|
Archives
|
I changed it to Kevin Giles as there was no page for that, have you found other ones on here or something? Just thought I ask! Wgolf ( talk) 18:09, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Workflowy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Y Combinator. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:35, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 04:40, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Knobbly. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The file File:Ridley map.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Orphaned map.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion. ~
Rob13
Talk 21:31, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
May 2018 The Shaun King 'See Also' Controversy
Please do not add
defamatory content to Wikipedia, as you did to
Shaun King, especially if it involves
living persons. Thank you.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk) 04:25, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- I don't think it's defamatory to link
Shaun King's article with
Grey Owl,
Jimmie Durham and
Rachel Dolezal, because he like them has been involved in a controversy about his racial identity. For example, this
Snopes article is all about the controversy around Shaun's racial identity and notes in its conclusion:
When Broughton’s August 2015 statement was taken into consideration, the sole remaining evidence of King’s purported fabrication hinged on photographs in which he appeared to possibly be white; however, biracial individuals historically “passed” as one race or another depending on circumstances (or even incidentally). While King appeared to be white in some early photos, he also appeared to be biracial or black in separate photos from his youth shared prior to the controversy.
- I don't think it's defamatory to link
Shaun King's article with
Grey Owl,
Jimmie Durham and
Rachel Dolezal, because he like them has been involved in a controversy about his racial identity. For example, this
Snopes article is all about the controversy around Shaun's racial identity and notes in its conclusion:
~ Knobbly ( talk) 05:08, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- It is entirely defamatory to add "See also" links from King's article to the articles of three people who are generally confirmed to have lied about their racial ancestry, when zero reliable sources can be found today stating that King is anything other than he says he is. (Note: Breitbart is not a reliable source.) It is a blatant attempt at creating
guilt by association and it's simply not going to be acceptable here.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk) 06:06, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- But don't defame
Rachel Dolezal and
Jimmie Durham in your effort to protect
Shaun King's reputation, especially given that they are also
living persons.
Knobbly (
talk) 08:20, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- See, this is precisely your problem - you're conflating things that aren't equivalent. As our article on Dolezal explains, a wide array of reliable sources describe her claims as false, and she has indeed publicly admitted that her claim was false. Neither is true of King; to the contrary, he strenuously, repeatedly and publicly rejected the allegations, and after revealing his out-of-wedlock parentage nearly three years ago, no reliable source has since questioned his ancestry.
One thing is not like the other, and that's why one of these things just doesn't belong.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk) 08:26, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- You have misunderstood the purpose of a 'See also' section. They're not about topics that are identical or as you allege topics that could be "conflated", but simply things that are similar.
Shaun King and
Rachel Dolezal have both been involved in controversies about their racial identity. Interestingly Rachel Dolezal while conceding her biological parents are 'white', continues to identify as 'black'.
Knobbly (
talk) 09:55, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- That is like saying
Osama bin Laden should be a "See also" for
Richard Jewell because they have both been accused of terrorism. The issue should be obvious.Cite error: There are
<ref>tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 13:58, 25 May 2018 (UTC)- But that could be solved, as it is in other articles, with sub-headings under the 'See also' section. Additionally, the topic of terrorism is massive, but the group of people involved in controversies about their racial identity is much smaller, so it's not a good allegory. Knobbly ( talk) 22:45, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- That is like saying
Osama bin Laden should be a "See also" for
Richard Jewell because they have both been accused of terrorism. The issue should be obvious.Cite error: There are
- You have misunderstood the purpose of a 'See also' section. They're not about topics that are identical or as you allege topics that could be "conflated", but simply things that are similar.
Shaun King and
Rachel Dolezal have both been involved in controversies about their racial identity. Interestingly Rachel Dolezal while conceding her biological parents are 'white', continues to identify as 'black'.
Knobbly (
talk) 09:55, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- See, this is precisely your problem - you're conflating things that aren't equivalent. As our article on Dolezal explains, a wide array of reliable sources describe her claims as false, and she has indeed publicly admitted that her claim was false. Neither is true of King; to the contrary, he strenuously, repeatedly and publicly rejected the allegations, and after revealing his out-of-wedlock parentage nearly three years ago, no reliable source has since questioned his ancestry.
One thing is not like the other, and that's why one of these things just doesn't belong.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk) 08:26, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- But don't defame
Rachel Dolezal and
Jimmie Durham in your effort to protect
Shaun King's reputation, especially given that they are also
living persons.
Knobbly (
talk) 08:20, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- It is entirely defamatory to add "See also" links from King's article to the articles of three people who are generally confirmed to have lied about their racial ancestry, when zero reliable sources can be found today stating that King is anything other than he says he is. (Note: Breitbart is not a reliable source.) It is a blatant attempt at creating
guilt by association and it's simply not going to be acceptable here.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk) 06:06, 25 May 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) 20:14, 28 May 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) 17:13, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
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) 17:15, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Lindsay Shepherd for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lindsay Shepherd is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lindsay Shepherd until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jytdog ( talk) 03:16, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
Hey, just a note, someone G11ed one of your articles, Workflowy, without notifying you. If you're interested, Ill email you the content. L293D ( ☎ • ✎) 13:46, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Workflowy Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 ( talk) 16:27, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Workflowy: Nominated for Deletion
I've nominated this for deletion, if you haven't noticed. Jytdog ( talk) 14:53, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi Knobbly, re: this edit, I see "Lindsay Shepherd's channel on". That's why I added YouTube. Is the template displaying something that I can't see? SarahSV (talk) 00:55, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah,
{{YouTube|channel=UCTjxmzChimJa3X_rAgLAnxg}}appears as Lindsay Shepherd's channel on YouTube. Great work improving the overall quality of the article. Also I've been meaning to ask, wouldn't it be better a screenshot of from The Agenda with Steve Paikin rather than a picture of Steve Paikin? (Or would that violate copyright?) Knobbly ( talk) 02:57, 22 June 2018 (UTC)- Do you happen to know what my computer is missing that means I don't see the words "on YouTube"? Re: the screenshot, we would have to claim fair use, whereas the image of Paikin is free.
SarahSV
(talk) 03:21, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- It could be that your browser isn't up to date or you've got some sort third-party app interfering reading the Wiki Markup language. The
Template:YouTube page which controls the code:
{{YouTube|VIDEOID}}wasn't helpful. Re: Paikin, fair enough. Knobbly talk 06:32, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- It could be that your browser isn't up to date or you've got some sort third-party app interfering reading the Wiki Markup language. The
Template:YouTube page which controls the code:
- Do you happen to know what my computer is missing that means I don't see the words "on YouTube"? Re: the screenshot, we would have to claim fair use, whereas the image of Paikin is free.
SarahSV
(talk) 03:21, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah,
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
-
Horsham, Victoria (
check to confirm |
fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Haven, Simon Ramsay, Brim and Josh Morris
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:43, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
We treat fiction and non-fiction differently. For non-fiction we look for what independent sources meeting WP:RS have to say about a book. If there aren't any, then the book is almost certainly not notable or significant enough to write about (which in fact would be true about a work of fiction). Doug Weller talk 12:40, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for getting back to me Doug. So just to be clear you’re saying there is no basis for short summaries of non-fiction in Wikipedia, if there’s no independent source summarising the material? Given the large number of books (both fiction and non-fiction) with plot or content summaries, (and no independent sources) I’d assumed this was allowed! Knobbly talk 11:38, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
Feel free to re-write the article - Gold escorts - it was very nice, small problem is that they have existed all around Australia - and needed to have evidence of this for all around oz - not just sa and vic - absoluteley delightful, sorry to have messed it... JarrahTree 11:05, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
- I live near the old Vic-SA
Gold Escort route, saw a book about it in the local library and assumed it the only one, but then realised later wherever there was gold, there would've been gold escorts. Thanks for adding a lede and a heading.
Knobbly
talk 12:54, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
- When you see those sorts of things - do the articles - that was a missing part of the industry on the Australian project - and important - and your effort was really good - another book at the library and another subject? - more please! JarrahTree 13:55, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Knobbly. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for taking and uploading the picture of the Murra Warra Wind Farm. I had been thinking of contacting the company to ask for some pictures (they have a great Twitter feed). I have used a new gadget called FileExporter (look in your preferences under Beta Features) to move it to Wikimedia Commons since you had released it under a suitable licence. I drove past the wind farm in January, but the day I passed was so smoky we could hardly see the turbines through the smog. Cheers. -- Scott Davis Talk 10:42, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 |
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) 00:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
|
Archives
|
I changed it to Kevin Giles as there was no page for that, have you found other ones on here or something? Just thought I ask! Wgolf ( talk) 18:09, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Workflowy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Y Combinator. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:35, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom ( talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot ( talk) 04:40, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Knobbly. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The file File:Ridley map.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Orphaned map.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion. ~
Rob13
Talk 21:31, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
May 2018 The Shaun King 'See Also' Controversy
Please do not add
defamatory content to Wikipedia, as you did to
Shaun King, especially if it involves
living persons. Thank you.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk) 04:25, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- I don't think it's defamatory to link
Shaun King's article with
Grey Owl,
Jimmie Durham and
Rachel Dolezal, because he like them has been involved in a controversy about his racial identity. For example, this
Snopes article is all about the controversy around Shaun's racial identity and notes in its conclusion:
When Broughton’s August 2015 statement was taken into consideration, the sole remaining evidence of King’s purported fabrication hinged on photographs in which he appeared to possibly be white; however, biracial individuals historically “passed” as one race or another depending on circumstances (or even incidentally). While King appeared to be white in some early photos, he also appeared to be biracial or black in separate photos from his youth shared prior to the controversy.
- I don't think it's defamatory to link
Shaun King's article with
Grey Owl,
Jimmie Durham and
Rachel Dolezal, because he like them has been involved in a controversy about his racial identity. For example, this
Snopes article is all about the controversy around Shaun's racial identity and notes in its conclusion:
~ Knobbly ( talk) 05:08, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- It is entirely defamatory to add "See also" links from King's article to the articles of three people who are generally confirmed to have lied about their racial ancestry, when zero reliable sources can be found today stating that King is anything other than he says he is. (Note: Breitbart is not a reliable source.) It is a blatant attempt at creating
guilt by association and it's simply not going to be acceptable here.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk) 06:06, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- But don't defame
Rachel Dolezal and
Jimmie Durham in your effort to protect
Shaun King's reputation, especially given that they are also
living persons.
Knobbly (
talk) 08:20, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- See, this is precisely your problem - you're conflating things that aren't equivalent. As our article on Dolezal explains, a wide array of reliable sources describe her claims as false, and she has indeed publicly admitted that her claim was false. Neither is true of King; to the contrary, he strenuously, repeatedly and publicly rejected the allegations, and after revealing his out-of-wedlock parentage nearly three years ago, no reliable source has since questioned his ancestry.
One thing is not like the other, and that's why one of these things just doesn't belong.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk) 08:26, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- You have misunderstood the purpose of a 'See also' section. They're not about topics that are identical or as you allege topics that could be "conflated", but simply things that are similar.
Shaun King and
Rachel Dolezal have both been involved in controversies about their racial identity. Interestingly Rachel Dolezal while conceding her biological parents are 'white', continues to identify as 'black'.
Knobbly (
talk) 09:55, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- That is like saying
Osama bin Laden should be a "See also" for
Richard Jewell because they have both been accused of terrorism. The issue should be obvious.Cite error: There are
<ref>tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 13:58, 25 May 2018 (UTC)- But that could be solved, as it is in other articles, with sub-headings under the 'See also' section. Additionally, the topic of terrorism is massive, but the group of people involved in controversies about their racial identity is much smaller, so it's not a good allegory. Knobbly ( talk) 22:45, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- That is like saying
Osama bin Laden should be a "See also" for
Richard Jewell because they have both been accused of terrorism. The issue should be obvious.Cite error: There are
- You have misunderstood the purpose of a 'See also' section. They're not about topics that are identical or as you allege topics that could be "conflated", but simply things that are similar.
Shaun King and
Rachel Dolezal have both been involved in controversies about their racial identity. Interestingly Rachel Dolezal while conceding her biological parents are 'white', continues to identify as 'black'.
Knobbly (
talk) 09:55, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- See, this is precisely your problem - you're conflating things that aren't equivalent. As our article on Dolezal explains, a wide array of reliable sources describe her claims as false, and she has indeed publicly admitted that her claim was false. Neither is true of King; to the contrary, he strenuously, repeatedly and publicly rejected the allegations, and after revealing his out-of-wedlock parentage nearly three years ago, no reliable source has since questioned his ancestry.
One thing is not like the other, and that's why one of these things just doesn't belong.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk) 08:26, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- But don't defame
Rachel Dolezal and
Jimmie Durham in your effort to protect
Shaun King's reputation, especially given that they are also
living persons.
Knobbly (
talk) 08:20, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- It is entirely defamatory to add "See also" links from King's article to the articles of three people who are generally confirmed to have lied about their racial ancestry, when zero reliable sources can be found today stating that King is anything other than he says he is. (Note: Breitbart is not a reliable source.) It is a blatant attempt at creating
guilt by association and it's simply not going to be acceptable here.
NorthBySouthBaranof (
talk) 06:06, 25 May 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) 20:14, 28 May 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) 17:13, 7 June 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) 17:15, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Lindsay Shepherd for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lindsay Shepherd is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lindsay Shepherd until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jytdog ( talk) 03:16, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
Hey, just a note, someone G11ed one of your articles, Workflowy, without notifying you. If you're interested, Ill email you the content. L293D ( ☎ • ✎) 13:46, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Workflowy Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 ( talk) 16:27, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Workflowy: Nominated for Deletion
I've nominated this for deletion, if you haven't noticed. Jytdog ( talk) 14:53, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi Knobbly, re: this edit, I see "Lindsay Shepherd's channel on". That's why I added YouTube. Is the template displaying something that I can't see? SarahSV (talk) 00:55, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah,
{{YouTube|channel=UCTjxmzChimJa3X_rAgLAnxg}}appears as Lindsay Shepherd's channel on YouTube. Great work improving the overall quality of the article. Also I've been meaning to ask, wouldn't it be better a screenshot of from The Agenda with Steve Paikin rather than a picture of Steve Paikin? (Or would that violate copyright?) Knobbly ( talk) 02:57, 22 June 2018 (UTC)- Do you happen to know what my computer is missing that means I don't see the words "on YouTube"? Re: the screenshot, we would have to claim fair use, whereas the image of Paikin is free.
SarahSV
(talk) 03:21, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- It could be that your browser isn't up to date or you've got some sort third-party app interfering reading the Wiki Markup language. The
Template:YouTube page which controls the code:
{{YouTube|VIDEOID}}wasn't helpful. Re: Paikin, fair enough. Knobbly talk 06:32, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- It could be that your browser isn't up to date or you've got some sort third-party app interfering reading the Wiki Markup language. The
Template:YouTube page which controls the code:
- Do you happen to know what my computer is missing that means I don't see the words "on YouTube"? Re: the screenshot, we would have to claim fair use, whereas the image of Paikin is free.
SarahSV
(talk) 03:21, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah,
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
-
Horsham, Victoria (
check to confirm |
fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Haven, Simon Ramsay, Brim and Josh Morris
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:43, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
We treat fiction and non-fiction differently. For non-fiction we look for what independent sources meeting WP:RS have to say about a book. If there aren't any, then the book is almost certainly not notable or significant enough to write about (which in fact would be true about a work of fiction). Doug Weller talk 12:40, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for getting back to me Doug. So just to be clear you’re saying there is no basis for short summaries of non-fiction in Wikipedia, if there’s no independent source summarising the material? Given the large number of books (both fiction and non-fiction) with plot or content summaries, (and no independent sources) I’d assumed this was allowed! Knobbly talk 11:38, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
Feel free to re-write the article - Gold escorts - it was very nice, small problem is that they have existed all around Australia - and needed to have evidence of this for all around oz - not just sa and vic - absoluteley delightful, sorry to have messed it... JarrahTree 11:05, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
- I live near the old Vic-SA
Gold Escort route, saw a book about it in the local library and assumed it the only one, but then realised later wherever there was gold, there would've been gold escorts. Thanks for adding a lede and a heading.
Knobbly
talk 12:54, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
- When you see those sorts of things - do the articles - that was a missing part of the industry on the Australian project - and important - and your effort was really good - another book at the library and another subject? - more please! JarrahTree 13:55, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Knobbly. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for taking and uploading the picture of the Murra Warra Wind Farm. I had been thinking of contacting the company to ask for some pictures (they have a great Twitter feed). I have used a new gadget called FileExporter (look in your preferences under Beta Features) to move it to Wikimedia Commons since you had released it under a suitable licence. I drove past the wind farm in January, but the day I passed was so smoky we could hardly see the turbines through the smog. Cheers. -- Scott Davis Talk 10:42, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
|
| Hello! Voting in the
2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 |
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) 00:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)