User talk:Jähmefyysikko: Difference between revisions

Archives

Index

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 90 days are automatically archived by ClueBot III.

Revdel done, but in future please supply the urls the content was copied from and if they’re not in English some idea of the translation. Nthep (talk) 12:15, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I’ll try to make it easier for you next time. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 12:17, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Jähmefyysikko, please tell me your reason for insisting that a page not have a template both at the top and at the relevant section(s). Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:53, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It just seems unnecessary for such a short article. Both templates are visible on the same screen and take up a considerable amount of space. But if you really insist on keeping both, that’s fine with me and you can restore the second one. Best, Jähmefyysikko (talk) 14:47, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I see what you mean. I’ve always thought having the template both at the top and at each relevant section is important, but I do agree that the article is quite short, so it may not be crucial in this case. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 16:39, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No reason given for what exactly? Gigman (talk) 20:04, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

For removing Estonia, or unlinking Tartu. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 20:06, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Tartu is not a household name, it needs to be specfied where it is, and “Estonia” is the most natural specifier. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 20:07, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

“Estonia” will be incorrect according to rules, since at the time this country had a different name. You could add “Estonian SSR” once again though, even know it’s already mentioned in infobox.

Tartu is unlinked for the same infobox reason, I believe we shouldn’t link same pages more than once on the same article.Gigman (talk) 20:12, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No. The RFC was specifically about the infobox. The other edits you have been doing in Estonian bios are not warranted by it. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 20:14, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Then there will be a contradiction to infobox information. You could state in early life section “Estonian SSR (present day Estonia)” if it will make you feel better. Gigman (talk) 20:18, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a contradiction. In the infobox, the last part is the sovereign state and needs to be the Soviet Union by the rules, but the prose is much more flexible. In many cases, mentioning the SSR or Soviet Union is not relevant for the subject, and as an article, Estonia covers more than independent Estonia (e.g. History starts with prehistory), and can be used as a link. As a broader article, it is also more useful for the general reader than the history-focused Estonian SSR. Read MOS:LINKONCE, the term in linked at the first occurrence at the body of the article. Infobox does not count, the article must be indendent of such decorations. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 20:33, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is revelant because it’s important for historical context + that’s in rules. We cant have Soviet Union and a modern day sovereign country smashed together. You can’t have a person born in “Pristina, Kosovo, Yugoslavia”, it’s just confusing.

I honestly don’t understand the problem you people have with USSR. Gigman (talk) 20:44, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

“If it will make you feel better”. Have you learned nothing from your blocks? Jähmefyysikko (talk) 20:36, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If it will make you feel better you can add it. What’s wrong with that sentence? How my blocks are even related to that? And my blocks are my blocks so leave them alone please. Gigman (talk) 20:46, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I personally feel better when Wiki articles don’t contradict their own infoboxes. Gigman (talk) 21:14, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]