News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2022).
|
please explain why taking part in one rare baseball event (grand slam single thing) is undue weight but taking part in another rare baseball event (no-hitter) isn;t? ty and lots of love Interface administrator changes
|
user_global_editcount
is a new variable that can be used in
abuse filters to avoid affecting globally active users. (
T130439)I am a newer editor who is working on his first draft and I think I got everything except for the box score. I have searched everywhere, it has taken days away from me, I am ready to publish it, I just need to find the box score, it has been purgatory for me, I have the article, except for the box score, I am asking for your help to find the box score for the 2022 A7FL Championship game, where the Trenton BIC and the Paterson U played in a BIC victory 32-30. Please, please, please! I will most likely respond in the morning/afternoon, if you find it, great! If not, then if you can, you can at least fix up my draft, anyway you can help will be great for me. Sportsfangnome ( talk) 07:13, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello J. I hope you are well. Thanks for the removal. In an interesting coincidence I read this comic an hour ago :-) Best regards. MarnetteD| Talk 16:13, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2022).
You make a good point at [1]. Gauss appears to have fewer degrees of academic-advisor+family separation from Olivia Newton-John than Euler does. I hereby propose from now on we instead call Gauss "the Greasier of the two famous guys" and Euler "the other guy". DMacks ( talk) 04:44, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Chad Taylor (guitarist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Livewire.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:20, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
I didn't want to call attention to it on the help desk itself, but I found your " tweak" quite funny. ~ ONUnicorn( Talk| Contribs) problem solving 18:46, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi Jayron: I don't find much time to contribute to the RefDesks these days, but I do still check in frequently, and I just wanted to say how much I have noticed and appreciated the tone and value of your your contributions there for a long while now. Your responses are invariably cogent, and as concise as they can be, being short on speculation, but well anchored in the relevant scholarship, and appropriately referenced where needed. You're an able communicator of science in particular and perhaps most importantly, you treat the space respectfully as part and parcel of Wikipedia. I don't mind saying, it's nice to have an admin there regularly these days, and that would be true for any admin, but I think that the fact that it's you helps set the tone there. So, sincerely, thanks for your contributions! SnowRise let's rap 05:13, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
The Reference Desk Barnstar | ||
For consistently high-quality and valuable contributions to the Reference Desks over a considerable duration, please accept this as a mark of appreciation from a fellow member of the RefDesk community. SnowRise let's rap 05:13, 17 August 2022 (UTC) |
Good morning/afternoon. I recently started an ANI thread about an IP who's been engaged in some tendentious editing regarding copyright issues. You commented in that thread, warning the IP about their behavior and asking the IP to confirm that they will make efforts to edit collaboratively.
Well, not only has the IP refused to acknowledge your warning and continued to insist that they're right and everyone else is wrong because they say so, they've gone even further, removing large portions of the article and even going so far as to suggest that us editors should be responsible for changing the sources to match his views. And they've continued to post to the ANI thread, misrepresenting facts to cast aspersions on me.
I feel quite comfortable asserting that the IP is here to right great wrongs, and not to build an encyclopedia. Happy ( Slap me) 14:32, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for your detailed reply to the Blue News RSN discussion, my concerns have been addressed. VickKiang ( talk) 00:29, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Everything I said in the edit was true - all research and backed up by the sources provided. Kellogsricecrispies ( talk) 15:49, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
I understand all this, and I know it’s controversial, I’ve tried to talk to whoever is deleting it on the talk page but no one is replying. Also I’m not getting any feedback from the edit summaries. If a person has not provided a reason for deleting my edit why has it been approved? Kellogsricecrispies ( talk) 16:03, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Also I deleted a section of the entry which I felt was inappropriate considering the deceased’s family, but was told by another moderator that my edit had been rejected because Wikipedia is “free from censorship” yet the user who deleted my edit was allowed to censor the page? It seems a bit one sided you must admit Kellogsricecrispies ( talk) 16:18, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for replying, I will see if I get any replies to my thread. In the mean time can you tell me why my deletion of text from the Taylor Hawkins wiki page was denied and subsequently reinstated? I gave reasons which I think are pertinent. Why is it that my text is deleted and the other text which is disrespectful the the family of the deceased remains active? Kellogsricecrispies ( talk) 17:00, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
So as it stands at the moment my deletion has been refused on the grounds of it “censoring” information, whilst at the same time my edit has been censored. You have to admit it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. Kellogsricecrispies ( talk) 17:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
The other moderator? I’ve asked them and they are not answering. I just want to know how it is possible that my edit is deleted and the deletion I made is reinstated, no questions, just simply reinstated. If I were a cynical person I’d say that some of the wiki editors are working to an agenda of sorts. Kellogsricecrispies ( talk) 17:23, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Narada Michael Walden, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John McLaughlin.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:22, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2022).
Good morning - I just wanted to say how much I appreciated your recent comments on the recent Reference Desk discussion about Portuguese composers. It's always nice to see someone forcefully pointing out that the reason that dead white German males make up a disproportionate fraction of "good" music (I cannot put enough quotes around that) is that dead white German males are ALSO who were writing the definition of "good."
In a specifically Wikipedia context, there's been ongoing back-and-forth on the pages for Philip Ewell, Journal of Schenkerian Studies, and Heinrich Schenker over these issues. If you ever care to add your thoughts to any of those discussions, I'd be interested to hear them. On the other hand, if I were you, I'd probably "nope" right the hell away after reading just a few sentences, definitely including my own failed attempts to remain civil. :)
Cheers! PianoDan ( talk) 17:25, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
I can read your comment starting with So, here's the question in two ways. It can be a steelman of the original poster. Or you could be asking the question yourself for real.
"Here's the question" can equally be interpreted as "here's his question" as well as "here's my question".
After your later comment I'm pretty sure I know which one you meant.
Peace! 85.76.9.156 ( talk) 16:09, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
We're getting various weird stuff emanating from the 166 subnet. Maybe it's time to semi-protect the ref desks for a week or so? ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:15, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Figured I'd ask you this before it slips my mind. What exactly were the false pretenses in my now-archived 9/11 reference desk post? Even the one other person I've asked says he can't detect any false pretenses in my question. Hmm1994 ( talk) 15:03, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Your knowledge level on a variety of subjects seems vast. Have you ever considered trying out for the Jeopardy! TV show? I suspect you would do well. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:41, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi Jayron32, hope you are doing well. I noticed that today you reverted edits by User:Adrivelaja on the article Oprah with Meghan and Harry, as they appeared to unconstructive. Since then, I have been forced to revert his/her edits twice myself as s/he keeps removing sourced content from a page that has been stable for a very long time, not to mention the grammatical errors and half sentences. In short, the page contains sensitive topics and covers info on several living people, so even though it's not a biography it should be treated as WP:BLP. With this in mind, I personally warned him/her on his/her talk page to avoid removing information and edit warring as s/he could end up being blocked. Nevertheless, shouldn't the page have some sort of protection? 'Pending changes' protection, perhaps? I would like to hear your opinion and I'd be glad if you could also keep an eye on this page. Many thanks. Keivan.f Talk 01:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2022).
Thankyou for the notice about the sockpuppet issue. I have done nothing at all with either of these accounts since before this was last openly discussed in September 2021. I did not even know they still existed, because I do not use them at all. The fact that this issue was brought up in the recent AN discussion, and yet is being brought up again after that is closed does not seem right to me. I am trying to avoid drama. I have this fear that commenting at ANI, even with what I said in the opening, is going to be used against me. This whole thing, bringing up an issue from over a year ago, that was addressed over a year ago, and was factored into the discussion of the restrictions I received at that time, just does not seem right. I would close these accounts if I could, but part of me is a little afraid even doing that would be used against me some how. I am not even sure what the passwords are to the accounts, and would have been hard pressed to even remember their names if I had been asked before this came up. If you think it will help you can make a statement on ANI saying that I have indicated I have not used them since the late summer of 2021, before the point at which they were first publicly announced, and have no intention to ever use them, and would like it if someone could close them. You can word why I want someone else to close them as best you see fit. I am not sure how easy it is for others to close accounts, so I have no idea if that is a thing that could be done. If not, then do not bother bringing that up. I thought after the AN discussion closed, things were settled if unless I did something else. It appears some want to rehash things that have already been discussed. Sorry this is so long. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 16:03, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
The second part of your post at ANI seems to have been inserted into the middle of my response. [2] I assume this was unintentional? AndyTheGrump ( talk) 18:01, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi! Could you take a look at this IP's contribution at ANI from earlier today? I have concerns that this was a clear attempt to WP:LOUTSOCK to personally attack an editor. It may have been done either to avoid scrutiny (and consequences), or to circumvent an ANI WP:PBAN, or to try to frame Supporters in a negative light to steer consensus. Regardless, blocks have been handed out in similar cases in the past, and I've laid out policy-based arguments why I think an indef block is warranted here.
Given how obscure ANI would be to anyone not deeply familiar with Wikipedia, I don't see how it could be anything but a sockpoppet. Cheers DFlhb ( talk) 18:36, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
The Admin's Barnstar | ||
For all your hard work. BorgQueen ( talk) 15:46, 24 October 2022 (UTC) |
This user has earned the 100,000 Edits Award. |
~ ToBeFree ( talk) 19:17, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
Just wanted to drop a note and say thanks for some of your edits. For someone who has described himself to the "left of Marx", you sure have done a impressive job adhering to wiki policy and putting your personal views in the backseat. We need more of that here. Rja13ww33 ( talk) 21:41, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Page 53 of Bayeux_Tapestry_tituli contains the statement HIC CECIDERUNT SIMUL ANGLI ET FRANCI IN PR[O]ELIO, which the article translates as "Here English and French fell at the same time in battle." The thing I'm wondering is how they meant "English". Was it just their way of saying "Anglo-Saxons"? ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:28, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. The thread is Toa Nidhiki05. Thank you. –– FormalDude (talk) 13:20, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2022).
{{
rangeblock|create=yes}}
or {{
uw-ublock|contains profanity}}
.The Half Barnstar | |
Just so you know I value your opinion even though we are in disagreement! I appreciate your arguments, as they help give perspective Curbon7 ( talk) 18:58, 3 November 2022 (UTC) |
Hi Jayron! Re your comment here, I have to strongly disagree with you. Yes, we don't have an exact understanding of who our readers are, but we know quite a bit, so we shouldn't throw up our hands and pretend we have no clue. It would also be the epitome of systemic bias to say that we should only ever take our own preferences into account rather than trying to place ourselves in the position of those who we're writing Wikipedia for. WP:READER and related essays like Barkeep49's Elite go into this further. Perhaps it's not useful to talk about this in the abstract, but I just felt compelled to reach out, since I find it dispiriting that we seem unable to agree even on the goal of serving readers, let alone on the specifics of how. Please feel free to let me know if I'm misinterpreting your comment in some way or if you have other thoughts about this; I'm always happy to chat. {{u| Sdkb}} talk 16:29, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello. Please, can you help me with those last questions? Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.207.182.207 ( talk) 14:05, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
With Stephen no longer holding the mop, we are short a very competent and capable admin that we would normally count on to appropriately assess consensus at ITN. I've thought for a long time about trying to pursue adminship in order to assist the ITN process. But I know I am missing a lot of qualities that one would normally associate with adminship - article creation and editing, examples of clear judgment, demonstrating WP:CLUEness... can you think of anything else?
More importantly, do you think this is something I should even bother trying to pursue, or should I continue to stick with my current role with participating at ITN/C without having the tools? 🌈WaltCip-( talk) 18:23, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
Great catch on that article, noticing that the "arrest" story was misrepresented in the text. Joyous! | Talk 23:37, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
...this, [3] if the OP is serious (which is hard to tell), they need to contact their doctor, to at least rule out ovarian cancer and other bad things. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:21, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
That would be User:Joseph A. Spadaro, whose posting style is unmistakable. Thank you, -- Viennese Waltz 13:32, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, but could you please explain why this comment at MPTalk/!voting was deleted? —
An editor seems to be edit-warring against several other editors, on the matter of the reported distance of Alvarez's home run in Game 6. I'd like your opinion on this. Thank you. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:04, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Here's a kitten, as appreciation for your speedy and useful reply on the Reference Desk
סשס
Grimmchild.
He/him, probably 13:54, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
The Socratic Barnstar | ||
Thank you for your nuanced and well-reasoned post at WP:Help Desk about the annual fundraising RFCs and the WMFs approach. I hope you don't mind, but I've swiped it for my userpage :) (with attribution, of course) ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him) Talk to Me! 23:59, 29 November 2022 (UTC) |
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2022).
/64
to the end of an IP in
Special:Contributions to see all of a subnet's edits, and
consider blocking the whole subnet rather than an IP that may change within a minute.Hi, I'm just dropping by for advice regarding the open RS noticeboard discussion regarding The Economist, The Times and The Daily Telegraph and trans issues. I chose you because you were the last admin to close and summarise a discussion on that page.
I feel that the discussion on these 3 publications is concluded now, there has only been one comment on each in the last ten days. Given the significance of the publications concerned, I really think we could do with a formal close for these discussions before they are archived. Would you be willing to do this, or do you know a good candidate to do so?
Boynamedsue ( talk) 07:35, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
I have nominated List of Cleveland Browns first-round draft picks for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm Talk 18:00, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
The Brittney Griner story was my first nomination for ITN, thank you for supporting it! PrecariousWorlds ( talk) 20:08, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
I've reverted your good-faith edit; the data is already in the article (second graf same section). DaydreamBelizer ( talk) 15:52, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
... in fact, now that it's officially nominated, when you have a few minutes to kill would you be so kind as to have a gander at the article to see if anything leaps out? TIA. — DaydreamBelizer ( talk) 16:55, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
In response to the message you sent:
"You're entirely new at Wikipedia, so I'll give you a little bit of a pass, but you should read WP:BLUDGEON. It's fine to start a discussion to seek input. That is a very good practice, and I commend you for doing so. However, once you've made your point, it is vital that you get out of the way and let others comment so we can see where WP:CONSENSUS lies. Repeatedly making the same points over and over, responding to every comment that disagrees with you, and other methods of bludgeoning discussions can be considered disruptive to the smooth running of Wikipedia. You've made your point; I advise you to desist further comments on that discussion and let it play out. --Jayron32 13:53, 9 December 2022 (UTC)"
I find that link to the WP:CONSENSUS page to be helpful, as that page documents an English Wikipedia policy that is worth understanding more as someone new.
I am fine with letting that discussion sit for a while, however many days it takes to see how things play out. I may like to, a while later, discuss one-on-one with you, on this page, both the merits of the scholarship I was trying to discuss, the history of that specific edit or issue on that page that I found, as well as what my experience was like only being engaged on the merits of the scholarship by one user, and another user not engaging with the content of sources or their validity while interrupting threads of discussion in which another user was asking questions and making requests of me related to establishing a better sourced article. SiciliaOliva ( talk) 00:31, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi, Jayron. I just opened an ANI thread you had closed to add a PS (I've indeffed the OP, after reading the thread and their talkpage). I hesitated about the etiquette, but IAR'd it on the principle that my information was helpful. Anyway, I very much hope you're not offended. Bishonen | tålk 09:44, 10 December 2022 (UTC).
I'm curious about your take on this question: we've had WMF trustee elections, who have now hired multiple CEOs after the various big debacles of yesteryear. So why aren't things better now, or, more better? The community elects trustees, who hire the CEO, who is the boss of everyone else, and enough time has now passed that we should have an effective WMF, one that is satisfying the community's needs, but for some reason, this system doesn't seem to be working. What's your take on this, as someone who's watched it unfold over the years? Thx, Levivich ( talk) 19:32, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello. I sometimes check the reference desk for interesting questions and answers, and I’ve been wanting to say for a while now a big thank you for your answers and participation there. Your comments are informative, interesting, helpful, and knowledgeable. I don’t know how you’ve garnered such a breadth of experience to provide such insight, but a heartfelt thank you from my side is the least I can offer. Mr Ernie ( talk) 03:11, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Five years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:20, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
MBlaze Lightning ( talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
MBlaze Lightning ( talk) 09:19, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
Happy Holidays | ||
Hello, I wish you the very best during the holidays. And I hope you have a very happy 2023! Bruxton ( talk) 17:35, 25 December 2022 (UTC) |
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2022).
|
please explain why taking part in one rare baseball event (grand slam single thing) is undue weight but taking part in another rare baseball event (no-hitter) isn;t? ty and lots of love Interface administrator changes
|
user_global_editcount
is a new variable that can be used in
abuse filters to avoid affecting globally active users. (
T130439)I am a newer editor who is working on his first draft and I think I got everything except for the box score. I have searched everywhere, it has taken days away from me, I am ready to publish it, I just need to find the box score, it has been purgatory for me, I have the article, except for the box score, I am asking for your help to find the box score for the 2022 A7FL Championship game, where the Trenton BIC and the Paterson U played in a BIC victory 32-30. Please, please, please! I will most likely respond in the morning/afternoon, if you find it, great! If not, then if you can, you can at least fix up my draft, anyway you can help will be great for me. Sportsfangnome ( talk) 07:13, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello J. I hope you are well. Thanks for the removal. In an interesting coincidence I read this comic an hour ago :-) Best regards. MarnetteD| Talk 16:13, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2022).
You make a good point at [1]. Gauss appears to have fewer degrees of academic-advisor+family separation from Olivia Newton-John than Euler does. I hereby propose from now on we instead call Gauss "the Greasier of the two famous guys" and Euler "the other guy". DMacks ( talk) 04:44, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Chad Taylor (guitarist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Livewire.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:20, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
I didn't want to call attention to it on the help desk itself, but I found your " tweak" quite funny. ~ ONUnicorn( Talk| Contribs) problem solving 18:46, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi Jayron: I don't find much time to contribute to the RefDesks these days, but I do still check in frequently, and I just wanted to say how much I have noticed and appreciated the tone and value of your your contributions there for a long while now. Your responses are invariably cogent, and as concise as they can be, being short on speculation, but well anchored in the relevant scholarship, and appropriately referenced where needed. You're an able communicator of science in particular and perhaps most importantly, you treat the space respectfully as part and parcel of Wikipedia. I don't mind saying, it's nice to have an admin there regularly these days, and that would be true for any admin, but I think that the fact that it's you helps set the tone there. So, sincerely, thanks for your contributions! SnowRise let's rap 05:13, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
The Reference Desk Barnstar | ||
For consistently high-quality and valuable contributions to the Reference Desks over a considerable duration, please accept this as a mark of appreciation from a fellow member of the RefDesk community. SnowRise let's rap 05:13, 17 August 2022 (UTC) |
Good morning/afternoon. I recently started an ANI thread about an IP who's been engaged in some tendentious editing regarding copyright issues. You commented in that thread, warning the IP about their behavior and asking the IP to confirm that they will make efforts to edit collaboratively.
Well, not only has the IP refused to acknowledge your warning and continued to insist that they're right and everyone else is wrong because they say so, they've gone even further, removing large portions of the article and even going so far as to suggest that us editors should be responsible for changing the sources to match his views. And they've continued to post to the ANI thread, misrepresenting facts to cast aspersions on me.
I feel quite comfortable asserting that the IP is here to right great wrongs, and not to build an encyclopedia. Happy ( Slap me) 14:32, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for your detailed reply to the Blue News RSN discussion, my concerns have been addressed. VickKiang ( talk) 00:29, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Everything I said in the edit was true - all research and backed up by the sources provided. Kellogsricecrispies ( talk) 15:49, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
I understand all this, and I know it’s controversial, I’ve tried to talk to whoever is deleting it on the talk page but no one is replying. Also I’m not getting any feedback from the edit summaries. If a person has not provided a reason for deleting my edit why has it been approved? Kellogsricecrispies ( talk) 16:03, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Also I deleted a section of the entry which I felt was inappropriate considering the deceased’s family, but was told by another moderator that my edit had been rejected because Wikipedia is “free from censorship” yet the user who deleted my edit was allowed to censor the page? It seems a bit one sided you must admit Kellogsricecrispies ( talk) 16:18, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for replying, I will see if I get any replies to my thread. In the mean time can you tell me why my deletion of text from the Taylor Hawkins wiki page was denied and subsequently reinstated? I gave reasons which I think are pertinent. Why is it that my text is deleted and the other text which is disrespectful the the family of the deceased remains active? Kellogsricecrispies ( talk) 17:00, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
So as it stands at the moment my deletion has been refused on the grounds of it “censoring” information, whilst at the same time my edit has been censored. You have to admit it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. Kellogsricecrispies ( talk) 17:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
The other moderator? I’ve asked them and they are not answering. I just want to know how it is possible that my edit is deleted and the deletion I made is reinstated, no questions, just simply reinstated. If I were a cynical person I’d say that some of the wiki editors are working to an agenda of sorts. Kellogsricecrispies ( talk) 17:23, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Narada Michael Walden, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John McLaughlin.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:22, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2022).
Good morning - I just wanted to say how much I appreciated your recent comments on the recent Reference Desk discussion about Portuguese composers. It's always nice to see someone forcefully pointing out that the reason that dead white German males make up a disproportionate fraction of "good" music (I cannot put enough quotes around that) is that dead white German males are ALSO who were writing the definition of "good."
In a specifically Wikipedia context, there's been ongoing back-and-forth on the pages for Philip Ewell, Journal of Schenkerian Studies, and Heinrich Schenker over these issues. If you ever care to add your thoughts to any of those discussions, I'd be interested to hear them. On the other hand, if I were you, I'd probably "nope" right the hell away after reading just a few sentences, definitely including my own failed attempts to remain civil. :)
Cheers! PianoDan ( talk) 17:25, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
I can read your comment starting with So, here's the question in two ways. It can be a steelman of the original poster. Or you could be asking the question yourself for real.
"Here's the question" can equally be interpreted as "here's his question" as well as "here's my question".
After your later comment I'm pretty sure I know which one you meant.
Peace! 85.76.9.156 ( talk) 16:09, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
We're getting various weird stuff emanating from the 166 subnet. Maybe it's time to semi-protect the ref desks for a week or so? ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:15, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Figured I'd ask you this before it slips my mind. What exactly were the false pretenses in my now-archived 9/11 reference desk post? Even the one other person I've asked says he can't detect any false pretenses in my question. Hmm1994 ( talk) 15:03, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Your knowledge level on a variety of subjects seems vast. Have you ever considered trying out for the Jeopardy! TV show? I suspect you would do well. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:41, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi Jayron32, hope you are doing well. I noticed that today you reverted edits by User:Adrivelaja on the article Oprah with Meghan and Harry, as they appeared to unconstructive. Since then, I have been forced to revert his/her edits twice myself as s/he keeps removing sourced content from a page that has been stable for a very long time, not to mention the grammatical errors and half sentences. In short, the page contains sensitive topics and covers info on several living people, so even though it's not a biography it should be treated as WP:BLP. With this in mind, I personally warned him/her on his/her talk page to avoid removing information and edit warring as s/he could end up being blocked. Nevertheless, shouldn't the page have some sort of protection? 'Pending changes' protection, perhaps? I would like to hear your opinion and I'd be glad if you could also keep an eye on this page. Many thanks. Keivan.f Talk 01:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2022).
Thankyou for the notice about the sockpuppet issue. I have done nothing at all with either of these accounts since before this was last openly discussed in September 2021. I did not even know they still existed, because I do not use them at all. The fact that this issue was brought up in the recent AN discussion, and yet is being brought up again after that is closed does not seem right to me. I am trying to avoid drama. I have this fear that commenting at ANI, even with what I said in the opening, is going to be used against me. This whole thing, bringing up an issue from over a year ago, that was addressed over a year ago, and was factored into the discussion of the restrictions I received at that time, just does not seem right. I would close these accounts if I could, but part of me is a little afraid even doing that would be used against me some how. I am not even sure what the passwords are to the accounts, and would have been hard pressed to even remember their names if I had been asked before this came up. If you think it will help you can make a statement on ANI saying that I have indicated I have not used them since the late summer of 2021, before the point at which they were first publicly announced, and have no intention to ever use them, and would like it if someone could close them. You can word why I want someone else to close them as best you see fit. I am not sure how easy it is for others to close accounts, so I have no idea if that is a thing that could be done. If not, then do not bother bringing that up. I thought after the AN discussion closed, things were settled if unless I did something else. It appears some want to rehash things that have already been discussed. Sorry this is so long. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 16:03, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
The second part of your post at ANI seems to have been inserted into the middle of my response. [2] I assume this was unintentional? AndyTheGrump ( talk) 18:01, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi! Could you take a look at this IP's contribution at ANI from earlier today? I have concerns that this was a clear attempt to WP:LOUTSOCK to personally attack an editor. It may have been done either to avoid scrutiny (and consequences), or to circumvent an ANI WP:PBAN, or to try to frame Supporters in a negative light to steer consensus. Regardless, blocks have been handed out in similar cases in the past, and I've laid out policy-based arguments why I think an indef block is warranted here.
Given how obscure ANI would be to anyone not deeply familiar with Wikipedia, I don't see how it could be anything but a sockpoppet. Cheers DFlhb ( talk) 18:36, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
The Admin's Barnstar | ||
For all your hard work. BorgQueen ( talk) 15:46, 24 October 2022 (UTC) |
This user has earned the 100,000 Edits Award. |
~ ToBeFree ( talk) 19:17, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
Just wanted to drop a note and say thanks for some of your edits. For someone who has described himself to the "left of Marx", you sure have done a impressive job adhering to wiki policy and putting your personal views in the backseat. We need more of that here. Rja13ww33 ( talk) 21:41, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Page 53 of Bayeux_Tapestry_tituli contains the statement HIC CECIDERUNT SIMUL ANGLI ET FRANCI IN PR[O]ELIO, which the article translates as "Here English and French fell at the same time in battle." The thing I'm wondering is how they meant "English". Was it just their way of saying "Anglo-Saxons"? ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:28, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. The thread is Toa Nidhiki05. Thank you. –– FormalDude (talk) 13:20, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2022).
{{
rangeblock|create=yes}}
or {{
uw-ublock|contains profanity}}
.The Half Barnstar | |
Just so you know I value your opinion even though we are in disagreement! I appreciate your arguments, as they help give perspective Curbon7 ( talk) 18:58, 3 November 2022 (UTC) |
Hi Jayron! Re your comment here, I have to strongly disagree with you. Yes, we don't have an exact understanding of who our readers are, but we know quite a bit, so we shouldn't throw up our hands and pretend we have no clue. It would also be the epitome of systemic bias to say that we should only ever take our own preferences into account rather than trying to place ourselves in the position of those who we're writing Wikipedia for. WP:READER and related essays like Barkeep49's Elite go into this further. Perhaps it's not useful to talk about this in the abstract, but I just felt compelled to reach out, since I find it dispiriting that we seem unable to agree even on the goal of serving readers, let alone on the specifics of how. Please feel free to let me know if I'm misinterpreting your comment in some way or if you have other thoughts about this; I'm always happy to chat. {{u| Sdkb}} talk 16:29, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello. Please, can you help me with those last questions? Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.207.182.207 ( talk) 14:05, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
With Stephen no longer holding the mop, we are short a very competent and capable admin that we would normally count on to appropriately assess consensus at ITN. I've thought for a long time about trying to pursue adminship in order to assist the ITN process. But I know I am missing a lot of qualities that one would normally associate with adminship - article creation and editing, examples of clear judgment, demonstrating WP:CLUEness... can you think of anything else?
More importantly, do you think this is something I should even bother trying to pursue, or should I continue to stick with my current role with participating at ITN/C without having the tools? 🌈WaltCip-( talk) 18:23, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
Great catch on that article, noticing that the "arrest" story was misrepresented in the text. Joyous! | Talk 23:37, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
...this, [3] if the OP is serious (which is hard to tell), they need to contact their doctor, to at least rule out ovarian cancer and other bad things. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:21, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
That would be User:Joseph A. Spadaro, whose posting style is unmistakable. Thank you, -- Viennese Waltz 13:32, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, but could you please explain why this comment at MPTalk/!voting was deleted? —
An editor seems to be edit-warring against several other editors, on the matter of the reported distance of Alvarez's home run in Game 6. I'd like your opinion on this. Thank you. ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:04, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Here's a kitten, as appreciation for your speedy and useful reply on the Reference Desk
סשס
Grimmchild.
He/him, probably 13:54, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
The Socratic Barnstar | ||
Thank you for your nuanced and well-reasoned post at WP:Help Desk about the annual fundraising RFCs and the WMFs approach. I hope you don't mind, but I've swiped it for my userpage :) (with attribution, of course) ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him) Talk to Me! 23:59, 29 November 2022 (UTC) |
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2022).
/64
to the end of an IP in
Special:Contributions to see all of a subnet's edits, and
consider blocking the whole subnet rather than an IP that may change within a minute.Hi, I'm just dropping by for advice regarding the open RS noticeboard discussion regarding The Economist, The Times and The Daily Telegraph and trans issues. I chose you because you were the last admin to close and summarise a discussion on that page.
I feel that the discussion on these 3 publications is concluded now, there has only been one comment on each in the last ten days. Given the significance of the publications concerned, I really think we could do with a formal close for these discussions before they are archived. Would you be willing to do this, or do you know a good candidate to do so?
Boynamedsue ( talk) 07:35, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
I have nominated List of Cleveland Browns first-round draft picks for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm Talk 18:00, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
The Brittney Griner story was my first nomination for ITN, thank you for supporting it! PrecariousWorlds ( talk) 20:08, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
I've reverted your good-faith edit; the data is already in the article (second graf same section). DaydreamBelizer ( talk) 15:52, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
... in fact, now that it's officially nominated, when you have a few minutes to kill would you be so kind as to have a gander at the article to see if anything leaps out? TIA. — DaydreamBelizer ( talk) 16:55, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
In response to the message you sent:
"You're entirely new at Wikipedia, so I'll give you a little bit of a pass, but you should read WP:BLUDGEON. It's fine to start a discussion to seek input. That is a very good practice, and I commend you for doing so. However, once you've made your point, it is vital that you get out of the way and let others comment so we can see where WP:CONSENSUS lies. Repeatedly making the same points over and over, responding to every comment that disagrees with you, and other methods of bludgeoning discussions can be considered disruptive to the smooth running of Wikipedia. You've made your point; I advise you to desist further comments on that discussion and let it play out. --Jayron32 13:53, 9 December 2022 (UTC)"
I find that link to the WP:CONSENSUS page to be helpful, as that page documents an English Wikipedia policy that is worth understanding more as someone new.
I am fine with letting that discussion sit for a while, however many days it takes to see how things play out. I may like to, a while later, discuss one-on-one with you, on this page, both the merits of the scholarship I was trying to discuss, the history of that specific edit or issue on that page that I found, as well as what my experience was like only being engaged on the merits of the scholarship by one user, and another user not engaging with the content of sources or their validity while interrupting threads of discussion in which another user was asking questions and making requests of me related to establishing a better sourced article. SiciliaOliva ( talk) 00:31, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi, Jayron. I just opened an ANI thread you had closed to add a PS (I've indeffed the OP, after reading the thread and their talkpage). I hesitated about the etiquette, but IAR'd it on the principle that my information was helpful. Anyway, I very much hope you're not offended. Bishonen | tålk 09:44, 10 December 2022 (UTC).
I'm curious about your take on this question: we've had WMF trustee elections, who have now hired multiple CEOs after the various big debacles of yesteryear. So why aren't things better now, or, more better? The community elects trustees, who hire the CEO, who is the boss of everyone else, and enough time has now passed that we should have an effective WMF, one that is satisfying the community's needs, but for some reason, this system doesn't seem to be working. What's your take on this, as someone who's watched it unfold over the years? Thx, Levivich ( talk) 19:32, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello. I sometimes check the reference desk for interesting questions and answers, and I’ve been wanting to say for a while now a big thank you for your answers and participation there. Your comments are informative, interesting, helpful, and knowledgeable. I don’t know how you’ve garnered such a breadth of experience to provide such insight, but a heartfelt thank you from my side is the least I can offer. Mr Ernie ( talk) 03:11, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Five years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:20, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
MBlaze Lightning ( talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
MBlaze Lightning ( talk) 09:19, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
Happy Holidays | ||
Hello, I wish you the very best during the holidays. And I hope you have a very happy 2023! Bruxton ( talk) 17:35, 25 December 2022 (UTC) |