Hello, EntropyReducingGuy! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages.

Getting Started Introduction • Contributing to Wikipedia • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Get help at the Teahouse Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions Department directory Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Verifiability • No original research Reliable sources • Citing sources • Content guidelines What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sockpuppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Discord server • IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper) Things to do Task Center • Be bold in editing Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Copy editing • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguation • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 22:27, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello EntropyReducingGuy! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Advanced automatic reference creation, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread. See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:20, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello EntropyReducingGuy! The thread you created at the Teahouse, How to edit the phrase that appears below article names in the "Add a link" box?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread. See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:14, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Noam Shazeer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page N12. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying your lying but we have strict rules on wp:blp. it didnt mention her any where and seemed like the homepage. could you fix the source or use another, or show me where you saw it? then we can unvert JamesEMonroe (talk) 13:37, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

specifically saying that she is gay JamesEMonroe (talk) 13:37, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @JamesEMonroe,

The source that I brought is not ambiguous and not a homepage. It is rather an episode from a podcast about LGBTQ issues broadcasted and streamed by the Israeli Public Broadcasting Corporation. At the end of this episode there is a short interview with Yael Eisenberg about her (then) new poetry book. In this interview the interviewer describes her as an LGBT artist (around minute 48:37). Of course this is all in Hebrew, which I assume you don't speak, but maybe you can find an Hebrew speaking person whom you trust to verify this. I suppose I should have put the time stamp in the reference to make it clear.

Also there is this article from Haaretz in Hebrew. Unfortunately it is behind a paywall. But even in the available secondary title you can see the sentence

מגלה איך מתנהלים עם בת זוג שהיא גם מוזיקאית — ועם מבטים הומופוביים ברחוב

which means that "she discovers how to deal with a girlfriend/partner who is also a musician, and with homophobic stares in the street".

So can you unvert it, or can I? EntropyReducingGuy(We can talk, but I reply with intended delay)💧♾️➡❄️📚 10:05, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @JamesEMonroe

Since there was no response from you for a long time, I'll take your silence as agreement and unvert.

10x EntropyReducingGuy(We can talk, but I reply with intended delay)💧♾️➡❄️📚 17:24, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

oh sorry, I thought I saw you already unverted, so I didnt reply. My bad. but yes I trust your judgement JamesEMonroe (talk) 22:27, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

yes you can unvert it JamesEMonroe (talk) 22:29, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

10x EntropyReducingGuy(We can talk, but I reply with intended delay)💧♾️➡❄️📚 15:28, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've just started it! (I saw you are interested in the subject, well... any help in developing the article would be greatly appreciated!) Thank you. Nextada (talk) 11:36, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Nextada

To be honest, I’m not sure what more to add at this stage. I’m confident that as we move closer to the singularity and AI eventually exceeds human capabilities in every area, this topic will become increasingly important. While we’re not quite there yet, this article will serve as a stub. I’ll keep you posted with any relevant sources that I may find. EntropyReducingGuy(We can talk, but I reply with intended delay)💧♾️➡❄️📚 13:35, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, 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.

Additionally, you must be logged in, have 500 edits, and have an account age of 30 days, and you are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any page within this topic.

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.

Rainsage (talk) 19:16, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

10x EntropyReducingGuy(I talk, but can reply slowly)💧♾️➡❄️📚 18:01, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not put articles into categories without references that support this categorizatio as you ttit in Saharon Shelah and some other pages. --Altenmann >talk 10:33, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I relied on the category page in the Hebrew Wikipedia, which I’ve now linked to the category in the English Wikipedia. I’ve corrected the Saharon Shelah page and will review the other pages I categorized to check which of them are missing a reference in the article. EntropyReducingGuy(I talk, but can reply slowly)💧♾️➡❄️📚 18:00, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, verifying info coming from other wikis is the correct way to edit. En-wiki has much sticter requirements for referencing than Wikipedias in other languages. --Altenmann >talk 21:52, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed 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 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

إيان (is it Ian?),

The Palestinian/Arab term an-Naksa (“the setback”) is not the name of the war itself, but rather refers to one of its consequences - the mass emigration or flight of Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza to Jordan and Egypt in the months following the conflict. See Naksa.

The term “Six-Day War” is, on its face, entirely neutral; none of the words in the phrase carry an inherently positive or negative connotation (apart from the general negativity associated with the word “war,” which also applies to your suggested alternative “1967 War”). The expression does not imply who won, or even that there was a winner at all. A six-day war could end in victory for either side, in a stalemate, or even in mutual reconciliation. By contrast, the word “setback” is, by definition, negative. Anyone hearing it will understand that it refers to something adverse happening to someone, even without knowing the historical details.

That said, if we lived in a reality where Naksa had become the widely accepted name of the war - so common that it effectively functioned as a proper noun - then per WP:POVTITLE, that is the title we should use. One could argue that something similar occurred with the article Naksa: while some Israelis might prefer a more neutral title such as “The 1967 flight/emigration/displacement of Palestinians,” the term Naksa is far more common, and therefore it is the appropriate choice. And I have no objection to that.

Regarding the issue of recognizability, I think you may be misunderstanding this criterion - and my willingness to temporarily adopt your interpretation for the sake of compromise probably didn’t help. A recognizable title does not need to spell out geographic or chronological details. It simply needs to be the name most familiar to readers, and by that standard, “Six-Day War” clearly qualifies. Geographic and chronological details contribute to precision, not recognizability. In terms of precision, I would rank the various possible names in the following order (from most to least precise):

1967 Six-Day War, or Six-Day War (1967) - most precise, since there was no other 6 days war in 1967.

1967 Arab-Israeli War - slightly less precise because not all Arabs participated in the war, and because the War of Attrition also started in that year.

Six-Day War - less precise because there are maybe up to 4 "wars" with this name.

1967 War - much less precise because many "wars" happened in that year. EntropyReducingGuy(I talk, but can reply slowly)💧♾️➡❄️📚 17:08, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your edits to Wikipedia. I wanted to follow up about an edit where, Category:21st-century Israeli male singers was tagged as non-diffusing. I've removed most of the tags that were incorrect. Please review WP:EGRS as well as double check how other categories are handled.

If you're not sure whether a subcategory is non-diffusing, you can often check the category page itself; many include a note or template. You can also read more at WP:EGRS and in the section on the final-rung rule. If you need further help, ask at the Teahouse. I've removed your non-diffusing tag. Singers aren't diffused by gender. ^SMason_Garrison 14:57, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Amichai Shoham. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. GiantSnowman 18:10, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@GiantSnowman Contrary to your suggestion, I do not make "unconstructive edits" and I make an effort to verify the accuracy of my contributions. While I may make unintentional mistakes like anyone else, that is not the case here. Amichai Shoham was indeed a footballer from Petah Tikva: he was born in the Ein Ganim neighborhood of Petah Tikva, lived there, died there, and was buried in Segulah Cemetery in Petah Tikva. I will now add these details to the article with reliable references and re-add the category. My mistake was not noticing that you had reverted my earlier edit, which led me think that this was the first time I was editing this article, and therefore to repeat it without explaining the reasoning or sourcing. I apologize for that. EntropyReducingGuy(I talk, but can reply slowly)💧♾️➡❄️📚 13:00, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing on the article supports your assertion. Hence, repeatedly adding the category was unconstructive. GiantSnowman 18:10, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the changes and references I added to the article yesterday, EntropyReducingGuy(I talk, but can reply slowly)💧♾️➡❄️📚 11:44, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please take the advice you're being given here about sourcing and categorization more broadly. You have two adminstrators asking you to be more careful with your categorization. Your talk page has multiple other similar requests from other editors. Please be more careful with sourcing. ^SMason_Garrison 14:13, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Smasongarrison Thanks for your comment, but I am a bit confused by it. On the one hand you say that "Singers aren't diffused by gender" which seems to suggest that the category Category:21st-century Israeli male singers should be non-diffusing. Yet on the other hand you say that it shouldn't be non-diffusing and you removed this tag. EntropyReducingGuy(I talk, but can reply slowly)💧♾️➡❄️📚 13:40, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I meant singers, sportspeople, and actors are not non-diffusing by gender. Likewise, LGBTQ rights activists are not non-diffusing, because they are activists for LGBTQ rights, not people who are LGBTQ. ^SMason_Garrison 13:50, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I understand what you said about "LGBTQ rights activists" and it makes sense. But I still don't understand about the "singers, sportspeople, and actors". Do you mean that only these particular occupations are "not non-diffusing by gender", unlike other occupations that are non-diffusing by gender? And if so, why? EntropyReducingGuy(I talk, but can reply slowly)💧♾️➡❄️📚 14:00, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those three occupations are not non-diffusing by gender. There may be other examples. Please review WP:EGRS, this difference is discussed in those policies. ^SMason_Garrison 14:05, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When I read in WP:DIFFUSE that “Subcategories defined by gender, ethnicity, religion, and sexuality should almost always be non-diffusing subcategories to prevent othering,” I mistakenly understood this to mean that all gender-based categories should be non-diffusing - especially since this appears to be common practice on the Hebrew Wikipedia. After reviewing WP:EGRS, I now see that sportspeople are explicitly excluded from this rule. However, singers are not mentioned there. Moreover, the rationale for the sportspeople exception does not apply to singers, since they generally do not compete in separate men’s and women’s categories.

That said, I found another reason why “21st-century Israeli male singers” should not be non-diffusing: the category is already doubly sub-categorized. If, instead, there were only a single category such as “Israeli male singers,” it should have been non-diffusing, per WP:EGRS: “However, if a category isn’t subdivided on other non-gendered grounds such as geography, genre or time period, then the person should be left in the un-gendered parent category alongside the gendered subcategory until some other relevant sub-categorization criterion is in place.”

In short, non-diffusing is very confusing :-) EntropyReducingGuy(I talk, but can reply slowly)💧♾️➡❄️📚 15:23, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it's a tricky area. However, at present, the consensus is that singers are diffused by gender.

I don't think you're interpreting the final rung rule correctly. What do you mean by "the category is already doubly sub-categorized"? ^SMason_Garrison 22:30, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you say that the consensus is that singers are diffused by gender, then I have to accept your word for it, but I don't understand why this is so. For example, what is the difference between singers and poets in this respect? It seems there is no explanation for it in WP:EGRS.

As for the final rung rule - I meant that “21st-century Israeli male singers” is already divided by time period (21st-century) so the next sentence doesn't apply "if a category isn’t subdivided on other non-gendered grounds such as geography, genre or time period, then the person should be left in the un-gendered parent category alongside the gendered subcategory until some other relevant sub-categorization criterion is in place.” EntropyReducingGuy(I talk, but can reply slowly)💧♾️➡❄️📚 08:55, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]