This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archives: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30 · 31 · 32 · 33 · 34 · 35 |
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Hodgdon's secret garden ( talk) 05:36, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
I appreciate your input at Time Traveler (roller coaster). As such, I have removed the image you substituted in the infobox as the design is copyrighted and, due to its three-dimensional design, can also be considered a sculpture. As you noted, there is no freedom of panorama in the United States, so no image of a copyrighted three-dimensional structure would be permitted. I look forward to working with you on removing all the other images of roller coasters on the site that are located in the United States. Consistency and all that. -- McDoob AU93 03:46, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of King's Cross Thameslink railway station at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah ( talk) 21:42, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
hello, saw you were the one that Moved Hughes Communications to Hughes Network Systems, but i dont see the page renamed/moved? Hughes Network Systems still redirects to Hughes Communications. am i missing something? Melodies1917 ( talk) 14:00, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
The second round of the 2019 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to scored 32 points to advance into round 3. Our top four scorers in round 2 all scored over 400 points and were:
Other notable performances were put in by Barkeep49 with six GAs, Ceranthor, Lee Vilenski, and Canada Hky, each with seven GARs, and MPJ-DK with a seven item GT.
So far contestants have achieved nine featured articles between them and a splendid 80 good articles. Commendably, 227 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2019 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. The judges are pleased with the thorough GARs that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 ( talk), Sturmvogel 66 ( talk), Vanamonde ( talk) and Cwmhiraeth ( talk) MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 17:45, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 10, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 19:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
My apologies for the above section stating that you are a party. You are not, I made a mistake with the template. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:51, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru. I tried here--> diff. --- In answer to my inquiry on an admins' noticeboard I'm told to request so-called userification in my userspace of the " Clarice E. Phelps" [draft prematurely turned] blp from you(?) diff Thanks-- Hodgdon's secret garden ( talk) 02:16, 3 May 2019 (UTC)-- Hodgdon's secret garden ( talk) 02:20, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
Administrators
must secure their accounts
The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.
|
This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:57, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
For the Arbitration Committee, - Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).
the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so
will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
On 8 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article King's Cross Thameslink railway station, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that King's Cross Thameslink railway station, then known as King's Cross Metropolitan (pictured), was one of the initial seven stations on London's first underground line? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/King's Cross Thameslink railway station. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, King's Cross Thameslink railway station), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile ( talk) 00:01, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Rapeseed | |
---|---|
... with thanks from QAI |
Good one! - Thank you for fixing the sad quirky, among so many other fixes! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:06, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Sigh, I got this wrong again, thanks. I've checked the rest of the month; there are no more redirects to a section. Per WT:ERRORS#Section links and bypassing redirects, I'd prefer lyric dramas, but I won't push it because the argument can be made that, in this case, the hovertext isn't confusing. - Dank ( push to talk) 20:06, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
The Civility Barnstar | |
Keep being the voice of reason. You can lead a horse to water ... 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 11:56, 13 May 2019 (UTC) |
Hi, the new hook about Filipino Americans is written poorly and not piped well. I would suggest:
On 15 May 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2018–19 Premier League, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.
— Amakuru ( talk) 17:28, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
I replied to your BLP1E claim at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2019_May_10.
You also discounted the question as to whether Ms Nelson's wishes mattered.
I was surprised, a decade or so, to learn that the wikipedia had a long-standing convention to take the wishes of BLP subject's into account, and agree to delete otherwise OK BLP articles, as a courtesy, when their notability is near the cusp. In principle it would be simpler if we were tough minded, and ignored all requests from BLP subjects. But we don't. These decisions are very subjective. Aggressive BLP subjects who make demands, rather than appeal to our sympathy are very likely to have their requests dismissed. When there are factors that appeal to the emotions of those deciding whether to agree to courtesy deletion, even a very notable person will win courtesy deletion.
Because Ms Nelson is an articulate beautiful young woman she would have a very strong sympathy factor on her side, if she appealed for a courtesy deletion. If she were to add to that an assertion like "I defended my mother's publication of the naked photo of me, when I was child, but that was half my lifetime ago, and I now agree with the politicians who saw me as a victim of child abuse..." This would be the clincher. She would almost certainly win courtesy deletion. Geo Swan ( talk) 12:54, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Events in the |
Life of Jesus according to the canonical gospels |
---|
Portals: Christianity Bible |
Hi, see Category:Annunciation in Christian art. The notion that 15th-century paintings have fixed titles like modern ones is wrong. There are standard names for the main religious subjects though. WP:THE applies. See WP:VAMOS for further details. Johnbod ( talk) 14:40, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Dear @ Amakuru:, I have nominated the article Montsoreau for GA-status according to the criteria. Would you mind to review it or to give me your feeling? All my very best, -- Suavemarimagno ( talk) 17:28, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battle of Dun Nechtain, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Macpherson ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:58, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru. Please start a WP:RM for the Midland League if you think it should be moved. Undoing a reverted move isn't really on. Cheers, Number 5 7 21:31, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
It appears that Tuesday's upcoming POTD hasn't yet been chosen. Are you going to be scheduling it soon? — RAVENPVFF · talk · 14:30, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi. In this edit, I think (but I'm not 100% certain) that it would be Canadian rather than US dollars. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 09:52, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I see you changed the image here. Please rewrite the "(pictured, right)" part in the hook, to just (pictured). Thanks, Yoninah ( talk) 15:00, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
the capitalization was indeed good; I disagree about adding the geographical identifier -- reduces the hooky nature. ∯WBG converse 15:42, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
I noticed that you didn't copy your edits to the unprotected version of tomorrow's POTD over to the protected version. Would you mind doing so? Thanks. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 16:35, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Coventry City F.C., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albert Lewis ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 16:20, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Do you think that Coldstream Guards would be a better target article than Facial hair in the military? Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Military uses the former page, which also seems like a more natural title for the picture to me. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 12:23, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).
Regarding your revert, you've reverted a similar change last time when Alucard 16 preformed one. I talked to you about this and exaplined that the move is correct per WP:NCTV, after-which you said you'll raise the issue. You didn't and as it currently stands, you are just exercising some strange WP:OWNERSHIP and preventing a single sub-set of a group of pages to be WP:CONSISTENT with literally every other television and Big Brother related page, with no backing of any guideline, but your personal preference. Very disappointing. -- Gonnym ( talk) 23:28, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Coventry City F.C., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Leslie Jones ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 16:12, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
do not believe in faux civility. Urge your friend to refrain from
trolling, if he expects favorable treatment. Also, he has made dozens of edits over the course of last few hours and the template usage notes state:- Do not use this template unless you plan to completely and permanently stop editing ... If you later resume editing, please remove this template from your user page.
which is amply clear.
∯WBG
converse
14:04, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Whatever you are using for this, please see WT:DYK - Increase number of hooks. We just changed the Template:Did you know/Clear so it has 9 hooks in the prep area. Might be that way for a long haul, with the going trend of short hooks. — Maile ( talk) 14:20, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Secret Life of Pets 2 (upcoming film). Since you had some involvement with the The Secret Life of Pets 2 (upcoming film) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 13:26, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
I've just posted twice to User_talk:Xezbeth#Two_Owsley_articles, the second time because I saw a similar subject matter in your User_talk:Xezbeth#McKinsey post to the same user page in early May and followed it a ways. I may get satisfactory response on my own but I thought I'd let you know of my encounter, also. I may have managed to 'ping' you on this, separately; sorry if it's done twice now. Thanks. Cheers. Swliv ( talk) 23:40, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I unprotected Gloria Vanderbilt since I blocked the main IP culprit of disruption. If there are more persistent problems we can reprotect, but I thought it was best to leave it open if possible. Ping FlightTime Thanks. -- Fuzheado | Talk 15:36, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Coventry City F.C., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Curtis ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 11:56, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
There was one support, one oppose, and one "no view" on this. Without going into the strengths of the "arguments" it should have at least been relisted, or closed as no consensus. Also, nb, Anfield, Liverpool is currently a circular link on the disam page. Johnbod ( talk) 23:07, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | ||
For your measured and sober assessments on ANI. Thanks for all that you do for the project! User:Lightburst 23:14, 19 June 2019 (UTC) |
Well, I think anyone is justified in tagging an article which is about to go the main page when it's packed with unreferenced claims and what was about to be presented on the main page wasn't even accurate. As of right now, if you're not happy with the process I've ended up with, you don't have to do anything. It'd be a shame because history has shown that WP:TRM is about three times more effective than WP:ERRORS. But it 100% depends on dedicated people like you. In any case, thanks for your help over the last year. We're knocking on for 2,000 fixes, which I don't think is something to be sniffed at by anyone. The Rambling Man ( talk) 16:01, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
This and
this were completely inappropriate since you did not follow
WP:CLOSECHALLENGE, specifically discussing it with me and if necessary initiating a
move review. The first was a
supervote. Reverting the move until any necessary implementation adjustments could be made would have been one thing; however, reopening the discussion was out of process. On top of that, ugly red errors messages
is a completely insufficient description of whatever you were seeing. Finally, you didn't even have the courtesy to even notify me. —
JJMC89 (
T·
C)
01:19, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Amakuru, can you please stop by the nomination page the next chance you get, since it needs your concurrence to proceed. Many thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 06:43, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi, the last hook in this set was being discussed at WT:DYK#Prep 5: Prisoner when you promoted the set to the queue. He was jailed for 13 years, not 12, as confirmed by all the sources. I also added it to the article text. Please change "twelve" to "thirteen". Thanks, Yoninah ( talk) 09:39, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Seven years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:31, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).
|
|
The third round of the 2019 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round needed to score at least 68 points, which is substantially lower than last year's 227 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:
Contestants managed 4 (5) featured articles, 4 featured lists, 18 featured pictures, 29 good articles, 50 DYK entries, 9 ITN entries, and 39 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them, and it is imperative to claim them in the correct round; one FA claim had to be rejected because it was incorrectly submitted (claimed in Round 3 when it qualified for Round 2), so be warned! When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 ( talk), Sturmvogel 66 ( talk), Vanamonde ( talk) and Cwmhiraeth ( talk). MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:11, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
Well I've heard of it, but I don't know about the opening line. All I know is "it's a gas gas gas...." Certainly not true that most or even many will get it. The Rambling Man ( talk) 13:10, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | ||
Wishing you a happy 4th! Lightburst ( talk) 03:12, 4 July 2019 (UTC) |
I'm proposing the recreation of Draft:Root Insurance Company as I believe I have been better able to establish notability. Calvinballing ( talk) 16:24, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi, we're waiting for your response at this nomination so we can promote it. Thanks, Yoninah ( talk) 22:08, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
Hey, sorry about the revert of your edit at the Fram discussion, was by accident. Sorry again. Kante4 ( talk) 11:02, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
But the consensus at Talk:Bougainville_campaign#Requested_move_24_June_2019 also applies to Norwegian Campaign, which you maybe didn't notice. Dicklyon ( talk) 14:44, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru,
I saw that you recently moved the Rural Municipality page after the discussion. Thanks. I was one of the ones who thought that since the article as written is entirely about Canadian RMs, it should be re-named.
The discussion reminded me of a different page, one that I think should be deleted. It's a mis-spelt redirect for the Canadian territory of Nunavut: Nunavat.
It strike me that keeping a mis-spelt page as a re-direct encourages mis-spelling in articles. If an editor incorrectly uses the mis-spelling as a wikilink, there's no indication that it's a spelling error. However, if the Nunavat re-direct page were deleted, and then an editor used "Nunavat" as a link, it would immediately come up as a redlink, alerting the editor that there was a problem.
I'm sure there's a wiki policy on this somewhere, but I couldn't find it so I thought I'd ask an administrator. :) -- Mr Serjeant Buzfuz ( talk) 15:45, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Firstly, thanks for that scarecrow joke yesterday. Corny, of course, but not in a bad way. Really "grounds" a story about standing alone in a field against semiravenous birds when the crowd is firmly (if subconsciously) in on the notion that buddy won the big one in a cornfield. Comedy or drama, corn is metaphorical gold in any town where corn is literally sold. Whether you meant to or not, you struck it rich last night. Congratulations!
But when I said we'd need to something about your name, that was just part of my act. A callback to a time I wasn't alive for in a place I've only seen on TV, read about in books and tried to reimagine online just "once or twice" before. So not to ruin a bad joke further by needing to explain the punchline aloud, but struggling to adapt to these "modern sensibilities" I've only heard "the kids" (Joplin, Dylan, Mitchell) sing about while "hepped up on goofballs" (referring to myself), allow me, if you will, good man, a chance to redeem your satisfaction (no guarantees implied):
Your name is alright, seriously. It's just that "in my day" ('80s pop culture expositions of purported '50s backstage filth), it seems like the "thing to do" when discovering ripe new corn-based talent is/was to change their name to something less "exotic" for the domestic market (corn-fed white Midwestern American folk). So I figured you might get a kick out of it, an allusion to "simpler times", as it were. But a day late, it dawned on me that you may likely be a proud African male (18 to 34). It is in this strange spirit of white-but-Canadian guilt I sincerely beg your pardon today, eh?
My people often forget the cruel indignities imposed on your people's ancestral cousins during, before and after the Golden Age of Hollywood and Professional Wrestling Hall of Fame and Museum cross-border television eras, onscreen and off, cannot stress it enough. Casual racism is the worst there is, the worst there was and the worst there ever will be. Equally true to this, people have a hard time believing I mean things like this, simply because I'm "always on" with regard to speaking in riddles and referencing old school ephemera far more liberally than I do scholarly academic articles. I'm blacklisted from performing at the Ref Desk, partially because of that, partially in solidarity with an oppressed StuRat and partially because of "creative differences", but never for telling a racist joke (Indian burns don't count, I was half-reared by Algonquin in the forest, nothing crude or mean). My "serious mental problems" are more in the style of Homer Simpson ( smiling politely) Too much TV, junk food, beer, weed, rock music, marital turmoil and sweet glorious head trauma!
Can you, in 2019, forgive me for being born a simple oaf whose only "real mistake" was getting into the entertainment business because he hated children? If not, can I least get some feedback on whether you thought I implied you should have a slave name instead of a stage name? Not that I'm so insecure in my tolerability that I need validation of my non-racist status card from the first black guy I potentially inexcusably insult, but just out of common decency? Please?
Even if I've just dug myself deeper by putting this wall of dry text between us and you never want to fool around again, I'll understand. But like that nice Jewish boy in South Park, I learned something today. "Amakuru" was never hard to pronounce, or about skin colour or the friends we made along the way. It's not one village, one river or any one of us rowing down this drain called life. Not me, not you, not the feelings in the subcockles of our hearts. Amakuru just fundamentally and basically stands for that one question it always has, the one we ask every morning, evening and underneath the moon. Transcends cultures and beliefs, tragedy and comedy, light and shadow, ladies and gentlemen:
That question is hello! InedibleHulk (talk) 07:36, July 11, 2019 (UTC)
Please explain on what basis you consider my edits to the infobox (which according to consensus should not be there anyway) at Next United Kingdom general election. Kevin McE ( talk) 13:31, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you. I believe there was a consensus at Talk:2019 Venezuelan uprising#Requested move 6 June 2019 to move the page to "30 April 2019 Venezuelan clashes"; I counted 8 support !votes and 4 oppose !votes, with the arguments in favor of moving at least as strong as those against.
Regardless, on April 30, the page had originally been moved to "2019 Venezuela uprising" without consensus, and as the discussion progressed, more and more agreed that the current title is flawed. Almost all agreed at the very least that if the title contains "uprising" or "coup" then it should contain the word "attempted". Several of us raised the concern during the discussion that a "no consensus" decision would keep the status quo title which had been imposed without consensus and for which there was now a consensus against, and I was hoping that this would be addressed in the closer's rationale. Can you address it? (Apologies again for bothering you.) Thanks, Davey2116 ( talk) 22:18, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
Seriously, you thought this was so urgent that you couldn't bother to talk to me about an image scheduled for three months from now before going off and posting a debate on the Main Page that failed to mention the historical importance, the notability of the photographer, that the only image we've banned for nudity or salaciousness since 2006 was literally a painting of an naked underage woman - and that one seems to have mostly been voted off more to avoid encouraging some sort of nasty situation with sock puppetry and attacks than any issues with it being a nude if you check the votes. Yes, in the very distant past we'd not schedule something with nudity. It's been over a decade since that's been a thing, and I don't think resurrecting it now helps anyone.
We've featured dead bodies... at least twice in close up, probably a lot more from even a slight distance. Some of the dead bodies were mutilated into works of art. We've had artworks including male full-frontal nudity, and more breasts than I can count. If you had asked me, I would have pointed this all out to you. I really, really wish you had done so. Try to do better in future? Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 05:44, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
The thing's scheduled for October. You're pushing this forwards very hard for somethibg with no near time limit. Did you need to start a survey before we xould talk over the issues and work out a neutral wordong, when I've made it very ckear I object to your heading and framing of the debate? Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 17:13, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi, did I restore all the right script after you "raked" the page? Thanks, Yoninah ( talk) 10:15, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Hello
I did want to fill you in that I don't have a problem with U.S. editors, I have a problem with people from several right-wing leaning states like Alabama, where dermies is from.
Alabama, Georgia, Texas and several other states that are extremely right and anti feminist. Mayb eI'm completely missing something as I am an Eritrean who lived in Southend-on-sea and London for most of his life, then moved ot Canada in mid 2018.
I've been tought over my life to have distrust towards such people, unlearning things is like me telling an American to unlearn whateve rvalues is dear to them.
We value freedom, and not invading other countries. So yeah, it's not all of the U.S. it's the right-wing anti abortion anti feminist states that I don't care fore, including Alabama, Georgia and Texas.
Pluss, I do have a problem with a country who's leader calls Africa a bleep hole and who tells Africans to "get out".
Maybe it is my pride being too high or something, it' show I was raised. I tell people, even though I speak with a British accent, and live din Southend-On-Sea and London for my whole childhood and London for my teenage years, and now Canada, that I am Eritrean, as I am born in Nakfa, and flead to the UK in 1998. I have similar problems with some parts of the UK, but I forgive the UK as they gave me a home, the U.S. would not.
So it's a combination of how I was raised, Donald Trump, and right-wing republican views in such states as Alabama, Texas and Georgia.
I do try to be civil as bes tI can, but I do not recognize authority from those states due to how I was raised.
I'm still unlearning things from my past, I used to be tought that my blindness meant I'd never amount to anything and i'm learning that that was false. These changes take time and are rather taxing on th emind.
Also next time an American wants to block me, don't do the short and sweet reasoning, it's like those officers in those TV shows, "you're arrested for murder, " "when?" "you're under arrest for murder, that's my answer."
Again maybe I'm missing something big time, and I trust you to help me understand form a wiki perspective.
I just don't trust pro gun and right-wing trump supporting and anti abortion people. And i know it's not all in those states, but it's enough that these things happen, maajority rules, and it hurts me to know that.
I do plan on engaging as best I can provided that they are willing to see where I am coming from too.
thanks
38.111.120.74 (
talk)
07:29, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
Did you intend to indefinitely full protect John Hancock Tower from editing as well as moving when you protected this article? Iffy★ Chat -- 20:55, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
On 27 July 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Clemantine Wamariya, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Clemantine Wamariya was reunited with her parents on The Oprah Winfrey Show, twelve years after being separated from them during the Rwandan genocide? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Clemantine Wamariya. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Clemantine Wamariya), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile ( talk) 00:01, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
I don't think it is the end of the world. But that was a bad close. There is no clear indication that there was no chance of a consensus in support and there was no clear consensus in opposition. People cannot double vote so consensus may change as more people participate. There was no harm in leaving it open but by closing it you supervoted to oppose. You should let the nomination last the full 7-days or until there is a clear consensus in opposition. The arguments mentioning "not global" and "only US" should be ignored per established guidelines. --- Coffeeand crumbs 22:59, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
After about taking a year off of anything dealing with content because of real life things that made doing research through sourcing in my spare time significantly less enjoyable than it used to be, I've decided to take the plunge back into that side of the project. Still as fun and interesting as it used to be. A nice breath of fresh air from sockpuppets and LTAs. Next to finish my 17th century conclave series of GAs this week before the library books are due and I can't renew them anymore. TonyBallioni ( talk) 04:08, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Greetings Amakuru. I am puzzled by your close at
Talk:List of the verified oldest people#Jeanne Calment ("Seeking Consensus" subsection). I would have rated this as no consensus. Most of the supporters argue that the dispute is a conspiracy theory that should be considered FRINGE, but that can't be compared to the "fake moon landings": in one case, experts have relied chiefly on the recollections of the article subject about her own life, or her prior declarations to census officers; in the other case there are thousands of people who were direct witnesses to the Apollo program. Also, you say that you discounted arguments pointing out that the Calment case has been disputed since 2000, because sources had not been presented. All those sources are in the
Jeanne Calment article, where numerous discussions since late 2018 have established consensus to describe the dispute in some detail, with appropriate caveats. As I said in my "Oppose" reasoning, the controversy about Jeanne Calment's age is now a key part of her notability.
Hopefully it will be settled in the coming years. Would you reconsider your conclusions? —
JFG
talk
09:46, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
did jump to the wrong conclusion but there's no point in surfacing this in full public glare!
[3] Best. Leaky caldron ( talk) 08:27, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.
Hi, seeking help with an edit war situation related to the RfC close you recently made. Apparently an editor is refusing to abide by the results of the RfC close, and said "The deletion of these families have no merit. Will keep adding back if deleted again". They have undone the deleted names two times 1 and 2. I left a warning message on their talk page. They are ignoring talk discussions, ignored participation in the RfC, and ignored the invitation to discuss how to implement the close - it is brute force only. I believe this account is a sock, based on the limited SPA edit history, but have not investigated who the master might be. Can you help? -- Green C 03:02, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru,
I have tried to discuss the issue with Cognissonance on his talk page (see the section "Disruptive edits"). When I felt that Cognissonance was edit-warring, I went to 3RR, but was advised that DRN might be the more appropriate place to raise the issue. He has been active in the Tenet article since the DRN was posted, but appears to be ignoring it; in the meantime, he is reverting everything in the article itself. Between the discussions on his talk page and the DRN, I feel like I'm doing everything I can to address the issue, but I also feel that he has no intention of addressing it. I don't know what else I can do save go to ANI (and my last visit there is not going well). Mclarenfan17 ( talk) 22:25, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Please don't delete discussions about items that are still current on the Main Page. – Sca ( talk) 15:35, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
Amakuru, I am being retrospectively accused of edit warring with you when I reverted your revert here, on July 13, and I'm also being accused of unspecified large-scale controversial moves, in an attempt to indef block me. I don't understand why, but a bunch of editors have piled on, while I can't get them to tell me which large-scale moves were controversial. Your perspective might be useful since they accuse me of edit warring with you. Top section in WP:AN/I. Dicklyon ( talk) 04:20, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
I was wondering if you could fix my Eunice Kettering hook in queue 4 to say age six instead of age 6. I asked yesterday on the DYK talk page, but no one will fix it. SL93 ( talk) 20:33, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi, could you consider pulling something already loaded in the prep sets to balance the DYK column, rather than using an old hook? We have six loaded prep sets to work with. Thanks, Yoninah ( talk) 22:36, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru, hope you're well. Should I assume that either my comments are now too irrelevant or that you aren't actioning any of them or something else? The Rambling Man ( Staying alive since 2005!) 07:57, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Hello I've talked with some people in person about my feelings towards Southern-U.S. editors and I've decided I will work with them going forward. My feelings towards Alabama have not changed, but my plan is to do my best not to let these feelings effect interactions with Drmies.
I was supposed to be away from the country on this date as I had planned on going to London to reunited with some old friends, but due to family reasons that fell through, so I'm here and willing to fix any issues I have done. As for accusations by Graham87 of me being somebody else, I won't even touch them. thanks. 38.111.120.74 ( talk) 21:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
... resorted to personal attacks I'm afraid. And that individual should be being held to a higher standard and shouldn't be edit warring to remove his personal attacks in my own user space. Incredibly poor. The Rambling Man ( Staying alive since 2005!) 15:25, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
I have opened a discussion of this issue on the talk page of the 2020 Republican Presidential primaries campaign page. Contrary to your assertion, i actually had already opened a discussion on the issue of Rocky De La Fuente's candidacy on the talk page. However I have opened a new discussion regarding the specific issue of campaign finances. I suggest you submit your remarks to the article's talk page. XavierGreen ( talk) 21:00, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diplomacy | |
If only there was a guardian angel barnstar. Whispyhistory ( talk) 21:29, 28 August 2019 (UTC) |
Greetings Amakuru! Would you reconsider your opinion about the 911 dab merge proposal in light of comments by other editors? This discussion has been opened for a long time, and if you could be persuaded to change your "Oppose" stance, then we would have a rough consensus. — JFG talk 06:47, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
The fourth round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 454 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with over 400 points being eliminated, and all but two of the finalists having achieved an FA during the round. Casliber, our 2016 winner, was the highest point-scorer, followed by Enwebb and Lee Vilenski, who are both new to the competition. In fourth place was SounderBruce, a finalist last year. But all those points are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.
Round 4 saw the achievement of 11 featured articles. In addition, Adam Cuerden scored with 18 FPs, Lee Vilenski led the GA score with 8 GAs while Kosack performed 15 GA reviews. There were around 40 DYKs, 40 GARs and 31 GAs overall during round 4. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.
As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).
If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:44, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archives: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30 · 31 · 32 · 33 · 34 · 35 |
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Hodgdon's secret garden ( talk) 05:36, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
I appreciate your input at Time Traveler (roller coaster). As such, I have removed the image you substituted in the infobox as the design is copyrighted and, due to its three-dimensional design, can also be considered a sculpture. As you noted, there is no freedom of panorama in the United States, so no image of a copyrighted three-dimensional structure would be permitted. I look forward to working with you on removing all the other images of roller coasters on the site that are located in the United States. Consistency and all that. -- McDoob AU93 03:46, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of King's Cross Thameslink railway station at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah ( talk) 21:42, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
hello, saw you were the one that Moved Hughes Communications to Hughes Network Systems, but i dont see the page renamed/moved? Hughes Network Systems still redirects to Hughes Communications. am i missing something? Melodies1917 ( talk) 14:00, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
The second round of the 2019 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to scored 32 points to advance into round 3. Our top four scorers in round 2 all scored over 400 points and were:
Other notable performances were put in by Barkeep49 with six GAs, Ceranthor, Lee Vilenski, and Canada Hky, each with seven GARs, and MPJ-DK with a seven item GT.
So far contestants have achieved nine featured articles between them and a splendid 80 good articles. Commendably, 227 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2019 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. The judges are pleased with the thorough GARs that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 ( talk), Sturmvogel 66 ( talk), Vanamonde ( talk) and Cwmhiraeth ( talk) MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 17:45, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 10, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 19:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
My apologies for the above section stating that you are a party. You are not, I made a mistake with the template. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:51, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru. I tried here--> diff. --- In answer to my inquiry on an admins' noticeboard I'm told to request so-called userification in my userspace of the " Clarice E. Phelps" [draft prematurely turned] blp from you(?) diff Thanks-- Hodgdon's secret garden ( talk) 02:16, 3 May 2019 (UTC)-- Hodgdon's secret garden ( talk) 02:20, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
Administrators
must secure their accounts
The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.
|
This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:57, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
For the Arbitration Committee, - Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).
the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so
will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
On 8 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article King's Cross Thameslink railway station, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that King's Cross Thameslink railway station, then known as King's Cross Metropolitan (pictured), was one of the initial seven stations on London's first underground line? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/King's Cross Thameslink railway station. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, King's Cross Thameslink railway station), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile ( talk) 00:01, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Rapeseed | |
---|---|
... with thanks from QAI |
Good one! - Thank you for fixing the sad quirky, among so many other fixes! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:06, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Sigh, I got this wrong again, thanks. I've checked the rest of the month; there are no more redirects to a section. Per WT:ERRORS#Section links and bypassing redirects, I'd prefer lyric dramas, but I won't push it because the argument can be made that, in this case, the hovertext isn't confusing. - Dank ( push to talk) 20:06, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
The Civility Barnstar | |
Keep being the voice of reason. You can lead a horse to water ... 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 11:56, 13 May 2019 (UTC) |
Hi, the new hook about Filipino Americans is written poorly and not piped well. I would suggest:
On 15 May 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2018–19 Premier League, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.
— Amakuru ( talk) 17:28, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
I replied to your BLP1E claim at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2019_May_10.
You also discounted the question as to whether Ms Nelson's wishes mattered.
I was surprised, a decade or so, to learn that the wikipedia had a long-standing convention to take the wishes of BLP subject's into account, and agree to delete otherwise OK BLP articles, as a courtesy, when their notability is near the cusp. In principle it would be simpler if we were tough minded, and ignored all requests from BLP subjects. But we don't. These decisions are very subjective. Aggressive BLP subjects who make demands, rather than appeal to our sympathy are very likely to have their requests dismissed. When there are factors that appeal to the emotions of those deciding whether to agree to courtesy deletion, even a very notable person will win courtesy deletion.
Because Ms Nelson is an articulate beautiful young woman she would have a very strong sympathy factor on her side, if she appealed for a courtesy deletion. If she were to add to that an assertion like "I defended my mother's publication of the naked photo of me, when I was child, but that was half my lifetime ago, and I now agree with the politicians who saw me as a victim of child abuse..." This would be the clincher. She would almost certainly win courtesy deletion. Geo Swan ( talk) 12:54, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Events in the |
Life of Jesus according to the canonical gospels |
---|
Portals: Christianity Bible |
Hi, see Category:Annunciation in Christian art. The notion that 15th-century paintings have fixed titles like modern ones is wrong. There are standard names for the main religious subjects though. WP:THE applies. See WP:VAMOS for further details. Johnbod ( talk) 14:40, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Dear @ Amakuru:, I have nominated the article Montsoreau for GA-status according to the criteria. Would you mind to review it or to give me your feeling? All my very best, -- Suavemarimagno ( talk) 17:28, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battle of Dun Nechtain, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Macpherson ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:58, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru. Please start a WP:RM for the Midland League if you think it should be moved. Undoing a reverted move isn't really on. Cheers, Number 5 7 21:31, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
It appears that Tuesday's upcoming POTD hasn't yet been chosen. Are you going to be scheduling it soon? — RAVENPVFF · talk · 14:30, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi. In this edit, I think (but I'm not 100% certain) that it would be Canadian rather than US dollars. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 09:52, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I see you changed the image here. Please rewrite the "(pictured, right)" part in the hook, to just (pictured). Thanks, Yoninah ( talk) 15:00, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
the capitalization was indeed good; I disagree about adding the geographical identifier -- reduces the hooky nature. ∯WBG converse 15:42, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
I noticed that you didn't copy your edits to the unprotected version of tomorrow's POTD over to the protected version. Would you mind doing so? Thanks. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 16:35, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Coventry City F.C., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albert Lewis ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 16:20, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Do you think that Coldstream Guards would be a better target article than Facial hair in the military? Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Military uses the former page, which also seems like a more natural title for the picture to me. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 12:23, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).
Regarding your revert, you've reverted a similar change last time when Alucard 16 preformed one. I talked to you about this and exaplined that the move is correct per WP:NCTV, after-which you said you'll raise the issue. You didn't and as it currently stands, you are just exercising some strange WP:OWNERSHIP and preventing a single sub-set of a group of pages to be WP:CONSISTENT with literally every other television and Big Brother related page, with no backing of any guideline, but your personal preference. Very disappointing. -- Gonnym ( talk) 23:28, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Coventry City F.C., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Leslie Jones ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 16:12, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
do not believe in faux civility. Urge your friend to refrain from
trolling, if he expects favorable treatment. Also, he has made dozens of edits over the course of last few hours and the template usage notes state:- Do not use this template unless you plan to completely and permanently stop editing ... If you later resume editing, please remove this template from your user page.
which is amply clear.
∯WBG
converse
14:04, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Whatever you are using for this, please see WT:DYK - Increase number of hooks. We just changed the Template:Did you know/Clear so it has 9 hooks in the prep area. Might be that way for a long haul, with the going trend of short hooks. — Maile ( talk) 14:20, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Secret Life of Pets 2 (upcoming film). Since you had some involvement with the The Secret Life of Pets 2 (upcoming film) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 13:26, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
I've just posted twice to User_talk:Xezbeth#Two_Owsley_articles, the second time because I saw a similar subject matter in your User_talk:Xezbeth#McKinsey post to the same user page in early May and followed it a ways. I may get satisfactory response on my own but I thought I'd let you know of my encounter, also. I may have managed to 'ping' you on this, separately; sorry if it's done twice now. Thanks. Cheers. Swliv ( talk) 23:40, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I unprotected Gloria Vanderbilt since I blocked the main IP culprit of disruption. If there are more persistent problems we can reprotect, but I thought it was best to leave it open if possible. Ping FlightTime Thanks. -- Fuzheado | Talk 15:36, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Coventry City F.C., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Curtis ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 11:56, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
There was one support, one oppose, and one "no view" on this. Without going into the strengths of the "arguments" it should have at least been relisted, or closed as no consensus. Also, nb, Anfield, Liverpool is currently a circular link on the disam page. Johnbod ( talk) 23:07, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | ||
For your measured and sober assessments on ANI. Thanks for all that you do for the project! User:Lightburst 23:14, 19 June 2019 (UTC) |
Well, I think anyone is justified in tagging an article which is about to go the main page when it's packed with unreferenced claims and what was about to be presented on the main page wasn't even accurate. As of right now, if you're not happy with the process I've ended up with, you don't have to do anything. It'd be a shame because history has shown that WP:TRM is about three times more effective than WP:ERRORS. But it 100% depends on dedicated people like you. In any case, thanks for your help over the last year. We're knocking on for 2,000 fixes, which I don't think is something to be sniffed at by anyone. The Rambling Man ( talk) 16:01, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
This and
this were completely inappropriate since you did not follow
WP:CLOSECHALLENGE, specifically discussing it with me and if necessary initiating a
move review. The first was a
supervote. Reverting the move until any necessary implementation adjustments could be made would have been one thing; however, reopening the discussion was out of process. On top of that, ugly red errors messages
is a completely insufficient description of whatever you were seeing. Finally, you didn't even have the courtesy to even notify me. —
JJMC89 (
T·
C)
01:19, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Amakuru, can you please stop by the nomination page the next chance you get, since it needs your concurrence to proceed. Many thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 06:43, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi, the last hook in this set was being discussed at WT:DYK#Prep 5: Prisoner when you promoted the set to the queue. He was jailed for 13 years, not 12, as confirmed by all the sources. I also added it to the article text. Please change "twelve" to "thirteen". Thanks, Yoninah ( talk) 09:39, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Seven years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:31, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).
|
|
The third round of the 2019 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round needed to score at least 68 points, which is substantially lower than last year's 227 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:
Contestants managed 4 (5) featured articles, 4 featured lists, 18 featured pictures, 29 good articles, 50 DYK entries, 9 ITN entries, and 39 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them, and it is imperative to claim them in the correct round; one FA claim had to be rejected because it was incorrectly submitted (claimed in Round 3 when it qualified for Round 2), so be warned! When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 ( talk), Sturmvogel 66 ( talk), Vanamonde ( talk) and Cwmhiraeth ( talk). MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:11, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
Well I've heard of it, but I don't know about the opening line. All I know is "it's a gas gas gas...." Certainly not true that most or even many will get it. The Rambling Man ( talk) 13:10, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | ||
Wishing you a happy 4th! Lightburst ( talk) 03:12, 4 July 2019 (UTC) |
I'm proposing the recreation of Draft:Root Insurance Company as I believe I have been better able to establish notability. Calvinballing ( talk) 16:24, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi, we're waiting for your response at this nomination so we can promote it. Thanks, Yoninah ( talk) 22:08, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
Hey, sorry about the revert of your edit at the Fram discussion, was by accident. Sorry again. Kante4 ( talk) 11:02, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
But the consensus at Talk:Bougainville_campaign#Requested_move_24_June_2019 also applies to Norwegian Campaign, which you maybe didn't notice. Dicklyon ( talk) 14:44, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru,
I saw that you recently moved the Rural Municipality page after the discussion. Thanks. I was one of the ones who thought that since the article as written is entirely about Canadian RMs, it should be re-named.
The discussion reminded me of a different page, one that I think should be deleted. It's a mis-spelt redirect for the Canadian territory of Nunavut: Nunavat.
It strike me that keeping a mis-spelt page as a re-direct encourages mis-spelling in articles. If an editor incorrectly uses the mis-spelling as a wikilink, there's no indication that it's a spelling error. However, if the Nunavat re-direct page were deleted, and then an editor used "Nunavat" as a link, it would immediately come up as a redlink, alerting the editor that there was a problem.
I'm sure there's a wiki policy on this somewhere, but I couldn't find it so I thought I'd ask an administrator. :) -- Mr Serjeant Buzfuz ( talk) 15:45, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Firstly, thanks for that scarecrow joke yesterday. Corny, of course, but not in a bad way. Really "grounds" a story about standing alone in a field against semiravenous birds when the crowd is firmly (if subconsciously) in on the notion that buddy won the big one in a cornfield. Comedy or drama, corn is metaphorical gold in any town where corn is literally sold. Whether you meant to or not, you struck it rich last night. Congratulations!
But when I said we'd need to something about your name, that was just part of my act. A callback to a time I wasn't alive for in a place I've only seen on TV, read about in books and tried to reimagine online just "once or twice" before. So not to ruin a bad joke further by needing to explain the punchline aloud, but struggling to adapt to these "modern sensibilities" I've only heard "the kids" (Joplin, Dylan, Mitchell) sing about while "hepped up on goofballs" (referring to myself), allow me, if you will, good man, a chance to redeem your satisfaction (no guarantees implied):
Your name is alright, seriously. It's just that "in my day" ('80s pop culture expositions of purported '50s backstage filth), it seems like the "thing to do" when discovering ripe new corn-based talent is/was to change their name to something less "exotic" for the domestic market (corn-fed white Midwestern American folk). So I figured you might get a kick out of it, an allusion to "simpler times", as it were. But a day late, it dawned on me that you may likely be a proud African male (18 to 34). It is in this strange spirit of white-but-Canadian guilt I sincerely beg your pardon today, eh?
My people often forget the cruel indignities imposed on your people's ancestral cousins during, before and after the Golden Age of Hollywood and Professional Wrestling Hall of Fame and Museum cross-border television eras, onscreen and off, cannot stress it enough. Casual racism is the worst there is, the worst there was and the worst there ever will be. Equally true to this, people have a hard time believing I mean things like this, simply because I'm "always on" with regard to speaking in riddles and referencing old school ephemera far more liberally than I do scholarly academic articles. I'm blacklisted from performing at the Ref Desk, partially because of that, partially in solidarity with an oppressed StuRat and partially because of "creative differences", but never for telling a racist joke (Indian burns don't count, I was half-reared by Algonquin in the forest, nothing crude or mean). My "serious mental problems" are more in the style of Homer Simpson ( smiling politely) Too much TV, junk food, beer, weed, rock music, marital turmoil and sweet glorious head trauma!
Can you, in 2019, forgive me for being born a simple oaf whose only "real mistake" was getting into the entertainment business because he hated children? If not, can I least get some feedback on whether you thought I implied you should have a slave name instead of a stage name? Not that I'm so insecure in my tolerability that I need validation of my non-racist status card from the first black guy I potentially inexcusably insult, but just out of common decency? Please?
Even if I've just dug myself deeper by putting this wall of dry text between us and you never want to fool around again, I'll understand. But like that nice Jewish boy in South Park, I learned something today. "Amakuru" was never hard to pronounce, or about skin colour or the friends we made along the way. It's not one village, one river or any one of us rowing down this drain called life. Not me, not you, not the feelings in the subcockles of our hearts. Amakuru just fundamentally and basically stands for that one question it always has, the one we ask every morning, evening and underneath the moon. Transcends cultures and beliefs, tragedy and comedy, light and shadow, ladies and gentlemen:
That question is hello! InedibleHulk (talk) 07:36, July 11, 2019 (UTC)
Please explain on what basis you consider my edits to the infobox (which according to consensus should not be there anyway) at Next United Kingdom general election. Kevin McE ( talk) 13:31, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you. I believe there was a consensus at Talk:2019 Venezuelan uprising#Requested move 6 June 2019 to move the page to "30 April 2019 Venezuelan clashes"; I counted 8 support !votes and 4 oppose !votes, with the arguments in favor of moving at least as strong as those against.
Regardless, on April 30, the page had originally been moved to "2019 Venezuela uprising" without consensus, and as the discussion progressed, more and more agreed that the current title is flawed. Almost all agreed at the very least that if the title contains "uprising" or "coup" then it should contain the word "attempted". Several of us raised the concern during the discussion that a "no consensus" decision would keep the status quo title which had been imposed without consensus and for which there was now a consensus against, and I was hoping that this would be addressed in the closer's rationale. Can you address it? (Apologies again for bothering you.) Thanks, Davey2116 ( talk) 22:18, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
Seriously, you thought this was so urgent that you couldn't bother to talk to me about an image scheduled for three months from now before going off and posting a debate on the Main Page that failed to mention the historical importance, the notability of the photographer, that the only image we've banned for nudity or salaciousness since 2006 was literally a painting of an naked underage woman - and that one seems to have mostly been voted off more to avoid encouraging some sort of nasty situation with sock puppetry and attacks than any issues with it being a nude if you check the votes. Yes, in the very distant past we'd not schedule something with nudity. It's been over a decade since that's been a thing, and I don't think resurrecting it now helps anyone.
We've featured dead bodies... at least twice in close up, probably a lot more from even a slight distance. Some of the dead bodies were mutilated into works of art. We've had artworks including male full-frontal nudity, and more breasts than I can count. If you had asked me, I would have pointed this all out to you. I really, really wish you had done so. Try to do better in future? Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 05:44, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
The thing's scheduled for October. You're pushing this forwards very hard for somethibg with no near time limit. Did you need to start a survey before we xould talk over the issues and work out a neutral wordong, when I've made it very ckear I object to your heading and framing of the debate? Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 6.8% of all FPs 17:13, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi, did I restore all the right script after you "raked" the page? Thanks, Yoninah ( talk) 10:15, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Hello
I did want to fill you in that I don't have a problem with U.S. editors, I have a problem with people from several right-wing leaning states like Alabama, where dermies is from.
Alabama, Georgia, Texas and several other states that are extremely right and anti feminist. Mayb eI'm completely missing something as I am an Eritrean who lived in Southend-on-sea and London for most of his life, then moved ot Canada in mid 2018.
I've been tought over my life to have distrust towards such people, unlearning things is like me telling an American to unlearn whateve rvalues is dear to them.
We value freedom, and not invading other countries. So yeah, it's not all of the U.S. it's the right-wing anti abortion anti feminist states that I don't care fore, including Alabama, Georgia and Texas.
Pluss, I do have a problem with a country who's leader calls Africa a bleep hole and who tells Africans to "get out".
Maybe it is my pride being too high or something, it' show I was raised. I tell people, even though I speak with a British accent, and live din Southend-On-Sea and London for my whole childhood and London for my teenage years, and now Canada, that I am Eritrean, as I am born in Nakfa, and flead to the UK in 1998. I have similar problems with some parts of the UK, but I forgive the UK as they gave me a home, the U.S. would not.
So it's a combination of how I was raised, Donald Trump, and right-wing republican views in such states as Alabama, Texas and Georgia.
I do try to be civil as bes tI can, but I do not recognize authority from those states due to how I was raised.
I'm still unlearning things from my past, I used to be tought that my blindness meant I'd never amount to anything and i'm learning that that was false. These changes take time and are rather taxing on th emind.
Also next time an American wants to block me, don't do the short and sweet reasoning, it's like those officers in those TV shows, "you're arrested for murder, " "when?" "you're under arrest for murder, that's my answer."
Again maybe I'm missing something big time, and I trust you to help me understand form a wiki perspective.
I just don't trust pro gun and right-wing trump supporting and anti abortion people. And i know it's not all in those states, but it's enough that these things happen, maajority rules, and it hurts me to know that.
I do plan on engaging as best I can provided that they are willing to see where I am coming from too.
thanks
38.111.120.74 (
talk)
07:29, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
Did you intend to indefinitely full protect John Hancock Tower from editing as well as moving when you protected this article? Iffy★ Chat -- 20:55, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
On 27 July 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Clemantine Wamariya, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Clemantine Wamariya was reunited with her parents on The Oprah Winfrey Show, twelve years after being separated from them during the Rwandan genocide? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Clemantine Wamariya. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Clemantine Wamariya), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile ( talk) 00:01, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
I don't think it is the end of the world. But that was a bad close. There is no clear indication that there was no chance of a consensus in support and there was no clear consensus in opposition. People cannot double vote so consensus may change as more people participate. There was no harm in leaving it open but by closing it you supervoted to oppose. You should let the nomination last the full 7-days or until there is a clear consensus in opposition. The arguments mentioning "not global" and "only US" should be ignored per established guidelines. --- Coffeeand crumbs 22:59, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
After about taking a year off of anything dealing with content because of real life things that made doing research through sourcing in my spare time significantly less enjoyable than it used to be, I've decided to take the plunge back into that side of the project. Still as fun and interesting as it used to be. A nice breath of fresh air from sockpuppets and LTAs. Next to finish my 17th century conclave series of GAs this week before the library books are due and I can't renew them anymore. TonyBallioni ( talk) 04:08, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Greetings Amakuru. I am puzzled by your close at
Talk:List of the verified oldest people#Jeanne Calment ("Seeking Consensus" subsection). I would have rated this as no consensus. Most of the supporters argue that the dispute is a conspiracy theory that should be considered FRINGE, but that can't be compared to the "fake moon landings": in one case, experts have relied chiefly on the recollections of the article subject about her own life, or her prior declarations to census officers; in the other case there are thousands of people who were direct witnesses to the Apollo program. Also, you say that you discounted arguments pointing out that the Calment case has been disputed since 2000, because sources had not been presented. All those sources are in the
Jeanne Calment article, where numerous discussions since late 2018 have established consensus to describe the dispute in some detail, with appropriate caveats. As I said in my "Oppose" reasoning, the controversy about Jeanne Calment's age is now a key part of her notability.
Hopefully it will be settled in the coming years. Would you reconsider your conclusions? —
JFG
talk
09:46, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
did jump to the wrong conclusion but there's no point in surfacing this in full public glare!
[3] Best. Leaky caldron ( talk) 08:27, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.
Hi, seeking help with an edit war situation related to the RfC close you recently made. Apparently an editor is refusing to abide by the results of the RfC close, and said "The deletion of these families have no merit. Will keep adding back if deleted again". They have undone the deleted names two times 1 and 2. I left a warning message on their talk page. They are ignoring talk discussions, ignored participation in the RfC, and ignored the invitation to discuss how to implement the close - it is brute force only. I believe this account is a sock, based on the limited SPA edit history, but have not investigated who the master might be. Can you help? -- Green C 03:02, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru,
I have tried to discuss the issue with Cognissonance on his talk page (see the section "Disruptive edits"). When I felt that Cognissonance was edit-warring, I went to 3RR, but was advised that DRN might be the more appropriate place to raise the issue. He has been active in the Tenet article since the DRN was posted, but appears to be ignoring it; in the meantime, he is reverting everything in the article itself. Between the discussions on his talk page and the DRN, I feel like I'm doing everything I can to address the issue, but I also feel that he has no intention of addressing it. I don't know what else I can do save go to ANI (and my last visit there is not going well). Mclarenfan17 ( talk) 22:25, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Please don't delete discussions about items that are still current on the Main Page. – Sca ( talk) 15:35, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
Amakuru, I am being retrospectively accused of edit warring with you when I reverted your revert here, on July 13, and I'm also being accused of unspecified large-scale controversial moves, in an attempt to indef block me. I don't understand why, but a bunch of editors have piled on, while I can't get them to tell me which large-scale moves were controversial. Your perspective might be useful since they accuse me of edit warring with you. Top section in WP:AN/I. Dicklyon ( talk) 04:20, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
I was wondering if you could fix my Eunice Kettering hook in queue 4 to say age six instead of age 6. I asked yesterday on the DYK talk page, but no one will fix it. SL93 ( talk) 20:33, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi, could you consider pulling something already loaded in the prep sets to balance the DYK column, rather than using an old hook? We have six loaded prep sets to work with. Thanks, Yoninah ( talk) 22:36, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru, hope you're well. Should I assume that either my comments are now too irrelevant or that you aren't actioning any of them or something else? The Rambling Man ( Staying alive since 2005!) 07:57, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Hello I've talked with some people in person about my feelings towards Southern-U.S. editors and I've decided I will work with them going forward. My feelings towards Alabama have not changed, but my plan is to do my best not to let these feelings effect interactions with Drmies.
I was supposed to be away from the country on this date as I had planned on going to London to reunited with some old friends, but due to family reasons that fell through, so I'm here and willing to fix any issues I have done. As for accusations by Graham87 of me being somebody else, I won't even touch them. thanks. 38.111.120.74 ( talk) 21:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
... resorted to personal attacks I'm afraid. And that individual should be being held to a higher standard and shouldn't be edit warring to remove his personal attacks in my own user space. Incredibly poor. The Rambling Man ( Staying alive since 2005!) 15:25, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
I have opened a discussion of this issue on the talk page of the 2020 Republican Presidential primaries campaign page. Contrary to your assertion, i actually had already opened a discussion on the issue of Rocky De La Fuente's candidacy on the talk page. However I have opened a new discussion regarding the specific issue of campaign finances. I suggest you submit your remarks to the article's talk page. XavierGreen ( talk) 21:00, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diplomacy | |
If only there was a guardian angel barnstar. Whispyhistory ( talk) 21:29, 28 August 2019 (UTC) |
Greetings Amakuru! Would you reconsider your opinion about the 911 dab merge proposal in light of comments by other editors? This discussion has been opened for a long time, and if you could be persuaded to change your "Oppose" stance, then we would have a rough consensus. — JFG talk 06:47, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
The fourth round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 454 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with over 400 points being eliminated, and all but two of the finalists having achieved an FA during the round. Casliber, our 2016 winner, was the highest point-scorer, followed by Enwebb and Lee Vilenski, who are both new to the competition. In fourth place was SounderBruce, a finalist last year. But all those points are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.
Round 4 saw the achievement of 11 featured articles. In addition, Adam Cuerden scored with 18 FPs, Lee Vilenski led the GA score with 8 GAs while Kosack performed 15 GA reviews. There were around 40 DYKs, 40 GARs and 31 GAs overall during round 4. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.
As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).
If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:44, 1 September 2019 (UTC)