Tunney
By the way, here I was not saying the heading was not notable or worthy of inclusion, just that it read as very unencyclopedic to me. Lemonademan22 (talk) 07:33, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
- I disagree entirely. It's a short, objective statement. There's nothing unencyclopedic about it at all. oknazevad (talk) 14:13, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
- It sounds, to me, cliché and oddly cheesy and sounds too informal, like a light hearted subheading opposed to a serious encyclopedic one. I won't remove it, but would you object to at least changing it a little? Lemonademan22 (talk) 14:27, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
- I just don't see the objection. The Tunneys took over the territory. "The Tunneys take over" is plain and simple. Perhaps including their first names instead of plural last name? I can't think of anything wrong with it. oknazevad (talk) 16:19, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
- Alright. Well, I'll think of something close to it, I just can't help but see it as unencyclopedic and too informal. Lemonademan22 (talk) 17:17, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
- I just don't see the objection. The Tunneys took over the territory. "The Tunneys take over" is plain and simple. Perhaps including their first names instead of plural last name? I can't think of anything wrong with it. oknazevad (talk) 16:19, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
- It sounds, to me, cliché and oddly cheesy and sounds too informal, like a light hearted subheading opposed to a serious encyclopedic one. I won't remove it, but would you object to at least changing it a little? Lemonademan22 (talk) 14:27, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
July 2025
Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to AT&T, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Merge templates are links to ongoing discussions. Do not obscure discussions that are still open by removing links to them. If the discussion is ready to be closed, then close it. I have done this for you. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 18:30, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
- I cannot close the discussion as I was WP:INVOLVED, but a tag that was on a high-visibility article for a discussion that hadn't had a comment in over sixty months when I removed it (three months ago) is unneeded. Tags are not to remain perpetually. oknazevad (talk) 18:34, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
- The fact that you were hiding links to a discussion you were involved in and opposed doesn't exactly make this better. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 18:42, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Revert edit summaries
At Mustard (condiment), you did, the second time, provide a reason for reverting my edit, this being sorely lacking the first time. If I had thought that there were 'zero reason' to make the edits, I would, quite simply, not have made them – I, for one, believe that the serial comma is not needed, making this come down to nothing more than opinion, ultimately. ZeroAlpha87 (talk) 12:23, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
- Making an edit just to change from one common acceptable style to another has long been unneeded. oknazevad (talk) 12:31, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
- Again, merely one view. ZeroAlpha87 (talk) 18:10, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
National signing day
I'd consider it a kindness if you withdrew or tempered your aspersions. I may be in wrong, but you know that I'm not a bad-faith troll and there's no need to go there. Best, Mackensen (talk) 00:14, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
Overalls: "That's what the source says"
There are plenty of articles that deny the fact that "Levi's invented overalls in the 1890s". I do not know why you are insisting that a *children's book* is somehow the authoritative source on this subject. If I had more free time I would find a more credible source and correct it. I can supply many, many examples of pre-1890s overalls, many from the Levi Strauss company archives. 74.207.34.56 (talk) 04:38, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
Dice accessibility
Hi Oknazevad,
Both Largoplazo and Graham87 confirmed that the unicode dice symbols are not properly pronounced in all screen readers, like NVDA. You can find the link to that discussion here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Accessibility/Archive_17#h-Template:Die-20250923080300 2600:8800:97:E200:1031:EF09:EE66:A6E0 (talk) 04:15, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
- I was unaware of that. The template should have alt text added then. I'll see what I can do. oknazevad (talk) 09:32, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
- So I looked into it. Turns out the template wasn't originally written to use Unicode but use icons in line with WP:ACCESS, but was changed without discussion last week. I reverted the template, oknazevad (talk) 09:37, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
Nomination of Brightspeed for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brightspeed, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brightspeed until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 5 October 2025 (UTC)
New Coke
I didn't added the logo in the edit you reverted therefore your edit summary is wrong. And beyound of that, I don't see any problem with the logo so I'd like to know why you call it "useless". Fma12 (talk) 09:17, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
- You indeed added the logo, as it was not present before your edit, and was there after, as clearly seen in the dif you linked to.
- The logo is useless because it is factually incorrect. There was no second wave at the top (that was from the next copy of the Coke text, as it repeated a few times around the can), the "New" banner was behind the "e" in "Coke" not on top of it, and the font is too skinny, as clearly seen in comparison to the actual can. But the biggest thing is there was no "New Coke" logo. There was the "Coke" logo and there was a banner saying "New", but it was not a single logo. It's been removed before for that reason, and the file should be deleted as erroneous, not restored to the article. oknazevad (talk) 10:07, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
List of arenas and stadiums
I note that you reverted my changes to the list of arenas and stadiums for the NBA, NHL, NFL, and MLS, with the edit summary that it was previously discussed. As such, would you please also revert the changes to List of current Major League Baseball stadiums as well, perhaps including the link to the previous discussion, so that it won't be disputed? Assadzadeh (talk) 17:30, 21 October 2025 (UTC)
- I fixed that one too. The discussion was some time back, so I'm looking to find it. I remember a brief discussion the last time from December 2023 (see my talk archives) where the idea that these links might be better served as a navbox was brought up, which I think would work, but unless such a navbox is made the see also section is the right place for them per the relevance criteria at WP:SEEALSO oknazevad (talk) 17:43, 21 October 2025 (UTC)
Sodastream
Hi Oknazevad. I saw your name in the list of recent contributors to PepsiCo, the parent company of SodaStream, on whose behalf I've recently begun editing. Would you mind taking a look at Talk:SodaStream#Controversies section? The question mostly concerns to how to apply WP:UNDUE properly - I'm avoiding editing the article directly due to my conflict of interest. Thanks! DAK1980 (talk) 08:03, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic Tetris.
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. 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 2025 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) 00:18, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
Category:World Video Game Hall of Fame has been nominated for deletion
Category:World Video Game Hall of Fame has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. silviaASH (inquire within) 00:40, 9 December 2025 (UTC)