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.
Welcome back :) GoodDay ( talk) 00:12, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
If you repost your personal attack, I will block your account. Tide rolls 14:13, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi Lightburst, I'm here in my capacity as a functionary. The CheckUser queue (and ArbCom) received off-wiki evidence regarding whether or not you are making conflict-of-interest edits, and what was presented pretty clearly established that you are on good personal terms with the folks in Koch Marshall Trio (enough so to raise concerns about neutrality) and also have a COI regarding Bengal cats. I can't force you to do anything, but it might be best if you just followed COI best practices in those areas - discuss changes if challenged rather than reverting, make edit requests, that sort of thing. This really is just a suggestion - take it or leave it as you see fit. (and sorry about posting this to your userpage by accident earlier...not sure how I screwed that up. Need more coffee, I guess.) GeneralNotability ( talk) 21:56, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi Lightburst. This is a follow-up to what I posted yesterday. Following our conversation over email, it looks like I was too hasty in accusing you of conflict-of-interest editing, and I'm sorry that I left that mark on your record. I get things wrong sometimes, and this was one of them. GeneralNotability ( talk) 14:08, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi Lightburst, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled user right to your account. This means that pages you create will automatically be marked as 'reviewed' and no longer appear in the new pages feed. Autopatrolled is assigned prolific creators of articles where those articles do not require further review, and may have been requested on your behalf by someone else. It doesn't affect how you edit; it is used only to manage the workload of new page patrollers.
Since the articles you create will no longer be systematically reviewed by other editors, it is important that you maintain the high standard you have achieved so far in all your future creations. Please also try to remember to add relevant WikiProject templates, stub tags, categories, and incoming links to them, if you aren't already in the habit; user scripts such as Rater and StubSorter can help with this. As you have already shown that you have a strong grasp of Wikipedia's core content policies, you might also consider volunteering to become a new page patroller yourself, helping to uphold the project's standards and encourage other good faith article writers.
Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Cabayi ( talk) 14:49, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
Thank you. Your efforts are most appreciated. MONGO ( talk) 17:44, 25 August 2022 (UTC) |
Hi there, you pinged me in with this: [1] but I won't reply in the deletion thread as it is meta discussion and not relevant to whether the article should be kept. However, I would turn the question around on yourself. Are you misunderstanding the GEO guideline, because a lot of the arguments on these seem to be "it is in a national park so it is notable". That is not the guideline, nor its intent. The whole purpose of any of the guidelines is to establish whether something is sufficiently notable to write an encyclopaedia article. Now some lakes ARE notable. Some of most obvious, of course, being Oregon's Crater Lake, or Loch Ness. But less well known, but still significant would be lakes like Bala Lake, where there is significant coverage of the lake from various sources (history, settings in books, the site of famous events etc.) for an article. Yet another mountain lake, Llyn Barfog, rightly only gets a passing mention in the article on Afanc despite being in a Welsh national park, because other than the Afanc legend, it lacks any notability. It is not completely unnotable. It gets mention in Susan Cooper's "Dark is Rising" sequence, but the point - and the reason why no one should make an article of such a lake - is that there is just not enough to say about it to be an encyclopaedic article. And that is a lake that actually gets mention in books other than guide books.
AfD is an exhausting exercise. People can create 30 stubs in a day. Some people create thousands and thousands of stubs. Deleting one of them requires hours of editor time in AfD. Most of them will never be touched because it is just too much effort, but that does not mean it is okay to have stubs that cannot be expanded. Most wikipedia pages are stubs. Most pages provide no good information to anyone, and will never grow beyond that. This is not the intention of those who want to build an encylopaedia.
I didn't nominate these pages, and I wouldn't have because AfD is broken. It needs deletion at scale and I look forward to the RfC on that. Nevertheless, having seen these I can say with certainty - having done the due diligence of researching them - that these pages are about subjects that are not notable in their own right. They are best placed into some collection style page that could then present interesting and useful content to the reader. I have made that point, and tbh I made it not so much in the hope that these ones get deleted, as in the hope that the creator of these would see that and realise that yes, that is a better idea. We are here to build an encylopaedia for the purpose of making good and curated content available to everyone for free. There is a better way to do it than this. There really is!
Those are my thoughts. You don't need to reply, or take them on board. I would hope that you would consider them at least.
Pob bendith. Have a good day. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 11:53, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for the Danclas, - very constructive reviewing! Today's recommended reading: Opera in Ukraine! - 1 September: I remembered the Vespro della Beata Vergine, 2 September: the last of the Rheingau Musik Festival concerts, and yesterday we read The Story of Mr Sommer, and followed Ruth Lapide. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:22, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
On 11 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Any port in a storm, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the first known publication of the phrase " any port in a storm" was in a 1749 erotic novel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Any port in a storm. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Any port in a storm), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
On 24 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bass Lake (Watauga County, North Carolina), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the slopes near Bass Lake at Flat Top Manor in North Carolina were covered with hundreds of apple trees? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bass Lake (Watauga County, North Carolina). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Bass Lake (Watauga County, North Carolina)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
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. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:07, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Jennifer Mee Mug Shot 2010.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. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:18, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
For your kind, reasonable words. Buffs ( talk) 19:08, 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) 01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Given that ComplexRational has noted they do not wish to disclose their prior account for privacy concerns, asking exactly when they began editing on that prior account should not be a question the candidate should answer. Doing so would erode their privacy. They have acknowledged the prior account, and ArbCom would have intervened had the prior account been under a cloud of some kind. That is sufficient to explain their prior experience and thus abilities with their current account. I respectfully request you remove the question. @ ComplexRational: given your legitimate privacy concerns, I would not answer this question. If you feel compelled to answer, I would not note when you began editing except in the most general of terms. -- Hammersoft ( talk) 18:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
I'll just respond here, so as not to belabor that thread. You can move it if you wish. Opinions on What's Wrong With RfA are a dime-a-dozen, but I'm of two minds when it comes to responses to opposition at RfA. In some cases, it seems like doing so just adds heat and doesn't lead anywhere productive. But I also think it's sensible for anyone who thinks our declining admin corps is a major cause for concern to speak up when they don't agree. I this case, I think it's really more about a concern for someone's privacy than support/opposition at RfA, though. I do think it's reasonable to wonder about a candidate's past accounts, to be clear, but it seems like that's satisfied by disclosing to arbcom (or at least that's sufficient for me, since they'll be able to actually check the old account rather than infer about the account from vague answers about start dates and experience). I see no problem with asking the question; I just don't know what sort of answer would actually be useful and would likewise hope he doesn't answer if he feels it would be a privacy problem. That's all. YMMV. Feel free to remove this if you've had enough of this business. :)
BTW I didn't realize until just recently that squelch is a term that comes from telecommunications/radios. It's interesting that its use doesn't seem to carry the connotations of the term, regarding the "signal" squelched as "noise". — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:19, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Your text
BTW I didn't realize until just recently that squelch is a term that comes from telecommunications/radios. It's interesting that its use doesn't seem to carry the connotations of the term, regarding the "signal" squelched as "noise". — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:19, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
Thanks for your help on Stewart Donaldson. I guess I went too too fast, I'll read this later. Sarrail (talk) 16:11, 15 December 2022 (UTC) |
Article rescue lifejacket of success | |
I hereby award you the (completely made up) Article Rescue Squad lifejacket of success for kick-starting the improvement of so many articles. CT55555( talk) 21:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC) |
Happy Holidays and Happy New Year, Lightburst!
The other day, I was having a conversation with someone about holiday cards and social media. It occurred to me that, in the years since I left Facebook, the site I use most to communicate with people I like isn't actually a social media site at all. If you're receiving this, it's pretty likely I've talked with you more recently than I have my distant relatives and college friends on FB, at very least, and we may have even collaborated on something useful. So here's a holiday "card", Wikipedia friend. :) Hope the next couple weeks bring some fun and/or rest. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:39, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. Feel free to take a "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" if you prefer. :) BOZ ( talk) 23:14, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello Lightburst: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:05, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:05, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
</gallery>
CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:14, 31 December 2022 (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.
Welcome back :) GoodDay ( talk) 00:12, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
If you repost your personal attack, I will block your account. Tide rolls 14:13, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi Lightburst, I'm here in my capacity as a functionary. The CheckUser queue (and ArbCom) received off-wiki evidence regarding whether or not you are making conflict-of-interest edits, and what was presented pretty clearly established that you are on good personal terms with the folks in Koch Marshall Trio (enough so to raise concerns about neutrality) and also have a COI regarding Bengal cats. I can't force you to do anything, but it might be best if you just followed COI best practices in those areas - discuss changes if challenged rather than reverting, make edit requests, that sort of thing. This really is just a suggestion - take it or leave it as you see fit. (and sorry about posting this to your userpage by accident earlier...not sure how I screwed that up. Need more coffee, I guess.) GeneralNotability ( talk) 21:56, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi Lightburst. This is a follow-up to what I posted yesterday. Following our conversation over email, it looks like I was too hasty in accusing you of conflict-of-interest editing, and I'm sorry that I left that mark on your record. I get things wrong sometimes, and this was one of them. GeneralNotability ( talk) 14:08, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi Lightburst, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled user right to your account. This means that pages you create will automatically be marked as 'reviewed' and no longer appear in the new pages feed. Autopatrolled is assigned prolific creators of articles where those articles do not require further review, and may have been requested on your behalf by someone else. It doesn't affect how you edit; it is used only to manage the workload of new page patrollers.
Since the articles you create will no longer be systematically reviewed by other editors, it is important that you maintain the high standard you have achieved so far in all your future creations. Please also try to remember to add relevant WikiProject templates, stub tags, categories, and incoming links to them, if you aren't already in the habit; user scripts such as Rater and StubSorter can help with this. As you have already shown that you have a strong grasp of Wikipedia's core content policies, you might also consider volunteering to become a new page patroller yourself, helping to uphold the project's standards and encourage other good faith article writers.
Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Cabayi ( talk) 14:49, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
Thank you. Your efforts are most appreciated. MONGO ( talk) 17:44, 25 August 2022 (UTC) |
Hi there, you pinged me in with this: [1] but I won't reply in the deletion thread as it is meta discussion and not relevant to whether the article should be kept. However, I would turn the question around on yourself. Are you misunderstanding the GEO guideline, because a lot of the arguments on these seem to be "it is in a national park so it is notable". That is not the guideline, nor its intent. The whole purpose of any of the guidelines is to establish whether something is sufficiently notable to write an encyclopaedia article. Now some lakes ARE notable. Some of most obvious, of course, being Oregon's Crater Lake, or Loch Ness. But less well known, but still significant would be lakes like Bala Lake, where there is significant coverage of the lake from various sources (history, settings in books, the site of famous events etc.) for an article. Yet another mountain lake, Llyn Barfog, rightly only gets a passing mention in the article on Afanc despite being in a Welsh national park, because other than the Afanc legend, it lacks any notability. It is not completely unnotable. It gets mention in Susan Cooper's "Dark is Rising" sequence, but the point - and the reason why no one should make an article of such a lake - is that there is just not enough to say about it to be an encyclopaedic article. And that is a lake that actually gets mention in books other than guide books.
AfD is an exhausting exercise. People can create 30 stubs in a day. Some people create thousands and thousands of stubs. Deleting one of them requires hours of editor time in AfD. Most of them will never be touched because it is just too much effort, but that does not mean it is okay to have stubs that cannot be expanded. Most wikipedia pages are stubs. Most pages provide no good information to anyone, and will never grow beyond that. This is not the intention of those who want to build an encylopaedia.
I didn't nominate these pages, and I wouldn't have because AfD is broken. It needs deletion at scale and I look forward to the RfC on that. Nevertheless, having seen these I can say with certainty - having done the due diligence of researching them - that these pages are about subjects that are not notable in their own right. They are best placed into some collection style page that could then present interesting and useful content to the reader. I have made that point, and tbh I made it not so much in the hope that these ones get deleted, as in the hope that the creator of these would see that and realise that yes, that is a better idea. We are here to build an encylopaedia for the purpose of making good and curated content available to everyone for free. There is a better way to do it than this. There really is!
Those are my thoughts. You don't need to reply, or take them on board. I would hope that you would consider them at least.
Pob bendith. Have a good day. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 11:53, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for the Danclas, - very constructive reviewing! Today's recommended reading: Opera in Ukraine! - 1 September: I remembered the Vespro della Beata Vergine, 2 September: the last of the Rheingau Musik Festival concerts, and yesterday we read The Story of Mr Sommer, and followed Ruth Lapide. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:22, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
On 11 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Any port in a storm, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the first known publication of the phrase " any port in a storm" was in a 1749 erotic novel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Any port in a storm. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Any port in a storm), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
On 24 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bass Lake (Watauga County, North Carolina), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the slopes near Bass Lake at Flat Top Manor in North Carolina were covered with hundreds of apple trees? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bass Lake (Watauga County, North Carolina). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Bass Lake (Watauga County, North Carolina)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
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. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:07, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Jennifer Mee Mug Shot 2010.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. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:18, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
For your kind, reasonable words. Buffs ( talk) 19:08, 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) 01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Given that ComplexRational has noted they do not wish to disclose their prior account for privacy concerns, asking exactly when they began editing on that prior account should not be a question the candidate should answer. Doing so would erode their privacy. They have acknowledged the prior account, and ArbCom would have intervened had the prior account been under a cloud of some kind. That is sufficient to explain their prior experience and thus abilities with their current account. I respectfully request you remove the question. @ ComplexRational: given your legitimate privacy concerns, I would not answer this question. If you feel compelled to answer, I would not note when you began editing except in the most general of terms. -- Hammersoft ( talk) 18:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
I'll just respond here, so as not to belabor that thread. You can move it if you wish. Opinions on What's Wrong With RfA are a dime-a-dozen, but I'm of two minds when it comes to responses to opposition at RfA. In some cases, it seems like doing so just adds heat and doesn't lead anywhere productive. But I also think it's sensible for anyone who thinks our declining admin corps is a major cause for concern to speak up when they don't agree. I this case, I think it's really more about a concern for someone's privacy than support/opposition at RfA, though. I do think it's reasonable to wonder about a candidate's past accounts, to be clear, but it seems like that's satisfied by disclosing to arbcom (or at least that's sufficient for me, since they'll be able to actually check the old account rather than infer about the account from vague answers about start dates and experience). I see no problem with asking the question; I just don't know what sort of answer would actually be useful and would likewise hope he doesn't answer if he feels it would be a privacy problem. That's all. YMMV. Feel free to remove this if you've had enough of this business. :)
BTW I didn't realize until just recently that squelch is a term that comes from telecommunications/radios. It's interesting that its use doesn't seem to carry the connotations of the term, regarding the "signal" squelched as "noise". — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:19, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Your text
BTW I didn't realize until just recently that squelch is a term that comes from telecommunications/radios. It's interesting that its use doesn't seem to carry the connotations of the term, regarding the "signal" squelched as "noise". — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:19, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
Thanks for your help on Stewart Donaldson. I guess I went too too fast, I'll read this later. Sarrail (talk) 16:11, 15 December 2022 (UTC) |
Article rescue lifejacket of success | |
I hereby award you the (completely made up) Article Rescue Squad lifejacket of success for kick-starting the improvement of so many articles. CT55555( talk) 21:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC) |
Happy Holidays and Happy New Year, Lightburst!
The other day, I was having a conversation with someone about holiday cards and social media. It occurred to me that, in the years since I left Facebook, the site I use most to communicate with people I like isn't actually a social media site at all. If you're receiving this, it's pretty likely I've talked with you more recently than I have my distant relatives and college friends on FB, at very least, and we may have even collaborated on something useful. So here's a holiday "card", Wikipedia friend. :) Hope the next couple weeks bring some fun and/or rest. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:39, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. Feel free to take a "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" if you prefer. :) BOZ ( talk) 23:14, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello Lightburst: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:05, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:05, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
</gallery>
CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:14, 31 December 2022 (UTC)