|
User talk:Danbloch/Archive 1
Hi, ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open! Hello, Danbloch. 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) January 2017
What's the problem? It seems quite clear to me. Please see wp:BRD Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 07:42, 18 January 2017 (UTC) @Jim1138: The paragraph begins, "In considering whether such an event could occur again," but never addresses that question. It then says that research has show relationships between various factors, but not what the relationships are. The final sentence leaves off one of these factors and rephrases the other two, using jargon not understandable without going back to the reference source ("English local authority areas"). When you finally make your way through all this the whole paragraph boils down to "deaths are caused by the pollution", which has already been stated and in no way justifies the effort of reading and rereading the paragraph. Finally, this paragraph doesn't relate to the topic of the section, environmental impact. Do you believe it says something other than that? Dan Bloch (talk) 09:16, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
@Jim1138: Many thanks. Sorry about omitting the description. Dan Bloch (talk) 20:39, 18 January 2017 (UTC) ArbCom 2017 election voter messageHello, Danbloch. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC) Thank you!Thanks so much for updating the Dave Duncan page. Stephani — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.91.173.34 (talk) 09:47, 31 October 2018 (UTC) ArbCom 2018 election voter messageHello, Danbloch. 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) Disambiguation link notification for December 25Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Feast of the Seven Fishes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Smelt (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.) It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 25 December 2018 (UTC) Your edit to Lissajous orbitRegarding your edit to Lissajous orbit, I think Queqiao is a halo orbit not Lissajous orbit as your source's title says.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 21:53, 6 January 2019 (UTC) Thanks. The text of the article says that it started in a halo orbit and then went into a Lissajous orbit, but it's a bit odd. I'll see if I can find a better source. Dan Bloch (talk) 22:18, 6 January 2019 (UTC) Duverger's lawSorry about that. I mistook your summary for having a whiff of "this hurts my brain so must die" but I see now the text has been queried without response on the talk page, the source is opaque, and the contributing user is dormant. And I certainly don't know what it's supposed to mean! Cheers! Captainllama (talk) 23:04, 15 July 2019 (UTC) Hey- I saw you were doing some detail work on LBJ ([1]) and I would like to invite you to take a look at 1948 United States Senate election in Texas. I added it to the category for Election Fraud in the United States (see the talk page there). Please make some edits on that page if interested. I think we should do a day-by-day, step-by-step kind of analysis of this election- from the campaign stops by Stevenson and LBJ to the court proceedings after the runoff. Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:47, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
給您的星章！
Re:wikilink and citation templatesHi! Re: an edit removing wikification of book titles and the publisher I would like to call attention to the following on Template:Cite book:
The documentation does say they can be wikilinked (It specifies certain parameters that should not), and I would strongly prefer that these items are wikilinked here. Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 03:11, 20 August 2019 (UTC) Hi! Those are indeed the guidelines I had in mind. For title, it says, "can be wikilinked to an existing Wikipedia article or url", and a redlink isn't an existing Wikipedia article. The publisher is open to discussion and I wouldn't have changed it if I hadn't been editing anyway, but since the significance would be the same if the publisher were the University of California Press, or Princeton Press, or Houghton Mifflin, I don't think it's relevant. Regards, Dan Bloch (talk) 03:54, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
Disambiguation link notification for November 18Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Doug Fears, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peter Brown (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.) It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:19, 18 November 2019 (UTC) ArbCom 2019 election voter message
The breakage I'm referring to is the reflist. I've corrected this and left the removal of the reading list award, though I'm not aware of any guidelines suggesting that awards need to have their own article in order to be sufficiently notable for mention on a book's page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leftmostcat (talk • contribs) 22:23, 29 January 2020 (UTC) To be fair, the only place I've seen it as an explicit guideline is on the Young adult fiction awards list, but I liked it. In this case, since The Windup Girl had so many significant awards I didn't think this one added anything, especially not in the lead paragraph. Thanks for fixing the reflist. Dan Bloch (talk) 01:44, 30 January 2020 (UTC) comma after e.g.Hi Danbloch, Yesterday I made some minor edits to WP:CITE. In the version prior to my edits, both `e.g.,` (with a comma) and `e.g.` (without) were used (oldid=942393293). Because I like consistency, I decided to settle upon one style (oldid=942917826). Afterwards you inserted commas after all e.g. occurrences (oldid=942897619). May I ask why? As pointed out on List_of_Latin_phrases_(E)#cite_note-26, there is no clear rule for or against the use of commas after e.g. and i.e. Moreover, on WP:MOS, e.g. is used exactly 16 times with a comma and exactly 16 times without. I also looked in the talk pages archives there and noticed the subject was discussed more than once; the consensus is there is no rule for or against. Consistency matters to me, but also clarity: if inserting a comma does not make the phrase easier to pronounce, read, and understand, then omit the comma. The usage of commas is not terribly important and certainly not worth risking an edit war or something. Nonetheless, I'm curious as to why you think it was necessary to insert commas after e.g. Kind regards, Michael! (talk) 12:07, 28 February 2020 (UTC) Hi, Michael!- Thanks for reaching out. In answer to your question, I don't care deeply about commas in general, but I was struck that you chose to remove commas in six locations instead of adding them in two and I decided that "change commas for consistency" was an excuse for "change commas to look the way I like". Possibly I was in a bad mood. Commas after "i.e." and "e.g." are preferred in US English, though it's not a hard rule. See, e.g., https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/ie-versus-eg?page=2, which samples six references. The point of List_of_Latin_phrases_(E)#cite_note-26 isn't clear to me and I don't think it belongs in Wikipedia at all, but in the one paragraph the author spends on US English he mentions only the New York Times and the AP Style Guide, which he says have no preference, and the Chicago Manual of Style, which says that commas are required but which the author tries to imply they're ambiguous about. I'll fix that. Anyway, it's not a big deal. Flip a coin if you want. Regards, Dan Bloch (talk) 22:19, 28 February 2020 (UTC) Podcast Article External LinksHi Danbloch, I hope you are staying safe. I have some questions regarding the Podcast article. Before marking my edits as spam, did you read the article that I had added? I think you need to provide the right reasons before declaring something as spam. I want you to reconsider. Thanks, Ram Thakur — Preceding unsigned comment added by RamThakur001 (talk • contribs) 03:36, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
PuppygateI don't even remember where I got this from, but "Puppygate" ended up on a list of topics I was going to research when I got time. You changed the redirect but there was no clear reason why you chose that target. I have fixed this, I think. Whether I have or not depends on how others feel about what I did, because there is another "Puppygate" which may very well be WP:UNDUE and WP:NOTNEWS, but if anyone wanted to do the research, I feel that it should be there. I can't say there is a clear primary topic, so I changed to disambiguation.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:43, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
OrdinalsHello- Thanks for reverting the addition of ordinals on Silicon Valley and similar. I noticed this on mobile and was going to fix once I got to a computer, but you beat me to it. Anyway, thought I would give some recognition. Cheers! ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia talk 14:01, 29 July 2020 (UTC) Nomination for merging of Template:Not in refs
About all those revertsHi Dan, I noticed that you reverted my addition of links to a ==See also== section. First, it's not WP:Original research. That's because Wikipedia's definition of original is "material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist", and there are sources such as Petruzzelli, Emily (2020-08-06). "Normalization of Deviance in the Time of COVID-19". American Institute of Chemical Engineers. Retrieved 2020-08-21. that very clearly connect the Normalization of deviance to a failure to follow safety procedures to prevent COVID-19. Second, this is the WP:SEEALSO section. The only "claim" being made is that people who are interested in the one article might also be interested in the other. The purpose of a link in the ==See also== section is just "to enable readers to explore tangentially related topics". That's why we don't cite the links there, even though it leads to the risk of editors occasionally thinking that the connection is just being made up on wiki instead of coming straight out of reliable sources. I think you should self-revert. WhatamIdoing (talk) 13:44, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
GDPREnola Holmes "you're mistaken, page does show up"[2] Due to GDPR and geoblocking that website does not show up for anyone that the website thinks is in the UK (or Europe in general). I hate geoblocking and as far as I know Wikipedia doesn't yet say anything about how to use url-access or url-status when dumb websites block people from looking at them. So it is "mostly dead": "451 Unavailable For Legal Reasons". Marking the original as dead means the archive copy will be presented first and all readers get shown the same version. It seemed better than not using the review at all (which is probably what I'll do next time). Maybe there are other good reasons for your change, but I was hoping someone might have something more to say about it than "works for me". -- 109.78.211.204 (talk) 03:35, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
Social distancingDid you actually read the citations before you undid my edit at Social distancing? Of the 8 citations, 5 use metres and 3 use feet (assuming the NY times articles I couldn't read use feet). More important: all sources that are actual scientific articles use metres, the one that use feet are not. To quote WP:MEDPOP, "The popular press is generally not a reliable source for scientific and medical information in articles.". And in any case, since this is not "a non-scientific article with strong ties to the United States or United Kingdom", "the primary units chosen will be SI units, non-SI units officially accepted for use with the SI, or such other units as are conventional in reliable-source discussions of the article topic" (WP:UNITS). 213.66.175.14 (talk) 14:51, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
Disambiguation link notification for December 1An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Influenza pandemic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bird flu. (Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 1 December 2020 (UTC) Short descriptionsCould I ask you about this edit? It's my understanding that short descriptions are not automatically imported from Wikidata so they need to be added into the article manually. If that's a mistake then that would be good for me to know. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 06:15, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
What is your motive?Why are you defending and enabling a multiply-blocked LTA? His edits should be reverted on sight, not reinstated. If you honestly think the changes should be made then do so under your own name, not by using revert/rollback. DuncanHill (talk) 21:39, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
LunarX PricePlease consider: Regards --Edoe (talk) 10:43, 10 February 2021 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for April 11An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pom Poko, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tanuki. (Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:52, 11 April 2021 (UTC) "Mental retardation"As suspected, somebody changed the relevant article. When I checked at the time of adding information about this condition to Generation Z, which was last year, it was not considered 'offensive'. Nerd271 (talk) 19:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC) Occam's razorI noticed you removed the part about explanations reflecting the psyche as much as the intellect. I see how it can be read your way and I think it's fair to remove, so thanks. MarshallKe (talk) 00:49, 12 August 2021 (UTC) Pending changes reviewer granted Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages. Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. See also:
— xaosflux Talk 15:54, 13 August 2021 (UTC) Clears throatHello, I noticed you removed the plot at Riot Baby for paraphrasing, do you mind fixing something else back? The plot section is empty. Reading Beans (talk) 03:59, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Oh! Alright. I’ll wait for someone else to do so then. I think I definitely suck at summarising. Thank you for your kind reply. Reading Beans (talk) 04:06, 17 August 2021 (UTC) Assistance on Disambiguation pageHello sir, I need clarification and assistance on Disambiguation. Please there's disambiguation page of MIM or Mim. The issue is that, there's no lead Topic referring to the Mim. Because of that, when one searches for Mim via Google, it returns no immediate response. My article about Mim is a name of a very important town in Ghana. Because of the Disambiguation, I was forced to add Ghana (Mim, Ghana). Inspite of this, when we do search of Mim, no Wikipedia article or disambiguation page pops up. Other editors too have used MIM as an abreviation. My humble request is if you can move Mim, Ghana to Mim for me. Then after, I can Mim as lead topic to redirect to the disambiguation page. Because what I have realized is that, all the other editors are using Mim as just an abbreviation of their Organization names. Since I am the only editor using Mim as a proper noun to refer to a major town in Ghana, I will be extremely grateful if you can help me use it as the lead Topic. Boadu Emma (talk) 00:23, 23 August 2021 (UTC) Pls the summary is this: The disambiguation page Mim or MIM doesn't respond to Google search. I understand there should be a lead Topic that will refer to the Disambiguation page. So my question is, can you help me by using my Article about Mim as the leading topic? My reasons are: 1. I am using Mim as a name of a mojor town in Ghana. All the rest of articles are using MIM as just an abbreviation. 2. Majority of Ghanaians search for Mim whenever they want to read about my article. Sadly however, when they search for Mim on Google, no Wikipedia article pops up. In fact, they always forget to add the Ghana. So please, assist me on the best way to go. Boadu Emma (talk) 00:39, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for sorting out Status quo anteI didn't understand why a common phrase and an obscure site were sharing a disambiguation page, but now realize that the phrase simply doesn't have its own WP page...I'm not sure why status quo ante bellum rates a page and status quo ante does not, but I'll leave this be. Clean Copytalk 11:42, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Ongoing discussion on Talk:Silicon ValleyHi Danbloch! I am reaching out because I have noticed you have been quite active on discussions concerning the Bay Area before. There is an important ongoing discussion at Talk:Silicon Valley#RfC: Inclusion criteria of Silicon Valley, Santa Clara Valley and Santa Clara County, California concerning whether Silicon Valley is a region or not and whether it should be regarded as such both in its article and in references to it across Wikipedia. I invite you to join the discussion and present your thoughts on the matter, as more opinions are sorely needed to build anytime of understanding or consensus. Best, Cristiano Tomás (talk) 16:33, 11 September 2021 (UTC) ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
Parker--your correction of a "correction"I see you caught and fixed the latest instance of someone "correcting" the planned maximum speed of the Parker Solar Probe, in terms of the speed of light. As always, it was an IP user--so no way to send a message back to straighten him or her out. I've posted comments in a couple of discussions on the talk page about that problem.
Ex abrupto in English (your recent revert)Hi, about your recent revert of my addition of ex abrupto to the list of Latin phrases, I think it's a matter of scope of the article. I added the phrase without much thinking, because it's definitely used (in fact, I was surprised that it was not there). But, after your revert, I tried searching for uses in English and didn't find any. So, is the article supposed to cover Latin phrases that are still in use (in any language) or just Latin phrases that are still used in English? Or maybe Latin phrases that have been used in English at any point in time? Here are some references for Italian usage: And here's one for French: —Gennaro Prota•Talk 22:06, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello! You reverted my small grammatical fix, and I've reinstated it. Please consider that something can be known BY a name, or it can be known AS a thing. For example: my horse is known AS Silver; he is known BY the name Silver. Do you see? Thanks. Equinox ◑ 09:07, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Dallas Legion (ultimate team) logo.png Thanks for uploading File:Dallas Legion (ultimate team) logo.png. 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) 03:32, 6 February 2022 (UTC) Nineteen eighty-four editI corrected a horrendous misspelling change by an IP editor and you reverted the editor's entire edit. As near as I skimmed, the edit was factual and contained references, so what did I miss? Thanks!
Orphaned non-free image File:Dallas Legion (ultimate team) logo.jpgThanks for uploading File:Dallas Legion (ultimate team) 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. --B-bot (talk) 17:09, 21 June 2022 (UTC) Re:Special:Diff/1099078069: I stand corrected. Apologies for the hassle. Primefac (talk) 11:51, 19 July 2022 (UTC) "Currently lives in"Thanks for finding and adding a citation here. But per WP:DATED, please avoid "currently" in such statements, and use something like "as of" instead. We have tons of articles which contain false claims about living people caused by such "currently"s. Regards, HaeB (talk) 22:44, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Danbloch, I've undone your edit on this page from NPP and just wanted to let you know. Only the AV Club is an actual review. Digital Spy is just a beat-by-beat recap, and the other three are blogs (or were at the time). If you want to hunt around for more reviews though, you're welcome of course, but I've turned it back into a redirect for now. Alyo (chat·edits) 18:08, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Board of Trustees electionThank you for supporting the NPP initiative to improve WMF support of the Page Curation tools. Another way you can help is by voting in the Board of Trustees election. The next Board composition might be giving attention to software development. The election closes on 6 September at 23:59 UTC. View candidate statement videos and Vote Here. MB 03:22, 5 September 2022 (UTC) ISFDBRe: this edit. We need to come up with a concise way to indicate that it doesn't include speculative fiction movies, games, and so on. Only books (in any format), magazines, and other "printed" (whether physical, electronic, or audio) material. What do you suggest? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:40, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Generation ZHi, I edited the article which title is indicated in the topic of this discourse. I noticed omission of punctuations, especially the use of (,) in the article. I just observed that my edits were reverted. I could agree with the deletion of full stop in "Gen" after the abbreviation as this might be optional but I cannot understand my the commas after the transitional statements, most of which are prepositional phrases were reverted. I believe that there must be an explanation for reverting the punctuation after the transitional statements. Thank you Margob28 (talk) 18:48, 19 September 2022 (UTC) APPOLOGY Sorry, a closer look at the reverted edits reflects clear justification. I regret acting in haste. Margob28 (talk) 19:02, 19 September 2022 (UTC) Tony MittonHello you've edited Children's lit page before so I wonder if you could comment on a draft that I am still working on while it is being considered https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tony_Mitton many thanks davidz Dz3 (talk) 14:09, 10 October 2022 (UTC)\
Short descriptionWP:SDEXAMPLES includes the line:
YEAR film by director. It is also recommended that short descriptions be short, preferably less than 40 characters so you could probably add "crime film"[3] back in while still keeping it short, if you want. -- 109.76.194.74 (talk) 00:02, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
Need help in the 1997-2012 vs 1995 edit war for the Generation Z article.Currently, there is a massive edit war over on the Generation Z article. Two editors that I suspect to be the same person (Argso and WikiBoo2) have the habit of putting outdated citations (and from sources that shouldn't even be allowed on the article in the first place) and have a monopoly over the article. Citations include a CBS article from 2015 or Pricewaterhousecoopers and Deloitte that are outdated and are financial institutions (which is not allowed as a source for determining an age range). They are very biased. I was reading through the Millennials section and I saw you verifying the 1981-1996 date range for Millennials. I wrote a talks page over on the Generation Z discussing this. I wanted to ask if you could check the article yourself and see if you can help. WaterIguana (talk) 17:31, 28 November 2022 (UTC) ArbCom 2022 Elections voter messageHello! 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 Requesting help to verify the credibility of citations and sources in the Generation Z date range sectionHello! I have created a talks page for the Generation Z article in the removal of outdated and uncredible citations for the date ranges, but people seemed to have ignored it. I have also contacted Wiki editor Some1 about this, but they haven't responded. Citations that need to be removed include the CBS News article that dates from 2015. I don't think that Bloomberg Law, United Press International, or PricewatwaterhouseCoopers are credible sources in the first place, and all of them have updated 2022 date ranges anyways that contradicts on what is posted on the Wiki page. The only three that appear to be credible for the 1995 section include the Jean Twenge, McCrindle, and Center for Generational Kinetics citations. All the other ones appear to violate the date range posting guidelines. Wiki editor GhostlyOperative had tried to fix this, but others have removed their edits despite them not reaching a consensus. It appears that they are stalling. I wanted to ask for your help in looking at the credibility of the citations since I know that you are a credible Wiki editor. I would be grateful for your help. Thank you WaterIguana (talk) 09:00, 8 December 2022 (UTC) There needs to be something done about editors editing without discussing it in the talks page.WikiBoo2 is continuing to vandalize the Generation Z article by attempting to move the 1996-2015 Center for Generational Kinetics citation to the 1997 section. There has not been any consensus to do this. I am very certain that they have created multiple accounts and are the reason why there are so many outdated citations. I am inclined to have them reported. I have also notified Some1 about this situation. This is why there is an edit war. WaterIguana (talk) 14:55, 8 December 2022 (UTC) Just a heads upHi there Dan Bloch, I would like to warn you about a new user WaterIguana. They appeared after a dispute on the Generation Z page and is using the same techniques of GhostlyOperative by giving excessive warnings, having the same strong opinions about outdated sources, misleading accusations by deliberately misinterpreting and putting together a strawman such as here on your talk page he's accusing me of something that was done by AusLondonder [4]. On top of that he's editing the page without consensus yet here he's accusing me of doing that but the only change I ever did after the status quo was to revert his edit. Wikiboo02 (talk) 15:04, 8 December 2022 (UTC) WikiBoo2 has attempted to move the 1996-2015 citation into the 1997-2012 section without making a consensus. They are lying, as I have said they have been making multiple accounts. This can bee seen in the edits history. I have reported this to Some1 as well. WaterIguana (talk) 15:19, 8 December 2022 (UTC) I have created a talks page about the situation over on the Generation Z section. WaterIguana (talk) 15:54, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Pern storiesRegarding the above and your reversion, note the template is titled 'Pern stories', not 'Pern books'. It is entirely appropriate to list books that contain Pern stories. And of course the whole point of a template is to allow readers to find related subjects without trawling through multiple articles. Unless you have a better rationale , I will re-add again. The Yeti (talk) 14:34, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
ISFDBTeensy bit confused why blogs like Boing Boing and File 770 are considered reliable, but the Genre Grapevine newsletter by a former journalist and Wikipedia-notable SFF author is not. AdainPH (talk) 17:50, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Hackers reversionJust curious why this edit was reverted: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hackers_(film)&oldid=prev&diff=1110672848 The article content does not indicate the important details from the citation that the surround/stereo mix is controversial. If you think the citation was misrepresented, might I suggest clearing up the wording instead of reverting it altogether? Idontusenumbers (talk) 20:03, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Hugo AwardsWhy are you removing valid third-party references for the awards and leaving the sole-sourced refs? Generally, we prefer to have independent sources on Wikipedia, not sources that develop or market the product or concept. It seems contrary to our sourcing requirements. Mindmatrix 21:00, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 6 November 2024
NoteI realized the conversation was in the wrong place so i pasted it to Teahouse,and removed it from Archiving a talk page UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 19:12, 10 November 2024 (UTC) The Signpost: 18 November 2024ArbCom 2024 Elections voter messageHello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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 The Signpost: 12 December 2024
The Signpost: 24 December 2024
|
Portal di Ensiklopedia Dunia
_logo.png){kind=link}
_logo.png){kind=link}
_logo.jpg){kind=link}
_logo.jpg){kind=link}