Open main menu

New comments, questions and concerns go on the bottom of this page. Please use the "New section" tab above if you have a new topic! If you post here I will respond here; other interested parties may want to follow the conversation, and it's rude to force them to jump back and forth. Similarly, if I post to your talk page, please respond there. Don't bother with talkback templates, I watchlist all pages as needed.

Archives: 2004–2009, 2010, January–June 2011, July–December 2011, January–June 2012, July–December 2012, January–June 2013, July–December 2013, January–June 2014, July–December 2014, January–June 2015, July–December 2015, January–June 2016, July–December 2016, January–June 2017, July–December 2017, January–June 2018, June–December 2018, January–June 2019,

Akane YamaguchiEdit

Hello. Help copy edit for article. Thanks you. Cheung2 (talk) 08:08, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I know nothing about the subject and would be of no help. oknazevad (talk) 08:09, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversaryEdit

Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:47, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

T-Mobile, Sprint and Dish NetworkEdit


I have been the one editing the T-Mobile, Sprint and Dish Network pages. I thought that the merger was completed.

I have one question though is Sprint now dissolved and can we put July 26, 2019 in the dissolved box ?

Here are the edits so far,

1. The subsidiaries of Sprint now belong to Dish Network. Boost Mobile Virgin Mobile USA Open Mobile

2. I went to each page and cited that the owner has changed. [1]

3. I then went to T-Mobile page and put Sprint as a division. (talk) 18:06, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

No, today was just a regulatory approval, with conditions . The actual sales are not yet complete. Sprint still exists, is not yet owned by T-Mobile, and have not sold Boost or Virgin to Dish yet. Be patient, and don't rush, which leads to incorrect articles. oknazevad (talk) 21:26, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

All completely understandable. (talk) 18:06, 28 July 2019 (UTC)


Hi Oknazevad. I agree that there may be some problems with the revision you undid, but as I mentioned, this is an instance of WP:BABY, meaning by undoing the revision, you removed some aspects of the revision which were not problematic. Could you please go back and consider directly which parts of the revision were, to your mind, incorrect, and which parts were not, and manually edit those pieces? Also, I was in the process of fixing the revision myself and adding some references, but you undid my reversion so quickly I had no time to complete my task. If you revert someone's contribution, and someone else comes along and reverts it back, consider how it appears to immediately revert it a third time yourself. Respectfully, PhobosIkaros 23:15, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

The problem is none of the three parts of the edit are worth keeping. The infobox does not support a theme song parameter (and it would be misformatted anyway), the parenthetical on the one driver's name is unneeded and unexplained, and the third part of the edit was incorrect info that broke a citation. It was unsalvagable.
Also, I'd just like to point out in your subsequent edit that you used IMDb as a source. IMDb is not considered a reliable source as it's user-generated content. A different source would be better. oknazevad (talk) 15:33, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Okay, Oknazevad. I understand your perspective and respect your editing choice. --PhobosIkaros 14:43, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Canadian Armed Forces ranks and insignia modificationEdit

Hi Oknazevad,

I don't know why you removed the color section of the officer ranks on This is an official layout, and as being member of the Canadian Armed Forces, I do confirm that they in fact exist. Publications aren't available for public release.

The system is based on the British one since 2016. I added this section since there is nothing public that explains those colors;

Thanks for your understanding.


Refs: A. Internal memorandum 11110-1 (G7-4), 26 feb 2014, OPERATION ORDER - CANADIAN ARMY IDENTITY B. CAO 33-19 - PUBLIC FUNDING TO RESTORE CA CORPS’ IDENTITIES C. CFSS Materiel Authorization (D01102CFS) - ARMY- BASIC CLOTH REGULAR & RESERVE, 20161005

as long as it's sourced, I have no objections. oknazevad (talk) 13:53, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Blends at Johnnie WalkerEdit

The high-end blends I added from are NOT the "special bottlings"...THOSE are found at .-- (talk) 17:01, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Nice to meet youEdit

  ~by the way ~
Very nice to meet you. ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 03:24, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
Nice to meet you too! Look forward to working with you. oknazevad (talk) 05:08, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 9Edit

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Railroad electrification in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hudson Line (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:08, 9 August 2019 (UTC)


Hi! Oknazevad. Is this a proper way to cite a source? #46. I just came across that article today. Thanks ~mitch~ (talk) 16:42, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Well, an email isn't exactly the best source. I tagged it as such. It's also not appropriate to include the entire text of an email in a ref. oknazevad (talk) 22:41, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
Yea, the whole email part is what I was wondering about. Thanks ~mitch~ (talk) 22:44, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

"Prop (stage, screen)" listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Prop (stage, screen). Since you had some involvement with the Prop (stage, screen) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 16:01, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

List of Sesame Street Muppets revisionEdit

Oknazevad, re: this revision diff: The source in question, while it is a primary source as you state, no longer exists; see here. Well, actually, the link goes to a general webpage in Sesame, as do many of the old character descriptions and puppeteer bios, which the SW removed as they're continually improved their website. I've been methodically going through this list and updating it, and as you can see here, I have been using the SW website, as well as several other websites, as primary sources where there's no other support for the list entries. Of course, if you had visited those links, perhaps you would've seen that. Also, your revision broke the link to SW's bio of Jennifer Barnhart, so could you fix that, please? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:15, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Then the solution is to use archive links from the internet archive, not remove the material outright. oknazevad (talk) 22:32, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
I've found, for most of the SW links in this article, that no archive links exist. It doesn't mean that we can't re-add the material once reliable sources are found. This is a FL, with strict adherence to WP:RS. The broken links and outdated content are why it shouldn't be a FL any longer, and cutting material that no longer has RS is the way to improve its quality to previous standards. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:09, 19 August 2019 (UTC)


All due respect, but USA ain't paying $50 million a year for a "developmental" brand. plus WWE flat out called NXT their third global brand alongside Raw and SD. NXT is now a big boy brand, there's no 2 ways around it.

Vjmlhds (talk) 18:44, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Still not equal to Raw and SmackDown. Please discuss at the wikiproject. Changes like that need broad consensus, and a lot of buy-in from many participants, not the unilateral change of one person. oknazevad (talk) 18:45, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Not equal according to who? You? If the actual company that owns it calls it equal (essentially), then why is it even an issue? Vjmlhds (talk) 18:50, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Parroting company line is promotional and a violation of NPOV. It's a significant issue in pro wrestling articles. oknazevad (talk) 19:34, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
The vast majority of Vjmlhds's edits did not call NXT equal to Raw. They stated it started as developmental and are not a global touring brand. Stating that is not incorrect, and the sourcing supports it. Any changes saying its a 3rd major brand definitely need to be discussed, but I see nothing wrong with just stating what the sources clearly state. - Galatz גאליץשיחה Talk 19:07, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
But his edits did plainly elevate NXT to equal to Raw. That's what I have issues with. oknazevad (talk) 19:34, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
This revert [1] did not say it was equal to. Plus you removed other info too - Galatz גאליץשיחה Talk 19:42, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

───────────────────────── Thank you Galatz for backing me up. I have since added a reference from CBS Sports (a reliable source) that calls NXT WWE's third major brand, so it ain't just WWE tooting it's own horn, or me just blindly echoing them. Vjmlhds (talk) 20:36, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

NWA historyEdit

The Nwa was a part of Impact Wrestling in the early 2000's it was originally called NWA TNA using both worlds and tag team championships you should allow this into the NWA page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Howieman43 (talkcontribs) 23:15, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

I am well aware of the history, being I watched it happen. The NWA article already covers this. Do not copy entire sections from one article to another like that! Stop your useless edits or you will be blocked for gross incompetence. oknazevad (talk) 01:34, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Corn (wheat) vs Corn (Maize)Edit

Whiskey is grain-based. It is either made with Rye (Rye Liquor) or Wheat ("Corn" Liquor, a designation dating back to Colonial times). Hotspur23 (talk) 19:43, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Absolutely not. Bourbon is made with corn/maize. Period. And you ignore malt whiskey, which is made from barley. Maybe you should actually read the references instead of introducing easily disproven errors. You clearly lack competence in the subject matter and absolutely must stop editing in the area or I will pursue a topic ban for gross incompetence. oknazevad (talk) 01:34, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

September 2019Edit

  Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove speedy deletion notices from pages you created yourself, you may be blocked from editing. — JJMC89(T·C) 05:06, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Please stop spuriously tagging files with speedy deletion notices based on your sole opinion of policy. I, to put it bluntly, dispute your interpretation, and do believe these files meet the non-free content use criteria based on their use as the primary means of identification of the differing editions of the game, which is the exact subject of the article in question. In short, you cannot single-handedly dictate their deletion. Clearly there's a difference of opinion here, and I desire that we find an appropriate forum to solicit additional opinions. If there's consensus that my interpretation is inappropriate, I will not object, but I don't like the idea of one editor declaring only his interpretation valid. oknazevad (talk) 05:11, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Advanced Dungeons and Dragons 2nd Edition Player's Handbook.jpgEdit


Thank you for uploading File:Advanced Dungeons and Dragons 2nd Edition Player's Handbook.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.


This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

List of United States rapid transit systems by ridershipEdit

May need some additional eyes (or at least another opinion) on this one. Thanks. --IJBall (contribstalk) 17:27, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I've watchlisted. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:38, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Oknazevad".