User talk:TheRazgriz

So, You Thought You Were on Twitter?

Disagree with an edit? Disagree with a revision? Disagree with a formatting change? Disagree with grammar and spelling corrections? Disagree with a a correction? Disagree with a citation? Disagree with an addition? Disagree with an article? Feeling salty?

Dont waste your time and mine coming here to stroke off your ego. Be a big boy and discuss it on the relevant talk page. This isnt social media, and this isnt my DM's. If you found your way here, you are doing Wikipedia wrong. Outright vandalism or passive-aggressive ego stroking alike have no place here.

Argue the merits of your stance, and let consensus decide. Debate and discussion belong in the public space to inform/educate all, and encourage others to participate in the discussion. That is my personal view, and I live it passionately in my real life as well as I do here. Anything left here by anyone other than me, will be reverted. Take it to the relevant talk page. TheRazgriz (talk) 01:06, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2024! The top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Cast your votes here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2024. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Notice of No Original Research Noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Original research for claim regarding polling for Donald Trump's legal cases on the 2024 United States election page.The discussion is about the topic 2024 United States elections. Thank you.

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents Noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Requesting reversal of premature closure of talk page section by TheRazgriz. Thank you.

Just a note on care on refactoring talk page content

Hey, Just dropping you a note that you accidentally broke the indentation of the thread you were trying to close at Talk:2024 United States elections. As the closure itself was contested at ANI, I have removed the closure and restored the version of the talk page to prior of your attempts of fixing the formatting that resulted in more issues and fixed the missing collapse bottom of the other thread you responded. Happy editing :) Raladic (talk) 02:32, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, upon reviewing after thinking I had corrected the code, I realized I had broken portions of the content within, but had real life to deal with for a bit so couldn't get to it.

I am only recently returning to source editing after years of visual editing, and it painfully shows lol. Thank you for the correction and the note. It is appreciated. Thank you. TheRazgriz (talk) 02:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Source editing can be a pain if you're more familiar with visual editor. I got lucky and only ever learned on source. I noticed you do a lot of closing; I'd discourage you from closing discussions, especially ones that you were involved in. Most talk page discussions don't need to be closed and automatic archiving can handle any clutter that might build up. Let me know if you want help configuring anything! Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 04:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: 2026 United States House of Representatives elections has been accepted

2026 United States House of Representatives elections, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 23% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Robert McClenon (talk) 04:38, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

114,000 edits?

Hi Razgriz, On your very first edit to your user page (see Special:Diff/1259009781) you stated that you were a Grandmaster Editor First-Class, i.e., that you had 114,000+ edits. However this account is approximately 6 months old and as at the time of me leaving this message shows 254 edits. I note that on your user page you state that you previously edited using IP address from 2007 or 2008 onwards, but I'm curious how you calculated that you had 114,000+ edits? Have you had any previous accounts? Regards, TarnishedPath^talk 13:26, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

As I am sure you are aware, this system is an honor system which is meant to be used in at least somewhat good faith. If you choose to peruse my bio you may have come across my opinion on the system.

But to answer your direct question, it is more of an estimate. As most of my time has been as an IP user (with an IP that frequently changes to boot) I have no real and factually accurate way of measuring my precise number of edits. So in arriving at my estimate, I did rough calculations dividing how many years I have been active into the (approx) total number of days, and estimate that when averaged I very likely made about 10-20 edits a day on average (some days many more, some days not at all). The vast majority of those edits would focus on minor edits (grammar and such), and a sizeable portion were of a bit more weight (translations, correcting mistranslations), and almost all of them concerning little niche areas of history focused wiki's (such as seemingly "random" pages to South American Generals of the 19th century, as a personal favorite example).

This very rough estimate would put me closer to the next "rank", but being as I cannot verify that edit count, and honestly Id be the only person I have ever seen with that (unverified) rank, it just felt silly so I didn't bother, especially considering my general feelings about the system itself. In retrospect, as I've become even more active on the named side of things, I sort of want to downgrade myself again a few ranks, but I don't honestly put too much importance in it so I've taken to emphasizing the sillier rank equivalent instead.

As for previous accounts, I might have created one back in 2007 or 2008 at some point, but I'm not sure. If I did I only would have used it a very short while as back then I preferred the total anonymity of editing into essentially a void without interaction. Certain behaviors were more prevalent back then among a noticeable portion of named users, and it turned me way off of bothering with any of that for all these many years until recently. Razgriz, the Red Wizard (talk) 16:08, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

If I take your current edit count of (as at the time of this comment) of 269 edits in 6 months, multiply it by 2 to give me an estimate for a year and then multiply that by 16 (2024 - 2008), I get 8,608. Anyway, whatever floats your boat. Have a good day. TarnishedPath^talk 22:53, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Well, not sure why you would do that. There is 3 different flaws with that: 1) Assumes in the last 6 months all edits were made only from this account, 2) assumes activity present in that limited range reflects activity over the span of nearly 2 decades prior, and 3) assumes what is present in that limited range can be extrapolated out 30 times.

Sounds to me like you are in search of a bone to pick. Dig for one somewhere else. Razgriz, the Red Wizard (talk) 02:12, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello TheRazgriz and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you are interested, or you can add it directly to your user page by copying the following: {{WPMILHIST Announcements}}.
• The project Academy has lots of useful information about editing and writing military history articles. One very useful introductory course to get you started is Writing a good stub.
• Important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, and article logistics.
• We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
• We've developed a set of guidelines that cover article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
• If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts.
• If you would like to receive the project's monthly newsletter, The Bugle, please sign up here.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:44, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

ARBPIA

You have recently made edits related to the Arab–Israeli conflict. This is a standard message to inform you that the Arab–Israeli conflict is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Additionally, editors must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert on the same page within 24 hours for pages within this topic. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics.

Additionally editors with fewer than 500 edits may not participate in RFCs in the topic area. I’m removing your comment in the RFC at Talk:Israel. nableezy - 01:41, 6 December 2024 (UTC)