![]() | This 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. |
Archive 30 | ← | Archive 32 | Archive 33 | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | Archive 36 | → | Archive 40 |
Sorry you are going through this stuff....There is never one possible result from these situations but a range and sometimes the range leans towards what feels wrong. That's the sad part of a collaborative project. There is never one right way. You've done so much great work on Wikipedia if you can, let this pass for the sake of the 'pedia. You are so valued. I've been there/ here/ whatever and know it can hurt or bother but it also passes. Hang in there! Littleolive oil ( talk) 16:28, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
What she said, every word. Go for music, see? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:33, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
I too feel sad to see this stuff, and I just want to cheer you up if I can (although I often manage to say the wrong things). There are so many ways that you contribute so positively here, that it's best to just let some things go – as in, leave others to wallow in the muck while you focus on what gives you pleasure. I've frankly been feeling awful about Wikipedia for a couple of months, and am just beginning now to get back on my wiki-feet (do fish have wiki-feet? I dunno), so I know that's easier said than done. But, anyway... -- Tryptofish ( talk) 21:20, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
Came here as well to underline what LOO said, and I have to add something too. Larry Sanger was right. Atsme got on the wrong side of the house-POV multiple times, and now has a team following her, arguing she deserves to be silenced. Common sense says that new editors would show up with new complaints if indeed behaviour was so egregious, and yet, after months of activity at the Fascism article, there were no complaints about her. The rules have so many holes that it's just a joke at this point, and more importantly, it causes grief to human beings, and damages the content and reputation of this project. petrarchan47 คุ ก 23:12, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
I don't like to come to your page, for obvious reasons (=it's likely to lead to rude removals and/or attacks by you and your enablers), and you don't like to see me here. However, accusing JzG of "misogyny" [1] because he criticises you and you are a woman — you give no other evidence or even argument that I can see, other than empty words about 'denigrating and patronizing a female editor' — is an unconscionable personal attack. Lashing out indiscriminately in such ways is not going to improve the impression you make at WP:AE, and if you continue making personal attacks you may be blocked. Bishonen | talk 17:13, 24 November 2019 (UTC).
|
Do not go deliberately looking for a fight as there are plenty of those in life without even having to look.-- MONGO ( talk) 20:07, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
I think you were wise to remove that comment. In passing, white supremacy doesn't mention the Republican Party either, and neither, I think, does white nationalism despite there being a white nationalist in charge of immigration policy right now. The Klan article, however, does mention the Democratic Party, and the articles on Southern Democrats and Southern strategy explain the switch. It's alarming to me, as a Briton, how many Americans are unaware of this history and are still susceptible to the lie that the Democrats are the party of slavery. Guy ( help!) 17:57, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
Why does the "Briton", User:JzG, hide behind "Guy"? Just wondering ... Gareth Griffith-Jones ( contribs) ( talk) 18:29, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi Atsme, I will probably be busy with other things for the next couple of days. If you have the time, Draft:Underwater Domain Awareness can benefit from a bit of attention. I have left some notes on the talk page, and as comments in the wikitext, but don't feel obliged to agree if you see things differently. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 14:28, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi Atsme, the American Politics amendment request which you were a party to has been closed and archived to Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2#Amendment request: American politics 2 (December 2019).
For the Arbitration Committee, – bradv 🍁 07:25, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
I hope it will cheer you up.
— Ched (
talk)
19:23, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
Cheer up girl!
Feast your blue eyes on these rather than transcriptions of past incidents.
You were never going to win against the system in battle anyhow, that is how it has been designed.
Should you decide to drop in from time to time, come and help us rag-tag reprobates to wage guerrilla warfare on the dog-related articles. A much more limited scale than you are use to, but with simpler, more achievable objectives.
Plus, I even thought that I saw the first stirrings of a pack beginning to form.........
William Harris
talk
10:48, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
Rescue Barnstar |
Your editing and assistance at Bachelor Lake and at the AFD discussion made a big difference. In the face of adversity, article improved; rescue done. Congratulations. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 11:32, 8 January 2020 (UTC) |
Thanks, 13 - as you alluded to above, article improvement made it all worthwhile. It was a good debate all the way around with a few minor exceptions. Wish we'd see more like that in AP2.
Perhaps having the article in WP will generate more interest and attention to the importance of aquatic ecosystems (big and small), and the need to maintain biodiversity, protect natural habitats and preserve the balance. I thought the
close by
Andrew Davidson was commendable and well thought out, so kudos to him as well!
Thirteen, I would start looking for found sources like
this one, and followed the leads to the government entities, etc. Others I found right away are:
Michigan DNR "Hubbard Lake",
"2017 Spring Hubbard Lake Walleye Survey",
Alcona Review,
"Citizen scientists investigate aquatic invasive species in Hubbard Lake" and
"Thunder Bay River Hydroelectric Project, Relicensing, and Hillman Dam", 4-43.
Atsme
Talk
📧
21:24, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
Doncram just redirected every lake in Brown County Minn without discussion, and I reverted those edits. They appear on this template.
Another quick thought - it doesn't hurt to consult experts, or at least editors who have some common knowledge about the topic. Knowing what to search for and the best angle to approach can prove highly beneficial, as does maintaining an open mind when collaborating, which is exactly what you have done, CaroleHenson - thank you! And the same applies to Lightburst and 7&6=thirteen. I have worked with Thirteen in the past, and our collaborations have been a net positive. I understand your concerns about having millions of articles with little information - WP:STUBDEF. Fortunately, WP has reviewers in WP:AfC and WP:NPP who do an outstanding job - (several of our admins have come from NPP). I help when I can, and typically encourage stub creators to expand their articles or at least get them to start class. Stub or longer, if an article is not notable, or it's unsourced, questionably sourced or pure promotion we simply decline it; therefore, WP does have some level of protection. NPP is always looking for new prospects to join the team (hint, hint). Atsme Talk 📧 20:07, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
You may be familiar with this, but here are all of the pictures, free to download in very high resolution:
I suspect this is because the copyright has expired. Would that mean we can use them here? -- BullRangifer ( talk) 21:11, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
( edit conflict)Cullen, is there any way I can encourage you to become an admin on Commons? The tendency there is sometimes a bit extreme; i.e., to err on the side of caution, even when it's overly extreme caution. Example: I uploaded some images from a "historic collection" (which happened to be my personal historic collection), and I had to jump through rings of fire to keep them from being deleted. Commons can be very strict about such things. Also, take a look at this Getty "circus" - they prevailed in the first case. With the latter in mind and the rising costs of litigation, I can understand why Commons assumed the position it did - it saves a lot of legal fees and grief. Putting all that side, I just want to say that BullRangifer's post was still very helpful and my thank you to him holds true. Even if we choose to avoid the Audubon website to download images (where they force you to commit before you can download the plate), at least he made us aware or reminded some editors that the images are available, and that's a good thing. 😊 Thank you to all who expressed their views. It was enlightening. And now I have a teleconference to attend. Atsme Talk 📧 01:57, 14 January 2020 (UTC):
You recently offered a statement in 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/Kudpung. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung/Evidence. Please add your evidence by January 28, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, CodeLyoko talk 05:06, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 30 | ← | Archive 32 | Archive 33 | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | Archive 36 | → | Archive 40 |
Sorry you are going through this stuff....There is never one possible result from these situations but a range and sometimes the range leans towards what feels wrong. That's the sad part of a collaborative project. There is never one right way. You've done so much great work on Wikipedia if you can, let this pass for the sake of the 'pedia. You are so valued. I've been there/ here/ whatever and know it can hurt or bother but it also passes. Hang in there! Littleolive oil ( talk) 16:28, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
What she said, every word. Go for music, see? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:33, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
I too feel sad to see this stuff, and I just want to cheer you up if I can (although I often manage to say the wrong things). There are so many ways that you contribute so positively here, that it's best to just let some things go – as in, leave others to wallow in the muck while you focus on what gives you pleasure. I've frankly been feeling awful about Wikipedia for a couple of months, and am just beginning now to get back on my wiki-feet (do fish have wiki-feet? I dunno), so I know that's easier said than done. But, anyway... -- Tryptofish ( talk) 21:20, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
Came here as well to underline what LOO said, and I have to add something too. Larry Sanger was right. Atsme got on the wrong side of the house-POV multiple times, and now has a team following her, arguing she deserves to be silenced. Common sense says that new editors would show up with new complaints if indeed behaviour was so egregious, and yet, after months of activity at the Fascism article, there were no complaints about her. The rules have so many holes that it's just a joke at this point, and more importantly, it causes grief to human beings, and damages the content and reputation of this project. petrarchan47 คุ ก 23:12, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
I don't like to come to your page, for obvious reasons (=it's likely to lead to rude removals and/or attacks by you and your enablers), and you don't like to see me here. However, accusing JzG of "misogyny" [1] because he criticises you and you are a woman — you give no other evidence or even argument that I can see, other than empty words about 'denigrating and patronizing a female editor' — is an unconscionable personal attack. Lashing out indiscriminately in such ways is not going to improve the impression you make at WP:AE, and if you continue making personal attacks you may be blocked. Bishonen | talk 17:13, 24 November 2019 (UTC).
|
Do not go deliberately looking for a fight as there are plenty of those in life without even having to look.-- MONGO ( talk) 20:07, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
I think you were wise to remove that comment. In passing, white supremacy doesn't mention the Republican Party either, and neither, I think, does white nationalism despite there being a white nationalist in charge of immigration policy right now. The Klan article, however, does mention the Democratic Party, and the articles on Southern Democrats and Southern strategy explain the switch. It's alarming to me, as a Briton, how many Americans are unaware of this history and are still susceptible to the lie that the Democrats are the party of slavery. Guy ( help!) 17:57, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
Why does the "Briton", User:JzG, hide behind "Guy"? Just wondering ... Gareth Griffith-Jones ( contribs) ( talk) 18:29, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi Atsme, I will probably be busy with other things for the next couple of days. If you have the time, Draft:Underwater Domain Awareness can benefit from a bit of attention. I have left some notes on the talk page, and as comments in the wikitext, but don't feel obliged to agree if you see things differently. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 14:28, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi Atsme, the American Politics amendment request which you were a party to has been closed and archived to Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2#Amendment request: American politics 2 (December 2019).
For the Arbitration Committee, – bradv 🍁 07:25, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
I hope it will cheer you up.
— Ched (
talk)
19:23, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
Cheer up girl!
Feast your blue eyes on these rather than transcriptions of past incidents.
You were never going to win against the system in battle anyhow, that is how it has been designed.
Should you decide to drop in from time to time, come and help us rag-tag reprobates to wage guerrilla warfare on the dog-related articles. A much more limited scale than you are use to, but with simpler, more achievable objectives.
Plus, I even thought that I saw the first stirrings of a pack beginning to form.........
William Harris
talk
10:48, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
Rescue Barnstar |
Your editing and assistance at Bachelor Lake and at the AFD discussion made a big difference. In the face of adversity, article improved; rescue done. Congratulations. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 11:32, 8 January 2020 (UTC) |
Thanks, 13 - as you alluded to above, article improvement made it all worthwhile. It was a good debate all the way around with a few minor exceptions. Wish we'd see more like that in AP2.
Perhaps having the article in WP will generate more interest and attention to the importance of aquatic ecosystems (big and small), and the need to maintain biodiversity, protect natural habitats and preserve the balance. I thought the
close by
Andrew Davidson was commendable and well thought out, so kudos to him as well!
Thirteen, I would start looking for found sources like
this one, and followed the leads to the government entities, etc. Others I found right away are:
Michigan DNR "Hubbard Lake",
"2017 Spring Hubbard Lake Walleye Survey",
Alcona Review,
"Citizen scientists investigate aquatic invasive species in Hubbard Lake" and
"Thunder Bay River Hydroelectric Project, Relicensing, and Hillman Dam", 4-43.
Atsme
Talk
📧
21:24, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
Doncram just redirected every lake in Brown County Minn without discussion, and I reverted those edits. They appear on this template.
Another quick thought - it doesn't hurt to consult experts, or at least editors who have some common knowledge about the topic. Knowing what to search for and the best angle to approach can prove highly beneficial, as does maintaining an open mind when collaborating, which is exactly what you have done, CaroleHenson - thank you! And the same applies to Lightburst and 7&6=thirteen. I have worked with Thirteen in the past, and our collaborations have been a net positive. I understand your concerns about having millions of articles with little information - WP:STUBDEF. Fortunately, WP has reviewers in WP:AfC and WP:NPP who do an outstanding job - (several of our admins have come from NPP). I help when I can, and typically encourage stub creators to expand their articles or at least get them to start class. Stub or longer, if an article is not notable, or it's unsourced, questionably sourced or pure promotion we simply decline it; therefore, WP does have some level of protection. NPP is always looking for new prospects to join the team (hint, hint). Atsme Talk 📧 20:07, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
You may be familiar with this, but here are all of the pictures, free to download in very high resolution:
I suspect this is because the copyright has expired. Would that mean we can use them here? -- BullRangifer ( talk) 21:11, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
( edit conflict)Cullen, is there any way I can encourage you to become an admin on Commons? The tendency there is sometimes a bit extreme; i.e., to err on the side of caution, even when it's overly extreme caution. Example: I uploaded some images from a "historic collection" (which happened to be my personal historic collection), and I had to jump through rings of fire to keep them from being deleted. Commons can be very strict about such things. Also, take a look at this Getty "circus" - they prevailed in the first case. With the latter in mind and the rising costs of litigation, I can understand why Commons assumed the position it did - it saves a lot of legal fees and grief. Putting all that side, I just want to say that BullRangifer's post was still very helpful and my thank you to him holds true. Even if we choose to avoid the Audubon website to download images (where they force you to commit before you can download the plate), at least he made us aware or reminded some editors that the images are available, and that's a good thing. 😊 Thank you to all who expressed their views. It was enlightening. And now I have a teleconference to attend. Atsme Talk 📧 01:57, 14 January 2020 (UTC):
You recently offered a statement in 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/Kudpung. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung/Evidence. Please add your evidence by January 28, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, CodeLyoko talk 05:06, 14 January 2020 (UTC)