This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice
Hi JzG, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.
Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.
To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!
Hello, JzG. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— GSS💬 03:51, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Newslinger, several refs had Epoch Times content at that domain. Maybe it has changed hands over time? I will check, thanks. Guy (help!) 15:46, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
Consequence of your empowerment to specific editor
According to the variably reliable comedy quiz show "QI" (for Quite Interesting) there are at least 21 one senses. Including for instance Proprioception. -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. (talk) 12:50, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
Cimon Avaro, plausible. I know some Elves in fact, IRL. Guy (help!) 22:09, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
The Wikimedia Foundation announced that they will develop a universal code of conduct for all WMF projects. There is an open local discussion regarding the same.
Arbitration
A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.
I see your rationale for removing An Online Gotha from Further Reading, but why did you also delete (unannounced and unexplained) Christina Croft's book as well ? If you dislike (as do I) the automatic link to Amazon, that can be replaced with a more-neutral (and perhaps cheaper) link to something like HOTCAT, or a non-Amazon catalogue number like LCC. Unfortunately, I've forgotten the Wiki-methods of doing that. Thanks —— Shakescene (talk) 15:44, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Shakescene, it's published through CreateSpace - self-published, in other words. We would not include it unless there's compelling evidence of its significance. Guy (help!) 15:49, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Please stop
Hi Guy. It's clear you don't like me. I am disappointed about that, but will get over it. However, I have asked you numerous times not to refer to me as a Catholic. Now there's nothing wrong with being a Catholic, it's just that I don't identify as such. I ask that you please place your obvious dislike for me aside and extend to me this basic courtesy. Thank you. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 12:40, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
In the unlikely event that you have come here to have a genuine discussion, I have some advice for you.
My suggestion is that you adopt a voluntary zero revert rule for yourself, and every time you are reverted, seek consensus on Talk, and limit yourself to a MAXIMUM of three replies to any user in any debate.
This will very often result in a version of content that you don't like. Welcome to Wikipedia. Take the articles off your watchlist and move on. It will also go a long way to reducing your reputation as a POV-pusher.
I have high confidence that if you carry on as you are, in the areas where you seem most active, then you will end up either topic-banned or site-banned. The wall-of-text argumentation, refusal to drop the stick, and obsessive focus on "winning" every dispute (and yes, coming here is another data point) mark you out as a warrior on a mission, and Wikipedia is very wary of such people.
Now, I have no doubt that you consider all this a gross misunderstanding of your motives and nature. But consider: it is based on observing how you behave here. I choose not to interact with you because I find your stonewalling and unbending belief in your own ineffable correctness to be irksome. I'm not the only one, hence your topic ban at KofC. Again, you may think this is not who you are, but it is who you appear to be, form the perspective of people looking in from the outside.
Doubtless you won't trust me here, and will dismiss this as me not liking you. You're free to do that. The list of people I dislike is very short, and you definitely did make it, briefly (well done). So feel free to go and talk to some of the other greybeards here. Maybe some of my talk page stalkers. Guy (help!) 13:21, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Mech people and Boro people are same people. Historically, Mech was name given by others to Boro people. If I add this fact then Chaipau forcefully revert my edit. I had also given citation. Today politically there is also Mech-Kachari group. All these facts are intact. But why Chaipau want to erase basic fact that People called Boros Mech ? Infact, Place inhabited by Mech is known as Boroland. It was never a proper designation. For example - Indian use Angrez for British or English people. Most of the edits by Chaipau is against Boro people. Yes, There is also seperate government certificate for Mech. But this don't give any scholarly explanation. Please help 🙏 . 1.38.133.253 (talk) 03:18, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello, JzG. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I gave into Wikipedian monarchists last time through exhaustion but the reality is that Johanna wasn't a Princess and her article should really be at Johanna von Hessen or such. PAustin4thApril1980 (talk) 15:17, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
Christopher Langan
I'm going to start telling everyone I too have a "double-life strategy" of working and exchanging pleasantries during the day, and doing other things at night :)
GorillaWarfare, Langan is a crank. There, I said it. We need to apply the highest standards of sourcing, and avoid credulous interviews and any other references that overstate the legitimacy of his views. Guy (help!) 00:04, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
When this conversation last happened I looked into The Baffler and it seemed to me to be a useable news source. Others seemed to agree, though there were a handful of SPAs involved (as there always are with this topic, it seems) that muddy the conversation a little bit. I wouldn't say that The Baffler article overstates the legitimacy of his views at all, and it is a useful source on the popularity Langan has found among fringe internet groups. I'm not married to the idea that Ward's commentary on the CTMU needs to be included, but is frustrating to repeatedly have this conversation and then see the source unilaterally removed after agreement was reached, and while other conversation on the source is ongoing. GorillaWarfare(talk) 00:13, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
GorillaWarfare, it's all about areas of expertise. A human interest story about a man who is really good at IQ tests is one thing; uncritically promoting the mad shit he says? Quite another. Guy (help!) 00:15, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
How is that uncritical promotion? It seems pretty critical to me. GorillaWarfare(talk) 00:19, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
(Came here from AN/I) I agree with GW that the statements about CTMU in the body of the article aren't promotional or uncritical, but I do wonder if mention of it should be removed from the lead. Lots of people come up with crankish theories about the Meaning of Life and the Theory of Everything and so on (I developed my own when I was 13), and isn't Langan notable not because he came up with one of these, but because he gets high scores on IQ tests? Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:33, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
No objections from me on that one. The sources discuss the CTMU but the reason for the coverage is pretty universally his IQ test performance. GorillaWarfare(talk) 00:35, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Beyond My Ken, I don't know. In the skeptic community, the crank theory is what he's know for, but that may not reflect the whole world. Guy (help!) 07:45, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Back to The Baffler, can we restore that source until the talk page discussion continues? GorillaWarfare(talk) 14:58, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
GorillaWarfare, seems like a crappy source for a BLP to me. Guy (help!) 15:14, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Not sure what you mean by "so add them". I'm waiting for the RfC to play out, and I offered those sources as my reason for including "far left" in the article. If I add the sources and their characterization of Antifa as "far left" before the RfC plays out, that would seem to be edit warring. Have I misunderstood you? Shinealittlelight (talk) 23:07, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
A lot of people have been asking me what it’s like being on the COVID wards in the hospital, so I figured I’d share what a typical day looks like for me:
6am – Wake up. Roll off of my pile of money that Big Pharma gave me. Softly weep as it doesn’t put a dent in my medical school loans
6:30am – Make breakfast, using only foods from the diet that gives me everlasting life by avoiding all fats, sugars, carbs, and proteins. For details buy my book and check out my shop.
7am – Get to work, load up my syringes with coronavirus before rounds.
8am – See my patients for the day. Administer the medications that the government tells me to. Covertly rub essential oils on the ones I want to get better.
9:30am – Call Bill Gates to check how 5G tower construction is going, hoping for more coronavirus soon. He tells me they’re delayed due to repairs on the towers used to spread the Black Plague. Curse the fact that this is the most efficient way to spread infectious diseases.
10am – One patient tells me he knows “the truth” about coronavirus. I give him a Tdap booster. He becomes autistic in front of my eyes. He’ll never conspire against me again.
11am – Tend to the secret hospital garden of St. John’s wort and ginkgo leaves that we save for rich patients and donors.
12:30pm – Pick up my briefcase of money from payroll, my gift from Pfizer for the incomprehensible profits we make off of the free influenza vaccine given every year.
1pm – Conference call with Dr. Fauci and the lab in Wuhan responsible for manufacturing viruses. Tell them my idea about how an apocalypse-style zombie virus would be a cool one to try for the next batch.
2pm – A patient starts asking me about getting rid of toxins. I ask her if she has a liver and kidneys. She tells me she knows “the truth” about Big Anatomy and that the only way to detoxify herself is to eat nothing but lemon wedges and mayonnaise for weeks. I give her a Tdap booster.
2:45pm – Help the FBI, CIA, and CDC silence the masses. Lament the fact that I can only infringe on one or two of their rights. Oh well, there’s always tomorrow.
4pm – One of my rich patients begins to crash. Laugh as I realize I’ve mismatched her spirit animal and zodiac moon sign. I switch out the Purple Amethyst above her bed for a Tiger’s Eye geode. She stabilizes. I throw some ginkgo leaves on her for good measure
6pm – Go onto YouTube and see coronavirus conspiracy videos everywhere. Curse my all powerful government for how inept they are at keeping people from spreading “the truth”
6:10pm – Go onto Amazon and see that a book about “the truth” is the #1 seller this week. Question the power of my all powerful government. Make a reminder to myself to get more Tdap boosters from the Surgeon General next time we talk.
7pm – Time to go home. Before I leave, sacrifice a goat to Dr. Fauci and say three Hippocratic Oaths.
9pm – Take a contented sigh as I snuggle under the covers made of the tinfoil hats of my enemies, realizing that my 4 years of medical school and 3 years of residency training have been put to good use today.
Guy Macon, ha, yes - I think one of my Facebook mates posted this too. Almost too true to be funny! Guy (help!) 20:31, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
My favorite bit: "A patient starts asking me about getting rid of toxins. I ask her if she has a liver and kidneys." Pure comedy gold. --Guy Macon (talk) 00:25, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
Trout
Whack me with one if you think I deserve it. ;-) Dan arndt (talk) 07:23, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
Compliant
You and I are agreeing far to often these days, it must stop.Slatersteven (talk) 10:02, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
This was closed as "keep" but with the closer's note "consensus is that GNG is met, but that it should be renamed." Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sophie, Princess of Prussia So can you move it to her untranslated legal name? I don't really want to get into arguments with those "fake royal" fans again but will support you if needed. Do you think this sets a precedent for renaming other articles on members of deposed German ex-royal families like her husband and many many others that translate their last name to their non-existent "title" and puts a comma after their first name?Smeat75 (talk) 16:24, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
RfC about late termination of pregnancy
There is an RfC [3] concerning a sentence in the lead of the Abortion article. The two issues are: whether late termination of pregnancy should be defined in terms of fetus viability or in terms of gestational age, and whether late term abortion is neutral terminology. NightHeron (talk) 17:09, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
Maybe you can help me here
Obviously, I'm not understanding things correctly. Could you help me to understand?
I thought tht what Headbomb and AMWNP did was to tell the bot to add the new parameter and remove the URL. Now it seems that what folks are saying is that adding the new parameter caused the template to remove the URL automatically, and that re-coding the template and running the bot would prevent that from happeneing in the future, as well as restoring the removed URLs.
Beyond My Ken, I don't think any further bot run is required, only the template change, which will reinstate the URL based on the new parameter. Guy (help!) 10:04, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
Beyond My Ken, I know, amazing, isn't it? And they erected a monument in Tappan, NY. There's an André Hill there I think. Guy (help!) 20:07, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
I grew up in Irvington, New York, a stone's throw from the André Captured monument in Tarrytown, which I know well because it was on the way to the Warner Library there (bigger than my village's library). Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:03, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
Awards guideline?
Hi Guy, are you still interested in the Awards guideline you were working on at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Wikipedia:Awards and accolades? The discussion seems to have stalled but I do think there is value in having more explicit guidelines for awards on the project. Axem Titanium (talk) 07:26, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Axem Titanium, yes I am. Do you have suggestions? Guy (help!) 08:27, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure how to put this into guideline-like language without making it sound like an essay so I'll just say it. There seems to be a tendency among humans (which I assume comprises most Wikipedia editors) to overestimate the prestige and notoriety of anything that has "award" or "medal" in its name. Maybe it's due to some psychological predisposition to shiny things. At any rate, I've noticed that a lot of awards on Wikipedia only have a thin veneer of notability, propped up by press releases and churnalism, with their articles devoted heavily to all the famous and notable honorees but never establishing that the award itself is meaningful in any way (cf. "awards mills", e.g. [5][6]). It's extremely hard for us as editors to get a sense of how much respect a niche award confers within an industry/field, especially from the snippets of boilerplate language in these winner announcement "press releasticles". I guess what I'm trying to say is that the Awards guideline should really be a notability guideline for Awards in order to have teeth. Inclusion criteria in awards lists is important but that should follow logically from notability. But the heart of the notability criteria for awards needs to be reliable, independent, significant coverage about the award itself and its meaning in its industry, not some fluff at the top of a winner list. It should explicitly raise the bar for press coverage to disallow churnalism from sources that are generally agreed to be reliable in other situations. Axem Titanium (talk) 16:34, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Does this person have immunity?
The person who takes sides as she wishes and adds some data she can not prove to the pages.
Violation of the principle of vandalism and impartiality.
Semsûrî , connects with some of the managers in the background. He can't answer the charges. It ensures that the complainant is blocked. Topic is being closed. When I investigated this, I noticed that this happened many times. I only submitted the first and last complaints. Although there are different people, users are blocked because the complaints are the same. Complaints are being ignored. Topic is being closed.
[1][2]188.57.11.86 (talk) 02:19, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Administrator changes
CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth
Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL
CheckUser changes
Guideline and policy news
Arbitration
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -- PhysiqueUL09 (talk) 20:06, 5 June 2020 (UTC)