rationale similar to "proposer is wasting community's time by making same requests". If there are any more questions, please let me know. —usernamekiran(talk) 17:42, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation Usernamekiran. I will wait till after the holidays and resubmit my move request. Heimhenge (talk) 19:23, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:04, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks CAPTAIN RAJU! —usernamekiran(talk) 14:08, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Usernamekiran: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, —MRD2014 ^{Merry Christmas!} 02:18, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Having a look at my invitee stats page, and comparing it to the change in the backlog in the last month (down 3200 from 27th Nov), it seems as though the backlog has reduced by exactly the same amount as the number of articles that have been reviewed by the 60ish people I brought on board. Coincidence? I think not. At this rate, a backlog drive seems almost superfluous, but I'm still going to run it so that we can crush the damn thing flat to zero. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 21:06, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Israel. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 28 December 2017 (UTC)