User talk:Astrophobe: Difference between revisions
CrafterNova (talk | contribs) →A kitten for you!: new WikiLove message Tag: WikiLove |
CrafterNova (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tag: 2017 wikitext editor |
||
| Line 1,038: | Line 1,038: | ||
[[File:Kitten in a helmet.jpg|left|150px]] |
[[File:Kitten in a helmet.jpg|left|150px]] |
||
You are an amazing Wikipedian, keep up the great work ;) |
You are an amazing Wikipedian, keep up the great work! LGBTQ+ Pride forever ;) |
||
[[User:SassyGamer483|SassyGamer483]] ([[User talk:SassyGamer483|talk]]) 19:05, 11 December 2021 (UTC) |
[[User:SassyGamer483|SassyGamer483]] ([[User talk:SassyGamer483|talk]]) 19:05, 11 December 2021 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 19:23, 11 December 2021
I get demoralized by messy talk pages full of arguments, so I archive discussions fairly quickly. Archives from my Talk Page can be found in the following places:
- Discussions related to Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red are at User talk:Astrophobe/Archive WiR
- Discussions related to math are at User talk:Astrophobe/Archive math
- Discussions related to biographies are at User talk:Astrophobe/Archive bio
- Discussions related to User permissions are at User talk:Astrophobe/Archive permissions
- Discussions related to random wiki bureaucracy is at User talk:Astrophobe/arbcom
- Various kind words are at User talk:Astrophobe/Archive kindness
- Help me fix the red link at User talk:Astrophobe/hatemail!
Dashes
The University of Wisconsin categories for faculty, alumni, etc., have used a certain type of dashes and this has been the case for years. I have the concern about understanding the different types of dashes. I do know other categories used similar dashes: University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign is an example. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 00:40, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- @RFD: interesting, thank you for the response! I'll try to remember then, so as not to create extra work for others. Thanks! - Astrophobe (talk) 05:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- @Astrophobe: Many thanks for your response. RFD (talk) 09:57, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Astrophobe
Thank you for creating Jan Leighley.
User:Samf4u, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Very well written and sourced article! Thanks for all your contributions to WP.
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Samf4u}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Samf4u (talk) 03:08, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
- @Samf4u: thank you so much for taking the time to say so, it means a lot to me! :D - Astrophobe (talk) 03:26, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello! Since you liked my other Inuit artist stubs, I though you might like this one too. It's the artist's co-op where they have been buying, selling and reprinting Inuit works for 60 years. Lots of coverage, but my writing is a bit dry. Feel free to edit if you like.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 07:10, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
- {{yo|ThatMontrealIP]] Oooh, thanks so much for sharing! I missed this message at first (just a busy few days) and I'm about to head to bed now, but I'll Watch the page as a reminder to myself to look through it carefully later. But at first glance it looks like a really great page! - Astrophobe (talk) 04:13, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
- @ThatMontrealIP: Sigh, of course I screwed up the one thing that you can't just edit: a ping. - Astrophobe (talk) 04:13, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi, courtesy notice: the "e" got dropped from the link for some reason. Fixed it for you. Have a nice day! --47.146.63.87 (talk) 00:46, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
Elizabeth Theiss-Morse has been nominated for Did You Know
Hello, Astrophobe. Elizabeth Theiss-Morse, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know
. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. EnterpriseyBot (talk!) 12:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
Advice
please see my note at Talk:Mae_C._King DGG ( talk ) 23:30, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
April 2020 at Women in Red
Online events:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 14:58, 23 March 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
DYK for Elizabeth Theiss-Morse
On 27 March 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Elizabeth Theiss-Morse, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that political scientist Elizabeth Theiss-Morse has written a book on the flexibility of the American national identity? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Elizabeth Theiss-Morse. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Elizabeth Theiss-Morse), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.
--valereee (talk) 00:01, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
Precious
political sciences and Inuit singing
Thank you for quality articles about women such as Kay Lehman Schlozman, Elizabeth Theiss-Morse, Lyn Ragsdale and Aasiva, for translations from French, for service from 2007, for remembering Boris Tsirelson, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
You are recipient no. 2376 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:53, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: Wow, thank you so much, I really appreciate this. That really means a lot to me! - Astrophobe (talk) 15:05, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
DYK for Kristin Goss
On 15 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kristin Goss, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that United States Supreme Court justice John Paul Stevens cited political scientist Kristin Goss in a case related to gun control? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kristin Goss. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Kristin Goss), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.
Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 00:02, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
DYK for Berge equilibrium
On 23 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Berge equilibrium, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in a Berge equilibrium, every player of a strategic game makes sure other players do as well as possible? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Berge equilibrium. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Berge equilibrium), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.
— Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi, please see note on your DYK review. If the hook fact is not cited inline, then there is no call to AGF it. AGF refers to an offline cite, a foreign-language source that you are unable to read, or a Google page that you are unable to view in your country. In this case, the hook fact is not even cited. If you haven't already done so, a quick read through Supplementary Guidelines will familiarize you with more of DYK's many rules. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 19:48, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
- I do know what AGF means, I interpreted "he stayed with Harris for 11 years" as the inline citation supported by "'Young Architect's Triumph: Design for new Manchester Art Gallery selected', Lancashire Daily Post, 11 June 1925, p. 4.". I attempted to access that publication and very quickly hit a paywall in attempting to look at a newspaper archive. But I guess I was too loose in considering that a direct cited statement of the hook. - Astrophobe (talk) 19:59, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
May 2020 at Women in Red
Online events:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 20:58, 29 April 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Mary Wollstonecraft Award
.jpg)
|
Mary Wollstonecraft Award | |
| On behalf of WP:WPWW, thank you for your recent new article on Melissa Schwartzberg, author of Counting the Many, which received the 2016 Spitz Prize. Rosiestep (talk) 17:32, 30 April 2020 (UTC) |
DYK for Neil Malhotra
On 2 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Neil Malhotra, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Neil Malhotra found evidence that voters reward incumbents for disaster-relief spending, but not for disaster-preparedness spending? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Neil Malhotra. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Neil Malhotra), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.
—valereee (talk) 12:03, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Astrophobe
Thank you for creating Lilly Goren.
User:MainlyTwelve, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
nice work ! I left you a reply on my talk page
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|MainlyTwelve}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Mainly 00:56, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Event coordinator granted
After reviewing your request for the "eventcoordinator" permission, I have enabled the flag on your account. Keep in mind these things:
- The event coordinator right removes the limit on the maximum number of new accounts that can be created in a 24-hour period.
- The event coordinator right allows you to temporarily add the "confirmed" permission to newly created accounts. You should not grant this for more than 10 days.
- The event coordinator right is not a status symbol. If it remains unused, it is likely to be removed. Abuse of the event coordinator right will result in its removal by an administrator.
- Please note, if you were previously a member of the "account creator" group, your flag may have been converted to this new group.
If you no longer require the right, let me know, or ask any other administrator. Drop a note on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of the event coordinator right. Happy editing! — xaosflux Talk 18:22, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Autopatrolled granted
Hi Astrophobe, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. However, you should consider adding relevant wikiproject talk-page templates, stub-tags and categories to new articles that you create if you aren't already in the habit of doing so, since your articles will no longer be systematically checked by other editors (User:Evad37/rater and User:SD0001/StubSorter.js are useful scripts which can help). Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 23:45, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
DYK for Julia Azari
On 10 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Julia Azari, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Julia Azari has shown that U.S. presidents increasingly defend their legitimacy by claiming to have a political mandate? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Julia Azari. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Julia Azari), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.
— Maile (talk) 12:02, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
sir, pls approved my account
sir, pls approved my account Pkschhonkar (talk) 18:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- I approve of your account. It's beautiful. - Astrophobe (talk) 18:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Astrophobe
Thank you for creating Nadia E. Brown.
User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Nice work!
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|North8000}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
North8000 (talk) 11:33, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
June 2020 at Women in Red
June 2020, Volume 6, Issue 6, Numbers 150, 151, 167, 168, 169
Online events:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 17:10, 25 May 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
I've nominated Esther Pineda G for DYK
You can view it here: Template:Did you know nominations/Esther Pineda G.
I encourage you to nominate future articles you create, expand 5x in size, or improve to GA, as most of the content in DYK is from North America and Western Europe. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 02:21, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
- @The Squirrel Conspiracy: Hi, thank you very much, I'm really pleased to see that! :D - Astrophobe (talk) 02:49, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
July 2020 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 16:10, 28 June 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
DYK for Esther Pineda G
On 20 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Esther Pineda G, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Venezuelan sociologist Esther Pineda G popularized the term violencia estética ('aesthetic violence') to describe the damaging pressure on women to respond to prevailing ideas of beauty? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Esther Pineda G. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Esther Pineda G), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.
— Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
August 2020 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 18:50, 26 July 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
September Women in Red edithons
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:53, 29 August 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Lovett
How dare you. The nurse said he could call himself 5'7". Guy (help! - typo?) 21:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hahaha, good point JzG, far be it for me to tell a man what height to call himself. Now maybe if he takes up professional basketball it'll merit a mention in his Wikipedia biography ... - Astrophobe (talk) 21:42, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- Astrophobe, Fauci was a college basketball player of some distinction, despite his lack of height. Guy (help! - typo?) 08:57, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
October editathons from Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:09, 21 September 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
WikiProject Spaceflight newsletter notification
|
The Downlink | The WikiProject Spaceflight Newsletter |
|---|---|---|
| WikiProject Notification |
| This is a one-time notification to all active WikiProject Spaceflight members. |
|---|
| The Downlink project page |
| I am notifying you, that thep The Downlink newsletter is starting up again, the first new issue will be published on the 1 November 2020. |
|
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:07, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
November edit-a-thons from Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:52, 28 October 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 |
December with Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:42, 26 November 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
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:
- Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
- Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
- Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
-- Amanda (aka DQ) 02:52, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Editor's Barnstar |
| For all the work you do, especially on biographies! Kj cheetham (talk) 12:59, 28 November 2020 (UTC) |
- Hey, thank you very much, Kj cheetham! I will display it proudly :) - Astrophobe (talk) 05:33, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
Very minor suggestion
Hi there, as a very minor suggestion, don't forget the Biography project when tagging projects for bios. :) -Kj cheetham (talk) 10:14, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- Good reminder, thanks! - Astrophobe (talk) 19:11, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
I know, you don't know me, but I just wanted to say, people like you made my life a lot easier
ArriehM (talk) 00:08, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
- Wow, thank you ArriehM, what a beautiful kitten! I really appreciate that. Can I ask what bit of work prompted this? I'd be interested in knowing what in particular proved to be useful for you. - Astrophobe (talk) 15:06, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Women in Red Barnstar | |
| You have really made a big difference to our coverage of women this year, Astrophobe, with over 260 new biographies of women over the past 12 months, all well presented and informative. We look forward to more along the same lines in 2021. |
--Ipigott (talk) 11:46, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Maybe you would like to add this to your user page:
 | This user has made 264 women blue. |
--Ipigott (talk) 11:46, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- Wow, thank you so much Ipigott! I really appreciate the kind words. I'll be thrilled to display these! By the way, how do you count how many WiR pages a person has written specifically? Is there a tool that counts related categories? - Astrophobe (talk) 17:32, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
| Saw your Women in Red post. Exceptional work this year! Essentially triple the number of articles I've been able to create in seven years. Hope you'll keep up the hard work in the new year. :) — Bilorv (talk) 14:01, 22 December 2020 (UTC) |
- My goodness, thanks so much bilorv! I really appreciate that. :) But don't sell yourself short — next I have to take a page out of your book and try to actually write some Good Articles! - Astrophobe (talk) 17:40, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for your efforts
|
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar |
| Thank you for your continued service adding to Wikipedia throughout 2020. - Cdjp1 (talk) 13:25, 25 December 2020 (UTC) |
- Hey, thank you so much, Cdjp1, I really appreciate this! - Astrophobe (talk) 19:15, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
A New Year With Women in Red!
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 03:01, 29 December 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Disambiguation link notification for January 25
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Political party, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nunatsiaq.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
February 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 14:58, 27 January 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
March 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 18:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Crooked Media Article
You said to create a talk page. Relatively new to this. A11200 (talk) 03:20, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
- Hi A11200, I was referring to a conversation I opened at Talk:Crooked_Media. It's time for us to discuss how to change the page for the better, so that we can build a consensus on what the page should contain and how it should be written. I completely agree with you that there is a lot of purely promotional content on the page that needs to be removed, but the challenge is to decide how to make it as fair as possible. - Astrophobe (talk) 03:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
I believe it’s important to assess the bias of the page just as I would say Fox News is conservative.
Also, loaded and subjective words/phrases need to be removed. It’s important to note that even numbers can act as promotional content since crooked media is trying to appeal to advertisers. That is one of the reasons that I added the source from media bias fact check. A11200 (talk) 03:47, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Just FYI....
You have the best username of all time. That is all. Generalrelative (talk) 23:39, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hah, why thank you Generalrelative! I quite like yours as well. :) - Astrophobe (talk) 00:12, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Sarah Cooper Good Article review
Hi, an editor has reviewed Sarah Cooper against the Good Article criteria, and placed it on hold. I've responded to most of the comments at Talk:Sarah Cooper/GA1, but would you mind addressing the "Birthdate needs a source" comment? I know that you've spent some time looking at sources about her year of birth. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 15:11, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi BennyOnTheLoose, thanks for bringing that to my attention! I expected that would be a sore spot, for one simple reason: a reliable source (the washington post, I think) once got her year of birth wildly wrong, which has caused all sorts of back and forth on the page. But after some discussion we found that on balance her year of birth is crystal clear, and the consensus on the talk page has been stable for a long time, so it shouldn't be a problem for hitting GA. I will take a crack at that in the next few hours. - Astrophobe (talk) 19:53, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- I think only one nominator for a Good Article gets a message from Legobot - so see User_talk:BennyOnTheLoose#Your_GA_nomination_of_Sarah_Cooper_3 ! Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:16, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks so much BennyOnTheLoose, and thanks again for adding me as co-nominator! - Astrophobe (talk) 00:38, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- AllegedlyHuman has made a DYK nomination - see nominations for 20 March. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:23, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks so much BennyOnTheLoose, and thanks again for adding me as co-nominator! - Astrophobe (talk) 00:38, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- I think only one nominator for a Good Article gets a message from Legobot - so see User_talk:BennyOnTheLoose#Your_GA_nomination_of_Sarah_Cooper_3 ! Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:16, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
April editathons from Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:15, 22 March 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Precious anniversary
| |
| One year! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:27, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 18
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Skathi (moon), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Elliptical.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Skathi (moon)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Skathi (moon) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 12:40, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Skathi (moon)
The article Skathi (moon) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold 
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Skathi (moon) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 20:00, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Skathi (moon)
The article Skathi (moon) you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:Skathi (moon) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 08:01, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
May 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 21:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Your GA nomination of Simonie Michael
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Simonie Michael you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Femkemilene -- Femkemilene (talk) 15:21, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Simonie Michael
The article Simonie Michael you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Simonie Michael for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Femkemilene -- Femkemilene (talk) 18:21, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Interesting article, thanks for nominating! I hope you bring it to DYK. I saw you also nominated political party for GA, and thought you might be interested in WP:The Core Contest, which is due to start in 20 days. FemkeMilene (talk) 19:08, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Awesome, thanks so much FemkeMilene! If I have a bit of spare time next month I definitely have a few articles in mind that would be a good fit for that competition. Thanks again for the review! - Astrophobe (talk) 22:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Aha, Femkemilene - Astrophobe (talk) 22:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
DYK for Simonie Michael
On 27 May 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Simonie Michael, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Simonie Michael was the first elected Inuk legislator in Canada? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Simonie Michael. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Simonie Michael), 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.
—valereee (talk) 00:02, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
June 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 18:48, 28 May 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
A barnstar for you!
|
The Writer's Barnstar |
| I'm not the right person to take it for its GA review but I've just seen your work on Political party and it's very much appreciated, excellent stuff: a good read and I hope it'll get GA at some point soon. — Bilorv (talk) 08:09, 13 June 2021 (UTC) |
- Thank you so much for this wonderful barnstar, bilorv! I will display it proudly. I am really glad to hear that you liked the article. I found it quite challenging to overhaul an article on such a fundamental topic, but it was all the more rewarding when it finally felt like Wikipedia had a reasonably thorough page on the topic. - Astrophobe (talk) 01:22, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Rollback granted
Hi Astrophobe. After reviewing your request, I have temporarily enabled rollback on your account until {{{expiry}}}. Keep in mind these things when using rollback:
- Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
- Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
- Rollback should never be used to edit war.
- If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
- Use common sense.
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! — xaosflux Talk 10:42, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
July 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 16:04, 22 June 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Your GA nomination of Political party
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Political party you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Goldsztajn -- Goldsztajn (talk) 22:20, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
Stone Butch
Thank you for pointing out my mistake, you are right, it was discussed on an older talk page that I hadn't noticed. To be honest I wasn't aware of the meaning of saphhic and wlw didn't show up on my monitor as blue so I didn't think of clicking on it. I'll revert my revert, and as that vandalism warning isn't valid that has to go as well, should I remove the entire section including your response? I'm not sure what the policy is in this case. WesGeek (talk) 19:02, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
- Hi WesGeek, I totally understand. "wlw" even looks like a string of gibberish, so it's very easy to see how it appeared to be vandalism! I don't think that blanking the discussion on their talk page would be the right approach; I fully expect their edit will be replaced quite soon with what seems to be the current consensus version of the page, and my hope is that someone will then engage in some consensus-building, since I think there's a legitimate point here that deserves a talk page discussion. Regardless, thanks very much for your vandalism-fighting work, keep it up! - Astrophobe (talk) 19:27, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Political parties in autocracies
I cannot think of any well regarded association which has ever labeled Saudi Arabia a democracy of any kind. They do not even have an elected national legislatures for there to be elections that can involve a party, not even an indirect one like the Chinese National People´s Congress. I cannot think of reasonable people who would not label Saudi Arabia an autocracy. It is not unfair or undue to label it as such.
- Of course Saudi Arabia is an autocracy. I never said otherwise. - Astrophobe (talk) 04:45, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
- How can it make sense then to use the undue label then?
- The lead section of an encyclopedia article covers only the most important points, in a high-level and very broad way. Unless an example is really essential to communicating some broad property of the subject of the page, it shouldn't be singled out for discussion in the first few sentences of the page. That's why I referred to the idea of WP:UNDUE weight. The guideline for how to write the introductory section of a Wikipedia is MOS:LEAD. Talking about the contemporary politics of Saudia Arabia is neither here nor there when you are trying to explain to people the fundamental idea of what a political party is. It's true that elephants have legs, but we don't discuss the legs of elephants in the lead of the page on legs, because it's not helpful for explaining what a leg is. Just as there is no reason to go into detail about the contemporary politics of any one specific country in the second paragraph of an article that is meant to explain what the idea of a political party is. - Astrophobe (talk) 05:45, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
- How can it make sense then to use the undue label then?
DYK for Mont Tremblant Conference
On 12 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mont Tremblant Conference, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that United States delegates to the Mont Tremblant Conference argued that the British Empire should be liquidated after World War II? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mont Tremblant Conference. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Mont Tremblant Conference), 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.
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for participating in my RFA
A writer like Fuller needs to be taken with a certain grain of salt. This is a fellow who once gave a lecture mentioning that he'd previous given a lecture years before from the same podium and asserting the only part of him that was the same was his pair of eyeglasses. Fuller's work tries to teach us to pull our focus back from our familiar attention to detail. His understanding of meta-culture may be unorthodox, but I find him a serious optimist yet very pragmatic. I appreciate your nice General Comment edit especially. BusterD (talk) 19:46, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
August Editathons at Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:23, 23 July 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Fixing a sidebar
On the International political economy page, there is a sidebar on the right which contains a "Scholars" tab under "International Relations Theory". I'm trying to figure out where this sidebar comes from and how to alter it. The listing of the "scholars" seems rather random (shouldn't it list the most influential or prominent IR scholars) and biased (the only woman is Susan Strange even though surveys of IR scholars point to many influential women in the discipline, e.g. [1]). Do you know how to fix it? Snooganssnoogans (talk) 22:20, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Snooganssnoogans, that's an interesting question! I absolutely agree with you. This is one of the best examples I've seen yet of the biases in Wikipedia's coverage of social scientists (and sadly I've seen a lot ...). I believe the list comes from Template:International relations theory. If you edit that template, you'll see the list specified as the "list8" parameter, so I assume you can edit it there. It looks like the Template is not under template protection so I think users without the template editor right can change it. While I absolutely think you should boldly go ahead and edit the list, if you do start a discussion on the talk page of that template about inclusion criteria I will be more than happy to contribute. - Astrophobe (talk) 22:37, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
Layla Love & Sennagod
I've started a thread on User:Sennagod's behaviour regarding the Love biography at WP:ANI [2] AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:46, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
- Hi AndyTheGrump, thank you for letting me know, and sorry I haven't been involved -- real life had the audacity to demand my attention this week! I am glad to see that there's been some action, and I hope that things settle down on that page soon enough. As someone who's waded very deep through the trenches of BLP construction, nothing makes me sweat quite like watching a frontal assault on the wikipedia page of a living subject. Every once in a while, a sufficiently tenacious editor can use extremely innocuous textual changes to really drag somebody through the mud on the talk page and in edit summaries, when that person's only crime was being the subject of an article that they had nothing to do with. It's one of the few things that really scares me about wikipedia. If it ever happened to a page I wrote I would G7 in a heartbeat, no matter how much work I'd put into it. Thanks for keeping an eye on that page, and I really hope this calms things down. - Astrophobe (talk) 02:32, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Games in Satisfaction Form
Dear Astrophobe, Thank you very much for your work as an Editor of the wikipedia! I really appreciate your work.
I have recently modified the game theory page for adding a subsection on games in satisfaction form and I have a page under review for satisfaction equilibrium, which is the solution concept associated with this game formulation. I would also like to create a page with more details on games in satisfaction form. Note for instance that games in normal-form (and other representations) have such individual pages. Nonetheless, I was a bit discouraged by seeing that my comments were undo under the light of self-citation. I have indeed introduced these ideas during my phd thesis 10 years ago. Today, I find more than 93 scientific articles using this game representation but there is no wikipedia page about this. I started this page because I am happy to see that this has become another game representation used in applications in wireless communications. By typing satisfaction equilibrium in Google you will realise about the numerous contributions about this. What would be your suggestion for including this new knowledge on wikipedia ? For a non negligible set of user of Wikipedia, these new editions I am trying to include will be beneficial.
Thank you once again for the time you dedicate to wikipedia. I really would like to contribute in the best way possible and I would like to hear from you before continuing my contributions.
Best wishes.
- @Sperlaza:
- Salut Sperlaza! Looking at the available sources online I do think you have a case that a page on satisfaction equilibrium could be beneficial and notable. There were two other reasons that I reverted your addition to game theory. The first was that the citation appeared to be to a paper you wrote. Though this can be appropriate, the community tends to view self-citation as a type of WP:PROMOTION, which is not an appropriate use of Wikipedia. Even if everyone is working in good faith to improve the encyclopedia, as I am sure you are, our judgment can easily get clouded about what is a notable contribution and what isn't when our own work is concerned, right? This is the reason that peer review is important for science! So what I recommend is the following: when you are writing about satisfaction equilibrium on Wikipedia, it would be best to always cite other people. Since your work is so central to this idea, you can make sure that everything is fully above board by sitting back and knowing that other people will add references to your work. The second point is that, in writing Wikipedia articles, we need to make sure that we are giving the correct weight to different parts of a topic, and not lending WP:UNDUE weight to a comparatively minor topic. Where you added satisfaction equilibrium, it was right alongside things like the bedrock idea of a Symmetric game. We can't have a list of every equilibrium concept that people use there, as if they're all equally prevalent -- I wrote the page Berge equilibrium and never even mentioned it on the game theory page because it's such a niche topic. Having said that, the list right now looks like a total mess -- we have Mean field games right next to Zero-sum game and Evolutionary game theory, which is such a silly mishmash of topics, so clearly a lot of work has to be done there. Probably then it's not so bad if you add a mention of satisfaction equilibrium to that list, but I would expect it to get refactored out to a different part of the page as it is improved -- and I would highly recommend citing someone else's work :) I hope this helps. - Astrophobe (talk) 20:59, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
- Salut Astrophobe! I am very happy to read your comments and suggestions. This feedback is really helpful.
I think this recent edit to Political science (disambiguation) is misplaced, Poly Sci is unrelated to "political science". I believe my original hatnote works best, or perhaps make Poli sci a disambiguation page? 162 etc. (talk) 04:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
- Hi 162 etc., the problem was just that if we have a hat note for every alternative meaning, we'll end up with dozens of lines of hatnotes at the top of that page. It looks reasonable now because page watchers keep moving hatnotes to disambiguation pages, but before people started doing that, the hatnotes on this page were ridiculously beyond WP:ONEOTHER. If you loaded the page early last year in a mobile browser you would have had to scroll down to see anything other than hatnotes! But a disambiguation page for "poli sci" or "poly sci" is a good idea. I've started Poli sci (disambiguation). - Astrophobe (talk) 15:12, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
- Looks good. I've linked Poli sci (disambiguation) from the main article with a hatnote. 162 etc. (talk) 15:38, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
September 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 22:28, 26 August 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello. Help copy edit. Nomji (talk) 01:54, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Nomji, you won't get far demanding that people help you on a volunteer project like Wikipedia. Try to ask nicely for help at the Teahouse or at a relevant WikiProject. - Astrophobe (talk) 04:12, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Political party
The article Political party you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold 
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Political party for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 17:40, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 17
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Political party, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page President.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Political party
The article Political party you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:Political party for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 19:41, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
October 2021 at Women in Red
Special event:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 01:34, 29 September 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
November 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Innisfree987 (talk) 21:27, 24 October 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
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 |
December 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Innisfree987 (talk) 00:10, 27 November 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
A kitten for you!
You are an amazing Wikipedian, keep up the great work! LGBTQ+ Pride forever ;)