User talk:Bkonrad/Archive 78
 | 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 75 | Archive 76 | Archive 77 | Archive 78 | Archive 79 | Archive 80 | → | Archive 85 |
Waldberg
Thanks for your interest in this dab page. It would be helpful if you could follow the WP:BRD process in future rather than re-reverting and risking an WP:EDITWAR. I have replaced all the links and more, having first updated the linked articles to refer to the "Waldberg" in question. In most cases, it was simply a question of adding the "Geography" section from German Wikipedia. I've also added the 3 people, two of whom already have articles. I have, however, left Waldberg (Riesalb) as hidden text as I couldn't find the municipality it was part of, even on de.wiki. I haven't bothered to re-instate the headings either as you seem to have a problem with that, even though it is standard practice. Hey ho. HTH. --Bermicourt (talk) 16:37, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for your interest. When editing disambiguation pages, please follow the applicable policies and guidelines. Each entry should have normally have exactly one navigable blue link to an article that supports the claimed usage (linking to articles that make no mention of the ambiguous term is unhelpful or may even be confusing for readers). older ≠ wiser 16:45, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
- I'm aware of the guideline and it's good that you are keen to delete irrelevant dab links. It needs doing, but let's not be over-zealous. If we don't want to wait for articles to be expanded, we can choose to add to the store of human knowledge by copying the relevant section into the target link, rather than deleting stuff that may have value. If in doubt, it's always worth talking. Anyway I think between us we've cleaned it up nicely, so thank you. --Bermicourt (talk) 16:58, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
- General rules of thumb to keep in mind about adding entries to disambiguation pages are WP:Write the article first and WP:verifiability. If I come across a disambiguation page with redlinked (or unlinked) entries, I usually do some degree of due diligence to look for existing articles in Wikipedia. If I do not find any, I generally remove or comment out the entry. If it is a subject area I have some familiarity with or have the time and patience to look into a bit more, I might try creating a stub article or adding a statement to an existing article. If the topic is of any actual significance, there's good likelihood that an article will eventually be created and added to the disambiguation page, but until such time there's little point in having it on the disambiguation page. older ≠ wiser 17:06, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
- I'm aware of the guideline and it's good that you are keen to delete irrelevant dab links. It needs doing, but let's not be over-zealous. If we don't want to wait for articles to be expanded, we can choose to add to the store of human knowledge by copying the relevant section into the target link, rather than deleting stuff that may have value. If in doubt, it's always worth talking. Anyway I think between us we've cleaned it up nicely, so thank you. --Bermicourt (talk) 16:58, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Rocinante reversion
Why did you revert my edit? The formatting was broken and I fixed it. Now it's broken again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minimac93 (talk • contribs) 02:09, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Minimac93:, your edit removed the {{disambiguation}} template and I mistook it for vandalism. But the last entry was invalid as there is no mention of "Rocinante" in Once Upon a Time (TV series) or in List of Once Upon a Time characters. older ≠ wiser 02:33, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, I noticed you undid my edit on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma_(disambiguation) and I would like to know why you think that it was unnecessary.
That page contained a reference only to the Korg KARMA which is a hardware music instrument and I thought that it would be beneficial to credit the KARMA computer algorithm as well since it doesn't belong to KORG so in other words it's a different thing.
Looking forward to hear from you. Thanks
* KARMA, is a parameter-based approach to generating musical effects and phrases developed by Stephen Kay — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zorfael (talk • contribs) 12:31, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 17 January 2017
- From the editor: Next steps for the Signpost
- News and notes: Surge in RFA promotions—a sign of lasting change?
- In the media: Year-end roundups, Wikipedia's 16th birthday, and more
- Featured content: One year ends, and another begins
- Arbitration report: Concluding 2016 and covering 2017's first two cases
- Traffic report: Out with the old, in with the new
- Technology report: Tech present, past, and future
What does that mean? --94.254.240.187 (talk) 12:25, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
- @94.254.240.187: Each entry on a disambiguation page should contain a navigable blue link to an existing article that contains relevant information on usage of the ambiguous term described in that entry. older ≠ wiser 13:04, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter - February 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.
Administrator changes
NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13
Guideline and policy news
- A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
- Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
- Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.
Technical news
- When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
- Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
- The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.
Arbitration
- The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.
Obituaries
- JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.
13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi Bkonrad! Just wanted to let you know that I restored Watershed Game, an article you deleted citing "Expired PROD". The PROD that was added to the article wasn't there for a week, but for only 12 minutes before you deleted it per that reason. Not to worry; I restored it, helped the user who expressed concerns, and he's content as can be. I just wanted to let you know about it. Happy Friday, man! Cheers -- ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:13, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 6 February 2017
- Arbitration report: WMF Legal and ArbCom weigh in on tension between disclosure requirements and user privacy
- WikiProject report: For the birds!
- Technology report: Better PDFs, backup plans, and birthday wishes
- Traffic report: Cool It Now
- Featured content: Three weeks dominated by articles
Male Genital Mutilation
I can see that you are violating the Wikipedia rules on MGM (disambiguation). The link is relevant. Stop violating the rules. Stop deleting.--Momo Monitor (talk) 23:00, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
- Au contraire, adding the link is against policy. First there is nothing at the linked article that has any indication that male genital mutilation is known by the initials. Second, the actual target of the link is a section titled "male genital modification"—there isn't even any mention of the term mutilation. older ≠ wiser 11:01, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
MGM
Stop deleting / undoing. It's a violation of the Wikipedia rules.--Élisée P. Bruneau (talk) 05:21, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
- Au contraire, adding the link is against policy. First there is nothing at the linked article that has any indication that male genital mutilation is known by the initials. Second, the actual target of the link is a section titled "male genital modification"—there isn't even any mention of the term mutilation. older ≠ wiser 11:01, 13 February 2017 (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. Thank you. Élisée P. Bruneau (talk) 13:52, 13 February 2017 (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. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Momo Monitor (talk • contribs) 13:55, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
On this day, 13 years ago...
|
Hey, Bkonrad. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Lepricavark (talk) 15:17, 13 February 2017 (UTC) |
|
Custom signature
It appears to me that your signature, older ≠ wiser, has little at all to do with your username. This could be confusing, for instance, in the recent WP:AN3 discussion, it was not immediately apparent that you were in fact the editor that was being talked about in the complaint. It is certainly true that you were not actually at fault; still, it is often best to avoid anything that even looks like you could possibly be attempting to confuse people with a signature that doesn't resemble your username (see WP:SIG#CustomSig: A customised signature should make it easy to identify the username, to visit the user's talk-page, and preferably user page.. For example, look at my signature here. My username is Jsharpminor, and my signature is J♯m (talk | contribs). In music chord notation, that would translate to J sharp minor. So not exactly my username, but you can obviously see who's talking, and it has something to do with my username. When I see your signature, I would expect to be redirected to User:OlderDoesNotEqualWiser, but that's clearly not the case. Would you consider changing either your signature, or perhaps your username if you would prefer? You could change it to simply be something like: --Bkonrad older ≠ wiser 06:57, 14 February 2017 (UTC), or anything you prefer. Just my thoughts on the subject. Cheers! J♯m (talk | contribs) 06:57, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) @Jsharpminor: While I'm inclined to agree that it's confusing when a signature doesn't reflect a username, it's interesting that WP:Changing username (which I was looking at yesterday apropos of a different editor), under "Alternatives to a rename", says
If you simply want to change your "public appearance" on talk pages, you can change your signature.
, which seems to support the practice! It depends whether "appearance" means "the name which appears" or just the cosmetic formatting of that name, but its location in that section suggests it can and should be used for a totally different user name. Interpretation of the SIG guideline hinges on whether clicking or hovering on a signature "makes it easy to identify the username". I'd say it doesn't. (I actually have even more of a problem with usernames which don't use the English language alphabet, as it's much easier to identify "Older=/Wiser", even when you have to map it on to "BKonrad", than a series of unrecognisable, hence unmemorable, symbols). PamD 08:27, 14 February 2017 (UTC)- @PamD:, you make some good points. Please understand the context from which I'm coming at this. User:Bkonrad was accused at WP:AN3 and replied with a sig of older ≠ wiser. The accuser said, "Just if anyone don't get it. older ≠ wiser IS User:Bkonrad", which was helpful because otherwise it would have looked like a third party responding in Bkonrad's defense. It's worth noting that Bkonrad was completely cleared, so there's no fault there, but it's also worth noting that the ultimate outcome of the AN3 discussion was that both of his accusers, Élisée P. Bruneau and Momo Monitor were blocked as sockpuppets. It's further worth noting that I'm not an admin, nor particularly well-versed in these sort of issues. However, it always strikes me as really weird when I run across a user whose sig in no way suggests their username. Again, I refer you to my sig as an example. Perhaps, in discussions such as the recent one at AN3, it might have been helpful had Bkonrad identified himself as such in the text of his response? J♯m (talk | contribs) 18:17, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Jsharpminor: You raise a good point. I don't frequent AN boards much and I'll keep it in mind to better identify myself when posting there in the future. I've been using the same signature for over a decade with only infrequent incidents of confusion. Regards, older ≠ wiser 19:06, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
- @PamD:, you make some good points. Please understand the context from which I'm coming at this. User:Bkonrad was accused at WP:AN3 and replied with a sig of older ≠ wiser. The accuser said, "Just if anyone don't get it. older ≠ wiser IS User:Bkonrad", which was helpful because otherwise it would have looked like a third party responding in Bkonrad's defense. It's worth noting that Bkonrad was completely cleared, so there's no fault there, but it's also worth noting that the ultimate outcome of the AN3 discussion was that both of his accusers, Élisée P. Bruneau and Momo Monitor were blocked as sockpuppets. It's further worth noting that I'm not an admin, nor particularly well-versed in these sort of issues. However, it always strikes me as really weird when I run across a user whose sig in no way suggests their username. Again, I refer you to my sig as an example. Perhaps, in discussions such as the recent one at AN3, it might have been helpful had Bkonrad identified himself as such in the text of his response? J♯m (talk | contribs) 18:17, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Teresa May
The established consensus is that a twodabs solution at Teresa May solves all of the problems. I have been patient with those who want to establish a new consensus, but my patience has not resulted in cooperation or any attempt to find an alternate resolution. Please consider this a notice that your last revert, even though your first revert, was edit warring, that you are not part of the discussion at Talk:Theresa May#Hatnote to Teresa May, and that further reverts without discussion may result in a noticeboard notice. Unscintillating (talk) 14:46, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
- With respect, your perception of an established consensus is a phantasm. The discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teresa May (2nd nomination) from July 2016 was to delete Teresa May (actress) (which has since been recreated and appears to be relatively stable). At that point there was some sidebar discussion about disambiguation, but nothing nearly as definitive as you seem to think. Similarly, the discussion you cite at Talk:Theresa May#Hatnote to Teresa May also from July 2016 appears to establish agreement to remove the hatnote altogether following deletion of the actress's article. I'll respond to the points you make in that stale discussion which you've revived there. older ≠ wiser 15:06, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
- Hi again Bkonrad. I've just given Unscintillating an edit-warring caution on his talk page, and hopefully this deters him from going on another reverting spree in future. If not, I think we may have no choice but to report him at WP:AN3RR.--Nevé–selbert 19:55, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
- Just to let you know, I have just now requested temporary full protection for the redirect at WP:RPP#Teresa May.--Nevé–selbert 23:33, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Re: Atana (disambiguation)
Perhaps you were too quick to revert Atana (disambiguation). I quote the Athena article: ‘In Mycenaean Greek, at Knossos a single inscription 𐀀𐀲𐀙𐀡𐀴𐀛𐀊 A-ta-na po-ti-ni-ja /Athana potniya/ appears in the Linear B tablets from the Late Minoan II-era "Room of the Chariot Tablets"; these comprise the earliest Linear B archive anywhere.[10][11] Although Athana potniya often is translated Mistress Athena, it literally means "the Potnia of At(h)ana", which perhaps, means the Lady of Athens;[12]’--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athena#Etymology_of_the_name_and_origins_of_her_cult .’ This is what I referred to in my edit summary and talk page statements I guess you missed. So you see, the article also uses spelling Atana (with dashes to show separate letters but aren't part of the spelling) for either literal or pronunciation, in addition to a second time making clear by putting ‘h’ in parentheses that the ‘h’ is optional and ‘Atana’ is one of the correct versions. I'd appreciate if you could revert your revert. I don't know about the other thing you removed; It seems someone else added that without actual usage on Wikipedia.--dchmelik (t|c) 13:01, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 February 2017
- From the editors: Results from our poll on subscription and delivery, and a new RSS feed
- Recent research: Special issue: Wikipedia in education
- Technology report: Responsive content on desktop; Offline content in Android app
- In the media: The Daily Mail does not run Wikipedia
- Gallery: A Met montage
- Special report: Peer review – a history and call for reviewers
- Op-ed: Wikipedia has cancer
- Featured content: The dominance of articles continues
- Traffic report: Love, football, and politics