Chipmunkdavis

Please click here to leave me a new message.

Welcome! If you post on this page, I will respond on this page. If I post on your talk page, I will have it watchlisted for the duration of the conversation (and possibly longer!), but please feel free to ping me if I appear to have missed something.

Issues in some revisions in Philippines

Hello CMD. Can you please check the following revisions of Philippines? They appear to include improper synthesis, or the claims therein are not directly supported by the cited sources. Moreover, the text contains detail better included in the child articles, and it has lengthened the article prose size. If possible, could you please revise the content (maybe the previous revisions before these could be restored, or the new claims are further summarized).

• https://en.luquay.com/w/index.php?title=Philippines&diff=1169811722&oldid=1169786551
• https://en.luquay.com/w/index.php?title=Philippines&diff=1172197392&oldid=1171184226

Thanks. Sanglahi86 (talk) 14:17, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Changes to International Units

Thank you Chipmonk for making your simplifications. The last user is some sort of highly qualified 'scientist' from USA who thinks that the ancient codes of centuries ago have some relevance to present science and so has been attempting to pervert this page with his high status perspective of whatever it is that he feels makes himself relevant to this world wide standard. He has been abusing his position for many years and so I am thankful to see someone else who has taken the time to correct the confusion that he has caused. Changes were made impossible through his convoluted methods of presenting information, when in fact it is or should be a simple affair with no need to mention anything about the three countries in the world who refuse to accept and implement the standards of the other 180+ nations.

I will support you should you wish to have someone who can take the time to keep these wikipages open and honest. I wish you the best of luck kk (talk) 13:35, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi kk, I am unfamiliar with the editing history of the page, my edits were mostly to fix some obvious tangential items and areas of duplication. Perhaps you can add your suggestions for improvement to the article talkpage? Best, CMD (talk) 02:36, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Nominating GA for Penang

Hey there & good day! I've been working on the Penang article for the past few weeks now & nominating it for GA. I was wondering if you're keen to help in its assessment? Thanks! hundenvonPG (talk) 02:55, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi HundenvonPenang, this is good news. I have enough involvement in the article that I think it would be best for someone else to review. However, a quick look. The sentence/paragraph "Meanwhile, George Town had a population of 794,313..." is unsourced, and a few more sources are clearly absent in Architecture, Sports, and Transportation. There are also a few too many images which some reviewers do bring up, but it is not a GA issue so other items may be more important. I'll watchlist the review. Best, CMD (talk) 08:36, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! Making the needed changes now. Also trying to unclutter the article by removing photos, though personally I'm rather undecided on which other photos to take off. hundenvonPG (talk) 10:15, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Hey there @Chipmunkdavis: Need advice/assistance. It appears my nomination of Penang for GA status prompted some IP address to accuse me of basically being a sockpuppet (in User talk:BlueMoonset#Current GAN on Penang). Utterly preposterous! I had zero idea of that last user who did the sockpuppeting, I only learnt of such issues now, and I had made some contributions on other areas too (eg. Oppo phones and Napoleon (2023 film)).

And by that logic, the Penang article cannot be improved and nominated for GA in spite of all the work that has gone in? Certainly this accusation was made in bad faith. Is there any action I can take? hundenvonPG (talk) 12:05, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

There's no action you need to take, presuming you are not a sockpuppet. Just let it work itself out. CMD (talk) 16:12, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks CMD! And Merry Christmas. hundenvonPG (talk) 16:15, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

CMD: just a note that a third IP has showed up at my talk page to attempt to raise my suspicions regarding the new Penang GAN, presumably because I was the one who delisted both of the articles back when the original sockpuppetry was finally uncovered a few years after the articles had been passed. Not sure whether you blocked the other two IPs after you deleted the original posts from my talk page, but it seems clear that they're somehow faking the widely variant addresses. Thanks for whatever you can do. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:46, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: These are all throwaway proxy IPs so they'll keep changing, the simplest path is to just revert and ignore them. Best, CMD (talk) 02:32, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Will do. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:50, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Rock around the clock

This user has achieved 3 of Bilorv's Challenges.

I saw you comment in the edit history. It could be worse. Somehow I hit 158 (see here). I'm going to have to make a conscious decision to get up at the crack of dawn to finish. Have a userbox. --evrik ^(talk) 14:20, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much evrik, well-appreciated, did not know that userbox existed. I don't think I am going to actively try to achieve more, although the GA review one seems a good long-term citizen plan. Now, how to get another i into Niue Nukutuluea Multiple-Use Marine Park... CMD (talk) 14:39, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Hah! When I discovered the page, I had already achieved five. With a little focus I completed four. I'm going to finish four more, and I'm done. Maybe. :-) I may never complete the clock one. --evrik ^(talk) 14:46, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Chipmunkdavis. Thank you for your work on Asphendou Cave petroglyphs. Another editor, Aszx5000, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Very well made article - just checking the other articles you have created/overhauled, and I think you should be autopatrolled? thanks

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Aszx5000}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Aszx5000 (talk) 16:25, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Autopatrolled granted

Hi Chipmunkdavis, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled user right to your account. This means that pages you create will automatically be marked as 'reviewed', and no longer appear in the new pages feed. Autopatrolled is assigned to prolific creators of articles, where those articles do not require further review, and may have been requested on your behalf by someone else. It doesn't affect how you edit; it is used only to manage the workload of new page patrollers.

Since the articles you create will no longer be systematically reviewed by other editors, it is important that you maintain the high standard you have achieved so far in all your future creations. Please also try to remember to add relevant WikiProject templates, stub tags, categories, and incoming links to them, if you aren't already in the habit; user scripts such as Rater and StubSorter can help with this. As you have already shown that you have a strong grasp of Wikipedia's core content policies, you might also consider volunteering to become a new page patroller yourself, helping to uphold the project's standards and encourage other good faith article writers.

Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! —Femke 🐦 (talk) 10:59, 23 June 2024 (UTC)