User talk:Pascalulu88

Hi Pascalulu88! I noticed your contributions to Homosexuality and psychology 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! HeyElliott (talk) 19:33, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! Pascalulu88 (talk) 20:02, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Neoromanticism (music), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Diamond.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 25 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm MichaelMaggs. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Eggcorn, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:58, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I did not realize that common knowledge items had to be referenced, e.g. my pointing out that "chaise lounge" is an eggcorn for "chaise longue." Maybe you could have messaged me before deleting? I'd have been happy to scare up a reference. Thanks. Pascalulu88 (talk) 22:08, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

)

You make a fair point with your edit. I was going off more a general, well if she was pregnant in 1720, and it becomes quite difficult to give birth by your 50s especially in the 18th century, then that's the min max range possible. That being said, the odds are incredibly unlikely to be 50 and be a powder money helping pirates, and after a discussing with the author of British Pirates in Print and Performance, even the pregnancy part is ambiguous. The trial transcript ends after saying an inspection will be done, there is nothing actually saying they were pregnant and its entirely possible Mary Read merely died of a fever or sickness in prison and not from giving birth. So yeah, I think you made the right choice, late 17th century. Lady Tyler "Bio" Rodriguez (talk) 14:49, 14 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! Pascalulu88 (talk) 14:53, 14 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Waxworker. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, John Neville (actor), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Waxworker (talk) 06:39, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Harrison Ruffin Tyler, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. TJMSmith (talk) 22:41, 27 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

User:TJMSmith This comment is condescending. My intentions in editing the article are to make it better and more useful to readers who have come to it because of the principal reason for HRT's fame. Pascalulu88 (talk) 10:42, 28 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

I wanted to go over something that came up in discussion at Talk:Detention of Rümeysa Öztürk#Title. Article titles at Wikipedia are chosen by applying the Wikipedia:Article title policy, which has key features like WP:COMMONNAME and WP:ENGLISHTITLE. Official names have very little influence on how an article title is chosen, and neither does how a name is spelled in another language: they yield to COMMONNAME and ENGLISHTITLE, as determined by the preponderance of reliable sources written in English. This was explained at the article Talk page with the relevant links, however it did not seem to take, as you resumed afterward with more talk about the "correct spelling" of her name and how that overrides reliable sources, neither of which is policy.

As far as what the title of that article should be, I have no opinion, having not examined the sources in detail, and no personal preference other than that it should follow Wikipedia article title policy. The simple use of the term correct spelling and the claim that native spelling trumps reliable sources makes it clear to me that you do not yet fully understand the article title policy. That's okay; there is a labyrinth of rules out there, and it's not possible to know all of them, and you are still relatively new here. But a word of advice: before getting involved in further Talk page discussions about article titles, I urge you to read up on article title policy, as your arguments in future move discussions will carry little weight if they are based purely on your own conception of what a title ought to be, rather than on Wikipedia policy. Mathglot (talk) 06:57, 18 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, but I don't need to have you as a mentor.

As far as Rümeysa Öztürk is concerned, there is no "other language" spelling of her name, certainly not an English language COMMONNAME spelling. Her name is purely Turkish. I don't see why we're obliged to mispell the name. What's the purpose for that? Pascalulu88 (talk) 02:42, 19 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry you feel that way, and I understand. I will just leave you with this thought then, which you may take or leave as you choose: Wikipedia has its own set of policies and guidelines, of which WP:Article title policy is a prime example. These are very possibly different rules than the ones you are used to; they may seem illogical, contrary to common sense, or just plain wrong. They have nevertheless evolved over two decades of collaboration by hundreds of editors in the Wikipedia community, and they guide us in reaching decisions here; without them, it would be chaos. You are welcome to contribute to that effort as well, by suggesting changes to policy. For example, you could suggest changes to Article title policy at Wikipedia talk:Article titles to try to bring it more into alignment with your views. What you cannot do, though, is to just jettison the rules and do it your way because you think your way is better. You may be able to do that for a while, but eventually it will catch up with you when some admin catches wind of what is going on and puts a stop to it. So I'd advise against going down that road.

You are free to raise proposals to change policy at the relevant policy Talk page and explain how they could be improved, and maybe your ideas will gain consensus and become the new policy. In the meantime, however, I suggest you just follow all the policies and guidelines as best you can, even the ones you don't necessarily agree with, filling in the gaps by asking questions at the WP:Teahouse or the WP:Help desk as needed. They will likely be much better venues for you to get the answers you need about article titles or anything else than I have been; I am sorry that I have not been very good at explaining it. I wish you all the best in your Wikipedia career, and happy editing! Mathglot (talk) 03:13, 19 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Apologies for my less than friendly tone in my previous remarks. I had no idea who you are but now I've looked and can see how extensive your activities are in Wikipedia. Thanks for your suggestions! Pascalulu88 (talk) 21:26, 24 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

I noticed your note on the talk section of the Looks Discrimination article. I just wanted to affirm your concern about the Western bias in the article. This is particularly important as modern Western Looks discrimination is deeply rooted in White Supremacy, Eugenics, and Social Darwinism. Due to this it is very important to include how other cultures internally experience looks discrimination (such as caste based appearance). 2001:56A:718C:E000:CD1A:EFAC:390F:B10B (talk) 20:55, 27 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Just a heads up, sentences in the ledes of articles do not have to be cited if they're supported by cited sentences in the body of the article. That is why I reverted your recent edits there. Best regards, Muttnik talk 13:41, 12 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! Pascalulu88 (talk) 17:28, 12 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Welcome to Wikipedia. Editors are expected to treat each other with respect and civility. On this encyclopedia project, editors assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not appear to do at Talk:Kalergi Plan. Here is Wikipedia's welcome page, and it is hoped that you will assume the good faith of other editors and continue to help us improve Wikipedia! Thank you very much! Doug Weller talk 15:01, 4 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the welcome. I haven't been here as long as you have but I have been here long enough to have made over 5,000 edits and this is the first time anyone has accused me of being impolite.

I do assume good faith. I have no doubt whatever that JoeAllen2 is completely sincere in his concern about disrespect for those on the Far Right.

Take care!

Pascalulu88 (talk) 15:41, 6 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Spotlight (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Fraser.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:01, 17 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

In recent editing of the article Linear A, you changed a mention of "Linear a and Minoan..." in the title of a cited article to "Linear an and Minoan..." I don't know whether this was a rather strange mistake of yours, or whether it was the result of applying a spell-checker without yourself checking the output, but either way it obviously needs care to avoid such mistakes again. JBW (talk) 14:53, 16 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

Looking at this edit, what you found was nothing I had intended to change. I have no idea how that reference to a "journal title" occurred. Thanks for spotting and fixing it. Pascalulu88 (talk) 04:04, 18 February 2026 (UTC)Reply