Emails
I got your emails. I am not involved in WV. Because I do not know their standards, I cannot comment on the content or sourcing of articles there. DMacks (talk) 03:44, 20 December 2025 (UTC)
- @DMacks, The question was not by the WV or WP standard, but I value your opinion. Thanks Harold Foppele (talk) 11:29, 20 December 2025 (UTC)
Happy New Year, Harold Foppele!
Harold Foppele,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Volten001 ☎ 10:33, 2 January 2026 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Nomination for discussion of Template:Quantum computing sidebar
Template:Quantum computing sidebar has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:51, 2 January 2026 (UTC)
no worries
it interested me 😀 🇵🇸🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦🇵🇸 23:09, 5 February 2026 (UTC)
- Steam is not what most folk think it is, of course. 🇵🇸🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦🇵🇸 23:13, 5 February 2026 (UTC)
- It is lighter than air :) Harold Foppele (talk) 23:20, 5 February 2026 (UTC)
- perhaps hot steam balloons would be safer than hot air balloons..... And we could reuse the water as it drips off the envelope 🇵🇸🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦🇵🇸 23:26, 5 February 2026 (UTC)
- It is lighter than air :) Harold Foppele (talk) 23:20, 5 February 2026 (UTC)
Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Theroadislong (talk) 16:53, 9 February 2026 (UTC)
Blocked for a week
Your attempt at gaming your pblock from creating pages was obvious and blatant. If you had simply owned up to it, or even gone "oh, I didn't realize-", we wouldn't be here. But your continual Wikilawyering about it makes it clear that it was in fact blatant and you either don't understand it was wrong or deny it was wrong. Accordingly, you have been blocked from editing English Wikipedia for a week. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:27, 12 February 2026 (UTC)
- I received your email. I prefer communicating directly on Wikipedia. I have no idew what you are referring to when this block is about your conduct in 2026, not anything 'dating back to 2014'. Also WP:OVERSIGHT likely is not what you appear to think it is. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:53, 12 February 2026 (UTC)
- You do not have talk page access revoked. You can in fact communicate using this talk page. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:04, 13 February 2026 (UTC)
- You do not have talk page access revoked. You can in fact communicate using this talk page. Please stop commiunicating using emails and communicate here. Thank you. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:10, 13 February 2026 (UTC)
- Hah when I open this page a block notice appears, so I assumed that I couldn't edit this. Well you know, I;m stupid. Harold Foppele (talk) 08:21, 13 February 2026 (UTC)
- @The Bushranger I cannot response to the issue at hand, and that has no use anymore. Yet, allow me one question: Would you consider tampering on purpose with a page history according to WP policy? Harold Foppele (talk) 12:10, 14 February 2026 (UTC)
- What do you mean by "tampering"? In English, this word gives the impression of ill-intent so is that what you meant to say? Blue Sonnet (talk) 14:08, 14 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Blue Sonnet Yes Harold Foppele (talk) 14:51, 14 February 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks for confirming but I'm pretty confused - if someone changes something according to this websites policy, then they're following established rules and it cannot be "tampering" by definition?
- Oxford defines tampering as "interfer[ing] with (something) in order to cause damage or make unauthorized alterations."
- Can you provide more context as your question is too ambiguous for anyone to answer (and I fully realise that The Bushranger is entirely within their rights to completely ignore this).
- Honestly speaking, it feels like you're asking a loaded question here. Blue Sonnet (talk) 15:02, 14 February 2026 (UTC)
- I can see two possible interpretations of the question here. One is casting aspersions and the other is requesting proxy editing. - The Bushranger One ping only 21:16, 14 February 2026 (UTC)
- There is a 3rd option. I simply dont know what to do yet. This is not to sound mysterious or loaded…. I simply will add this: Draft:Henry Kapteyn maybe I should have pointed to this instead of WV. Harold Foppele (talk) 21:24, 14 February 2026 (UTC)
- This does not clear up what is meant by
tampering on purpose with a page history according to WP policy
in the slightest. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:58, 14 February 2026 (UTC) - It is prohibited to link to draft articles from mainspace. By definition, they are not ready to be part of the actual encyclopedia content. DMacks (talk) 00:10, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- But than it was within WP, now it went to WV, Harold Foppele (talk) 00:13, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- This does not clear up what is meant by
- There is a 3rd option. I simply dont know what to do yet. This is not to sound mysterious or loaded…. I simply will add this: Draft:Henry Kapteyn maybe I should have pointed to this instead of WV. Harold Foppele (talk) 21:24, 14 February 2026 (UTC)
- I can see two possible interpretations of the question here. One is casting aspersions and the other is requesting proxy editing. - The Bushranger One ping only 21:16, 14 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Blue Sonnet Yes Harold Foppele (talk) 14:51, 14 February 2026 (UTC)
- What do you mean by "tampering"? In English, this word gives the impression of ill-intent so is that what you meant to say? Blue Sonnet (talk) 14:08, 14 February 2026 (UTC)
- @The Bushranger I cannot response to the issue at hand, and that has no use anymore. Yet, allow me one question: Would you consider tampering on purpose with a page history according to WP policy? Harold Foppele (talk) 12:10, 14 February 2026 (UTC)
- Hah when I open this page a block notice appears, so I assumed that I couldn't edit this. Well you know, I;m stupid. Harold Foppele (talk) 08:21, 13 February 2026 (UTC)
- You do not have talk page access revoked. You can in fact communicate using this talk page. Please stop commiunicating using emails and communicate here. Thank you. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:10, 13 February 2026 (UTC)
- You do not have talk page access revoked. You can in fact communicate using this talk page. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:04, 13 February 2026 (UTC)
- There we have a fundamental difference of opinion. The reason for all this: I made the link. Calling it evading. You could have made the same link without any problem. v:Template:Opentask Harold Foppele (talk) 08:24, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- User:Harold Foppele I came here after the separate chat on my talk page. v:Template:Opentask is not appropriate in this case, as if you follow the link on it to Template:Wikiversity it clearly says it is for the External Links section. It is not for use in the body of a Wikipedia article, and WP:EASTEREGG also applies. I strongly suggest you try to avoid WP:LAWYERing in this case and learn from the block, as sometimes the spirit of a block is more important than the exact wording of it. You can WP:APPEAL your latest block, but I strongly very recommend against that too. -Kj cheetham (talk) 11:17, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- P.S. Such links being in the External Links section is also supported by WP:MOSSIS. -Kj cheetham (talk) 11:31, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Kj cheetham Wiki Lawyering is not what I try to do. During the discussion WP:MOSSIS and WP:EASTEREGG did both come up during the discussion. User:Ldm1954 stated that he did not read MOSSIS in that way. I like to point out that I'm only trying to get this clear. If you look at WV pages there are 1000th links like [([ w:textbook|textbook ]] but than WV might have different policies. I like to see this as a debate, not as a Judge/Jury discussion. Would that be possible? Thanks Harold Foppele (talk) 13:33, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- I'm not involved with Wikiversity at all - that is a different project to Wikipedia and almost certainly has different policies. I also don't want to get into the semantics along the lines of "should" vs "must", nor review further what led to your block, but arguably the place to discuss usage of such links to sister projects is Wikipedia talk:Wikimedia sister projects. -Kj cheetham (talk) 13:46, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- Kj cheetham Thank you for the link! For obvious reasons I cannot enter the discussion there now. Just as an example: v:Machine_learning#Wikipedia that is how WP is linked to WV. Again I want to point out that I'm not discussing the block. Thanks again for the link. Harold Foppele (talk) 13:54, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- Just a quick note from an uninvolved editor to this particular discussion - the link you've given to Machine learning has a separate section that's clearly linked as Wikipedia cross-project links so I can see they'll take me to another site.
- If I was on Wikipedia and clicked the link you added in the middle of the article, I'd be incredibly confused to find myself on another website!
- External links have their own section, so I wouldn't even consider that happening in the body of an article - especially without any clear indication. One minute I'm on Wikipedia, next I'm on a project that looks similar but isn't the website I started on? I honestly wouldn't be happy.
- I'm also on mobile, which makes it much harder to see any difference between the two websites.
- When other websites do this sort of thing it feels a bit sneaky and like they're trying to trick me, so I definitely wouldn't like to have it happen on Wikipedia. It would make me trust it less and be more wary of clicking links because I wouldn't have any idea where I'd end up - a lot of people use mobiles so it's harder to see where links will take you on the mobile website.
- Anyway, just some context from an outsider - further discussion can happen on the relevant page if needed when the block expires. Blue Sonnet (talk) 18:23, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- The link could look like this: Wikiversity:Quantum/Henry C. Kapteyn but at WV it is not used like this. Harold Foppele (talk) 18:28, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- It would need to be in it's own separate section like it is on the Wikiversity site, it's under "Readings" at the bottom so I imagine that would be like our "See also" or "External links" pages.
- I wouldn't be worried about that and would be fine with it being placed there. I only had a concern with the way it was originally added - it looked as if it was a normal internal Wikipedia link & that was very confusing, but it's been fixed now 🙂 Blue Sonnet (talk) 18:36, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- Your colleague is busy editing Draft:Henry Kapteyn, if it is accepted there will be no requirement for the Wikiversity easter egg. Theroadislong (talk) 18:38, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- Colleague? Harold Foppele (talk) 18:51, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- I don't understand why I'm being called snide remarks. All I did was improve the draft (created by Kj Cheetham). Can someone explain why this is happening? To be clear, I'm not a colleague of Harold Foppele. Johnwilliamsiii (talk) 15:32, 16 February 2026 (UTC)
- See the "Possible inappropriate behavior" section on your talk page. You have both worked on the draft, a colleague is a person with whom one works. Theroadislong (talk) 15:38, 16 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Theroadislong, I'm being accused without basis and based on assumptions. I find this very reprehensible. I believe a colleague is an employee of a joint company. The term is being used here derisively. I don't think this is in the spirit of Wikipedia. So, because a comment was posted on my talk page, you're free to insult me? I find this unacceptable. Regards. Johnwilliamsiii (talk) 16:01, 16 February 2026 (UTC)
- I apologise if that is incorrect but you have edited his sandbox here so I presumed you had some connection with him? Theroadislong (talk) 16:12, 16 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Theroadislong, I'm being accused without basis and based on assumptions. I find this very reprehensible. I believe a colleague is an employee of a joint company. The term is being used here derisively. I don't think this is in the spirit of Wikipedia. So, because a comment was posted on my talk page, you're free to insult me? I find this unacceptable. Regards. Johnwilliamsiii (talk) 16:01, 16 February 2026 (UTC)
- See the "Possible inappropriate behavior" section on your talk page. You have both worked on the draft, a colleague is a person with whom one works. Theroadislong (talk) 15:38, 16 February 2026 (UTC)
- I don't understand why I'm being called snide remarks. All I did was improve the draft (created by Kj Cheetham). Can someone explain why this is happening? To be clear, I'm not a colleague of Harold Foppele. Johnwilliamsiii (talk) 15:32, 16 February 2026 (UTC)
- Colleague? Harold Foppele (talk) 18:51, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- Kj cheetham Thank you for the link! For obvious reasons I cannot enter the discussion there now. Just as an example: v:Machine_learning#Wikipedia that is how WP is linked to WV. Again I want to point out that I'm not discussing the block. Thanks again for the link. Harold Foppele (talk) 13:54, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- I'm not involved with Wikiversity at all - that is a different project to Wikipedia and almost certainly has different policies. I also don't want to get into the semantics along the lines of "should" vs "must", nor review further what led to your block, but arguably the place to discuss usage of such links to sister projects is Wikipedia talk:Wikimedia sister projects. -Kj cheetham (talk) 13:46, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Kj cheetham Wiki Lawyering is not what I try to do. During the discussion WP:MOSSIS and WP:EASTEREGG did both come up during the discussion. User:Ldm1954 stated that he did not read MOSSIS in that way. I like to point out that I'm only trying to get this clear. If you look at WV pages there are 1000th links like [([ w:textbook|textbook ]] but than WV might have different policies. I like to see this as a debate, not as a Judge/Jury discussion. Would that be possible? Thanks Harold Foppele (talk) 13:33, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- v:Mathematical Properties here is an example of cross-wiki links. Harold Foppele (talk) 18:54, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
February 2026
Please refrain from making edits generated using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology) to Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to User:Harold Foppele/sandbox. GPTZero says 98% AI generated. Theroadislong (talk) 08:41, 12 February 2026 (UTC)
Since it is a sandbox the LLM text is there as template. Harold Foppele (talk) 08:24, 13 February 2026 (UTC)
- That is not how we write articles, see WP:BACKWARDS. Theroadislong (talk) 08:34, 13 February 2026 (UTC)
- It's a sandbox not an article. Harold Foppele (talk) 08:39, 13 February 2026 (UTC)
- Harold, there are two legitimate uses for a sandbox, to test out editing, and to hold potential articles. This is clearly not the first. so must be the second. Do you intend to create an article about Sven H. Grundmann? Phil Bridger (talk) 17:43, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- Yes Phil. But this is just a template Harold Foppele (talk) 17:59, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- We don't use AI for creating templates. Theroadislong (talk) 18:03, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- Yes Phil. But this is just a template Harold Foppele (talk) 17:59, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- Harold, there are two legitimate uses for a sandbox, to test out editing, and to hold potential articles. This is clearly not the first. so must be the second. Do you intend to create an article about Sven H. Grundmann? Phil Bridger (talk) 17:43, 15 February 2026 (UTC)
- It's a sandbox not an article. Harold Foppele (talk) 08:39, 13 February 2026 (UTC)
- That is not how we write articles, see WP:BACKWARDS. Theroadislong (talk) 08:34, 13 February 2026 (UTC)
Time Energy Vibration
Hi fellow boomer! Maybe my ideas about time and space may be interesting or rubbish but who knows? May I ask you to comment? Timpo (talk) 16:28, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Timpo The question of space/time is more separate, what exactly is space and what exactly is time. In space there is no fixed point. None. Everything moves. In time the is no smallest limit for now. Zeptolasers and their successors nibble (or add) zero's behind the comma. Its a nice discussion. Maybe I can make a course for it. Cheers Harold Foppele (talk) 18:58, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Jan Timman
On 20 February 2026, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jan Timman, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. 10:04, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Jan Timman
On 22 February 2026, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jan Timman, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Black Kite (talk) 10:05, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
Blocked for sockpuppetry
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. — Newslinger talk 10:52, 8 March 2026 (UTC)Concern regarding Draft:Polonium dichloride dibromide
Hello, Harold Foppele. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Polonium dichloride dibromide, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:07, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Polonium dichloride dibromide
Hello, Harold Foppele. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Polonium dichloride dibromide".
Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply , and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 17:26, 8 June 2026 (UTC)