![]() | 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 34 | Archive 35 | Archive 36 | Archive 37 |
July, 2018 – November, 2018
I don't think it's something on that page, because past edits that looked normal now do not. It has to be something transcluded. Natureium ( talk) 18:54, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
Don't let anyone in the home know you're reading this stuff.... ok? 😂 Atsme 📞 📧 22:32, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
I'll be very distracted for the rest of today, traveling most of Monday, and in meetings Tuesday. Can you see if there's any oil you can pour on this troubled water [1] (and read the sections down from there)? E Eng 21:51, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
I'm in the very early stages of creating
User:Tryptofish/Drafts/Jack Sumner. It's an historical biography about someone I just found out about, and WP simply cannot be without it! Caution: male editors are advised to cross their legs before looking at the page. --
Tryptofish (
talk)
18:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Attention hookers: Template:Did you know nominations/Jack Sumner. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 23:53, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
this is nothing less than cross-wiki harassment and trolling. You would be wise to retract it. Should I see any continuation or escalation the matter, I shall go to the en:wp administrators to seek a block. As you will be well aware, the matter was already requested to be closed by an admin on Commons, and has not been pursued by the party concerned. Your post on Jimbo's page is nothing more than a personal attack as part of your long running grudge. Deeply unwise. -- Colin° Talk 21:17, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Colin: You are hereby banned from my talk page (something I have only done to two other editors before you). Do not ever edit this talk page again, or my talk page at any other wiki. I will not edit your talk page. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 21:27, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
These past few days at Commons have made me realize just how overall good we have it here at enwp, despite the huge room there is for improvement. "Enwp has the worst governance imaginable, until you compare it to the governance of any other wiki." Those people crazy for real. E Eng 04:42, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Please mark the Shirin Oskooi article for deletion . She is not notable and we can't have articles on every reality contestant. I am a ip editor since 2004. I can't AFD it ,you can .Please. I see you active based on AFD ,so please afd it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.233.143.77 ( talk) 04:07, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Did I do something wrong? Claustro123 ( talk) 18:26, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
On 27 July 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jack Sumner, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Grand Canyon explorer Jack Sumner intentionally castrated himself? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jack Sumner. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Jack Sumner), 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.
Vanamonde ( talk) 00:02, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
Fantastic work at Jack Sumner! What a sad and odd story. Thanks for writing it! MX ( ✉ • ✎) 01:58, 27 July 2018 (UTC) |
Hello yes it's WP:MOSNICKNAME. Giant Snowman 16:27, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
User:CristieJ is new, and in trouble, and it was my fault kinda thing.
It's almost how I was welcomed to the wiki, and I know exactly how they feel.
Should I do anything? I want to tell them that they really have it wrong, but how, without making it worse?
I stayed away about two years after my initial experience!! - Roxy, the dog. barcus 17:58, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
Please explain to me how labeling someone's stance as inconsistent is a personal attack. @ Ritchie333: Feel free to join in since I know you can't help yourself. Nihlus 22:00, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
I feel very strange in having to write such a thank you notice, but you are the very first of the four persons I've so far encountered, who did not want to slay my opinions, my doings, or me.
When I voted to delete in the
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States_with_facial_hair_(4th_nomination) then I did also consider to elaborate my opinions in an more objective manner with some food for thought, but was in doubt if it would get a bit too long, and so I chose to postpone the decision. Seeing how I immediately received a troll-label from a Wiki employee (Rhododendrites) based on throwing half truths into the air about my previous edits, then I will abstain from further elaboration there. But if you think elaboration is something worth bringing to market, then I'm willing to write it somewhere for you to read and use anyway you may see fit.
Pladderballe (
talk)
18:37, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
For the next few days, I'm going to have only intermittent internet service, so if I'm slow to respond to anything, that's why. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 21:01, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Tryptofish. Just wanted to pick your brain more on copying within wikipedia following this addition to the GMO talk page. I know that the minimum is an edit summary note and always try to leave a link back to the source article when I do one. Your edit summary seemed to suggest that a talk page template is required when it reaches a certain size. I ask because I am doing a lot of this at the moment and plan on doing more. There are historical instances too, most of the history section at GMO was copied from History of genetic engineering. I have often justified not leaving a talk page template to myself due to my somewhat arrogant position that I have written most of the information I am moving around anyway, but if I am honest it is also something I find time consuming busy work and I don't like the look of talk pages filled with templates at the top. Anyway you are one of the more versed editors here on not only policy, but the practical implications of policy so thought I should just see what you think. If you think it is necessary I will go back and template the talk pages. Some examples are [4], [5], [6], [7] and [8].
While I am here I might as well get you opinion on how to resolve the correlation between the GMO article with the genetic engineering one. They are essentially going to mirror each other on process, history, applications, regulation and controversies. Maybe GE will focus more on the process, while GMO on the application, but the differences are not going to be much. I don't think a merge would stick, but it would be the easiest solution and one I will make if you think it is worth a shot. Can you think of any points of difference between the two that would make the articles unique? There is a similar issue with GM crops vs GM plants, but at least there are differences between the two concepts. All GMOs are results from genetic engineering and all products of genetic engineering are GMOs. I think I will take it to the talk page at some point, but if you have any rough ideas on how best to outline the articles up I would love to hear them. Sorry for the TL:DR. AIRcorn (talk) 08:51, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Dear Tryptofish/Archive 36,
I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for ten years or more.
Best regards, Chris Troutman ( talk) 23:21, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
I'm sorry you don't have Wikipedia e-mail enabled, as I would like to be able to talk with you about sensitive matters without people looking over my shoulder. Do you do IRC? Bishonen | talk 06:34, 14 August 2018 (UTC).
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Gateway Pundit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Antifa ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:17, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
I know you said you're just starting to look into the recent edits, and it's a lot to go through in terms of talk discussion or content. Because of that, feel free to ask more pointed questions at the talk page if my summary here wasn't clear. There's been a lot of stuff going on that's difficult to keep track of even for being heavily involved, so I'm not surprised if it's daunting for others to dive in.
I'll admit I'm quite tired out from trying to civilly respond to all the battleground and sniping being reintroduced into the topic yet again when I've been intent on trying to deal with problematic behavior without going to AE right away, but I'm hoping things can be settled down. My main content concerns in that regard are the changes to the lead and reintroducing this (i.e., burying the consensus statement). As long as that can be addressed, I'm good with tag removal at this point. The other stuff on talk, while problematic, is only going to bog things down at this point if everyone tries to address all those things at once. If you're going to take a 3O-type role, hopefully those two things give an area of focus to hopefully get something done. Kingofaces43 ( talk) 18:49, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
...since it would be kinda repeating myself, just with different emphases to answer your specific concerns, to reply directly at the AFD.
Anyway, the problem is more the conflation of kaijū with giant animals, even though the former term also encompasses (1) smaller creatures (the original, literal meaning of the word is "strange" or "mystical" animal, and a lot of "kaijū films", such as The Return of Godzilla, prominently feature monsters of sub-human proportions), (2) non-organic monsters like Mechagodzilla, which no one calls "giant animals", and (3) "normal-sized" versions of fictional animal species that happen to be very large ( Godzilla, to give just the most famous example, is actually, in most versions of the series continuity, the last survivor, or one of the last survivors, of a dinosaur species). Yeah, most monsters called kaijū are animals and are very large, but extrapolating from that that the word itself refers to giant animals specifically and that lists of kaijū constitute lists of giant animals is WP:OR, but I wouldn't call it SYNTH since there is no synthesis of different sources involved.
Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 09:35, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Re: this edit, aren't we essentially doing the same thing in the New York Times article? We note "The NYT" in the lead sentence, but don't reference the paper that way in the article. I imagine there are other examples. With the Gateway Pundit, the site itself seems to use the "TGP" abbreviation when I last looked at it, so noting it seemed reasonable to me. We also list the site in the TGP disambiguation page, which makes me more inclined to include the abbreviation somewhere in the Gateway Pundit article. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 01:01, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot ( talk) 21:32, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Are you going? I'll be at the
All American Quarter Horse Congress that whole week, and where I'll be staying is a short 10 min away. How could I resist?
Atsme
📞
📧
23:08, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
I hope some of the things I say on the TPs of WikiFriends aren't misconstrued as 100% serious - case in point, this comment. Some of the replies to my comments over time make me wonder. I'm pretty sure our friends in the UK have perfected satire but I've also experienced a few times when the punch line was lost in the translation. 🤔 Oh well, it's too late to worry about it now. Atsme 📞 📧 23:19, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
You came to my talk page a few weeks ago about concerns you were thinking of bringing to WP:AE. I wouldn't be notifying if that weren't the case, but I just ended up opening a case there. I'm not sure if those were the exact same issues that were concerning you or not, so I figured I'd let you know. Kingofaces43 ( talk) 21:15, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, I accidentally rolled back your note to Drmies. I've fixed my error. - Sitush ( talk) 19:56, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
that happens a lot.I hate to break it to you, but your edits getting rolled back all the time is not as accidental as you think... We all just really don't care what you think and wish you'd stop talking to us. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:18, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
I just pop a couple of Tums and move on. Atsme ✍🏻 📧 20:56, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
That was a damp squid... Simon Adler ( talk) 21:35, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
Your request for clarification has been archived at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms. For the Arbitration Committee, Mini apolis 22:48, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
I think you're basically right on the general issue, but you're missing the point in this case; I can't explain why, though, per WP:BEANS. I know I would probably be happier and more productive (in terms of adding content to the encyclopedia) if I stayed away from that toxic environment in general, but I don't think that's what you were talking about. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 21:59, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
I don't remember if Mike ever did date her or not. I think so, but it was a long time ago. I'm fairly sure it wasn't a sideways insult, she seemed pretty happy to be there. Did she want to be a groupie and thought that a bad audition and a lewd offer would get her "in"? All she would have had to do was show up for a few of our practice sessions for that; we weren't exactly beating the groupies off with a stick. Did she think it had something to do with metal? With singing? Did she think we'd give her the gig in exchange for "favors"? Was she just messing with us? If so, why? I wasn't kidding, Tryp. It haunts me. I was already dating my wife at the time, so it's not like a missed opportunity or anything. It's just like, if I saw bigfoot riding a tricycle or something. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 03:12, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Did someone say perverted filth? Where? Please link.You asked for it. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 18:18, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
( edit conflict)I couldn't imagine Michael Bolton fronting a punk band. I could see him jumping genres to gangsta rap, though. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Your request for clarification has been archived at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests. For the Arbitration Committee, Mini apolis 15:40, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Just wondering - are you really, really busy or are your day naps getting longer? 😂 Atsme ✍🏻 📧 22:14, 29 September 2018 (UTC). Just remembered - it’s time for that lovely health prep! Many happy parrotfish dropppings! 10:39, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
Was this a joke, or have you gotten a name change since birth :-) Nyttend ( talk) 22:30, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
(and no, I'm not going to make a spoonerism from that)Thank god for that... ;)
So you undo of my change on Jill Stein description was saying ‘former local politician’ instead ‘politician’ because of her carrer subsections in same page have her saiding, she was elected as town meeting representative in Lexington, Massachusetts for 5 years in her home state. Thus having ok reason for small edit.
But sure at first and I was ok about you undoing it with probably first part saids ‘unsourced’ because it’s in page itself so why brother needs source it anyway, but you had dare try excusing me for ‘violating’ WP:BLP over two words that I edited it, Was sounded unintentionally what paranoiac person would said?!?
I’m sorry to said but that what you reasoned undoing my edit sounds little worsome and ludicrous? Chad The Goatman ( talk) 19:39, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Dear Tryptofish, Well, have hopefully made some progress and I think it's looking in reasonable shape. I would be hugely grateful if you would have a look and let me know what you think. Specifically, advice on the following would be most helpful:
Any other, more general, advice would also be appreciated. Don't feel any need at all to run things by me. Just make any corrections/amendments as you see fit. And there is absolutely no rush. I'm away shortly, am still awaiting receipt of Sarah Raven's book, and it remains in desperate need of a plan/map which I'm trying to source, so I won't be looking to push it to PR until mid November'ish. Many thanks indeed. KJP1 ( talk) 13:51, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
I'm going to a reunion, and might not get around to editing here on Friday or Saturday. So if I'm slow to respond to anything, that's why. I should be back to editing on Sunday. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 21:57, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
The short wall on this horse trailer w/living quarters seems to be getting shorter....especially when you’ve got to play catch with a rambunctious Boston Terrorist Terrier, and a mini-Aussie not quite a year old. I think the ball & pinion in my right arm is gone from throwing whatever it is they bring me to throw. When I try to ignore them, they pull & claw at my arm with their little paws that are garnished with sharp claws. Appears that I’ll be going to the Wiki Conference looking like I’ve been in a dog fight...and that doesn’t count my battle scars from editing Wikipedia. I’ll fit right in. Oh, and I’ll trade you 2 dogs for 1 fish. 😂
Atsme
✍🏻
📧
23:24, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Regarding modifying the paid contribution disclosure policy as you discussed in this comment: because this is tangential to the discussion on the conflict of interest talk page, I'm commenting here instead. As far as I recall, specific editors have made the statement you said, not WMF Legal. The open question is whether or not introducing a more stringent set of conditions would require an "alternative paid contribution disclosure policy" to receive consensus approval, as defined in the terms of use. Given that there is no indication that the subset of the English Wikipedia community that pays attention to such things is in agreement on a policy, some of those who want to add additional conditions for disclosure take the position that conditions can be layered on top without creating an alternative policy. Whereas there is room for community-specific interpretation within the scope of the conditions in the terms of use, I think an expansion of the conditions without going through a broad consensus discussion (the small number of followers at the paid contribution disclosure talk page is really too small to set policy in my view; I know others disagree) would be counterproductive. An attempt to enforce stricter conditions without broad consensus will trigger a whole new set of discussions about the topic, so we may just as well have a broader discussion beforehand. isaacl ( talk) 05:35, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
You removed macroelectrodes, but retained human surgical use. Not sure why you did this, but macroelectrodes are what record LFPs in humans, not microelectrodes. Can you elaborate why you made the change? Wikibluejay ( talk) 21:38, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Here is your Happy Halloween wish from the headless chicken monster! Atsme ✍🏻 📧 20:24, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
Run and hide! The trick or treaters will soon arrive!!
![]() |
|
Why are demons and ghouls always together?
What happens when you goose a ghost?
|
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
You lost me with this "that were cited by the close, were needlessly insulting." Cited by the close? Atsme ✍🏻 📧 19:49, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
I understand that SashiRolls (it's not a false flag) is pissed at you and a number of other Wikipedians who commented on the original case. I think his personality obsession is unwarranted but understandable considering the way Wikipedia kinda encourages this stuff. What I don't understand is why his follow-up comment is so jarring to you. Are we talking past each other? I really am confused.
Incidentally, I don't want to change your opinion. I value it. I actually just want to understand it and right now I really don't.
jps ( talk) 21:19, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Okay, I think I get it now. You are right that he's continuing a battleground mentality and that's something he's going to have to change, but I actually think he doesn't understand that this is the case because of his time banned from the website. Certainly he is convinced he is right and refuses to admit he is wrong, but my take is that Wikipedia as a community shouldn't require that someone change their beliefs about whether they were right or wrong in a given dispute, just that there is a Wikipedia way to do things (don't personalize, don't dig in your heels, know when to let things go), and then there is the way that will get you in trouble.
My take on the matter is that this represents a clear case of Wikipedia eating itself all ouroboros like. SashiRolls got caught up in a dispute where he saw how the personalization of a conflict can be used to its greatest effect. He saw something weird and started buzzing around it annoyingly. Cirt got mad and pounced as he is very good at doing and was extremely effective in his well-aimed hit. The end effect of this was proving that, in spite of Wikipedia rules to the contrary, personalization works. SashiRolls has since then had only off-wiki outlets and spent considerable amounts of time begging anyone who would listen to recognize that something weird happened, and fast forward to today. As I said to SashiRolls off-wiki, there are a fair number who see the situation as being that he is your classic trollish irritant who just got lucky in that his guess about whether there was something weird. But I also think that he is such an irritant in part because of the way Wikipedia works.
Now Wikipedia may (dys)function in such a fashion that he's too ruined to be let back in. I really don't know what the rate of return is on these cases. However, I think there may be a chance that he just needs to learn how to put his head down.
In any case, I think I now understand better where you are coming from. I think I agree with you that this guy hasn't figured out how to shake hands and make nice in the context of Wikipedia. Plus, he's been hanging out in the bad guys/girls club for a while now. I think that he is just used to a snarkier repartee than Wikipedia would typically tolerate at a unblocking party. Just look at how ludicrous his unblock request is, he almost laughably doesn't know how this kind of interaction is supposed to proceed. But I don't think he will learn any of this unless given a shot at being unblocked. He still may not be able to learn it because, frankly, the weird history of this scenario might have made him too toxically clever to ever be a "normal" editor. But you're right that I see a bit of how I was treated by this website in what's going on here, and so I do think that if I deserve a shot, he might deserve a shot.
Sorry to spew pontification, but hopefully I've understood your point.
jps ( talk) 23:44, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Tryptofish: I too was a bit surprised at your strongly worded response. I think you might be reading a little too much into what Sashi was saying. He has an unorthodox, elliptical style of speaking that can seem off-putting and come across as confrontational when (IMO) it's not intended as such, but I really don't think he means any harm. As for "he thinks I'm wrong and he's right", well, that probably applies to all of us, doesn't it? I hope you will reconsider your position. Sometimes it's hard to try to put yourself in someone else's shoes, but in this case I think it's worth doing. I think we could all use a little more empathy. 28bytes ( talk) 12:54, 1 November 2018 (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. |
![]() | 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 34 | Archive 35 | Archive 36 | Archive 37 |
July, 2018 – November, 2018
I don't think it's something on that page, because past edits that looked normal now do not. It has to be something transcluded. Natureium ( talk) 18:54, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
Don't let anyone in the home know you're reading this stuff.... ok? 😂 Atsme 📞 📧 22:32, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
I'll be very distracted for the rest of today, traveling most of Monday, and in meetings Tuesday. Can you see if there's any oil you can pour on this troubled water [1] (and read the sections down from there)? E Eng 21:51, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
I'm in the very early stages of creating
User:Tryptofish/Drafts/Jack Sumner. It's an historical biography about someone I just found out about, and WP simply cannot be without it! Caution: male editors are advised to cross their legs before looking at the page. --
Tryptofish (
talk)
18:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Attention hookers: Template:Did you know nominations/Jack Sumner. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 23:53, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
this is nothing less than cross-wiki harassment and trolling. You would be wise to retract it. Should I see any continuation or escalation the matter, I shall go to the en:wp administrators to seek a block. As you will be well aware, the matter was already requested to be closed by an admin on Commons, and has not been pursued by the party concerned. Your post on Jimbo's page is nothing more than a personal attack as part of your long running grudge. Deeply unwise. -- Colin° Talk 21:17, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Colin: You are hereby banned from my talk page (something I have only done to two other editors before you). Do not ever edit this talk page again, or my talk page at any other wiki. I will not edit your talk page. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 21:27, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
These past few days at Commons have made me realize just how overall good we have it here at enwp, despite the huge room there is for improvement. "Enwp has the worst governance imaginable, until you compare it to the governance of any other wiki." Those people crazy for real. E Eng 04:42, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Please mark the Shirin Oskooi article for deletion . She is not notable and we can't have articles on every reality contestant. I am a ip editor since 2004. I can't AFD it ,you can .Please. I see you active based on AFD ,so please afd it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.233.143.77 ( talk) 04:07, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Did I do something wrong? Claustro123 ( talk) 18:26, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
On 27 July 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jack Sumner, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Grand Canyon explorer Jack Sumner intentionally castrated himself? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jack Sumner. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Jack Sumner), 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.
Vanamonde ( talk) 00:02, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
Fantastic work at Jack Sumner! What a sad and odd story. Thanks for writing it! MX ( ✉ • ✎) 01:58, 27 July 2018 (UTC) |
Hello yes it's WP:MOSNICKNAME. Giant Snowman 16:27, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
User:CristieJ is new, and in trouble, and it was my fault kinda thing.
It's almost how I was welcomed to the wiki, and I know exactly how they feel.
Should I do anything? I want to tell them that they really have it wrong, but how, without making it worse?
I stayed away about two years after my initial experience!! - Roxy, the dog. barcus 17:58, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
Please explain to me how labeling someone's stance as inconsistent is a personal attack. @ Ritchie333: Feel free to join in since I know you can't help yourself. Nihlus 22:00, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
I feel very strange in having to write such a thank you notice, but you are the very first of the four persons I've so far encountered, who did not want to slay my opinions, my doings, or me.
When I voted to delete in the
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States_with_facial_hair_(4th_nomination) then I did also consider to elaborate my opinions in an more objective manner with some food for thought, but was in doubt if it would get a bit too long, and so I chose to postpone the decision. Seeing how I immediately received a troll-label from a Wiki employee (Rhododendrites) based on throwing half truths into the air about my previous edits, then I will abstain from further elaboration there. But if you think elaboration is something worth bringing to market, then I'm willing to write it somewhere for you to read and use anyway you may see fit.
Pladderballe (
talk)
18:37, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
For the next few days, I'm going to have only intermittent internet service, so if I'm slow to respond to anything, that's why. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 21:01, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Tryptofish. Just wanted to pick your brain more on copying within wikipedia following this addition to the GMO talk page. I know that the minimum is an edit summary note and always try to leave a link back to the source article when I do one. Your edit summary seemed to suggest that a talk page template is required when it reaches a certain size. I ask because I am doing a lot of this at the moment and plan on doing more. There are historical instances too, most of the history section at GMO was copied from History of genetic engineering. I have often justified not leaving a talk page template to myself due to my somewhat arrogant position that I have written most of the information I am moving around anyway, but if I am honest it is also something I find time consuming busy work and I don't like the look of talk pages filled with templates at the top. Anyway you are one of the more versed editors here on not only policy, but the practical implications of policy so thought I should just see what you think. If you think it is necessary I will go back and template the talk pages. Some examples are [4], [5], [6], [7] and [8].
While I am here I might as well get you opinion on how to resolve the correlation between the GMO article with the genetic engineering one. They are essentially going to mirror each other on process, history, applications, regulation and controversies. Maybe GE will focus more on the process, while GMO on the application, but the differences are not going to be much. I don't think a merge would stick, but it would be the easiest solution and one I will make if you think it is worth a shot. Can you think of any points of difference between the two that would make the articles unique? There is a similar issue with GM crops vs GM plants, but at least there are differences between the two concepts. All GMOs are results from genetic engineering and all products of genetic engineering are GMOs. I think I will take it to the talk page at some point, but if you have any rough ideas on how best to outline the articles up I would love to hear them. Sorry for the TL:DR. AIRcorn (talk) 08:51, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Dear Tryptofish/Archive 36,
I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for ten years or more.
Best regards, Chris Troutman ( talk) 23:21, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
I'm sorry you don't have Wikipedia e-mail enabled, as I would like to be able to talk with you about sensitive matters without people looking over my shoulder. Do you do IRC? Bishonen | talk 06:34, 14 August 2018 (UTC).
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Gateway Pundit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Antifa ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:17, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
I know you said you're just starting to look into the recent edits, and it's a lot to go through in terms of talk discussion or content. Because of that, feel free to ask more pointed questions at the talk page if my summary here wasn't clear. There's been a lot of stuff going on that's difficult to keep track of even for being heavily involved, so I'm not surprised if it's daunting for others to dive in.
I'll admit I'm quite tired out from trying to civilly respond to all the battleground and sniping being reintroduced into the topic yet again when I've been intent on trying to deal with problematic behavior without going to AE right away, but I'm hoping things can be settled down. My main content concerns in that regard are the changes to the lead and reintroducing this (i.e., burying the consensus statement). As long as that can be addressed, I'm good with tag removal at this point. The other stuff on talk, while problematic, is only going to bog things down at this point if everyone tries to address all those things at once. If you're going to take a 3O-type role, hopefully those two things give an area of focus to hopefully get something done. Kingofaces43 ( talk) 18:49, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
...since it would be kinda repeating myself, just with different emphases to answer your specific concerns, to reply directly at the AFD.
Anyway, the problem is more the conflation of kaijū with giant animals, even though the former term also encompasses (1) smaller creatures (the original, literal meaning of the word is "strange" or "mystical" animal, and a lot of "kaijū films", such as The Return of Godzilla, prominently feature monsters of sub-human proportions), (2) non-organic monsters like Mechagodzilla, which no one calls "giant animals", and (3) "normal-sized" versions of fictional animal species that happen to be very large ( Godzilla, to give just the most famous example, is actually, in most versions of the series continuity, the last survivor, or one of the last survivors, of a dinosaur species). Yeah, most monsters called kaijū are animals and are very large, but extrapolating from that that the word itself refers to giant animals specifically and that lists of kaijū constitute lists of giant animals is WP:OR, but I wouldn't call it SYNTH since there is no synthesis of different sources involved.
Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 09:35, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Re: this edit, aren't we essentially doing the same thing in the New York Times article? We note "The NYT" in the lead sentence, but don't reference the paper that way in the article. I imagine there are other examples. With the Gateway Pundit, the site itself seems to use the "TGP" abbreviation when I last looked at it, so noting it seemed reasonable to me. We also list the site in the TGP disambiguation page, which makes me more inclined to include the abbreviation somewhere in the Gateway Pundit article. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 01:01, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot ( talk) 21:32, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Are you going? I'll be at the
All American Quarter Horse Congress that whole week, and where I'll be staying is a short 10 min away. How could I resist?
Atsme
📞
📧
23:08, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
I hope some of the things I say on the TPs of WikiFriends aren't misconstrued as 100% serious - case in point, this comment. Some of the replies to my comments over time make me wonder. I'm pretty sure our friends in the UK have perfected satire but I've also experienced a few times when the punch line was lost in the translation. 🤔 Oh well, it's too late to worry about it now. Atsme 📞 📧 23:19, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
You came to my talk page a few weeks ago about concerns you were thinking of bringing to WP:AE. I wouldn't be notifying if that weren't the case, but I just ended up opening a case there. I'm not sure if those were the exact same issues that were concerning you or not, so I figured I'd let you know. Kingofaces43 ( talk) 21:15, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, I accidentally rolled back your note to Drmies. I've fixed my error. - Sitush ( talk) 19:56, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
that happens a lot.I hate to break it to you, but your edits getting rolled back all the time is not as accidental as you think... We all just really don't care what you think and wish you'd stop talking to us. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:18, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
I just pop a couple of Tums and move on. Atsme ✍🏻 📧 20:56, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
That was a damp squid... Simon Adler ( talk) 21:35, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
Your request for clarification has been archived at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms. For the Arbitration Committee, Mini apolis 22:48, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
I think you're basically right on the general issue, but you're missing the point in this case; I can't explain why, though, per WP:BEANS. I know I would probably be happier and more productive (in terms of adding content to the encyclopedia) if I stayed away from that toxic environment in general, but I don't think that's what you were talking about. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 21:59, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
I don't remember if Mike ever did date her or not. I think so, but it was a long time ago. I'm fairly sure it wasn't a sideways insult, she seemed pretty happy to be there. Did she want to be a groupie and thought that a bad audition and a lewd offer would get her "in"? All she would have had to do was show up for a few of our practice sessions for that; we weren't exactly beating the groupies off with a stick. Did she think it had something to do with metal? With singing? Did she think we'd give her the gig in exchange for "favors"? Was she just messing with us? If so, why? I wasn't kidding, Tryp. It haunts me. I was already dating my wife at the time, so it's not like a missed opportunity or anything. It's just like, if I saw bigfoot riding a tricycle or something. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 03:12, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Did someone say perverted filth? Where? Please link.You asked for it. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 18:18, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
( edit conflict)I couldn't imagine Michael Bolton fronting a punk band. I could see him jumping genres to gangsta rap, though. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Your request for clarification has been archived at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests. For the Arbitration Committee, Mini apolis 15:40, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Just wondering - are you really, really busy or are your day naps getting longer? 😂 Atsme ✍🏻 📧 22:14, 29 September 2018 (UTC). Just remembered - it’s time for that lovely health prep! Many happy parrotfish dropppings! 10:39, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
Was this a joke, or have you gotten a name change since birth :-) Nyttend ( talk) 22:30, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
(and no, I'm not going to make a spoonerism from that)Thank god for that... ;)
So you undo of my change on Jill Stein description was saying ‘former local politician’ instead ‘politician’ because of her carrer subsections in same page have her saiding, she was elected as town meeting representative in Lexington, Massachusetts for 5 years in her home state. Thus having ok reason for small edit.
But sure at first and I was ok about you undoing it with probably first part saids ‘unsourced’ because it’s in page itself so why brother needs source it anyway, but you had dare try excusing me for ‘violating’ WP:BLP over two words that I edited it, Was sounded unintentionally what paranoiac person would said?!?
I’m sorry to said but that what you reasoned undoing my edit sounds little worsome and ludicrous? Chad The Goatman ( talk) 19:39, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Dear Tryptofish, Well, have hopefully made some progress and I think it's looking in reasonable shape. I would be hugely grateful if you would have a look and let me know what you think. Specifically, advice on the following would be most helpful:
Any other, more general, advice would also be appreciated. Don't feel any need at all to run things by me. Just make any corrections/amendments as you see fit. And there is absolutely no rush. I'm away shortly, am still awaiting receipt of Sarah Raven's book, and it remains in desperate need of a plan/map which I'm trying to source, so I won't be looking to push it to PR until mid November'ish. Many thanks indeed. KJP1 ( talk) 13:51, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
I'm going to a reunion, and might not get around to editing here on Friday or Saturday. So if I'm slow to respond to anything, that's why. I should be back to editing on Sunday. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 21:57, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
The short wall on this horse trailer w/living quarters seems to be getting shorter....especially when you’ve got to play catch with a rambunctious Boston Terrorist Terrier, and a mini-Aussie not quite a year old. I think the ball & pinion in my right arm is gone from throwing whatever it is they bring me to throw. When I try to ignore them, they pull & claw at my arm with their little paws that are garnished with sharp claws. Appears that I’ll be going to the Wiki Conference looking like I’ve been in a dog fight...and that doesn’t count my battle scars from editing Wikipedia. I’ll fit right in. Oh, and I’ll trade you 2 dogs for 1 fish. 😂
Atsme
✍🏻
📧
23:24, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Regarding modifying the paid contribution disclosure policy as you discussed in this comment: because this is tangential to the discussion on the conflict of interest talk page, I'm commenting here instead. As far as I recall, specific editors have made the statement you said, not WMF Legal. The open question is whether or not introducing a more stringent set of conditions would require an "alternative paid contribution disclosure policy" to receive consensus approval, as defined in the terms of use. Given that there is no indication that the subset of the English Wikipedia community that pays attention to such things is in agreement on a policy, some of those who want to add additional conditions for disclosure take the position that conditions can be layered on top without creating an alternative policy. Whereas there is room for community-specific interpretation within the scope of the conditions in the terms of use, I think an expansion of the conditions without going through a broad consensus discussion (the small number of followers at the paid contribution disclosure talk page is really too small to set policy in my view; I know others disagree) would be counterproductive. An attempt to enforce stricter conditions without broad consensus will trigger a whole new set of discussions about the topic, so we may just as well have a broader discussion beforehand. isaacl ( talk) 05:35, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
You removed macroelectrodes, but retained human surgical use. Not sure why you did this, but macroelectrodes are what record LFPs in humans, not microelectrodes. Can you elaborate why you made the change? Wikibluejay ( talk) 21:38, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Here is your Happy Halloween wish from the headless chicken monster! Atsme ✍🏻 📧 20:24, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
Run and hide! The trick or treaters will soon arrive!!
![]() |
|
Why are demons and ghouls always together?
What happens when you goose a ghost?
|
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
You lost me with this "that were cited by the close, were needlessly insulting." Cited by the close? Atsme ✍🏻 📧 19:49, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
I understand that SashiRolls (it's not a false flag) is pissed at you and a number of other Wikipedians who commented on the original case. I think his personality obsession is unwarranted but understandable considering the way Wikipedia kinda encourages this stuff. What I don't understand is why his follow-up comment is so jarring to you. Are we talking past each other? I really am confused.
Incidentally, I don't want to change your opinion. I value it. I actually just want to understand it and right now I really don't.
jps ( talk) 21:19, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Okay, I think I get it now. You are right that he's continuing a battleground mentality and that's something he's going to have to change, but I actually think he doesn't understand that this is the case because of his time banned from the website. Certainly he is convinced he is right and refuses to admit he is wrong, but my take is that Wikipedia as a community shouldn't require that someone change their beliefs about whether they were right or wrong in a given dispute, just that there is a Wikipedia way to do things (don't personalize, don't dig in your heels, know when to let things go), and then there is the way that will get you in trouble.
My take on the matter is that this represents a clear case of Wikipedia eating itself all ouroboros like. SashiRolls got caught up in a dispute where he saw how the personalization of a conflict can be used to its greatest effect. He saw something weird and started buzzing around it annoyingly. Cirt got mad and pounced as he is very good at doing and was extremely effective in his well-aimed hit. The end effect of this was proving that, in spite of Wikipedia rules to the contrary, personalization works. SashiRolls has since then had only off-wiki outlets and spent considerable amounts of time begging anyone who would listen to recognize that something weird happened, and fast forward to today. As I said to SashiRolls off-wiki, there are a fair number who see the situation as being that he is your classic trollish irritant who just got lucky in that his guess about whether there was something weird. But I also think that he is such an irritant in part because of the way Wikipedia works.
Now Wikipedia may (dys)function in such a fashion that he's too ruined to be let back in. I really don't know what the rate of return is on these cases. However, I think there may be a chance that he just needs to learn how to put his head down.
In any case, I think I now understand better where you are coming from. I think I agree with you that this guy hasn't figured out how to shake hands and make nice in the context of Wikipedia. Plus, he's been hanging out in the bad guys/girls club for a while now. I think that he is just used to a snarkier repartee than Wikipedia would typically tolerate at a unblocking party. Just look at how ludicrous his unblock request is, he almost laughably doesn't know how this kind of interaction is supposed to proceed. But I don't think he will learn any of this unless given a shot at being unblocked. He still may not be able to learn it because, frankly, the weird history of this scenario might have made him too toxically clever to ever be a "normal" editor. But you're right that I see a bit of how I was treated by this website in what's going on here, and so I do think that if I deserve a shot, he might deserve a shot.
Sorry to spew pontification, but hopefully I've understood your point.
jps ( talk) 23:44, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Tryptofish: I too was a bit surprised at your strongly worded response. I think you might be reading a little too much into what Sashi was saying. He has an unorthodox, elliptical style of speaking that can seem off-putting and come across as confrontational when (IMO) it's not intended as such, but I really don't think he means any harm. As for "he thinks I'm wrong and he's right", well, that probably applies to all of us, doesn't it? I hope you will reconsider your position. Sometimes it's hard to try to put yourself in someone else's shoes, but in this case I think it's worth doing. I think we could all use a little more empathy. 28bytes ( talk) 12:54, 1 November 2018 (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. |