This is an archive of past discussions with NatGertler. 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 6 | Archive 7 |
All Pages: | 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - ... (up to 100) |
Thanks for your input and edits. Reading the feedback (of 41, at this point) I ran into this post that might be helpful to the discussion, though not the inclusion issue. A couple of posters claimed that Eastman had engaged in Obama Orly Taitz-level birtherism, but I'm not aware of same at this point. (Orly ran for AG in 2014 in CA, the year Harris won reelection, and finished the "R" primary with 3.1% 6th out of 7 candidates.) Her candidacy was endorsed by black "preacher" James David Manning who believes homosexuals should be stoned to death. She was apparently not endorsed by James Dobson's Family "Research" Council, though she claimed to have been. (Could they have been worried about their 501(c)3 status?) Feel free to erase, of course: Activist ( talk) 19:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
With you closing my complaint so fast but will not continue chasing it. Being called a 'werdo' or 'weirdo' is still insulting. Don't comment on my talk page please.
BlueD954 ( talk) 09:44, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for that removal. I actually had that same edit in there, in Preview mode, all ready to go; but I didn't follow through. I had already done the "find", and located the insertion in Jan. 2018 (by an editor who left shortly thereafter). The fact that it lasted this long amazed me, as it's clearly pov and unencyclopedic. Given how controversial a topic it is, I didn't want to get sucked into a quarrel, so I just abandoned the edit, hoping someone would come along some day, and do it. Pleasantly surprised it took hours, and not years. There are other problems in the lead as well, and I decided not to take that on, either; namely, paragraph 3 is unique info and summarizes nothing in the body of the article. But if you look at paragraph 3 of the opposing article, it's a mirror image of this one, also unique and not related to information there, although each one points to the other article. This smells of some sort of "deal" that may have been made between the two camps in some Rfc somewhere, and I didn't want to get into that, either, if that is the case. However, lead guidelines are clear, and neither paragraph belongs in their respective article, as the lead is supposed to summarize *that* topic, and not some other one, and is not supposed to have unique information not described in detail in the article body. If you have the stomach to deal with all that as well, even better. Mathglot ( talk) 23:29, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Where does an organization's opposition or support of a particular position belong? I put support under Activities, but should I have created another section? I'm referencing this change: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Liberty_Counsel&diff=next&oldid=978939063 Thanks. Ihaveadreamagain 18:00, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Hey NatGertler, I noticed lately that you were removing “voice actor” from several celebritie articles, and I was curious you could remove the one on the Scott Weinger article. Because I kept on explaining to them what you said, “voice acting” is a subset of “acting”, but unfortunately my request keeps getting declined. 2600:1000:B04B:322:3007:4FEA:8EE4:7659 ( talk) 14:51, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, unfortunately it got restored again. Deacon Vorbis isn’t listening, I was just following the Wikipedia policy. 2600:1000:B03F:D3B7:4035:CF5C:866E:4D29 ( talk) 15:53, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Hey NatGertler, I just wanna say thank you for backing me up and defending me from Vorbis. I just didn’t why he’s making a big fuss over this issue, because I’m not. I was only following the Wikipedia policy of the Subset policy. 2600:1000:B065:1E3E:7198:52CB:502:AF1D ( talk) 20:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your feedback. In particular, thank you for catching that one of the previous articles cited was referring to a different ULC and not to the Modesto organization. You caught something that I did not see in the article and that is appreciated. Secondly, I went back and reviewed the sources and found an article by The New York Times which first criticized the ULC based in Modesto, CA as a diploma mill in 1977, using that wordage, and then found two articles by The Irish Times, rather than relying on the short piece, which criticized the organization, based in Modesto, CA, as a "degree mill." Thank you again for the feedback and for being so clear about what issues were present and how to address them. That was very helpful in re-examining it. I did not feel discouraged at all. I found your words to be constructive and encouraging. Thank you. SeminarianJohn ( talk) 02:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
Hey Nat, again I just wanted to say thank you once again for the removal of the voice acting occupation on the Scott Weinger article, there's just one more thing on that article that hasn't been removed yet, the short description section above that article also has "voice actor" in it that hasn't been removed yet, that's all. 2600:1000:B058:69A8:5D89:667D:320E:FC8 ( talk) 21:03, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
Based on your comments, you might want to know Raegan Revord of Young Sheldon's article is currently at User:Alden_Loveshade/Raegan_Revord. I hope to see it return to main space. Responsible edits are welcomed there. Alden Loveshade ( talk) 01:45, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi!
I am conducting an interview study about how Wikipedia editors collaborate in the English edition of Wikipedia. The project description is on the WMF meta wiki: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Characterizing_Collaboration_Models_in_the_EN,_FR_and_ES_Language_Editions_of_Wikipedia.
This research study is part of a larger project where we are trying to understand how editors collaborate in different language editions of Wikipedia. I was looking through our team’s prior dataset and came across conversations that you have had on the IsAnybodyDown? article talk page. I am interested in learning more about those conversations.
Would you be willing to participate in a 1 hour interview about your experience? The interview will take place virtually over Skype, Hangout, Zoom or phone.
Our research team will make our best efforts to keep your participation confidential. Participation in our study is voluntary. If you are willing to participate in this interview, or if you have additional questions please email me. Or, if you are concerned about direct email you can contact me through Wikipedia’s mail feature.
If you are interested or have any other questions, please let us know.
via Email: tbipat@uw.edu or English Wikipedia: tbipat
Tbipat ( talk) 22:29, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
7&6=thirteen (
☎) has given you a
Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.
To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{ subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. |
7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 17:56, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
You keep calling my edits opinions. What specifically is an opinion? Can you give an example. Stop abusing this website and reverting the hard work of other editors.
Thank you for supporting my removal of the unsourced date of birth in Lillian Randolph. I appreciate your follow-up edit and the comments that you posted on the article's talk page. I don't understand why some editors seem to prefer unsourced dates and ages over what is found in reliable published sources. I'm glad that the changes caught your attention. Eddie Blick ( talk) 02:51, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
I have mentioned you at an ANI discussion I have started. Mo Billings ( talk) 17:30, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
help me to edit with Flutter (comic series) please
In 2020, the EU DisinfoLab found that the World News Network was part of a disinformation campaign that helped Asian News International reproduce negative reports produced in Brussels and Geneva, that were pro-India and negative in iterations against Pakistan and China.[7]
The above sentence was included on both pages. "Big News Network" and "World News Network". /info/en/?search=World_News_Network and /info/en/?search=Big_News_Network
Seems the sentence has been deleted from "Big news Network" page because they are not at fault.. so same should be the
These links don't talk about World News Network since it is a news aggregator collecting articles from many sources. https://www.voanews.com/south-central-asia/pakistan-demands-un-eu-investigate-fake-pro-india-ngos-media https://www.dawn.com/news/1594928
Skv282 ( talk) 11:45, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Hey NetGertler, I need your help with something. I’ve been trying to request edit to be removed on the Charles Martinet article, but my request keeps getting declined. Is there any chance you could help out of that’s ok? 97.33.66.176 ( talk) 18:53, 15 February 2021 (UTC) 97.33.66.176 ( talk) 18:53, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
It’s ok, I understand. I’m very sorry if I wasted your time on this. I sincerely apologize. 97.33.65.199 ( talk) 20:46, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for the heads up on what a "minor edit" is ... I'll keep that in mind.
I don't quite understand the (polite) accusation of COI on the Made / Nous page--I don't work for Canada Media Fund, nor am I Mathieu Chantelois (as was suggested previously)! I think Made | Nous is doing some important work in terms of representation, diversity, etc. in Canadian film and television and thought they should have a better Wikipedia page. I had tried to add the logo, but it was rejected--any advice there? Thanks! Blipblip88 ( talk) 00:14, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, NatGertler. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Jackie Kannon, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 21:02, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
I am new to editing biographical information, can i not link the biographical information to the artists website Rupert1969 ( talk) 14:11, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, got it! Rupert1969 ( talk) 14:59, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Regarding the changes that you flagged on a biography for Peter Eastman(artist) i have made the necessary changes to citations so that they do not reference the subjects website or associated commercial gallery. Do i then remove the flag myself? Rupert1969 ( talk) 09:23, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi NatGertler. I just heard that you removed the date of birth Wallace Shawn's Wikipedia's page!
Please do not remove the date of birth at Wallace Shawn's Wikipedia article. Because Wallace Shawn's date of birth is very important. And I don't want anyone to remove Wallace Shawn's date of birth.
Also, I already fixed the Wallace Shawn's date of birth. He's born on November 12, 1943.
I hope you understand this about Wallace Shawn's date of birth correction. Have a good day.
Kind regards, Daniel Slewa.
Obviously, I'm a bit 'green' to editing on Wiki. Re: Spitzer's advocating of restorative therapy; The original info. came from a NYT article: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/19/health/dr-robert-l-spitzer-noted-psychiatrist-apologizes-for-study-on-gay-cure.html which references the 2001 date. The article in the NYT dated May 9, 2001 announces Spitzer's delivery of the paper at the annual APA conference: https://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/09/us/study-says-gays-can-shift-sexual-orientation.html?searchResultPosition=18. The APA 2001 annual conference program listing Spitzer's scheduled symposium is available on line as a PDF (which I downloaded)...not sure how to upload that doc or exactly how to cite it (apa 154th annual meeting - American Psychiatric Associationhttps://www.psychiatry.org › am_program_2001). Finally, the original 2001 paper was not published until 2003 in the journal I cited and is available as a PDF at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1025647527010. I was able to download the PDF from the Wayback Machine at no cost. I'm in the middle of writing a research paper titled 'Transvestic Expression on the Gender Incongruence Continuum and the Prevalence of Concomitant Autism and Gender Incongruence' and occasionally refer to Wiki; the misinformation is astounding, to say the least, and as you said this misinformation can come from 'both sides' either trying to 'tear down' or 'promote' unsubstantiated views. While I may personally view Spitzer's paper on restorative therapy or McHugh's (Johns Hopkins) positions on sexual orientation and gender identity as nonobjective opinion, I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion. However, when there is a loss of objectivity, particularly by leading members of the APA (i.e. Spitzer, McHugh) who advocate their personal or religious beliefs over objective positions I will make an effort to objectively 'clear the air'. Verticalhorizon1 ( talk) 13:24, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Nat, I appreciate the due diligence for establishing the dates of Spitzer's paper. I did not see any references to sample size of Spitzer's paper listed in the 2001 APA annual conference syllabus you described. We do know from the PDF the annual meeting was held May 5-10 2001 and the paper was presented in Symposium 67 B on Wednesday May 9, 2001 (pg. 84 of syllabus; pg. 116 of PDF). The NYT reported the presentation of the paper on May 9, 2001. In that article, the reporter, Erica Goode, states the following: 'The researcher, Dr. Robert Spitzer, said his study was based on 45-minute telephone interviews with 143 men and 57 women who had sought help to change their sexual orientation'. That is the identical sampling group listed in the subsequent 2003 publication of the paper. ( https://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/09/us/study-says-gays-can-shift-sexual-orientation.html?searchResultPosition=18). I am relying the information reported by Goode in the NYT as accurate, as the NYT is extremely diligent about fact checking. The point is, the paper was originally presented by Spitzer on May 9, 2001, but was not published publicly until 2003. The Program for the 2001 APA annual meeting PDF does not have a title listed in the properties, but could be cited as follows: 'American Psychiatric Association (2001). Program: APA 2001 Annual Meeting, Washington, DC: Author.' I believe the NYT article can be listed either as a link or by citing Goode as author and the NYT as publisher. Awful lot of work to correct a relatively minor error on Wiki, but being as factual as possible is pertinent.-- Verticalhorizon1 ( talk) 13:37, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
While I posted a generic apology to people I had denigrated on my talk page, I would like to offer a personal apology to you. And again, I expect to be held to it, as I attempt to understand why it took that ANI notice to get me to reconsider behavior that, as User:HighInBC noted, I did not for a second think was ok. -- Jibal ( talk) 04:46, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
I removed the prod from Lifepak and added some references from reliable sources. Even though the article may hve been created by someone with some connection to the company, I think that the article now shows notability. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 18:18, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
.Thanks again, and happy editing!
Cabrils ( talk) 23:56, 2 August 2021 (UTC)Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Deborah Kaplan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Abington Township. 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) 06:01, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Happy New Year from Wikimedians of Los Angeles!
To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list. |
-- JSFarman ( talk) 02:08, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
LA to FA 2022 | |
---|---|
Dear NatGertler, You're invited to a zoom call, taking place on February 11, with the goal of improving the article on Los Angeles to Featured article status! I often find it daunting to approach the Big Subjects on my own—so if you, like me, want a time to sit down with fellow dedicated editors and tackle something important and complex, this is the zoom for you! I, unfortunately, have no way to transmit snacks over zoom; but I trust you to exercise good judgement and discretion in selecting snacks of your own. Hope to see you there—if you're interested, add your name here! theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs) ( they/she) 00:19, 10 January 2022 (UTC) To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list. |
Hi. I know your page says you're retired, but I need more editors to help discern a consensus in this discussion, and I notice that you made edits as recently as last month, and have worked on the Comics Project. Cany you offer your two cents? Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 19:53, 19 February 2022 (UTC):
Hello, NatGertler,
I'm contacting you because you had a discussion on the article talk page with an SPA editor who seems focused on this group. They recently removed a lot of content from this article that I restored because it looks like they were just removing all of the content concerning lawsuits involving this group although their edit summaries stated that the edits were to remove poorly sourced content.
Since I saw you participated in this talk page discussion regarding this group, I wanted to ask you if you could look over what I restored and remove any content that should have stayed unrestored. But I see from the message above that you are retired and are likely to also say "No" to this request, too. But it doesn't hurt to ask so here I am! Thanks and I hope you are enjoying your retirement from the project. Liz Read! Talk! 21:03, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jay Coop · Talk · Contributions 21:03, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Yes, I'm writing on my own talk page... to remind myself that if further "pregnant people" discussion emerges, that's not the only non-gendered term being used. Google Scholar finds slightly more hits for "pregnant individuals" in 2022 (2700) than "pregnant persons" (2480). And then there's the matter of when the use of "pregnant women" is merely the citing of an older article, and thus not reflecting current language choices. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 02:09, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
Range | pregnant individuals |
pregnant women |
ind/women (per cent) |
---|---|---|---|
1910-1940 | 216 | 7410 | 2.91 |
1940-1970 | 416 | 17400 | 2.39 |
1970-2000 | 1650 | 609000 | 0.27 |
1989-2019 | 6500 | 1630000 | 0.40 |
For this, thanks for that! Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 17:42, 12 May 2023 (UTC) |
I didn't notice your comment when I returned that discussion to the closed version. FYI, the IP user you were addressing does have a user account, it was just blocked indef a moment ago. MrOllie ( talk) 16:00, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
You have recently made edits related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them. This is a standard message to inform you that gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, see WP:CTVSDS. – dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 19:07, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
I don't know if anyone's watching my talk page... but as I'm actively avoiding editing in article space at this point, here are some egregious things I'm finding. I shall keep building this list.
]]
Feel free to respond or even mark within the message if you address any of these things. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 19:04, 26 February 2023 (UTC) Last expanded: Nat Gertler ( talk) 17:30, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
I recently made an edit to the Focus on the Family article that was in error because I inadvertently confused Focus on the Family with Family Research Council. You undid my edit, probably because you noticed my error. This is to thank you for that. P8Wm7G42 ( talk) 02:19, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
I've been asking for an article update for months and the contributors have left it at that for updates. The investigations and the authorities classified it as a terrorist attack. A head of state does not receive the body of a person involved in a road accident at the airport but does so if this is the victim of a terrorist attack. and this happened. President Mattarella received Parisi's body at the Rome airport.-- Peter39c ( talk) 20:25, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Can you point out on the Talk page where there is a consensus that it's undue weight to mention that EWG publishes material about PFAS? I only see a section where two editors are disagreeing about it and KOA keeps reverting it. Steven Walling • talk 04:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, NatGertler. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Technical test, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 21:02, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
I appreciate the additional note, as I had indeed misread your comment. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:07, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi Nat
i have responded with a detailed point by point response on the Biography of living persons page - can you please help me take this forward? I believe my claims have a solid chain of arguments and am requesting your help. Any edits made are shot down without a fair hearing - hence had raised these concerns.
thanks
Hibiscus192255 (
talk) 08:23, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
Whats wrong with adding flashthemes? Its a legal GoAnimate revival site and itsthe part of the article, Why did You Retrevie it? Кингзјевонњикимен ( talk) 06:20, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Dear Nat May I ask why you continue to suppress fully-sourced material on the 'Galerie Gmurzynska' page, citing WP:BLPCRIME concerns? That material is comprehensively referenced with highly reputable sources such as the New York Times, New Left Review, etc. It may be uncomfortable for the owners of that institution, but those events are very much a part of its history and should not be suppressed unless Wikipedia is intended to become an advertising/commercial space? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vantongern959 ( talk • contribs) 19:29, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
There is a discussion here which may be of interest to you. Wes sideman ( talk) 13:53, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Edit-a-thon and Wikipedia Day Celebration | |
---|---|
Please join Wikimedians of Los Angeles on Saturday, February 17 from 12:00 to 4:00 pm for a Los Angeles and West Hollywood-themed edit-a-thon at the West Hollywood Library. (For the details and to sign up, see Wikipedia:Meetup/Los Angeles/February 2024.) We'll also be celebrating Wikipedia's 23rd birthday/Wikipedia Day. (There will be cake!) We hope to see you there! JSFarman via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:04, 1 February 2024 (UTC) |
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Raise the Titanic!, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 16:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello, NatGertler!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the
Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the
Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!
Ldm1954 (
talk) 03:33, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
|
I would like a second opinion on this edit, because the edit adds back the Internet Gutter source, which I feel may be on the verge of disruptive editing against consensus. It is in my opinion that the so-called "grounded" videos should not be mentioned at all. -- Minoa ( talk) 21:42, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions with NatGertler. 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 6 | Archive 7 |
All Pages: | 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - ... (up to 100) |
Thanks for your input and edits. Reading the feedback (of 41, at this point) I ran into this post that might be helpful to the discussion, though not the inclusion issue. A couple of posters claimed that Eastman had engaged in Obama Orly Taitz-level birtherism, but I'm not aware of same at this point. (Orly ran for AG in 2014 in CA, the year Harris won reelection, and finished the "R" primary with 3.1% 6th out of 7 candidates.) Her candidacy was endorsed by black "preacher" James David Manning who believes homosexuals should be stoned to death. She was apparently not endorsed by James Dobson's Family "Research" Council, though she claimed to have been. (Could they have been worried about their 501(c)3 status?) Feel free to erase, of course: Activist ( talk) 19:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
With you closing my complaint so fast but will not continue chasing it. Being called a 'werdo' or 'weirdo' is still insulting. Don't comment on my talk page please.
BlueD954 ( talk) 09:44, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for that removal. I actually had that same edit in there, in Preview mode, all ready to go; but I didn't follow through. I had already done the "find", and located the insertion in Jan. 2018 (by an editor who left shortly thereafter). The fact that it lasted this long amazed me, as it's clearly pov and unencyclopedic. Given how controversial a topic it is, I didn't want to get sucked into a quarrel, so I just abandoned the edit, hoping someone would come along some day, and do it. Pleasantly surprised it took hours, and not years. There are other problems in the lead as well, and I decided not to take that on, either; namely, paragraph 3 is unique info and summarizes nothing in the body of the article. But if you look at paragraph 3 of the opposing article, it's a mirror image of this one, also unique and not related to information there, although each one points to the other article. This smells of some sort of "deal" that may have been made between the two camps in some Rfc somewhere, and I didn't want to get into that, either, if that is the case. However, lead guidelines are clear, and neither paragraph belongs in their respective article, as the lead is supposed to summarize *that* topic, and not some other one, and is not supposed to have unique information not described in detail in the article body. If you have the stomach to deal with all that as well, even better. Mathglot ( talk) 23:29, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Where does an organization's opposition or support of a particular position belong? I put support under Activities, but should I have created another section? I'm referencing this change: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Liberty_Counsel&diff=next&oldid=978939063 Thanks. Ihaveadreamagain 18:00, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Hey NatGertler, I noticed lately that you were removing “voice actor” from several celebritie articles, and I was curious you could remove the one on the Scott Weinger article. Because I kept on explaining to them what you said, “voice acting” is a subset of “acting”, but unfortunately my request keeps getting declined. 2600:1000:B04B:322:3007:4FEA:8EE4:7659 ( talk) 14:51, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, unfortunately it got restored again. Deacon Vorbis isn’t listening, I was just following the Wikipedia policy. 2600:1000:B03F:D3B7:4035:CF5C:866E:4D29 ( talk) 15:53, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Hey NatGertler, I just wanna say thank you for backing me up and defending me from Vorbis. I just didn’t why he’s making a big fuss over this issue, because I’m not. I was only following the Wikipedia policy of the Subset policy. 2600:1000:B065:1E3E:7198:52CB:502:AF1D ( talk) 20:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your feedback. In particular, thank you for catching that one of the previous articles cited was referring to a different ULC and not to the Modesto organization. You caught something that I did not see in the article and that is appreciated. Secondly, I went back and reviewed the sources and found an article by The New York Times which first criticized the ULC based in Modesto, CA as a diploma mill in 1977, using that wordage, and then found two articles by The Irish Times, rather than relying on the short piece, which criticized the organization, based in Modesto, CA, as a "degree mill." Thank you again for the feedback and for being so clear about what issues were present and how to address them. That was very helpful in re-examining it. I did not feel discouraged at all. I found your words to be constructive and encouraging. Thank you. SeminarianJohn ( talk) 02:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
Hey Nat, again I just wanted to say thank you once again for the removal of the voice acting occupation on the Scott Weinger article, there's just one more thing on that article that hasn't been removed yet, the short description section above that article also has "voice actor" in it that hasn't been removed yet, that's all. 2600:1000:B058:69A8:5D89:667D:320E:FC8 ( talk) 21:03, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
Based on your comments, you might want to know Raegan Revord of Young Sheldon's article is currently at User:Alden_Loveshade/Raegan_Revord. I hope to see it return to main space. Responsible edits are welcomed there. Alden Loveshade ( talk) 01:45, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi!
I am conducting an interview study about how Wikipedia editors collaborate in the English edition of Wikipedia. The project description is on the WMF meta wiki: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Characterizing_Collaboration_Models_in_the_EN,_FR_and_ES_Language_Editions_of_Wikipedia.
This research study is part of a larger project where we are trying to understand how editors collaborate in different language editions of Wikipedia. I was looking through our team’s prior dataset and came across conversations that you have had on the IsAnybodyDown? article talk page. I am interested in learning more about those conversations.
Would you be willing to participate in a 1 hour interview about your experience? The interview will take place virtually over Skype, Hangout, Zoom or phone.
Our research team will make our best efforts to keep your participation confidential. Participation in our study is voluntary. If you are willing to participate in this interview, or if you have additional questions please email me. Or, if you are concerned about direct email you can contact me through Wikipedia’s mail feature.
If you are interested or have any other questions, please let us know.
via Email: tbipat@uw.edu or English Wikipedia: tbipat
Tbipat ( talk) 22:29, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
7&6=thirteen (
☎) has given you a
Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.
To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{ subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. |
7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 17:56, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
You keep calling my edits opinions. What specifically is an opinion? Can you give an example. Stop abusing this website and reverting the hard work of other editors.
Thank you for supporting my removal of the unsourced date of birth in Lillian Randolph. I appreciate your follow-up edit and the comments that you posted on the article's talk page. I don't understand why some editors seem to prefer unsourced dates and ages over what is found in reliable published sources. I'm glad that the changes caught your attention. Eddie Blick ( talk) 02:51, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
I have mentioned you at an ANI discussion I have started. Mo Billings ( talk) 17:30, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
help me to edit with Flutter (comic series) please
In 2020, the EU DisinfoLab found that the World News Network was part of a disinformation campaign that helped Asian News International reproduce negative reports produced in Brussels and Geneva, that were pro-India and negative in iterations against Pakistan and China.[7]
The above sentence was included on both pages. "Big News Network" and "World News Network". /info/en/?search=World_News_Network and /info/en/?search=Big_News_Network
Seems the sentence has been deleted from "Big news Network" page because they are not at fault.. so same should be the
These links don't talk about World News Network since it is a news aggregator collecting articles from many sources. https://www.voanews.com/south-central-asia/pakistan-demands-un-eu-investigate-fake-pro-india-ngos-media https://www.dawn.com/news/1594928
Skv282 ( talk) 11:45, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Hey NetGertler, I need your help with something. I’ve been trying to request edit to be removed on the Charles Martinet article, but my request keeps getting declined. Is there any chance you could help out of that’s ok? 97.33.66.176 ( talk) 18:53, 15 February 2021 (UTC) 97.33.66.176 ( talk) 18:53, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
It’s ok, I understand. I’m very sorry if I wasted your time on this. I sincerely apologize. 97.33.65.199 ( talk) 20:46, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for the heads up on what a "minor edit" is ... I'll keep that in mind.
I don't quite understand the (polite) accusation of COI on the Made / Nous page--I don't work for Canada Media Fund, nor am I Mathieu Chantelois (as was suggested previously)! I think Made | Nous is doing some important work in terms of representation, diversity, etc. in Canadian film and television and thought they should have a better Wikipedia page. I had tried to add the logo, but it was rejected--any advice there? Thanks! Blipblip88 ( talk) 00:14, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, NatGertler. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Jackie Kannon, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 21:02, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
I am new to editing biographical information, can i not link the biographical information to the artists website Rupert1969 ( talk) 14:11, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, got it! Rupert1969 ( talk) 14:59, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Regarding the changes that you flagged on a biography for Peter Eastman(artist) i have made the necessary changes to citations so that they do not reference the subjects website or associated commercial gallery. Do i then remove the flag myself? Rupert1969 ( talk) 09:23, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi NatGertler. I just heard that you removed the date of birth Wallace Shawn's Wikipedia's page!
Please do not remove the date of birth at Wallace Shawn's Wikipedia article. Because Wallace Shawn's date of birth is very important. And I don't want anyone to remove Wallace Shawn's date of birth.
Also, I already fixed the Wallace Shawn's date of birth. He's born on November 12, 1943.
I hope you understand this about Wallace Shawn's date of birth correction. Have a good day.
Kind regards, Daniel Slewa.
Obviously, I'm a bit 'green' to editing on Wiki. Re: Spitzer's advocating of restorative therapy; The original info. came from a NYT article: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/19/health/dr-robert-l-spitzer-noted-psychiatrist-apologizes-for-study-on-gay-cure.html which references the 2001 date. The article in the NYT dated May 9, 2001 announces Spitzer's delivery of the paper at the annual APA conference: https://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/09/us/study-says-gays-can-shift-sexual-orientation.html?searchResultPosition=18. The APA 2001 annual conference program listing Spitzer's scheduled symposium is available on line as a PDF (which I downloaded)...not sure how to upload that doc or exactly how to cite it (apa 154th annual meeting - American Psychiatric Associationhttps://www.psychiatry.org › am_program_2001). Finally, the original 2001 paper was not published until 2003 in the journal I cited and is available as a PDF at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1025647527010. I was able to download the PDF from the Wayback Machine at no cost. I'm in the middle of writing a research paper titled 'Transvestic Expression on the Gender Incongruence Continuum and the Prevalence of Concomitant Autism and Gender Incongruence' and occasionally refer to Wiki; the misinformation is astounding, to say the least, and as you said this misinformation can come from 'both sides' either trying to 'tear down' or 'promote' unsubstantiated views. While I may personally view Spitzer's paper on restorative therapy or McHugh's (Johns Hopkins) positions on sexual orientation and gender identity as nonobjective opinion, I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion. However, when there is a loss of objectivity, particularly by leading members of the APA (i.e. Spitzer, McHugh) who advocate their personal or religious beliefs over objective positions I will make an effort to objectively 'clear the air'. Verticalhorizon1 ( talk) 13:24, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Nat, I appreciate the due diligence for establishing the dates of Spitzer's paper. I did not see any references to sample size of Spitzer's paper listed in the 2001 APA annual conference syllabus you described. We do know from the PDF the annual meeting was held May 5-10 2001 and the paper was presented in Symposium 67 B on Wednesday May 9, 2001 (pg. 84 of syllabus; pg. 116 of PDF). The NYT reported the presentation of the paper on May 9, 2001. In that article, the reporter, Erica Goode, states the following: 'The researcher, Dr. Robert Spitzer, said his study was based on 45-minute telephone interviews with 143 men and 57 women who had sought help to change their sexual orientation'. That is the identical sampling group listed in the subsequent 2003 publication of the paper. ( https://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/09/us/study-says-gays-can-shift-sexual-orientation.html?searchResultPosition=18). I am relying the information reported by Goode in the NYT as accurate, as the NYT is extremely diligent about fact checking. The point is, the paper was originally presented by Spitzer on May 9, 2001, but was not published publicly until 2003. The Program for the 2001 APA annual meeting PDF does not have a title listed in the properties, but could be cited as follows: 'American Psychiatric Association (2001). Program: APA 2001 Annual Meeting, Washington, DC: Author.' I believe the NYT article can be listed either as a link or by citing Goode as author and the NYT as publisher. Awful lot of work to correct a relatively minor error on Wiki, but being as factual as possible is pertinent.-- Verticalhorizon1 ( talk) 13:37, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
While I posted a generic apology to people I had denigrated on my talk page, I would like to offer a personal apology to you. And again, I expect to be held to it, as I attempt to understand why it took that ANI notice to get me to reconsider behavior that, as User:HighInBC noted, I did not for a second think was ok. -- Jibal ( talk) 04:46, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
I removed the prod from Lifepak and added some references from reliable sources. Even though the article may hve been created by someone with some connection to the company, I think that the article now shows notability. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 18:18, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
.Thanks again, and happy editing!
Cabrils ( talk) 23:56, 2 August 2021 (UTC)Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Deborah Kaplan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Abington Township. 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) 06:01, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Happy New Year from Wikimedians of Los Angeles!
To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list. |
-- JSFarman ( talk) 02:08, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
LA to FA 2022 | |
---|---|
Dear NatGertler, You're invited to a zoom call, taking place on February 11, with the goal of improving the article on Los Angeles to Featured article status! I often find it daunting to approach the Big Subjects on my own—so if you, like me, want a time to sit down with fellow dedicated editors and tackle something important and complex, this is the zoom for you! I, unfortunately, have no way to transmit snacks over zoom; but I trust you to exercise good judgement and discretion in selecting snacks of your own. Hope to see you there—if you're interested, add your name here! theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs) ( they/she) 00:19, 10 January 2022 (UTC) To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list. |
Hi. I know your page says you're retired, but I need more editors to help discern a consensus in this discussion, and I notice that you made edits as recently as last month, and have worked on the Comics Project. Cany you offer your two cents? Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 19:53, 19 February 2022 (UTC):
Hello, NatGertler,
I'm contacting you because you had a discussion on the article talk page with an SPA editor who seems focused on this group. They recently removed a lot of content from this article that I restored because it looks like they were just removing all of the content concerning lawsuits involving this group although their edit summaries stated that the edits were to remove poorly sourced content.
Since I saw you participated in this talk page discussion regarding this group, I wanted to ask you if you could look over what I restored and remove any content that should have stayed unrestored. But I see from the message above that you are retired and are likely to also say "No" to this request, too. But it doesn't hurt to ask so here I am! Thanks and I hope you are enjoying your retirement from the project. Liz Read! Talk! 21:03, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jay Coop · Talk · Contributions 21:03, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Yes, I'm writing on my own talk page... to remind myself that if further "pregnant people" discussion emerges, that's not the only non-gendered term being used. Google Scholar finds slightly more hits for "pregnant individuals" in 2022 (2700) than "pregnant persons" (2480). And then there's the matter of when the use of "pregnant women" is merely the citing of an older article, and thus not reflecting current language choices. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 02:09, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
Range | pregnant individuals |
pregnant women |
ind/women (per cent) |
---|---|---|---|
1910-1940 | 216 | 7410 | 2.91 |
1940-1970 | 416 | 17400 | 2.39 |
1970-2000 | 1650 | 609000 | 0.27 |
1989-2019 | 6500 | 1630000 | 0.40 |
For this, thanks for that! Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 17:42, 12 May 2023 (UTC) |
I didn't notice your comment when I returned that discussion to the closed version. FYI, the IP user you were addressing does have a user account, it was just blocked indef a moment ago. MrOllie ( talk) 16:00, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
You have recently made edits related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them. This is a standard message to inform you that gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, see WP:CTVSDS. – dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 19:07, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
I don't know if anyone's watching my talk page... but as I'm actively avoiding editing in article space at this point, here are some egregious things I'm finding. I shall keep building this list.
]]
Feel free to respond or even mark within the message if you address any of these things. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 19:04, 26 February 2023 (UTC) Last expanded: Nat Gertler ( talk) 17:30, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
I recently made an edit to the Focus on the Family article that was in error because I inadvertently confused Focus on the Family with Family Research Council. You undid my edit, probably because you noticed my error. This is to thank you for that. P8Wm7G42 ( talk) 02:19, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
I've been asking for an article update for months and the contributors have left it at that for updates. The investigations and the authorities classified it as a terrorist attack. A head of state does not receive the body of a person involved in a road accident at the airport but does so if this is the victim of a terrorist attack. and this happened. President Mattarella received Parisi's body at the Rome airport.-- Peter39c ( talk) 20:25, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Can you point out on the Talk page where there is a consensus that it's undue weight to mention that EWG publishes material about PFAS? I only see a section where two editors are disagreeing about it and KOA keeps reverting it. Steven Walling • talk 04:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, NatGertler. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Technical test, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 21:02, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
I appreciate the additional note, as I had indeed misread your comment. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:07, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi Nat
i have responded with a detailed point by point response on the Biography of living persons page - can you please help me take this forward? I believe my claims have a solid chain of arguments and am requesting your help. Any edits made are shot down without a fair hearing - hence had raised these concerns.
thanks
Hibiscus192255 (
talk) 08:23, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
Whats wrong with adding flashthemes? Its a legal GoAnimate revival site and itsthe part of the article, Why did You Retrevie it? Кингзјевонњикимен ( talk) 06:20, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Dear Nat May I ask why you continue to suppress fully-sourced material on the 'Galerie Gmurzynska' page, citing WP:BLPCRIME concerns? That material is comprehensively referenced with highly reputable sources such as the New York Times, New Left Review, etc. It may be uncomfortable for the owners of that institution, but those events are very much a part of its history and should not be suppressed unless Wikipedia is intended to become an advertising/commercial space? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vantongern959 ( talk • contribs) 19:29, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
There is a discussion here which may be of interest to you. Wes sideman ( talk) 13:53, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Edit-a-thon and Wikipedia Day Celebration | |
---|---|
Please join Wikimedians of Los Angeles on Saturday, February 17 from 12:00 to 4:00 pm for a Los Angeles and West Hollywood-themed edit-a-thon at the West Hollywood Library. (For the details and to sign up, see Wikipedia:Meetup/Los Angeles/February 2024.) We'll also be celebrating Wikipedia's 23rd birthday/Wikipedia Day. (There will be cake!) We hope to see you there! JSFarman via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:04, 1 February 2024 (UTC) |
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Raise the Titanic!, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 16:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello, NatGertler!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the
Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the
Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!
Ldm1954 (
talk) 03:33, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
|
I would like a second opinion on this edit, because the edit adds back the Internet Gutter source, which I feel may be on the verge of disruptive editing against consensus. It is in my opinion that the so-called "grounded" videos should not be mentioned at all. -- Minoa ( talk) 21:42, 8 March 2024 (UTC)