User talk:NewsAndEventsGuy/Archive 5

Wikipedia Books

Since you participated in the discussion on Wikipedia Books I herewith inform you that a decision has been taken.

See Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)/Archive_176#Suppress_rendering_of_Template:Wikipedia_books Dirk Hünniger (talk) 20:27, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — MarkH₂₁^talk 04:37, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FYI I am on long wikibreak and did not see this until after the ANI was closed. I had prior unrelated dealings with one of the eds but was not involved in matters that led to the filing itself NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:05, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commments on standardizing captilization viz a viz "Climate change" vs "Climate Change"

Housekeeping note: This was in response to my edit here Special:Diff/951019125NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 02:31, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is advise not to edit others' comments per TPO. Remember that editing a comment from 2005 isn't helpful for anyone; no on reads RefDesk archives anyway. — J947 ^[cont] 02:17, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

First, lest you complain I changed the section heading, see TPG. No one owns edit headings. Also MOS. Don't link in section headings. At least that used to be the standard here unless it changed when I wasn't looking. And finally this is my talk page so see WP:OWNTALK

Second, on the substance...J, I get it. I also get WP:IAR. Let's review. If our rules make stupid shit happen, then we are supposed to work together to set rules aside to make smart shit happen. Now let us see... There are 300 some links to Climate Change using initial caps, compared to 5000+ links to Climate change using sentence case. There is a massive debate presently hibernating about changing the article scope of global warming / climate change articles/redirects. These 300 links to Climate Change (initial caps) is legacy litter that must be dealth with whatever happens. The BEST way to deal with them is to audit those links, per the WikiProject agreement to try to standardize them. That's a mountain of wikignome work. Good faith editors who don't understand the backstory can easily make life hard on the rest of us. So at the moment, I'm AGF that you mean well. But forget the rules and ask "What is best for the longterm project?" If you will entertain this with an open mind then the question is

Is there any rule, anywhere that says THOU SHALT NOT change someone else's comment for any reason?

And the answer is close but not quite. It can be found as you say in the WP:TPG, however it isn't a death penalty violation. The first issue is whether you changed the meaning? I challenge you to show that I altered the meaning. Next, did you leave an explanatory note? Yes, yes I did. Third is there a reasonable reason (even if it is not valued by someone)? Yes, yes there is. You're putting FORM over SUBSTANCE. See WP:Wikilawyering. If there is a substantive problem beyond WP:DONTLIKE by all means let me know. I hate screwing up. But I also hate busy work. Fixing formatting left over form 2005 so we have less maintenence work in the future IMPROVES the project and avoids future busy work if/when article restructuring debate resumes. In my view, you might mean well, but you are interfering with good faith wikignome activities that are making things better and your insistence on status quo chaos is making them worse.... with no reason other than citing rules.NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 02:31, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm pretty sure that the MoS only applies to articles (apart from the accessibility bits): [The MoS] is the style manual for all English Wikipedia articles. I'm not willing to argue much over this but reconsider: changing a 2005 comment is useless. It is practically useless to go around archives imposing random comments about random once-off links that do not matter one tiny bit now. Replying to so we have less maintenence work in the future: what maintanence work? Changing random 2005 comments to implement precedent established 15+ years later? Re: These 300 links to Climate Change (initial caps) is legacy litter that must be dealth with whatever happens – why? — J947 ^[cont] 02:51, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Then we agree... you DONTLIKE this bit of Wikignome housekeeping (i.e., "useless"). Great, I'm not asking you take any more of your time worrying about something you say doesn't matter. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:52, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nikolaneberemed

I agree. And given [1] I've gone ahead and given them an indefinite block. Doug Weller talk 14:33, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Doug NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:19, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Self-Acknowledging DS for racism

I'm not bothering to give myself the alert template, but anyone may point to this comment as evidence that I am "Aware" that DS applies to the topic of racism. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 21:32, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Self alert climate change

I seem to have archived my older self-alerts re DS for climate change, so here is a new one NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 22:43, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in climate change. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 22:43, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Give myself the DS Alert for the MOS

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:43, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ds awareness

Alternatively, you can use Template:Ds/aware. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 03:08, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I already did... see the top... which is good for documenting, but does not accomplish the purpose for which I self issue, which is to show other eds (taken aback when that template appears on their page) that its no big deal because I put the identical scary looking thing on my own. The whole purpose of the alert revamp i 2013 was to destigmatize by converting from "warning" to "no/fault FYI". DS/aware is fine for clerk type purposes but does nothing for helping smooth feeltings. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 10:06, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

Precious

Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:30, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Belated thanks! Though I think your calendar may be malfunctioning. I just past 10.... NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:27, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help on Wikiproject Climate change project

Hi,

any chance you want to help out on increasing coverage and info on this ? Carbon sink upscaling additional info on carbon sink upscaling (missing info) --Genetics4good (talk) 16:36, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I haven't been around for a long time but wanted to acknowledge you ask and thank you for trying to recruit help. Sounds like a worthy thing to do, but if I dedicate time to studying sources enough to focus on an article I have a different sub topic in mind. Time will tell if life arranges itself and I focus on that... or not. Keep up the good work NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:25, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UCoC Phase 2

Phase 2 is all about coming up with a mechanism for enforcing the UCoC. I know this because I'm on the committee doing the drafting work. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:23, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, extra points for both clarity and being succinct! This knowledge reinforces my belief that huge discussions about our site specific duplicative effort is rather premature and approaching pointlessness. Thanks so much for your work on that most worthy of efforts! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 11:33, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Love your talk page disclaimer, so much so that I'm borrowing it for my own talk page notice. Thanks!

––FORMALDUDE^(talk) 04:05, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, hope it works for you. You have reminded me, however, of a favorite saying, which I am addressing to myself here..... we all teach best what we most need to learn NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 09:57, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's from Richard Bach right? I'm definitely stealing that from you as well for one of my daily quotes! A great saying and certainly applicable to me too. I mean, I obviously found it so useful that I wanted even more people to benefit from it XD. Cheers ––FORMALDUDE^(talk) 14:53, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, I guess it is. But in my case it was from one my mentors in an internship a long long time ago. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 23:13, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Solar power reassessment

Solar power has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:20, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your reference to "that part of WP:DISRUPT which says "A disruptive editor is an editor who.... Does not engage in consensus building ..."

I note that at Talk:Global warming controversy/Archive 11 you mention the "A disruptive editor is an editor who.... Does not engage in consensus building (and) repeatedly disregards other editors' questions or requests for explanations concerning edits or objections to edits" provision of [WP:DISRUPT].

Have you ever had any luck causing this provision of [WP:DISRUPT] to be enforced? -- Deicas (talk) 23:13, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:28, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary Sanctions for balkans

Yeah I know about DS for the balkans, so you don't need to template me, thanks NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 15:43, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Harassment from now-indeffed user (originally "Vandalism with STALKING")

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Limits to Growth, you may be blocked from editing. As per the talk page, the disappearing of references, then tagging them as citation needed. Boundarylayer (talk) 18:37, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:DISRUPTSIGNS; To repeat from article talk, note that WP:STALKING (aka HOUNDING) requires a showing that there is no purpose other than being an ass.... that the type of articles that attract both of us are broadly interrelated, and my work on your edits is fixing P&G problems. If you disagree, that's fine, but for the second (third?) time today, please make your case at WP:ANI.NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 18:47, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Femke (talk) 19:54, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for heads up. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:01, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The ANI thread mentioned above is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive editing by User:boundarylayer, and resulted in BL receiving an indefinite block, and their UTRS appeal has been closed, per their user talk. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 15:15, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fake information (Treatment of Crimea on maps of Russia etc)

Someone is deliberately putting back maps with Crimea being portrayed as part of Russia. What can be done in order for Wikipedia to stop promoting this?:

Please delete this map as it does not reflect reality: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_Russia_-_Chukotka_Autonomous_Okrug.svg#filehistory

Thanks for head's up... I'm thinking... on the other hand, I don't feel it is an emergency so please be patient. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 01:33, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]