User talk:Tomatoswoop

About [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Star_chart&diff=856491999&oldid=856491724 your edit]: I keep a copy of {{tl|Hatnote templates}} on my user page so I can refer to it. There are too many lots to choose from!

Also, making and editing disambiguation pages is a rather exacting art; they are not articles at all, but navigation guides. Read and digest WP:DAB and MOS:DAB as thoroughly as possible (it will take a while), then you’ll be good to go. Cheers! — Gorthian (talk) 04:22, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

:Thanks for your help Gorthian. I was aware when creating it that I would probably get something wrong, but I figured it would be best not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and make an attempt to at least leave the situation better than how I found it. In any case, I appreciate your neatening up of the new disambiguation page I created, and I hope that even if my disambiguation page wasn't 100% up to scratch, it was at least better than adding yet another line at the top of the star chart article.

:Thanks for the tip re: Hatnotes too (and for that matter teaching me that the bit at the top is called a hatnote... what a charming word)

:Tomatoswoop (talk) 04:36, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Information orange.svg Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to :Music of Latin America, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Erick (talk) 00:44, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Please note that disambiguation pages like :Consolidation are meant to help readers find a specific existing article quickly and easily. For that reason, they have guidelines that are different from articles. From the Wikipedia:Disambiguation dos and don'ts you should:

• Only list articles that readers might reasonably be looking for
• Use short sentence fragment descriptions, with no punctuation at the end
• Use exactly one navigable link ("blue link") in each entry that mentions the title being disambiguated
• Only add a "red link" if used in existing articles, and include a "blue link" to an appropriate article
• Do not pipe links (unless style requires it) – keep the full title of the article visible
• Do not insert external links or references - Wikipedia is not a business directory

Thank you. Leschnei (talk) 00:03, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Just a quick note to thank you for the comment on my talk page, and your very insightful summary of my action and thinking.

I particularly appreciated your final paragraph – I have been struck by how significantly the awful events of the last two weeks, and their treatment by the media and other commentators, have deeply impacted a wide range of communities. Not just Israelis and Palestinians, but Jews worldwide, Muslims worldwide, and peace activists worldwide have been shaken, and the tension and stress levels remain very high.

The intensity of editing around the topic here has reached a level I have not seen before, and I have been editing here for more than a dozen years.

Onceinawhile (talk) 22:04, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Tomatoswoop,

Thanks for adding the banner. Just wanted to let you know that I had planned to review the article, which is in a dire state. I started with the tables and then the lead section and I want to get to the main part soon. In the meantime, though, it's true that the lead might seem overly complicated compared to the rest of the article. So thanks for pointing that out and just bear with me until I manage a wider review! Thanks! Julius Schwarz (talk) 07:15, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

:@Julius Schwarz well, thanks for choosing the time to put some hard work into what are obviously underserviced areas. Not being an expert on the subject matter I doubt I have anything particularly useful to contribute, but I look forward to seeing how it turns out --Tomatoswoop (talk) 03:32, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

::Looking at the article history now, one pointer that I might give is that the following:

::: A European political foundation, formally a political foundation at European level, informally a Eurofoundation, is a research and advocacy organization close to, but independent from a Europarty. They are funded by the European Parliament. Their purpose is to act as platforms aiming at developing forward-looking ideas and concepts for their respective political family and providing a forum where those ideas can be widely debated. There are nine Eurofoundations as of 16 March 2009.

::is, if not always elegant, it is fairly comprehensible and readable. A non-expert can read this and get a rough idea of what an EPF is, what it does, how it is situated in the European system etc.

::I would have plenty of criticisms of this (which I started to outline, but this comment started to get very long and I'm running out of time, so I'll just leave it at that for now), and its occasionally kind of "PR speak" writing style & ambiguities. And I'm not advocating reversion or anything, as I understand from your comment that in addition to a bit of room for improvement in writing style, it is either out of date, or simply incorrect, or both. (As I said, as to the substance on this topic, I defer to you!). But, all that said, even with all those inelegancies & ambiguities, it is still a set of relatively plain English sentences that give the reader an overview of a thing, what it is, what it does, how it sits in a political framework, etc.. Tomatoswoop (talk) 04:41, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

...the recent Talk, and recent edits at North Caucasus. Cheers. 76.136.112.80 (talk) 14:57, 12 April 2025 (UTC)