Guild of Copy Editors 2023 Annual Report edit

Guild of Copy Editors 2023 Annual Report
 

Our 2023 Annual Report is now ready for review.

Highlights:

  • Introduction
  • Membership news, obituary and election results
  • Summary of Drives, Blitzes and the Requests page
  • Closing words
– Your Guild coordinators: Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Wracking.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

June 2: Hacking Sunday (+preview of June 8 Wiknic) edit

June 2: Hacking Sunday @ Prime Produce
 

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our Hacking Sunday at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan. It is intended primarily for technical contributors, though newcomers are welcome as well! The event runs for the whole day, though you are welcome to come by for as little or as long as you'd like.

All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Wikimedia's Technical Code of Conduct.

A documentary filmmaker will be in attendance, working on Rabbit Hole, which aims to document Wikipedia's community to showcase how our network tackles important questions about how history is recorded. They will be in attendance to film snippets of this gathering for the documentary. It is completely optional to be a part of the film and there will be protocols in place if you wish to not be filmed. If there are any questions about the filming please reach out to the filmmaker, Meg Vatterott (meg.vatterott@gmail.com).

Meeting info:

P.S. Next up will be Sat June 8 Wiknic on Governors Island!

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 29 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment edit

 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 29 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

redirects edit

hi. i have made a lot of redirects before, but this is the first time i have been asked to do cats on them. is that for all redirects? Iljhgtn (talk) 23:10, 29 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Iljhgtn. Yes, every redirect should be categorized per WP:REDCAT. Since you create a lot of redirects, you might be interested in this script that makes redirecting a lot easier. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
i do not make too many, not sure how that tool works, but i have made a few dozen at least Iljhgtn (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

2023 Union Square riot edit

I just wanted to inform you that I have addressed your FAC comments. — 🌙Eclipse (talk) (contribs) 13:50, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Feedback request: Music Good Article nomination edit

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:I've Failed You on a "Music" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Feedback request: Social sciences and society Good Article nomination edit

 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:David S. Shellabarger on a "Social sciences and society" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Cora Agnes Benneson at TFA edit

Is this a good time for TFA? How about July 17? - Dank (push to talk) 22:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey @Dank. July 17 would be fine. Best, voorts (talk/contributions) 00:13, 5 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sat June 8: Governors Island Wiknic edit

June 8: Wiknic @ Governors Island
 
2023 Wiknic group photo

You are invited to the picnic anyone can edit on Governors Island, at 403 Colonels Row by the ArtCrawl Harlem house.

This is a sequel event to the 2023 Governors Island Wiknic and will feature a workshop led by AfroCrowd at the ArtCrawl Harlem house. We'll also encourage collaboration for wiki-coverage of ArtCrawl Harlem's current exhibition at Governors Island. All are welcome, new and experienced!

Bring a picnic blanket and some potluck, as well as some sunscreen! We'll also provide sandwiches for everyone, and maybe some NYC pizza too, but we encourage you to bring your own favorite dishes to share, especially for those food cultural topics you would like to improve on Wikipedia.

We'll also do a portal thing for a bit with West Coast friends at Wikipedia:Meetup/LA/Wiknic2024.

Saturday, June 8, 2024 NYC Wiknic @ Governors Island (RSVP on-wiki)

All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:36, 5 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Administrators' newsletter – June 2024 edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2024).

  Administrator changes

  Graham Beards
 

  Bureaucrat changes

 
 

  Oversight changes

  Dreamy Jazz

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 5 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

WP:Articles for deletion/1905 (film) edit

Hi voorts,

Thank you for taking the time to analyze and close the long-overdue WP:Articles for deletion/1905 (film). As you correctly noted in your closing note, this was certainly not an uncontroversial AfD, which means that per WP:NACD, it is best left for an admin to close. There's a fair chance an admin will close it the same way you did, but since both Delete and Merge are viable potential outcomes here, being closed by someone who can implement any of those outcomes will eliminate any appearance that the close was even partly dictated by the tools you have on hand. Personally, I find all but one of the Keep !votes to be exceptionally weak, with some of their "source analysis" being self-serving and dishonest. But of course, I'm involved. I hope you understand, and revert your close to leave this for an admin. Feel free to ping any of the regular AfD closers, so that this doesn't sit there for another two weeks...Thank you! Owen× 22:31, 5 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @OwenX, I'm pretty busy preparing for vacation. Please feel free to revert the close on my behalf. @Liz, are you free to close this? Best, voorts (talk/contributions) 23:52, 5 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thank you. Done! Paging @Liz: to close, please. Owen× 00:09, 6 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
I second OwenX's call for a reopening of this AFD. There were two Delete !votes, one was made before I presented additional research of sources, and the other was based on an unreasonably biased and misleading statement. This argument tried to denounce all of the sources I presented, focusing particularly on one that they found weak instead of a thorough analysis, and using a faulty translation followed by a misinterpretation of WP:SIGCOV. I do not find this argument convincing, and I retain my stance that it should be kept. As I mentioned in my previous reply in the discussion, I will defer to the decision of the closer. I think Voorts' conclusion of No Consensus is reasonable, but I believe it would be even better to have additional input from an experienced admin. I appreciate both Voorts and Liz for taking the time to review the discussion! —Prince of EreborThe Book of Mazarbul 15:58, 6 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
This argument tried to denounce all of the sources I presented - no one made such an argument there. The closest I find there is disproving your claim that all twelve sources you cited provide SIGCOV. All it took to disprove your claim was to show that at least one of those twelve sources did not provide SIGCOV. Since you didn't amend your original statement, I can only conclude that you are relying on a dishonest assertion, just like you are trying to rely on a strawman argument here. This is not how WP works. Owen× 16:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Err... The reason I brought up the twelve sources in the first place was replying to your Delete !vote, as you had stated that you saw plenty of sources but found none satisfying SIGCOV, and I begged to differ. In my subsequent reply, I have already provided further proof and rationale for why I believe the China Times source you specifically chose to challenge in your comment was, albeit weaker than the others, still valid. You did not respond with thorough analysis or substantive arguments, and instead included a misleadingly trimmed-down translation, followed by an accusation of dishonesty on my part. I still stand by the same stance and rationales that I have presented since my initial !vote, so I am not sure how that constitutes dishonesty on my end. I can understand that you may feel upset when someone else pointed out flaws in your arguments. It is totally fine, we all make mistakes at times. But the fact that this AFD was already concluded nearly two weeks ago, yet you are still bringing it back up, perhaps provides a clearer picture of what is going on. Just let the closing admin decide. I have nothing further to add. —Prince of EreborThe Book of Mazarbul 16:32, 6 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
One, and only one, of the following two statements can be true:
  1. All twelve cited sources provide SIGCOV; or
  2. At least one of those twelve cited sources does not provide SIGCOV.
I don't need to go over each and every one of the twelve to prove that Statement #1 is false. All I need to do is pick one - any one. Most AfD participants are at least truthful enough that I don't have to check the veracity of their statements. I originally thought you made an honest mistake, but it soon became clear you were not above twisting the truth to get your way. You conceded that China Times source did not provide SIGCOV of the level we expect, yet here you are, still arguing that your original claim was true, and that I said that none of the sources you cited provided SIGCOV. Are you hoping no one reads that exchange to see you are being dishonest? Is every dirty trick allowed in your strive to keep your pet page?
The AfD is not "concluded". It is open. But my argument here has nothing to do with the article. It has to do with user conduct that is unbefitting a Wikipedia editor. Owen× 16:52, 6 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
I genuinely think you are interpreting things the wrong way around. I originally thought you had simply missed my points or did not review the Chinese and Japanese sources I presented, as you seemingly had addressed the English sources only. That is why I replied, suggesting you to review the twelve sources I quoted, which all seem decent to me. If you have noticed, my initial question (the first time I replied to you) was about half of the sources in the discussion not covering production difficulties. Did you really review all the sources presented in the discussion thoroughly before you cast your Delete !vote, so you would realise that plenty of the sources are unrelated to production difficulties? Is that also an act of dishonesty?
Even until this moment, I have made the same argument multiple times, explaining why I believe the China Times source should be considered as passing SIGCOV. I am totally open to disagreement, but you did not even address why you think the three rebuttals (especially the mistranslation, which I could also consider as an act of dishonesty) I made were wrong, and instead straight-up called me dishonest and stuffs, to the point where I feel you are taking my disagreement on your views personally. I am tired from engaging in this discussion, and I see no point in continue bothering Voorts here. Of all the hundreds of AFDs I have participated in, both here and on the zhwiki, this one tops the list as the most pointless. You may continue to comment on the AFD page. But there is really nothing further for me to add, as long as you refrain from your personal attacks. It is night time in my time zone. Good night. —Prince of EreborThe Book of Mazarbul 17:50, 6 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

May 2024 NPP backlog drive – Points award edit

  The Reviewer Barnstar
This award is given in recognition to Voorts for accumulating at least 50 points during the May 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions helped play a part in the 14,452 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 18:56, 6 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

May 2024 NPP backlog drive – Streak award edit

 

Worm Gear Award

This award is given in recognition to Voorts for accumulating at least 7 points during each week of the May 2024 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions played a part in the 14,452 reviews completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! Hey man im josh (talk) 19:19, 6 June 2024 (UTC)Reply