![]() | 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 15 | ← | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 |
Thank you so, so much for your positive contribution to this article, and to the discussion at AfD. Particularly, thank you for saying that "this is what Wikipedia is supposed to be about". Absolutely, it's entirely why I'm here. I see WP as a huge repository of really useful, really important information. If WP mutates into a big repository of film-plots and minor DJs with a lot of meaningless awards, just because DJs and films generate newspaper articles like dogs generate stuff on pavements, I'm off somewhere more interesting instead! And while I understand the need for secondary sources, one has to be a bit flexible in a situation where the article's sources are likely to be in obscure places, written in an obscure language. In the end, the important thing is: is the information likely to be correct, and is it likely to be genuinely interesting to our readers - not exactly WP policy, but unofficially a useful benchmark. If it ticks both boxes, I'd rather keep the article and hope someone finds better sources over time. But don't tell anyone I'm using unofficial benchmarks in my heart... Elemimele ( talk) 18:06, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 11:54, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() | |
Eight years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:22, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
this is either a really tacky ominous warning (Yeah... no) or an oblique reference to an editor conduct issue in an unrelated venue where no corrective action will be taken. That can be perceived as aggressive, petty, or even WP:ABF, and I don't recommend doing it, and would in fact recommend redacting it as not helpful. Basically, there's only so much complaining about other editors any one editor can do before they are perceived as themselves being contentious, so it's a good idea to curate one's editor-focused snark carefully. Free advice is worth what you paid for it. Cheers, Jclemens ( talk) 21:20, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi Stalwart111, having looked over your contributions recently, you appear to take part in a lot of "admin"-type work so you might have a better idea than me about whether this is a problem that needs looking at or if its best to simply ignore and carry on. Currently Eastmain's AfD stats (for the max I can see at 500) show that 95.5% are Keep !votes but only 59.3% agree with the result. This is before even trying to factor in the effect that Eastmain's Keep !vote might have had on the outcome in the first place. What dya think? HighKing ++ 13:08, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I saw your Talk comment here. Could you tell me whether you think this similar move was appropriate? As stated in my move summary, this new article compares favorably with other similar articles such as Gajim, Psi_(instant_messaging_client) or Pidgin_(software). It has a golem.de source as well as a detailed academic research paper on specifically this software (and one other software). I would appreciate any suggestions you may have. Thanks! -- Yae4 ( talk) 19:29, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Thank you so much for the improvements you made to the F.P. Verney article.
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
For magnificent research skills. Literaturegirl ( talk) 15:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC) |
My PayPal account says I need a name, mobile number, or email in order to send your reward. There is also a send cash to a location option that I've never used, but would use, if you indicate. Oh, wait, it looks like you can request money using my email: treehugginpenforhire@yahoo.com Literaturegirl ( talk) 15:30, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
I meant to respond to your ping last night, but didn't get around to it. The thread is closed now so I hope you don't mind me posting here. First I just want to make it clear here that I didn't call you a moron. I said your comment was one of the more moronic ones. That is an important distinction. What I said was uncivil though and not necessary for getting my point across, so I apologise for that. I also want to make clear that I don't give a flying fuck about the use of profanities. I am more concerned about the clear personal attack, like calling someone stupid, and more so that kind of behaviour being defended as a valid response to a disagreement here. I don't know about your workplace, but I have worked at multiple diverse places around the world over the years (including Aussie) and colleagues talking to each other that way is not common parlance and it certainly would lead to some disciplinary action if it was reported. That is beside the point anyway as we are not an Australian company, but a volunteer group with clear policies that say repeated personal attacks can lead to blocks (i.e that there are consequences for insulting other editors). Aircorn (talk) 17:12, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
"Yeah, but we can't build collaboratively if we're uncivil"; sure, that's true. But we can't build anything (with civility or not) if the same editors consistently get away with damaging what is already here. Case in point; am currently at WP:AN and WP:DRV where an admin has admitted to taking instructions (on Reddit) from the subject of a thrice-deleted Wikipedia article and collaborating with other off-wiki editors to have that article restored. Yes, an admin. If that doesn't warrant colourful language, what does? St★lwart 111 11:40, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
It's just feedwater, we've been been around it all night. [1] -- Euryalus ( talk) 12:15, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 11:28, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello, the consensus was reached here. The editor who nominated all these articles then went (on the same day the previous AfD was closed) and nominated half of them again. I think it's disruptive and should be procedurally closed with the articles dealt with one at a time as per the previous outcome. Deus et lex ( talk) 09:46, 28 October 2021 (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 15 | ← | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 |
Thank you so, so much for your positive contribution to this article, and to the discussion at AfD. Particularly, thank you for saying that "this is what Wikipedia is supposed to be about". Absolutely, it's entirely why I'm here. I see WP as a huge repository of really useful, really important information. If WP mutates into a big repository of film-plots and minor DJs with a lot of meaningless awards, just because DJs and films generate newspaper articles like dogs generate stuff on pavements, I'm off somewhere more interesting instead! And while I understand the need for secondary sources, one has to be a bit flexible in a situation where the article's sources are likely to be in obscure places, written in an obscure language. In the end, the important thing is: is the information likely to be correct, and is it likely to be genuinely interesting to our readers - not exactly WP policy, but unofficially a useful benchmark. If it ticks both boxes, I'd rather keep the article and hope someone finds better sources over time. But don't tell anyone I'm using unofficial benchmarks in my heart... Elemimele ( talk) 18:06, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 11:54, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() | |
Eight years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:22, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
this is either a really tacky ominous warning (Yeah... no) or an oblique reference to an editor conduct issue in an unrelated venue where no corrective action will be taken. That can be perceived as aggressive, petty, or even WP:ABF, and I don't recommend doing it, and would in fact recommend redacting it as not helpful. Basically, there's only so much complaining about other editors any one editor can do before they are perceived as themselves being contentious, so it's a good idea to curate one's editor-focused snark carefully. Free advice is worth what you paid for it. Cheers, Jclemens ( talk) 21:20, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi Stalwart111, having looked over your contributions recently, you appear to take part in a lot of "admin"-type work so you might have a better idea than me about whether this is a problem that needs looking at or if its best to simply ignore and carry on. Currently Eastmain's AfD stats (for the max I can see at 500) show that 95.5% are Keep !votes but only 59.3% agree with the result. This is before even trying to factor in the effect that Eastmain's Keep !vote might have had on the outcome in the first place. What dya think? HighKing ++ 13:08, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I saw your Talk comment here. Could you tell me whether you think this similar move was appropriate? As stated in my move summary, this new article compares favorably with other similar articles such as Gajim, Psi_(instant_messaging_client) or Pidgin_(software). It has a golem.de source as well as a detailed academic research paper on specifically this software (and one other software). I would appreciate any suggestions you may have. Thanks! -- Yae4 ( talk) 19:29, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Thank you so much for the improvements you made to the F.P. Verney article.
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
For magnificent research skills. Literaturegirl ( talk) 15:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC) |
My PayPal account says I need a name, mobile number, or email in order to send your reward. There is also a send cash to a location option that I've never used, but would use, if you indicate. Oh, wait, it looks like you can request money using my email: treehugginpenforhire@yahoo.com Literaturegirl ( talk) 15:30, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
I meant to respond to your ping last night, but didn't get around to it. The thread is closed now so I hope you don't mind me posting here. First I just want to make it clear here that I didn't call you a moron. I said your comment was one of the more moronic ones. That is an important distinction. What I said was uncivil though and not necessary for getting my point across, so I apologise for that. I also want to make clear that I don't give a flying fuck about the use of profanities. I am more concerned about the clear personal attack, like calling someone stupid, and more so that kind of behaviour being defended as a valid response to a disagreement here. I don't know about your workplace, but I have worked at multiple diverse places around the world over the years (including Aussie) and colleagues talking to each other that way is not common parlance and it certainly would lead to some disciplinary action if it was reported. That is beside the point anyway as we are not an Australian company, but a volunteer group with clear policies that say repeated personal attacks can lead to blocks (i.e that there are consequences for insulting other editors). Aircorn (talk) 17:12, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
"Yeah, but we can't build collaboratively if we're uncivil"; sure, that's true. But we can't build anything (with civility or not) if the same editors consistently get away with damaging what is already here. Case in point; am currently at WP:AN and WP:DRV where an admin has admitted to taking instructions (on Reddit) from the subject of a thrice-deleted Wikipedia article and collaborating with other off-wiki editors to have that article restored. Yes, an admin. If that doesn't warrant colourful language, what does? St★lwart 111 11:40, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
It's just feedwater, we've been been around it all night. [1] -- Euryalus ( talk) 12:15, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 11:28, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello, the consensus was reached here. The editor who nominated all these articles then went (on the same day the previous AfD was closed) and nominated half of them again. I think it's disruptive and should be procedurally closed with the articles dealt with one at a time as per the previous outcome. Deus et lex ( talk) 09:46, 28 October 2021 (UTC)