This is an archive of past discussions with User:Tom Morris. 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.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Software changes
There are no technical changes this week.
Feedback about Tech News in 2014
The writers of the technical newsletter are asking for your opinion. Did you get the information you wanted this year? Did we miss important technical news in 2014? What kind of information was too late? Please tell us at m:Talk:Tech/News. You can write in your language. Thank you!
The Wikidata BEACON generator was updated by Magnus. It now uses all properties with “formatter URL”, so always up-to-date with target URLs. It is faster, too.
Happy new year! :) It'll be a great one for Wikidata!
Have you filed bugs in the past? Awesome! It'd be super helpful if you have a look at your old bugs and see if they are still relevant. You can find them at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/maniphest/query/authored/ (make sure you're logged in on Phabricator)
Hello Tom Morris, I'm Sarah Conn, I am new in wikipedia, and I have created a biographical page that you have deleted me. This page is Ric Marin. I have tried to make up a new one, with more relevant information on books and web pages, but it has been already eliminated because it was based on the same page that you, as administrator, deleted. Well, my goal is to write about new classical musicians, on Europe, disciples of important and relevant personalities on music. This disciples are winners of music competitions and make real concerts on life. They are alive, and some of them are young, as this case Ric Marin.
I would ask you, please, how to write properly and correct this pages that I think Wikipedia should have as an inherent and contemporary enciclopedic information. If you could advise me to improve my writing, I would be grateful. Thankyou very much — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarahconn (talk • contribs) 13:46, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sarahconn. The page on Ric Marin was deleted because the subject of the wasn't notable. There is a deletion discussion where a number of experienced Wikipedia editors weighed in and decided that there weren't enough reliable sources to make the subject notable. The point about notability is that Wikipedia articles need to be verifiable—that is, contain material that is backed up by a reliable source.
To avoid articles getting deleted, you can work on them as drafts in "user space", that is on a page that is marked as belonging to you. If you would like a page that you have worked on that has been deleted to be "userfied", feel free to tell me or ask to have a page userfied. You can then work on the page until you think it has enough references and sources to be ready to appear in Wikipedia. If a topic is not notable despite the best efforts to find reliable sources, then it isn't suitable to be in Wikipedia I'm afraid. I hope that helps. —Tom Morris (talk)
Thankyou very much for your usefull explanation Tom Morris. If you could take out from deletion the page Ric Marin I would improve on it in my user's page and put in references and reliable information. Thanyou again, I will edit the page Ric Marin, when it will not be in "deletion pages". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarahconn (talk • contribs) 17:19, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
There is absolutely no need to discuss this matter
Please delete this page, it is kind of racist because interracial relationship is becoming more common nowadays.This page is insignificant and causes offence towards me.Can you please delete the page?Jason foren daniel (talk) 15:08, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Jason foren daniel: That's a case you can make at the deletion discussion. We don't delete articles simply because they cause "offence". There's plenty of things in Wikipedia that offend a lot of people, from frank discussions of sexuality and religion to documentation of cruel and vicious historical events. Present an argument for deletion on the deletion discussion page and if that argument is compelling enough, the page will get deleted. For more information, please see arguments to avoid in deletion discussions and deletion policy. —Tom Morris (talk) 15:11, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
What if nobody is interested this shows insignificance and occupying useful space, I alone cannot discuss with myself about the article causing offence, in Wikipedia nobody (maybe some) would want to discuss the topic because they don't want to cause offence Wikipedia is edited by people all over the world.Jason foren daniel (talk) 15:17, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Does the word "interracial" not sound offensive to you, so instead of calling "interracial" I would prefer "man married to a women"(without mentioning race) people learn and read from Wikipedia, so if they read interracial marriage they will produce it in writing which may reproduce and cause chain reproduction, they would wonder why is it called that, race is created by men and does not differentiate human parts because human beings are same do we need to differentiate people based on the color of their skin, facial features(in asians), etc.Jason foren daniel (talk) 15:40, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Jason foren daniel: Okay, so if the word "interracial" being used in the article on List of interracial romance films is a problem, surely the logical conclusion is we ought to delete the articles on Interracial marriage, Interracial marriage in the United States, Loving v. Virginia, Anti-miscegenation laws, the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act, 1949 and any other article discussing the legal or social history of interracial marriages, the laws against them and the valiant attempts to challenge said laws? Of course not. Wikipedia documents historical and social forces that are pretty abhorrent: someone might read the article on the Holocaust and decide that they really want to go out and finish the job, or they might read the article on homophobia and decide that going around beating up some gays might be a fun evening's entertainment for them. We don't make decisions about Wikipedia articles to protect against the reactions of the stupidest possible reader but to empower the curious and aware to learn more about the world, including the ugly bits. —Tom Morris (talk) 15:48, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
The article is insignificant and it depends on your opinion to delete it (if you're racist) Hollywood is doing it's best by integrating ,Africans,Indians,Asians and even Arabs into their movies in order to squash stereotypes and does a marvelous job in doing that, by increasing the parts played by women in its movies it squashes sexist stereotypes too.Jason foren daniel (talk) 16:01, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Interracial marriage is becoming more common nowadays many movies are played with a mixture of people from various races and you argue like there is something new happening in the world like human beings marry each other on the earth, that's a common occurrence .On the other hand something like September 11 attacks doesn't happen everyday so it requires coverage from the media.Jason foren daniel (talk) 16:13, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Jason foren daniel: Okay, but there is coverage from "the media" (actually, better, from rather more trustworthy academic sources) discussing interracial marriages. Similarly, the same argument could be made about this category listing films that depict same-sex marriage. That something is a common occurrence doesn't mean that Wikipedia shouldn't cover it, if there are multiple independent reliable sources discussing the topic in detail. —Tom Morris (talk) 16:17, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
It's entirely up to you because you're an administrator.So comparing same race marriage and interracial marriage doesn't the latter's title evolve a stereotype to kids not knowing what interracial marriage by pointing out that it is interracial marriage, kids eventually think that they should stick to marrying a person from their own race because there's a difference between the two marriages title WHICH IS "interracial"-Jason foren daniel (talk) 16:30, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Jason foren daniel: Sorry, I just can't buy that argument. Are you honestly saying that people are going to be put off having a relationship with someone of another race/ethnicity because Wikipedia has an article entitled List of interracial romance films and the use of the word "interracial" makes it seem like such relationships are markedly different from non-interracial relationships? I have no source for this except my own experience of love and relationships, but I'm reasonably sure that a person's choice to get into a relationships, even marriages, is dependent on a whole lot more factors the knock-on effects of the title of a Wikipedia list article. Indeed, why not also make the similar case that because of society's historic disapproval of interracial marriage, there are people who are likely to get to this article to see films that depict a positive and loving inter-racial relationship? There's as much evidence for the former media influence theory as there is for the latter. Not that any of that matters because deletion policy makes it pretty clear that we don't delete articles because of considerations like that.
It is also not my responsibility as an administrator to decide in this case. It is now up to another administrator to close the deletion discussion when it has reached a point where there is consensus on what to do about the article. I'm not sure continuing this thread of discussion will a productive use of your time or my time, and it is unlikely to affect the outcome of the deletion discussion. —Tom Morris (talk) 16:41, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Okay this is my last comment Wikipedia is voted in alexa top ten sites accessed, stereotyping begins after mass audiences notice the word interracial and comment on it. Hollywood attracts movie lovers who If they take a liking towards a particular movie, read the movie's article and notices interracial which makes it disgusting because it shows that people have gone towards stereotyping races(even after overcoming slavery and knowing that its bad), when they have to use interracial to differentiate a relationship between human beings.I request you to delete the article Hollywood is trying to eradicate stereotypes, I would expect the world to do so too.It's entirely upto you.Jason foren daniel (talk) 16:51, 4 January 2015 (UTC)—
This week's article for improvement (week 2, 2015)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Frank Atkinson (museum director), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Halifax. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
