User talk:Masterhatch

• Archives1 3 June 2006 to 06 November 2006
• Archives2 7 November 2006 to 29 August 2021
• Archives3 30 August 2021 to 2 December 2025

Hi there. I see you have dealt with this editor. Wondering is you have anything to add to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Reema.1971. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 14:34, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Magnolia677, User:Abujahangir and User:Abuhasanjahangir are the same person and I had suggested to him that he make note of it on his user page — which he did. I did not know User:Reemi.1971 was also included. Abujahangir had said there were only the 2 accounts when another editor had questioned him. He made no reference to Reemi.1971. Masterhatch (talk) 14:58, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This one made my head spin. I'm sure their last edit at Port Alberni was AI. Cheers! Magnolia677 (talk) 15:02, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He does use AI for most of his edits -- for both replying on talk and editting articles. Masterhatch (talk) 15:04, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Promotional account. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:32, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i saw your userpage and im christian too, but a lutheran. @Masterhatch Yooniik (talk) 17:52, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yooniiik has given you a puppy!

Puppies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your puppy must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a puppy, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of puppies by adding {{subst:Puppy}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message.

Thank you masterhatch!You welcomed me to wikipedia and I am so grateful to you! In Christ, Yooniiik Yooniik (talk) 17:56, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Masterhatch:

Hi! How is it going? Question 4 ya: have you ever talked to OrdinaryOtter? They are so nice! Yooniik (talk) 23:54, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Name doesn't ring a bell. Masterhatch (talk) 00:38, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

okay wasnt trying to be snoopy Yooniik (talk) 00:55, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2026!

Hello Masterhatch, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2026. Happy editing, Abishe (talk) 07:33, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 07:33, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2026!

Hello Masterhatch, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2026. Happy editing, Yooniik (talk) 19:11, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Hello, Masterhatch! Merry Christmas! Yooniik (talk) 19:11, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There were about 20 other pages where I did similar reverts. The discussion on the MOS Talk page is interesting. Best wishes for the New Year! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:11, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was following the conversation there. Felt no need to chime in as the rest of the gang was doing a good job at that. Masterhatch (talk) 03:33, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Masterhatch. You have new messages at WT:AFD.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

~2026-31669-3 (talk) 13:45, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masterhatch, I was hoping that you could provide some feedback as an external party.

Recently I made an edit on the Sukarno article that contextualized 30 September Movement. The topic is contentious and tends to bring out emotions (see: Talk:30 September Movement) because it led to the mass murder of what many believe to be in excess of 1,000,000 civilians and it is part of the lived experience of many Indonesians and my edit was reverted by an anonymous user.

While there are competing theories, my view is that CIA documents declassified by FOIA requests as well as statements from PKI party officials have created a weak consensus on involvement of PKI leadership in the coup attempt. My goal is not to to litigate this on Wikipedia or to instigate a revert war, but I think that aligning with external consensus and having consistency across articles is a good thing.

What do you think is the best way to navigate this? Ostip (talk) 04:10, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ostip, I see there is no discussion at Talk:Sukarno regarding the edit in question. I suggest you get a discussion going there and see what others think. Remember, the onus is on you to gain consensus to reinstate that edit. Not sure what I can say beyond that at this point. Masterhatch (talk) 04:22, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, thanks. Ostip (talk) 14:42, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

06:59, 10 February 2026 (UTC) ~2026-90080-3 (talk) 06:59, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Helo I am inquiring about Draft:NGO Funding Act (Uganda) to be reviewed ~2026-90080-3 (talk) 07:58, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't review drafts. Be patient. Someone will be along to review it. Masterhatch (talk) 11:46, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: Hey, why do you keep reverting talk pages without talking about the changes you’re making and stop vandalizing my changes.

Please see wikipedias manual of style.

User:Techgod, specifically which part of the MOS are you talking about? I merely cleaned up the mess you made, as explained on your talk page. Masterhatch (talk) 21:50, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well let’s see,

it’s standard practice to contact the editor to have them explain the edits they have made before wholesale reversion.

it’s standard practice to assume all edits are done in good faith.

it’s standard practice to keep your colourful language about messes to yourself and act professional.

it must be difficult for new users such as yourself to get the hang of editing. Please review the manual of style and current best practices before making any edits to anything I’ve written. Techgod (talk) 22:48, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have seen several of the responses you have made to attempted edits and suggestions I made regarding historiographical terminology on the pages of historic states. I would like to bring up inconsistency across these articles. Some such as the articles on the Sassanian Empire and Ilkhanate do use the historical terms in the infobox rather than the commonly used historiographical terms. I believe it should be consistent, either all pages on historic states should only use the historiographical term, or if an historic state had an official name (the Seleucid Empire never had an official name and hence I believe that should stay), it should use that in the infobox.

This probably isn’t the best place to discuss this, can you direct me to somewhere where I can bring this up? Edidor123 (talk) 23:21, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Edidor123, the best place to bring it up... Not sure about the "best" place. It was a good start at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Greece/Byzantine world task force. I think at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style is a good place. LOTS of eyes will see it and if there is a better place, someone there will know for sure. I totally 100% agree there has to be consistency with naming. I looked at Sasanian Empire and Ilkhanate and I see your point. Some things seem to be inconsistent. Look at infobox country for formatting of names. Masterhatch (talk) 23:48, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Kelpfrog has given you a fox! Foxes promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day much better. Your fox must be fed and given headpats three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a fox, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Give someone a fox by adding {{subst:Fox}} or {{subst:Fox2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hi Masterhatch, thanks for welcoming me! Kelpfrog (talk) 12:01, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

About this removal. I have never seen any article under the mass murder cat (that might not be the case with murder but I haven't looked too deeply there), [especially those for attacks against civilians in conflicts] require convictions for them to be populated as such. Mariupol hospital airstrike, 14 October 2024 Al-Aqsa Hospital attack, the recent 2026 Minab school attack among numerous others come to mind.

Regards Gotitbro (talk) 01:31, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I re-read the article. No where does it say "murder". Also, do the reliable sources call it murder? And is there clear evidence that the civilians were targeted? To me, at least, it seemed awfully POV to be throwing around a murder tag like that without RS supporting it. Masterhatch (talk) 01:43, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I can see Afghan RS (anti-Taliban et. al.) call it slaughter, massacre et. al. But more importantly I don't think or recall POV ever being an issue for the cat at articles for mass casualty bombings regardless of the concerned conflict. Mass murder as a specific term used/disused in RS has never been an issue (and its subcats should clarify the specific cases of where and how it applies). Gotitbro (talk) 02:43, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

thank you so much for the welcome message on my talk page. it is highly appreciated and will be looking into it as more time becomes available to me to work on this hobby :)

I have 1 question as of now. is there a way to change my username? made this account a while ago and would love to change the name if possible.

thanks in advance

with love, Hackerman654 (talk) 11:36, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Masterhatch, you've repeatedly reverted a correction, probably without meaning to, on Berbers. The state of Mauretania was annexed by the Romans in the year 44 CE, not 44 BC. This is not a simple stylistic difference, those dates are 88 years apart. Thanks DiodotusNicator (talk) 05:01, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:DiodotusNicator, did you even read MOS:VAR? You cannot mix era styles. BC and CE are different era styles. Please read MOS:ERA. Masterhatch (talk) 11:36, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please re-read my message slowly. DiodotusNicator (talk) 11:55, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

		A beer on me!
		Thanks for the welcome message! Saw you were a Canucks fans, hopes this serves as some minor consolation after your season... Viscrealrealism (talk) 18:55, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Viscrealrealism (talk) 18:55, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I became a fan when i was 7 years old in that run of '82. I'm used to heartbreak and disappointment by now. The motto around my house is "just one Cup before I die..." (though I like to tease my dad that he remembers the Vancouver Millionaires winning in 1915). Masterhatch (talk) 19:46, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dear colleague: I noticed, that you deleted the word "christian" in my edit of Abkhazia:

Large areas of the region were left uninhabited and many Christian Armenians, Georgians, Russians and others subsequently migrated to Abkhazia, resettling much of the vacated territory.

It is important to emphasize immigration of Christians into Abkhazia, because it is the reason why Christianity is the most popular religion in Abkhazia today: Religion in Abkhazia . Could you please restore and correct my edit as shown above? ArcturusNotTaurus (talk) 09:24, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ArcturusNotTaurus: citing sources is very important. And so is grammar. Check out Help:Referencing for beginners & Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Masterhatch (talk) 14:40, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately, you did not answer my question.

Instead you committed a wiki-crime of lazy referencing. ArcturusNotTaurus (talk) 18:38, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]