User talk:NormadicEditor

❅

❆

❅

❆

❅

❆

❅

❆

❅

❆

❅

❆

Parliamentarian working for Minivan Daily

Hi NormadicEditor,
I wanted to ask you a question regarding the article you wrote about the Maldivian parliamentarian, Ahmed Haitham. It says that he worked as a photojournalist for Minivan Daily, and that he was arrested in 2012. Based on the references you provided (see: Reference 1, Reference 2), I couldn't find anything that corroborates that sentence. Is there any other reference you can provide that gives any support to that sentence?
Thanks,
Unilandofma (talk) 15:34, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

https://majlis19.mihaaru.com/candidates/358 (I have put this source)

This is the news source which confirms he was actually the photojournalist.

According to this article, and during the time of minivan daily as journalists we used to get the pictures from a source called Insaafuge Dhathuru Photo stream ( which back in the days was run under his administration) and according to some Facebook sources it was reported he was arrested during that and I linked the article on the people arrested on minivan daily, the relevance of this is subjective yes! thank you for noticing this. NormadicEditor (talk) 16:33, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for raising the issue, I happened to find more on the incidents of 2012 during the attacks on Maldivian journalists

https://cpj.org/2012/07/at-least-four-journalists-attacked-in-maldives-pro/

This article his name is mentioned,

https://minivannewsarchive.com/date/2012/07/14

this article his name is not mentioned but a brief of what happened was given.

Happens to be he was also attacked 11th of July 2012 with 3 more journos from raajje Tv. NormadicEditor (talk) 16:53, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi,

Thanks for clarifying that! I appreciate it. Unilandofma (talk) 17:07, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks to you, I got to learn more :) NormadicEditor (talk) 17:17, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy to help :) Unilandofma (talk) 17:22, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for helping me navigate Wikipedia. Much appreciated ^^ Pettylittlething (talk) 17:00, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Re:Hey Again!

Hi, I hope you're doing well and I am too myself! The reason why I'm sending a message to your talk page instead of replying to the one you sent on mine is because that I wasn't able to and my theory as to why is because you didn't sign it! Also please don't delete any previous conversations on my talk page and replace it with new ones. If you want to make a new one, there's a "New Topic" button where you can create a new one. As to the Ahmed Haitham article, you can add the PDFs in a reference but other than that I don't see anything wrong with it. Thanks! Unilandofma^{(Talk to me!)} 04:25, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Also would like to let you know that I have reverted it on my talk page now! Unilandofma^{(Talk to me!)} 04:26, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Hey really sorry about acting like a boomer! :P That would be the best way to dictate that whole mess on your talk page! I just finished restructuring it! I have like 5 more bills and 3 more petitions and 8 more amendments to add there! any suggestions on how I can keep the layout of it ? ( I picked the most controversial ones and left the rest out and still these are the numbers). Also I am doing pretty good got on this after Christmas sugar rush! NormadicEditor (talk) 04:42, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

I recommend you add the most notable things he did instead of like everything he did. As for the layout, I honestly have no idea and I completely apologize! Merry Christmas! (if you celebrate it over there in Austria) Unilandofma^{(Talk to me!)} 04:46, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

I’m Muslim, so I don’t really celebrate it, but hey, I’m not about to say no to good food and presents. Priorities, right?Now, about those noteworthy numbers they’re so many, it feels like I’m reading Ganoon Asaasee itself! Honestly, bro deserves all the accolades.Speaking of deserving, I started reading the parliamentary Hansard last week, and let me tell you, it was like watching a sitcom. Most of the people sitting there clearly have no idea what they’re doing! I was facepalming so hard, I’m surprised I don’t have a permanent handprint on my forehead. NormadicEditor (talk) 04:52, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Same even I'm Muslim! Honestly, I think all parliament members in the world generally don't realize how much power they have, well I mean some probably do. What got you interested in reading the Hansard? Unilandofma^{(Talk to me!)} 05:00, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

I had all the bills and documents with me which I got from the assessment, but I needed to confirm that a Maldivian had truly gone through with all of it. For all I see is them screaming atop their voices in parliament! At first, it was utterly unbelievable, so I began reading through the records, meticulously matching them to the dates.Yet, imagine my astonishment, there was a gentleman in the foreign relations committee who, with all earnestness, inquired about the meaning of a “treaty.” That, my dear, is when I abandoned all hope of delving further into the efforts of others. It is truly disheartening to witness such a state of affairs. And to see that Anni, of all people, has but a single piece of parliamentary work to his name this entire term? I was positively shoookath! NormadicEditor (talk) 05:09, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Really? Anni has only one? Honestly I'm shocked and disappointed in him. I expected more from him after all he was a former president but I guess you can't really expect much from Maldivian politicians. Unilandofma^{(Talk to me!)} 05:23, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Trust me I weeped! https://majlis.gov.mv/en/19-parliament/members/94 have a look committees only! no bills, no amendments no resolutions, no petitions. Heart-wrenching. NormadicEditor (talk) 06:07, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Honestly it's sad to see this. I expected better but oh well! Unilandofma^{(Talk to me!)} 06:35, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Me too! (I had to hide the factor from my mamma, as it would have broken her heart) Btw I've completely revised the layout and updated the initiative section using information directly from the Hansard records, summarising everything in a more organised paragraph format. I'd appreciate your review, as I needed to conduct extensive research on this matter. The issue is quite significant for us, and even a single misplaced word or sentence could potentially impact the entire proceedings and article.I spent the entire night reviewing the Hansard blocks, and found something quite interesting. In the records, Haitham first presents the numbers and factors, then requests stakeholder investigation because they were initially skeptical. Then, in the second committee Hansard, when they returned with their report confirming his findings, he actually says "I told you so" - word for word - to the stakeholders! Here's what's particularly intriguing though, while this was supposed to be a confidential committee due to national security reasons, all the confidential documents and minutes from the meetings have been made public. The resources are excellent (especially for investigative journo's and potential terrorists), but doesn't this essentially compromise national security? NormadicEditor (talk) 07:58, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

I honestly agree with you it does in a way compromise national security but I'm pretty sure they agreed that for those documents to be declassified. I couldn't find anything from Hansard about Ahmed Haitham though - so I'm curious how you found it. Also, I recommend you don't go too off topic from Ahmed Haitham, after all this is a biography of him. Unilandofma^{(Talk to me!)} 10:58, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

I've conducted extensive research on maintaining its integrity and have included both the implications and implementation stages (mostly when writing about a resolution or amendment its required to write implication and implementation) , along with their subsequent outcomes. I've added a brief reference to the initiative's impact to demonstrate its catalytic effect. While I've aimed to be comprehensive, I've also tried to maintain focus without straying too far from the core subject. Please let me know if you think the scope needs adjustment. I appreciate your guidance on keeping the content aligned with the objectives.

https://majlis.gov.mv/storage/committee/meetings/minutes/wsZ3riWuQ8gQ2qiFE4kTuHsp5TK6Yogy0u7dj7j9.pdf Regarding the first resolution, it was initially proposed as an agenda item in the Hansard. The resolution concerning illegal immigrants was listed as the second agenda item, and this particular session only covered the first agenda hearing, which contained limited details.

https://majlis.gov.mv/storage/committee/meetings/minutes/P39StUA4bcKkzkTbjuiUMvnwJF59uxp9slQEkrOP.pdf Page 37 - During the initial committee meeting,(which is dated prior to this one under committee documents but the file is missing as being classified but its on YouTube under committee) Haitham presented specific statistics regarding undocumented migrants in the Maldives, citing approximately 63,000 undocumented migrants with total migrant workers estimated between 145,000 to 230,000. These figures were met with skepticism from stakeholders, who were then tasked with conducting their own investigation to verify the numbers. When the stakeholders returned to the second committee meeting with their findings(which is this one), their report confirmed Haitham's initial assessment. This led to a notable moment in the Hansard records where Haitham responded with "I told you so" to the stakeholders, highlighting the accuracy of his preliminary research and validating his concerns about the scale of undocumented workers in the Maldives- (this is confidential but is available under committee hansard labeled as confidential to public) Also my bad! I forgot to put this hansard as a cite! I'm so glad you are thorough!!

https://majlis.gov.mv/storage/committee/meetings/minutes/6W6BdagaouN0A3uZtFLimEAjibRdGuzIrOImjTWl.pdf -Presents the resolution on involving PISCES systems- (also a labeled as a confidential hansard) NormadicEditor (talk) 13:25, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Also cropped most of the implication and aftermath to align subsequently with the biography aspect :)) NormadicEditor (talk) 13:39, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Ohh! I see. I admire your dedication for his article. Maintaining and expanding it must be tiring. Unilandofma^{(Talk to me!)} 16:53, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

It’s very tiring, but I am a perfectionist. This was supposed to be my vacation, and I’m writing at home, not at work! Everyone else is elsewhere with their significant others, while I’m here digging up dirt on politicians! Did you see my article on Yoosuf Maaniu Mohamed? NormadicEditor (talk) 22:48, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes I have! I think you forgot to put some links to a reference on Yoosuf Maaniu Mohamed. Unilandofma^{(Talk to me!)} 07:28, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Which ones ? I am still expending it too! NormadicEditor (talk) 07:37, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

There's a link pointing to https://federation.edu.au/connect/alumni/success-stories/profiles/m-z/mohamed,-yoosuf-maaniu2 that's not in a reference and there seems to be a reference number with nothing pointing to it under the Commissioner General of Maldives Customs heading. Unilandofma^{(Talk to me!)} 08:03, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Aah! I will update that one, I need to revise the entire article, also its not yet reviewed by the Maldivian project. but before that, I require guidance on how to handle the ventilator corruption issue. MP Haitham was the one who brought this matter to parliament's attention. Subsequently, the minister provided false information about it. This led to multiple inquiries, followed by a letter from the Majlis (sent by the MP) summoning the health minister. The case then proceeded to the Prosecutor General's office, where they declined to press charges. It was then referred to arbitration before returning to parliament. The issue continued with further motions and extensive debates.It's important to note that debates and parliamentary work are distinct. Debates involve discussion, while actual parliamentary work primarily occurs in committees and represents the substantive efforts of the parliament.My main concern is whether I should create a separate redirect for the ventilator corruption issue or simply highlight the key points as concisely as possible, focusing on the most relevant aspects. What would you advise? NormadicEditor (talk) 01:57, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Id recommend you highlight the key points and not make it too lengthy! Unilandofma^{(Talk to me!)} 04:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

yes I will highlight the key points, but after the whole research I did last night, that one needs a section below the corruption in Maldives page, I didn't know it was a whole saga until last night. NormadicEditor (talk) 07:42, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

well corruption is always a big problem in every government Unilandofma^{(Talk to me!)} 08:38, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm dealing with an editor who seems unfamiliar with the subject matter and is making problematic edits to the Ahmed Haitham article. They've tagged the article as poorly written due to minor formatting issues like missing spaces, and are claiming it's too lengthy despite the 60+ citations justifying the content. They've made several misguided changes, including changing 'parallel economies' to 'black market', then to 'parallel economy', misunderstanding the term's specific usage in this context. They've also incorrectly modified terms used by legislators and altered punctuation incorrectly. Now they're labeling the article as melodramatic. I've tried explaining the importance of precise terminology and the relevance of the content, even suggesting they review similar articles like AOC's for comparison. However, they continue to make unconstructive remarks and changes without seeming to grasp the topic's complexity. I'm concerned about maintaining the article's accuracy and integrity. How should I proceed in addressing these persistent issues? NormadicEditor (talk) 04:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

The lengthy part is actually somewhat true. When I checked the article, I've noticed it's really lengthy so you could try to summarise it after all this is a BLP so it's best that we try to summarise unnecessary parts even though it is crucial to keep them but best to summarize it as much as we can without oversimplifying. As for the terminology part, I agree it should be kept as that based on the context provided. As for maintaining it and addressing the issues, talk about it on the article's talk page and reach a consensus. Unilandofma^{(Talk to me!)} 08:14, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

I acknowledge that, the current version is the best we can achieve with all the information, though I'll try to trim it further. The editor's hostility and excessive focus on spacing issues were unwarranted. The significant differences between British and Indian English variants are important to maintain, and the editor simplifying the terminology risks reducing the article to something akin to a simplistic indian drama piece. This situation has been frustrating. My research on other legislators' pages confirms that this approach is standard, with articles meeting or exceeding A-class criteria. Some legislators' articles exceed 300,000 bytes but remain uncut due to the importance of detailing crucial legislation and socio-economic impacts. The content's significance justifies its current length. NormadicEditor (talk) 09:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

It's good that you're trimming the article, and no editor should be hostile on Wikipedia so I suggest you tell them on their talk page or give them a warning. Unilandofma^{(Talk to me!)} 11:04, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

I like the suggestion to "try to trim it further". Perhaps going into slightly less details on certain issues and keeping in mind the article's focus should be on the politician not on a detailed examination of each issue. Jellysandwich0 (talk) 02:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

@Jellysandwich0 I completely agree with you here. Unilandofma^{(Talk to me!)} 08:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

overlinking

While linking is often helpful, please do not use it excessively.

Jellysandwich0 (talk) 04:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

The relationship between Hansard records, parliamentary adjournments, and their contextual significance is complex and often misunderstood as overlooking. While these elements are not directly equivalent to oversight, they play a crucial role in parliamentary transparency and accountability. Hansard transcripts and adjournment debates serve as important references for media scrutiny and public discourse. However, the nuances of these parliamentary processes are frequently overlooked, as many individuals, including some journalists, do not engage in thorough investigative research. During times of conflict or controversy, it becomes especially critical for investigative journalists to present accurate and contextual information from these sources. Failing to do so may lead to misinterpretations or escalate conflicts based on incomplete or improperly framed parliamentary proceedings. So the topic we are discussing here can be highly critical and should be referred to references. NormadicEditor (talk) 05:18, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Links and citations are not the same. Your use of citations is correct, helpful, and appreciated. In Wikipedia, a link is a word placed in brackets. Please do not use them with common, widely understood words, as you did with "license", "political", "journalist", "technology", "committee", "tourism", and "implementation". Thank you. Jellysandwich0 (talk) 03:41, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

This situation demonstrates the importance of those links, like in specific context, see the use of 'parallel economies' in plural was intentional, reflecting the multiple informal economic systems discussed in the article. While we often assume people like you understand such nuances, yet it's clear that providing more context can prevent misunderstandings. In the future, I'll aim to be more explicit about such distinctions while remaining mindful of the need for concise writing. Thank you. NormadicEditor (talk) 11:26, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Space between sentences

In English there should be a space between two sentences:

CORRECT: In his address to the committee, Haitham outlined how this significant demographic shift posed various challenges to national security, economic stability, and social infrastructure. The parliamentary records show that Haitham framed the issue as a potential national security threat, emphasising the need for an accurate count of illegal immigrants and a coordinated response involving key stakeholders.

INCORRECT: In his address to the committee, Haitham outlined how this significant demographic shift posed various challenges to national security, economic stability, and social infrastructure.The parliamentary records show that Haitham framed the issue as a potential national security threat, emphasising the need for an accurate count of illegal immigrants and a coordinated response involving key stakeholders.

Notice that in correct writing there is a space between the two sentences. In the Ahmed Haitham article, the space was often missing. Thank you for your cooperation. Jellysandwich0 (talk) 05:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

As a graduate of an Ivy League English-speaking university, I possess a strong grasp of these concepts but I am more than happy to learn from you. However, I acknowledge that while linking sources and citations, I occasionally make inadvertent errors in sentence structure. It's important to note that the content undergoes a collaborative process involving multiple editors and administrators. Our administrative guidelines emphasize the necessity of providing references or citations for all statements pertaining to parliamentary matters, given their significance to law, order, and public interest. I appreciate your feedback, as it contributes to the ongoing refinement of our communication standards. NormadicEditor (talk) 05:25, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

On January 3, in the Ahmed Haitham article, you repeatedly did not place a space in front of sentences following citations. For example "On March 7, 2024, Attorney General stated that while full recovery of compensation was unlikely...". This has been corrected. There should be a space between the two. Jellysandwich0 (talk) 03:58, 4 January 2025 (UTC) Jellysandwich0 (talk) 03:58, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

I understand your point. Occasional formatting issues, such as missing spaces after citations, don't necessarily reflect on the quality of the content or the writer's competence. These are often minor oversights that can occur during the editing process, especially when dealing with complex topics and numerous citations. It's important to focus on the substance of the article rather than small formatting errors, which can be easily corrected. In collaborative environments like Wikipedia, such minor issues are typically addressed through the ongoing editing and review process. So thanks for correcting it and you deserve an award for sighting the spacing! :) NormadicEditor (talk) 09:56, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

lengthiness

There is excessive detail in the Ahmed Haitham article. This is to be avoided in Wikipedia. Wikipedia has a short, but useful, resource: Wikipedia:Too much detail. Jellysandwich0 (talk) 04:15, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

When writing about complex laws or notable individuals with extensive accomplishments, it's important to balance concision with comprehensive coverage. While brevity is valued, some biographies require more detail to accurately represent a person's significance. For lawmakers and legal topics, consider examining other Wikipedia articles in this domain to understand the appropriate level of detail and context. The goal is to provide a clear, factual summary that captures essential information without omitting crucial elements, even if this results in a longer entry than initially desired. NormadicEditor (talk) 09:53, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

disagreement

You recently wrote, "I know you think you know what you are doing but I am fully aware at this point you are just going up and off on assumptions and essentially boasting off, pretending to know off, but it's not helping you or the article, also reflecting on how much you know." in my talk page. When disagreeing at Wikipedia, we focus on the editing rather than being hostile.

Writing that you graduated from an "Ivy League English-speaking university" is not necessary. You were not being judged, your editing was being discussed.

Accusing me of vandalising the Ahmed Haitham article seems hyperbolic to me. Did my edits vandalise the article?

You wrote "Currently this feels more like Vandalism upon a more personal agenda." in my talk page. The accusation seems more dramatic than accurate to me.

Please use talk pages constructively, not for melodrama. Jellysandwich0 (talk) 04:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes, your corrections were often hostile, as evident on your talk page. When you're unfamiliar with a topic, altering words without understanding their context is problematic. Despite my repeated explanations, you persisted with aggressive edits and poor English. While noticing small formatting issues is commendable, your passive-aggressive approach and changing the narrative without fully reading the article is not. Accusing others of "poor English" is unnecessary, thats when I mentioned my education. As I mentioned, even the best writers need editors before publication. However, your excessive focus on minor spacing issues is melodramatic. Despite my multiple explanations of terminology, you continued to change it without understanding. You're welcome to edit the page if you cease being passive-aggressive. You're the first among 17 editors to approach it this way. If you find a legislator's page long, compare it to AOC's or other notable legislators'. The current summarization, supported by citations, explains the issue's magnitude concisely. Let's be diplomatic: if you're interested in editing, discuss nicely without passive-aggression. Correct spacing or formatting errors, but don't alter or omit crucial content. The English style I'm using is different from what you have been trying to change the article to. Several admins are monitoring the article and provide constructive feedback when necessary, they don't go on like a bully on my talk page with correct spacing and incorrect whilst being explained multiple times. Be respectful, and I'll reciprocate. if you want to discuss this furthermore I am open to it and I have resonated with you enough and I appreciate you removing the spacings! also you used the spacing issue as Melo drama on my talk page as if you were explaining it to a child, making a whole mountain out of spacing. NormadicEditor (talk) 09:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)