User talk:Dennis Bratland/Archive 36
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 30 | ← | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | Archive 36 | Archive 37 |
Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!
Hello,
Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.
I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!
From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.
If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.
Thank you!
--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
Category:Transformers automobiles has been nominated for discussion
Category:Transformers automobiles, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. TTN (talk) 21:00, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
Need clarification at your 'lift IBAN' request.
Howdy. Would you make a list of the socks you mentioned at AN & who is or was caught or suspected of owning those socks? GoodDay (talk) 00:58, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- You mean other than the accounts listed at each of the sockpuppet investigation pages? I'm not sure what else there is besides those. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:21, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- List'em all if you can. GoodDay (talk) 01:32, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- I really can’t. Look: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HughD/Archive. I should copy paste those hundreds of accounts somewhere? I feel like I’m missing something. Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:47, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- That's alright. I was curious about one of the commentators at AN, who's yet to respond to a question I asked. Anyways, no worries. GoodDay (talk) 01:55, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- I‘ve alluded to a non-stale socking problem that has yet to be investigated. I mentioned some of the reasons but not all the diffs with the various behavioral evidence. I can’t really do that with the iban. Which is part of why I stopped procrastinating on requesting lifting the ban. Dennis Bratland (talk) 02:08, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- That's alright. I was curious about one of the commentators at AN, who's yet to respond to a question I asked. Anyways, no worries. GoodDay (talk) 01:55, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- I really can’t. Look: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HughD/Archive. I should copy paste those hundreds of accounts somewhere? I feel like I’m missing something. Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:47, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- List'em all if you can. GoodDay (talk) 01:32, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Triumph Motorcycles
Hello Dennis. You have just deleted several of my posts dating from last week back to May 2019 (over six months ago) about Triumph Motorcycles Ltd, giving reasons that they are 'blatant advertising' and 'copy and pasted from the website'. However my posts were original and not promotional in the slightest; they were objective, neutral, informative and of great relevance to anyone with an interest in Triumph motorcycles, and for that reason I would appreciate you reconsidering your recent actions by undoing the edits and deletions you've made. Thank you. Markthebikefan (talk) 10:24, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- The place to discuss this is at Talk:Triumph Motorcycles Ltd. Other editors there need to discuss this with you, not only me. Dennis Bratland (talk) 13:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Okay. In the meantime I've removed the warning statements at the top. Markthebikefan (talk) 08:04, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- But you haven’t discussed anything...? -Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:16, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- Okay. In the meantime I've removed the warning statements at the top. Markthebikefan (talk) 08:04, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
December 2019
Your recent editing history at Dodge Tomahawk shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Sennen Goroshi ! (talk) 00:09, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Dennis_Bratland reported by User:Sennen goroshi (Result: ). Thank you. Sennen Goroshi ! (talk) 00:15, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 12
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dodge Tomahawk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:01, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Notice
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Sennen goroshi. Lepricavark (talk) 22:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Please join us for our Cascadia Wikimedians annual meeting, Monday, December 23, 5:30pm PST
|
Please join us for our Cascadia Wikimedians annual meeting, Monday, December 23, 5:30pm PST. You can join us virtually from your PC, Mac, Linux, iOS, or Android at this link: https://virginia.zoom.us/my/wikilgbt. If your are in Seattle, the address of the physical meeting is: Capitol Hill Meeting Room at Capitol Hill Library (425 Harvard Ave. E., Seattle, WA 98102) 47°37′23″N 122°19′22″W / 47.622928°N 122.322912°W
The event page is here. You do not have to be a member to attend, but only members can vote in board elections. New members may join in person by completing the membership registration form onsite or (to be posted) online and paying $5 for a calendar year / $0.50 per month for the remainder of a year. Current members may renew for 2019 at the meeting as well.
|
Links
I fixed a link wether you agree with the fix or not.100.11.77.202 (talk) 21:20, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
- We don't put external links in the body of articles, and we don't add external links to the bottom of articles unless it is a unique resource directly related to the article topic. See WP:ELNO. Eastman Industries is just a redlink in the article Roadster (bicycle). You could add a reference
<ref></ref>with a citation that verifies that Eastman Industries is a significant roadster bicycle manufacturer. Links to companies are generally just spam; we really need citations of independent third party reliable sources. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:33, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
2020 Cascadia events especially around photography
Dennis, I'm helping to schedule and push out info on 2020 Wikipedia related events in Cascadia. Just polling you to see if you are aware of any e.g. the Chittenden Locks tour you did some time ago? ☆ Bri (talk) 02:49, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
- I've been thinking about this and at the moment I can't come up with anything good. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:00, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 37
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 37, November – December 2019
- #1Lib1Ref
- Wikimedia and Libraries User Group
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:09, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
WT Social userbox
I made a WT Social userbox:
| Wikitext | userbox | where used |
|---|---|---|
{{User:Dennis Bratland/WT social}}
|
linked pages |
--Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:03, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
Sorry for bothering you, but...
- New Page Patrol needs experienced volunteers
- New Page Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles. We could use a few extra hands on deck if you think you can help.
- Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; Wikipedia needs experienced users to perform this task and there are precious few with the appropriate skills. Even a couple reviews a day can make a huge difference.
- If you would like to join the project and help out, please see the granting conditions and review our instructions page. You can apply for the user-right HERE. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 20:15, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
New LTA page
I was incubating this for more evidence but another used it to WP space, so might as well point it out to you. Cheers and stay well ☆ Bri (talk) 19:59, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
- Cool! I'm somewhat inactive at the moment but I'll add some notes to it. I mean to respond to that new page patroller invite above too, when I get a chance. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:37, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
April 2020
This is your only warning; if you purposefully and blatantly harass fellow Wikipedian(s) again, as you did at User talk:Carmaker1, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Carmaker1 (talk) 20:04, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. El_C 21:12, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Smallbones(smalltalk) 22:41, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
April 2020
This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, as you did at User talk:Carmaker1, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Carmaker1 (talk) 23:33, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Stop posting accusations against me on your talk page and then claiming I have no right to reply. Take it to WP:ANI and state your case in a forum where I am allowed to respond.
Alternatively, you could simply focus on content. Stop talking about who you are, stop talking about who other editors are. Stop telling us about your motives, stop claiming to know the motives of others. Post only about article content and sources, and post nothing about other people. If you simply followed that basic rule, all your problems would evaporate. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:37, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Carmaker1 (talk) 00:27, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
Dennis you actually have multiple forums to respond to what Carmaker has written. You can do so at ANI. You can do so at ArbCom. You can do so at El C's talk page. In fact you did this last one. You do not have some inherent right to do so on Carmaker's user talk page. Stop edit warring over it. By policy you are already past 3RR and could be blocked. As a formal warning I advise you to immediately cut it out. You are of course welcome to respond to the ANI thread or at ArbCom. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:38, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
- All true except the part about me having to stay off their page if they’re going to use their page to disparage me. If they use that page to attack me they forfeit the privilege of exclusive access. I don’t have to wait for a noticeboard to act while attacks on me are left posted there with no right for me to reply. This is spelled out in WP:POLEMIC and the user page guidelines. One’s user pages are not a safe perch from which to attack others with impunity. —Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:03, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
- You're correct you don't have to wait if there's a problem. You can open an ANI thread - explaining that you were unable to talk to them because you have been asked not to post on the talk page. You can post to the open ArbCom Case Request as an example why, in your eyes, the case should be accepted. I understand why Carmaker's post upset you but it is not a polemic. And to the extent that it was, ANI or ArbCom or El C's talk page can absolutely help get someone who isn't you involved to deal with Carmaker. Your edit warring about it was not helpful especailly because, in my eyes, we were not at a situation described at WP:POLEMIC. There was a version of that post which would have been but that, in my view, wasn't it, it was a user seeking help from an experienced and skilled sysop. Barkeep49 (talk) 02:28, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
- P.S. I mean it about ANI. To the extent you see Carmaker continuing to edit about users rather than content say so in the ANI thread. Some, including some arbs, have commented that the community hasn't had an adequate chance to deal with Carmaker. Well here is a chance for you to make your case. Barkeep49 (talk) 02:32, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
- My sympathies are 90% with you in this dispute, so please trust me on this. You're misinterpreting POLEMIC, which provides the remedy of removal of inappropriate content, not a right of reply from someone impugned. Even if he says mean things about you, you need to stay off his page if he's asked. There are other editors who will rein him in, even if not right away. Everyone knows there's bad blood here (and as mentioned, that's not to say there's equal blame on both sides) and sees what's going on. EEng 02:31, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
Issue 38, January – April 2020
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 38, January – April 2020
- New partnership
- Global roundup
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Great American Wiknic virtual edition 2020
 |
You are invited to the Great American Virtual Wiknic on Sunday, August 16, 2020, noon to 2pm
|
 |
Atlas Obscura
Photos from our visit to Haleets were selected by Atlas Obscura [1]. Edited to add: missed it in your photo index, already there. Anyway, pleasing to see them. I added a bunch to my own index lately. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:17, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- I saw that but I had trouble verifying they published it. Dennis Bratland (talk) 14:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- There's a book preview of the 2nd edition (October 2019) on Amazon and Google Books; Haleets is in the index but the page isn't in the preview (sad). When things open up again maybe one of us can check a hardcopy. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:04, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, that's the one I saw. The Ballard Branch has the second edition and I couldn't find the photo in there. I'm not what the index is referring to, toher than a passing mention of Haleets on a different topic. It's not in the Washington State section of the book. Unless I didn't look hard enough, which happens. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:45, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- Well, the index links the same page to Parowan Gap petroglyphs (Utah), Leo Petroglyph (Ohio), Map Rock (Idaho), in addition to Haleets. Maybe the page has a collection of petroglyphs. I guess we'll see. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:54, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 39, May – June 2020
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 39, May – June 2020
- Library Card Platform
- New partnerships
- ProQuest
- Springer Nature
- BioOne
- CEEOL
- IWA Publishing
- ICE Publishing
- Bytes in brief
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:13, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Numbers
Nice work on streamlining the lede on 2011 Vancouver Stanley Cup riot, but I'll note that Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers, specifically MOS:NUMNOTES, states, "comparable values should be all spelled out or all in figures, even if one of the numbers would normally be written differently". So you changed the correct
- "At least 140 people were reported as injured during the incident, 1 critically; at least 4 people were stabbed, 9 police officers were injured, and 101 people were arrested that night."
to the incorrect
- "At least 140 people were injured during the incident, including one critically. At least four people were stabbed, nine police officers were injured, and 101 people were arrested".
I changed it back. I recognize that this looks odd to people familiar with other manuals of style. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:55, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, I see. Thanks! --Dennis Bratland (talk) 07:41, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 1
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Gemtech (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Silencer
- Muzzle shroud (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Silencer
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:43, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 8
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gemtech, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Silencer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Sleeping Giants Loaded terms.
Statement formerly here was stupid and has been removed by its author. Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 04:51, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Restore talk page of deleted article?
You moved Erica C. Barnett to the draft namespace in 2019 but I can't find what happened to the old talk page. Is it possible to merge the old talk page back into the new Talk:Erica C. Barnett? JzG (talk · contribs) also moved it -- from Draft:Erica C. Barnett. to Draft:Erica C. Barnett due to an extraneous period. Not sure who could resurrect the page but it would save a lot of time if the past discussions were available if not on talk then in the talk archive. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:46, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
- Dennis Bratland, oh good grief, that festering dreck is back again? Guy (help!) 21:58, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
- Keeping talk archives around helps us avoid having repeat the same festering dreck once a consensus has been reached. Wipe it from memory and we have to re-fight the exact same battles. I don't relish going over the same ground again either. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:03, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- The talkpage was deleted last month by User:Fastily: [2]. SilkTork (talk) 08:14, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- I went to their talk page and followed the directions over to Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#Draft_talk:Erica_C._Barnett. Thanks! --Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:26, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- The talkpage was deleted last month by User:Fastily: [2]. SilkTork (talk) 08:14, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- Keeping talk archives around helps us avoid having repeat the same festering dreck once a consensus has been reached. Wipe it from memory and we have to re-fight the exact same battles. I don't relish going over the same ground again either. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:03, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
I've undeleted per your formal request: Draft talk:Erica C. Barnett. SilkTork (talk) 17:30, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- And now fully restored: Talk:Erica C. Barnett. Any problems, please let me know. SilkTork (talk) 17:39, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 40
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020
- New partnerships
- Al Manhal
- Ancestry
- RILM
- #1Lib1Ref May 2020 report
- AfLIA hires a Wikipedian-in-Residence
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:14, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Favor
Can you put Michel von Tell on your watchlist? I think we have potentially some pseudo LDR promotion going on. ☆ Bri (talk) 04:06, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
- Sure thing. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:05, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 41
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 41, September – October 2020
- New partnership: Taxmann
- WikiCite
- 1Lib1Ref 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
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 |
Disambiguation link notification for December 23
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Martin Shkreli, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Elle.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
My apologies for the Lindsay Ellis edits
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
While I didn't care for your attitude towards me ("No one cares about your feelings"), I did have it coming and I guess I should grow up and not get too offended by it. I was wrong for trying to change somethinh due to opinions but it really came out of me wanting the place to be more positive. I'm a huge fan of her and I do know what she's experienced. It was still wrong of me to do and I'm sorry. Can you ever forgive me? --HenryBarnill 11:38 10 January 2021 (UTC)
- I have the same exchange with editor after editor after editor: please stop telling me what you think and show me your sources. Please stop telling me something is disputed or controversial or questionable if you can't cite one single source that disputes it or says it's controversial or says it's questionable. We can have an intelligent conversation about whether source X is more reliable than source Y, or whether a fact is or isn't in a given source. But when nobody cites anything, all we're doing is staring up at clouds and debating whether or not we agree one of the clouds looks like a bunny.
So whether I like you or not or whether I forgive you or not, one thing I can say is that if we can stick to sources and leave everything else out of it, we can get along. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:00, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
- What do you want from me? I just said I'm sorry. I was wrong to post feelings and opinions without sources. I was wrong. A bad decision I hope to never make again. You keep getting too personal about this when I want to end on better terms. -- HenryBarnill — Preceding unsigned comment added by HenryBarnill (talk • contribs) 20:39, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
- I. Want. You. To. Cite. Sources.
If you're not going to state facts and cite the sources for those facts, then don't post anything. Don't add content to an article without sources. Don't delete content from articles without reading the sources. That's what I want. Talk to me about what's in the sources, or don't talk to me. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:46, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
- I. Want. You. To. Cite. Sources.
Books & Bytes - Issue 42
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 42, November – December 2020
- New EBSCO collections now available
- 1Lib1Ref 2021 underway
- Library Card input requested
- Libraries love Wikimedia, too!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 21
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Greaser (subculture), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Latino.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Writing Black History of the Pacific Northwest into Wikipedia - Editathon 2021
 |
|
Cascadia Wikimedians placed this banner at 03:52, 24 February 2021 (UTC) by using the Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle/Invitees list.To subscribe to or unsubscribe from messages from Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle, please add or remove your name here.
Books & Bytes – Issue 42
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 42, January – February 2021
- New partnerships: PNAS, De Gruyter, Nomos
- 1Lib1Ref
- Library Card
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Boozefighters MC logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Boozefighters MC 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) 17:11, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Stop spamming me please.
I'm not vandalizing anything. I already explained my edit. 136.158.59.173 (talk) 05:03, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
- HughD? Why come back? What’s the point? —Dennis Bratland (talk) 05:15, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm not sure who HughD is. 136.158.59.173 (talk) 05:23, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
- You want to be called Sennen goroshi? 72bikers? I don't know which you consider your real name to be. I always thought it was Hugh. Whatever. You should find a new hobby. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 05:39, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 43
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 43, March – April 2021
- New Library Card designs
- 1Lib1Ref May
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
FLAGICON and motorsport
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello. I see that you have made good faith removals of numerous flagicon entries for international motorsports competitors. Please know that this is against consensus for these people. The situation is different from many other sports as, because you have stated elsewhere, there are no formal national 'teams'. However, the tradition of the sport and the international regulations defined by the governing body codify and control the competitor's 'nationality' with respect to their international sporting career. In this aspect, the guides have always been incorrect, mostly because they are dominated by kevball dingbats who know jack about motorsport history, tradition and modern practice. The drivers most certainly do represent their respective nations, and this is demonstrated abundantly within the sport. Cheers. Pyrope 17:27, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Although I generally do not surveil Dennis' activities, I have been affected by this (firstly in 2014) particularly with new users and far-east IPs swamping motorcycle racing. The rationale is quite clear: there is no nationalism, except in the fanzones where they promote the riders. Again quite clear is that the flags should be accompanied by text, as few are knowledgeable-enough to recognise at a glance (meshelf less that 10).
I recently traced the alleged-'local consensus', where F1 articles were decided to be exempt from the normal, at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons/Archive 14#Formula 1 where Pyrope contributed. I didn't wade through all of it, but the complaints were that there was historic nationalism involving team colours (eg., British Racing Green) and possibly some other argument over licensing countries (see Bo Bendsneyder where the IP wanted him as Indonesian, and Can Öncü who was allegedly born in Norway, not Turkey as asserted on-Wiki). Another gripe was that few (too few) editors made the decision to deprecate flags. Seems to me that a new RfC is needed.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 18:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, every international sport decorates players names with flags. If that was all it took to justify sticking flags everywhere, MOS:SPORTFLAG wouldn't exist in the first place. That some people feel nationalistic (or state, province, city, college, etc) pride about racing or competitive dog walking or bridge is doesn't make competitors into members of national teams. Getting an exception for drivers pushed through has a snowball's chance in hell. But apparently we have to go through this bureaucratic exercise to prove it.
I'd ask Pyrop to carefully read MOS:FLAG and accept what the words say: the Olympics and World Cup are competitions between national teams. Any other random sport, no. You might wish it said something else, but it doesn't, so please just take the flags off. Otherwise, I guess a big RfC is needed where two dozen editors will all say to follow the MOS as written. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:21, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, every international sport decorates players names with flags. If that was all it took to justify sticking flags everywhere, MOS:SPORTFLAG wouldn't exist in the first place. That some people feel nationalistic (or state, province, city, college, etc) pride about racing or competitive dog walking or bridge is doesn't make competitors into members of national teams. Getting an exception for drivers pushed through has a snowball's chance in hell. But apparently we have to go through this bureaucratic exercise to prove it.
June 2021
Hello, I'm 0mtwb9gd5wx. I noticed that you are making confused changes to content in an article, Honda Super Cub, but you didn't provide a any valid reason. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you.
Your recent editing history at Honda Super Cub shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 06:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
- Please join the discussion at Talk:Honda Super Cub#Pop culture section. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:19, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Flickology
I'd thought the context - the op-ed writer's dislike of the Flick analogy - made the use more authoritative. In the grand scheme of things it's not great to have discussion of the analogy be so Clinton-centric, but it's also likely that sources on other uses won't come up all that often. Suffice it to say that this edit would be a very roundabout way to defame Stefanik, so maybe best to hold off on ascribing motive?Camperdownian (talk) 03:09, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
- I don't follow what you're saying. But if you think other editors could form a consensus, you should explain what you are proposing at Talk:Tracy Flick and see if there is support for it. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:11, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Seattle map revisions
Hello, I have noticed you have reverted my edits. I understand your reasons, but I have to tell you why those images are irrelevant. First, they are very poor. A simple dot on a map, and only 3 options. Second, the title gets in the way of important information, such as surrounding areas. You can even get at a glance views of the interactive map, but those take up space. We're in the 21st century, and these already exist by default in map infoboxes. Many other cities only have these, Atlanta, Boston, Portland OR and ME, Providence, Columbus, Denver, Salt Lake City, New York, Los Angeles, etc. SkunkaMunka (talk) 20:25, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
I forgot to mention. The city is outlined, just zoom in on the map, you’ll see it. Also, relief maps are irrelevant. These are only good for natural areas. I am working with other proponents of the mapframe project to have a relief switch implemented. But for now, interactive maps are far better than pushpins. SkunkaMunka (talk) 20:52, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- Why are you having this discussion here instead of at Talk:Seattle? There are hundreds of editors watching that page. Even if you can’t change my mind, if you convinced most of them, then my opinion wouldn’t matter. Please go to the article talk page and address everyone interested in the Seattle article. —Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:33, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Mapframe for Seattle
Can someone please go about an interactive map on the Seattle article? I would really love this to be implemented. SkunkaMunka (talk) 21:05, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 45
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 45, May – June 2021
- Library design improvements continue
- New partnerships
- 1Lib1Ref update
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:04, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Category:Fictional sunken cities has been nominated for merging
Category:Fictional sunken cities has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:10, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Mass Deletions of Military Infoboxes
Hello, Dennis Bratland. I wanted to thank you for addressing the issue of the mass deletion of military infoboxes directly to User:Binksternet on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography. Binksternet unduly deleted 112 military infoboxes within one hour-- and he only targeted articles whose infoboxes that I personally edited (no doubt by searching through my user contribution history). Several of the articles already had a military infobox, I merely added more information or a citation to several of them. But apparently even if it was sourced properly, it didn't matter. And he didn't even delete all the military infoboxes that I added or edited. Several of them still remain, and I can attest the ones he left untouched are not those of public figures who are specifically known for their military service-- so it would appear the 100+ infoboxes Binksternet deleted were done so indiscriminately. He hasn't yet deleted military infoboxes in other articles that I did not edit-- which to me, comes off more as a content dispute or vandalism directed towards my edits personally rather than an effort to adhere to proper editing form.
There seems to be no guiding principle or consistent logic to this mass deletion. I mean, is the 8 weeks that speaker of the House John Boehner spent in enlisted Navy boot camp in 1968 before he was medically discharged for a bad back really that notable enough for Wikipedia that it should remain in his infobox? But yet, the more than 50 bombing missions that acclaimed filmmaker Robert Altman flew as an Army Air Force officer and co-pilot of a B-24 Liberator in the Pacific Theater of World War II is not notable enough for his infobox? Where's the logic in that? Or, is senator Mitch McConnell famous specifically for the 37 days he spent in the Army Reserve before his discharge and thus should remain in his infobox? And I'm not even trying to discount Boehner or McConnell's brief service periods, just that Binksternet's reasoning for the mass deletion is simply ridiculous and unfounded.
I see that you're an Air Force veteran. I was also in the service, having served overseas in the Navy during the early and middle phases of the Iraq War, which explains my strong interest in the military records of many, many notable people. Who's to judge which person's military service is more notable than another's? If a notable person devoted their time to the service, then I believe it should be noted in their infobox regardless of the length of their service period and regardless whether or not that person is specifically notable for their service-- and I'm certain most other editors (and biographers) feel this way as well. I have an itching to do a mass revert of those deletions, but then I may then be accused of instigating an editing war or possibly risk an edit ban on Wikipedia-- which I surely don't want to risk. This is what irritates me the most about Wikipedia-- the hubris of many of the senior editors that all seem to think that they own every article on the site, and if they simply don't "like" a particular edit (despite it being appropriately sourced), then poof! It's gone. Hours, days, weeks of my own hard work and research flushed down the toilet. It just makes me not want to contribute anymore if it's all gonna be for nothing, anyway. But I ranted long enough and again, thank you for taking the time to address the issue. It's greatly appreciated. —Ldavid1985 (talk) 08:07, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
- Articles like John Boehner can't really tell us much because nobody is claiming it's a model to emulate. If you want to judge what Wikipedia's standards are, it's best to focus on policy and guidelines, and to look at the example of Featured articles. We can at least say that somebody believes it's high quality if it's a FA. Looking at FAs like Charles Inglis (engineer), Gough Whitlam, Thomas White (Australian politician), or J. R. R. Tolkien, we can confirm what MOS:INFOBOX says: it varies case by case. Sometimes military service is prominent, with icons and flags, sometimes it's not included, sometimes something in between. It's mostly determined by the NPOV policy, especially WP:PROPORTION and that is based on sources. Pretty much everything on Wikipedia comes down to sources. Stay focused on sources, be willing to bend to whatever good sources say and do, and you'll have a sound basis for any changes on Wikipedia articles. What you don't want is to get caught up in a pissing contest between to factions neither of which has bothered to check the sources. That's my advice. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:13, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 46
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 46, July – August 2021
- Library design improvements deployed
- New collections available in English and German
- Wikimania presentation
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:14, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
In December 2017 you brought Carmaker1 to the ANI board. The community is now considering an Indef block or Topic Ban proposals, if you'd like to weigh in now is your chance. TomStar81 (Talk) 23:04, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
- TomStar81, not saying it's your intent, but this looks perilously like WP:CANVASSing. EEng 23:14, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
- Not per se, I'm going over older carmaker1 posts since the ARBCOM case was denied and notifying original posters and admins who've interacted with him. It would be unfair if only a selected part from this current dispute were involved in the discussion, we need people who can look at all aspects of this for clearer course of action. Whether people participate or not is their business, but I want to make sure they at least know its being considered. Unlike ARBCOM, ANI has no specific infobox to mention cases or whose involved, and I'm only mentioning that its being considered, not that 'your participation is urgently needed' or that 'this is our chance to get rid of him' or 'silence his opposition' or so forth. TomStar81 (Talk) 23:21, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
- I would refer the ANI admins to my opinions from the last time Carmaker1 was at ANI, and the time before that. I predicted nothing would change and we would be back in the same place again, and here we are, doing it again. My position hasn't changed. It's only a question of whether the ANI admins will repeat what they did in the previous cases, or try something new. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:11, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- Not per se, I'm going over older carmaker1 posts since the ARBCOM case was denied and notifying original posters and admins who've interacted with him. It would be unfair if only a selected part from this current dispute were involved in the discussion, we need people who can look at all aspects of this for clearer course of action. Whether people participate or not is their business, but I want to make sure they at least know its being considered. Unlike ARBCOM, ANI has no specific infobox to mention cases or whose involved, and I'm only mentioning that its being considered, not that 'your participation is urgently needed' or that 'this is our chance to get rid of him' or 'silence his opposition' or so forth. TomStar81 (Talk) 23:21, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 47
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 47, September – October 2021
- On-wiki Wikipedia Library notification rolling out
- Search tool deployed
- New My Library design improvements
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:58, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
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 |
Books & Bytes – Issue 48
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 48, November – December 2021
- 1Lib1Ref 2022
- Wikipedia Library notifications deployed
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:12, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 49
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 49, January – February 2022
- New library collections
- Blog post published detailing technical improvements
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:05, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
May 2022 Seattle meetup
 |
Distant Worlds Coffeehouse. For the address and to RSVP, please click here. |
|
Books & Bytes – Issue 50
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 50, March – April 2022
- New library partner - SPIE
- 1Lib1Ref May 2022 underway
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:52, 1 June 2022 (UTC) (UTC)
A situation has arisen whereby a new SPA is deleting text added by yourself. I have left guidance in the edit summary but has again deleted; if you have the time could you swing by Talk:American Motorcyclist Association#Outlaw and One Percentor Description, as the refs and content being challenged will mean much more to you. Thanks.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 14:56, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 51
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 51, May – June 2022
- New library partners
- SAGE Journals
- Elsevier ScienceDirect
- University of Chicago Press
- Information Processing Society of Japan
- Feedback requested on this newsletter
- 1Lib1Ref May 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:45, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 52
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 52, July – August 2022
- New instant-access collections:
- SpringerLink and Springer Nature
- Project MUSE
- Taylor & Francis
- ASHA
- Loeb
- Feedback requested on this newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:20, 30 September 2022 (UTC)