User talk:Ikhouvanjou14

Welcome!

Hi Ikhouvanjou14! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Drmies (talk) 02:01, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that one or more recent edit(s) you made did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! Liu1126 (talk) 07:31, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 20:56, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maakt het voor iedereen makkelijker... Drmies (talk) 20:59, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, please start using edit summaries. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 15:59, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning: per WP:COMMUNICATE, you need to acknowledge these concerns and start communicating. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 12:32, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the reminder. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 14:05, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 14:40, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Futsal logo

Can you explain why you reverted the Futsal World Cup logo? ILoveSport2006 (talk) 19:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yours has many blank spaces, also too big. When the bot shrinks it, the logo itself (excluding the blank spaces) is smaller. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 19:05, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think your logo has too little space and looks a bit untidy. Is there any way we can get the Futsal World Cup logo without the background similar to the other logos for FIFA competitions? ILoveSport2006 (talk) 19:20, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have not found that logo with either transparent background or dark texts, therefore this is the best for now. Same with the U-20 WWC. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 19:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:2024 FIFA Futsal World Cup.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:2024 FIFA Futsal World Cup.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:01, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable non-free use File:2024 FIFA U-20 Women's World Cup.png

Thanks for uploading File:2024 FIFA U-20 Women's World Cup.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file's talk page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2024

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Second inauguration of Donald Trump. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Happily888 (talk) 12:43, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

prabook.com

Hi, I haven't double checked, but was under the impression that it is not an RS. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:896D:92:B85F:9FCA (talk) 05:02, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coppa Italia final

Please do not change players position. See pdf final report for line-up positions. Image will be fixed. Island92 (talk) 22:26, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All based on https://img.legaseriea.it/vimages/68250f90/2024-25_CPITA_FINAL_UNI_1_MILBOL_ENG.pdf and attached match report https://www.legaseriea.it/en/match/winner-match-41-winner-match-42-coppa-italia-final, both formations and squad numbers which you got wrong at. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 22:45, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Positions were correct once I informed @S.A. Julio: for the image to be adjusted per final pdf report. You changed positions as well as numbers. Now all fixed. There is no rush needed here. Island92 (talk) 22:57, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How do you know the weather was wrong? Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 23:09, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Because I watched the match on the television and no clear indication of that forecast. Island92 (talk) 23:11, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:2025 FIFA Beach Soccer World Cup.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:2025 FIFA Beach Soccer World Cup.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing on 2025 UEFA Nations League final

As with many of your contributions on the European finals this season, you did not source any of the information you added to 2025 UEFA Nations League final. Please keep in mind WP:V, WP:RS and WP:NOR apply; claims on Wikipedia need to be supported by credible sources. As much as I trust you're correct in asserting the Nations League final is the 41st Iberian Derby, this needs to be backed up by a reference. Therefore I have removed the information for the time being, and can be restored with a reliable source. Thanks, S.A. Julio (talk) 00:36, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

June 2025

Hello, I'm GiantSnowman. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Josiah Trimmingham have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Giant Snowman 08:55, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

June 2025 (2)

Next time, don't falsely accuse a good faith edit updating the squad of "vandalism". You can simply update the preliminary information and not make dangerous accusations. Thanks! PizzaKing13 (¡Hablame!) 🍕👑 02:17, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

captions

Hey, could you please see WP:CAPFRAG? In short, lone sentence fragments as captions don't end in full stops. Remsense 🌈 论 23:31, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OTD for July 15

Hi, thanks for editing the July 14 and July 15 page for WP:OTD. I see that you are moving around a lot of hooks, even though I swapped the hooks for 2025 a couple days ago. Are you interested in helping with the project? If so, I suggest looking at the "View History" tab first to ensure that an editor hasn't moved around the hooks yet, so that work is not duplicated. I might take a look at pages you have edits already to ensure that the articles you selected are eligible to be on the Main page. Let me know if you have any questions and happy editing! Z1720 (talk) 17:25, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I might want to help, but just because I am now quite not busy as I usually do. Would help if I have time. I have always looked at the articles I added to see if there is any notices. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 17:26, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help in OTD. Just note that articles with yellow or orange banners, or with lots of uncited text, cannot be in OTD sets. See WP:OTDRULES for the criteria for inclusion for OTD. Let me know if there are any questions. Z1720 (talk) 16:38, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your help with OTD. Just noting here that OTD gives preference to people and events with a centennial birthday, which is why I reverted your edit to July 29. Also, OTD doesn't require two births and two deaths per day: WP:OTD just says to include births and deaths, males and females, and general variety of careers and geographic location: there's no need to ensure that there are even numbers of everything. Let me know if there are any questions! Z1720 (talk) 03:49, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are many dates with all four births, also some missed centenary, such as on July 10 with Mahathir Mohamad. I only added his name after realizing his 100th birthday a few days later. And your revert on July 29 made B-D with no female representation, which I have restored. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 05:24, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Updates

We do not post live updates per WP:LIVESCORES. Just wait for the games to finish, thanks. Kante4 (talk) 16:02, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see this and you getting reverted by another user aswell. This is disruptive editing against consensus, please stop that. Kante4 (talk) 16:09, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is any differences between finished basketball quarters and finished games in tennis and badminton, seen here and here, all of which were already stable and thus not exactly live report. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 16:23, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should have been reverted. A match is "live" until it is finished, so no quarter score, half time score or so should be entered. If you disagree you can start a discussion at the correct venue of course. Kante4 (talk) 16:42, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From what I saw I think that has been the usual practice in both racquet sports for a long time. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 16:53, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Which does not make it correct. Some editors (more the newer ones) don't know about that policy. Kante4 (talk) 16:57, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bach

Thank you for bringing Bach to the OTD section of the main page! I thought of it but you did it ;) - I decorated my user pages for the occasion. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 2025

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. 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. Repeatedly: duplicating cite template parameters, removing appropriate links, adding web addresses, and de-abbreviating, is all unnecessary. The first three behaviours are highly discouraged and generally reverted on-sight. The latter also makes it harder to read and therefore use a citation. Why you've taken it upon yourself to do this thankless worsening of the encyclopedia, I don't know, but cut it out. And it's beyond laughable that you call users cleaning up your garbage editing vandals. Kingsif (talk) 00:23, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No. It is you who needs to stop. You have provide absolutely no reason and have always refused any discussion. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 00:29, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you unable to read edit reasons? You haven't asked for discussions. What the hell are you on about. Kingsif (talk) 00:30, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, you just reverted without any edit summary, those are refusal to discussion. It was User:S.A. Julio who have always done the "Union" thing, since like forever. And why do you need to add Final (competition) to the UEFA Women's Euro 2022 final, screamed WP:OVERLINK to me. And saying that Finalissima is major tournament is a nonsense, sounds like you cannot differ major tournament or not. A major tournament is not just one-off game, same with UEFA Super Cup and FA Community Shield, not even when teams play two games to win, like the FIFA Intercontinental Cup. Ask User:S.A. Julio. And Special:Diff/1303266942 is WP:PA so look in the mirror. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 00:39, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. I linked the diff below with an explanation, for one of your edits. I've also explained this in the past with Julio. Being told what's wrong with an edit, you should listen and not repeat it elsewhere. 2. I didn't add anything, I literally just reverted to the previous version - and FWIW, your edit adding a wikilink to "football". Is that not OVERLINK to you. 3. Finalissima is different from all those others, not least because it's between international teams rather than clubs for the cash. The fact that it's beyond the continental tournament but, most importantly, UEFA and CONMEBOL both consider it a major tournament does indeed make it so. 4. No, I won't just ask Julio about everything, pointing me to your mate is not how you get out of behaving like this. Kingsif (talk) 00:48, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is how things are, see UEFA Euro 2024 final and 2026 UEFA Champions League final, you wanna edit those too? Julio did that, not me. I have always following his examples, including the "Union" thing (Special:Diff/1293241474) that you said "whoever keeps doing this with UEFA refs across Wikipedia needs to stop already. it's garbage levels of excess text and very clearly worse in general". Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 01:10, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have always following his examples - Again, it's not a suitable defense for not listening to explanations, to say that you are simply copying another user's editing. You take on responsibility for all your own edits, and as you noted at Julio's talk page when you went to complain about me, I have reverted them doing this in the past, too, and have explained it. If you knew this already, why are you still copying the edits you know have been challenged? And yes, I would edit those other articles, too. As you said, you know I've removed this in all instances, not just with you. Speaking of the edit reason of mine you quote here, that is probably referring to Julio, if he has been doing this longer than you, and I think you're aware of that? Kingsif (talk) 01:20, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Diff - from before your immaturity. See, I provide edit reasons that fully explain what I do. You don't use edit reasons and go report people as soon as they don't let you do whatever you like. Kingsif (talk) 00:35, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Erasing the warning on your talk page is another sign of refusal to discuss. Hence, I suggest to look in the mirror again. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 00:43, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Removing clearly silly warnings is commonplace. And reminder that you have never asked for a discussion: you literally ignored my edit reason explanation, reverted my next edit by calling it vandalism from the very start, edit warred without any explanation in your defense, whined to your mate, then went to a noticeboard for 'clear vandals'. Someone here needs a mirror and it's not me. Kingsif (talk) 00:50, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Absolute lie. I did not call any vandalism from the "very start" unless it is a clear one, and on neither page I said so. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 01:01, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will assume you have simply forgotten. This was my first edit to the content in question. This is the very next edit: you calling my edit "vandalism". You could have used that edit reason to ask why, to explain your edit, even to call out my lack of an edit reason in that instance, but you went straight to ad hominem. Kingsif (talk) 01:15, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My first edit was this. That was already the third. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 01:22, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure, but I was referring to your first after when I got involved - which is surely obvious? It can't be from the start of the issue if it's before the issue. Kingsif (talk) 01:36, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

August 2025

Do NOT continue to make edits you know are bad. What is the point mate, why are you insisting on making references twice as long and harder to read. And why have you suddenly decided to add irrelevant info to the leads of articles. Your edit reasons say you're 'fix'ing them, and if you actually think you are, you might want to read Wikipedia a bit more before editing. Kingsif (talk) 14:19, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You insist on adding Final (competition), is it good edit? You insist to have moot parameter in language=en, is that good edit? Of course those nonsenses are good because those are your edits, whatever real fixes I did are bad edits. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 14:39, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very ironic from someone who insists on wikilinking football and adding moot parameters in author= and website= (while also taking the single piece of info for that and making it worse and less accessible in both cases)!

But you are also perfectly aware that I do not insist on those things; I revert your objectively bad edits to a stable version edited by the community which has small things that could be improved but aren't actively bad. Nothing you have edited in these article are fixes. In fact, they fly in the face of MOS. Again, if you don't know this, learn before editing. Kingsif (talk) 15:11, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When your edit is automatically tagged for prose issues, is it a good edit? Kingsif (talk) 15:13, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Possible". All of my edits are bad, and all of yours are perfect and shall never be disputed nor fixed. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 15:20, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mate, you know I have never suggested that - you are the only one who brings up 'my' edits, which are simply correcting yours and therefore aren't even content edits to be disputed or fixed. This is about your poor edits and arrogant behaviour, and trying to ignore criticism by throwing shit at me isn't going to stick.

Please do not use misleading edit summaries when making changes to Wikipedia pages. This behavior is viewed as disruptive, and continuation may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. This and this are deliberately misleading edit summaries to deliberately hide edits to the lead that you have previously been informed - at this talkpage, at another article, and at the article in question - goes against MOS. How many times do you need to be told. Kingsif (talk) 16:22, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]