User talk:Interstellarity/Archives/2021/April
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Dreamy Jazz in topic Amendment request: India-Pakistan closed and archived
 | This page 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. |
"Most influential"... etc.
@Interstellarity: Greetings. You should stop adding "the most influential", "greatest" etc. on the lead of notable people. All of the ones you have added have been reverted; please read MOS:WTW and make sure you garner consensus before making changes to the lede of major articles. Wretchskull (talk) 09:35, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Wretchskull: My apologies. Thanks for reminding me. I noticed that the articles Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, and Leonardo da Vinci use those words in the lead. Are those in violation of that Wikipedia policy you mentioned? Interstellarity (talk) 11:16, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- These are exceptions that prove the rule. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:40, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Edit summaries of William M. Connolley
 | This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
Could an admin assess whether these edit summaries by William M. Connolley are civil? Diffs: [1], [2], [3], [4]. I could raise it to WP:ANI, however, I would prefer to have an independent admin look at it and give feedback on whether the summaries are in line with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Interstellarity (talk) 18:37, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- I'm probably not the best person to reply so I'll leave it open. I saw the same change on Muhammad and felt it was a non-encyclopedic change. Has Muhammad really been waiting 1300 years for some journalist, trying to fill out a few column inches, to decide he's top-40 notable? Probably not. Probably the wiki doesn't need a journalist's opinion on who's worthy of a mention in their listicle either.
- That said, William M. Connolley's summaries are robust, not warm-and-cuddly, but not uncivil either. Cabayi (talk) 19:14, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
- With Cabayi's assessment in mind, I'll add this and close the request:
- Special:Diff/1015276026: a subjective but common concern, with a more detailed explanation than usual; fine
- Special:Diff/1015275848: more subjective than the first diff, basically only stating a disagreement without providing a real explanation – not uncommon, and it's fine
- Special:Diff/1015276311: "spam" is not only a negative description of the content, "spammed" can also refer to other contributions of the editor. When referring to article content added in good faith by someone who clearly didn't intend to do anything described in the lead sentence of Wikipedia:Spam, it's not really a fair assessment, but it summarizes concerns about the edit in a single word, which is acceptable enough and should probably simply be accepted as criticism.
- Special:Diff/1015276237 shouldn't have been sent per WP:ESDONTS.
- That said, reacting to harshly voiced criticism by creating an ANI thread ignores the reasonable concerns expressed with it, and accepting the criticism in such a case is usually the best solution. When responding to someone who discusses in this way, please attempt to ignore the other editor's conduct in your reply and focus on the facts. Responding to the other person's tone makes yourself leave the recommended areas of the pyramid displayed at WP:RCD. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:02, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for assessment, ToBeFree. I try my best to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, many of my edits get reverted, even if I meant well. I try my best to be calm with every editor I meet and especially to AGF. I going to take this to dispute resolution so that we can figure out whether it is encyclopedic to say considered one of the most influential people of all time. The thread below this one is related to this one. You are welcome to take a look at that one and comment your thoughts here. Thanks, Interstellarity (talk) 19:37, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Interstellarity, may I kindly recommend not to push that into any noticeboard, including any of those about dispute resolution? The important point here is not just assuming good faith, it is assuming that the other side could be correct, and that oneself could be completely wrong. This is usually the case in circumstances such as this discussion here. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:43, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- @ToBeFree: OK. Maybe discuss it on a WikiProject talk page somewhere. Not sure where. Interstellarity (talk) 19:50, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Don't? :) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:51, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- @ToBeFree: Actually, because I made the edits on multiple different pages, it's hard to choose which talk page to discuss it one. What do you recommend in this case? Interstellarity (talk) 20:01, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry, that was ambiguous. What I meant to say is "I recommend to drop the stick". :) You've been bold, people disagree about the addition, shit happens, time to move on. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:11, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- @ToBeFree: Thanks for clarifying. Interstellarity (talk) 20:15, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry, that was ambiguous. What I meant to say is "I recommend to drop the stick". :) You've been bold, people disagree about the addition, shit happens, time to move on. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:11, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- @ToBeFree: Actually, because I made the edits on multiple different pages, it's hard to choose which talk page to discuss it one. What do you recommend in this case? Interstellarity (talk) 20:01, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Don't? :) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:51, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- @ToBeFree: OK. Maybe discuss it on a WikiProject talk page somewhere. Not sure where. Interstellarity (talk) 19:50, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Interstellarity, may I kindly recommend not to push that into any noticeboard, including any of those about dispute resolution? The important point here is not just assuming good faith, it is assuming that the other side could be correct, and that oneself could be completely wrong. This is usually the case in circumstances such as this discussion here. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:43, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for assessment, ToBeFree. I try my best to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, many of my edits get reverted, even if I meant well. I try my best to be calm with every editor I meet and especially to AGF. I going to take this to dispute resolution so that we can figure out whether it is encyclopedic to say considered one of the most influential people of all time. The thread below this one is related to this one. You are welcome to take a look at that one and comment your thoughts here. Thanks, Interstellarity (talk) 19:37, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).
Administrator changes
Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS
Guideline and policy news
- Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
- Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the
delete-redirectuserright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.
Technical news
- When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
- Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)
Arbitration
- A community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure is open until April 25.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
TheWikiWizard-April 2021
Hello, Interstellarity! Here is the April 2021 issue of TheWikiWizard.
Wikipedia News
- MediaWiki has a new logo. Looks great, doesn't it?
- Did you get to see the April Fools DYK for the Main Page? If not, catch them here (Under April 1)
- In the Beta Features, try out "Discussion tools" it is a very useful feature for replying to talkpage messages. You will need an account to do so!
Memorials
- Pi zero has passed away. Our condolences go out for Pi zero and anyone who knew him. Thank you Pi zero for your service here at Wikimedia. We are very sorry to hear this. We will never forget your valuable contributions to Wikipedia and it's sister projects.
Humour
Tsugaru's Humour Section
- April Showers can't Bring May Flowers, if the Flowers ran away to June!
- You can't get in trouble, if you don't cause trouble!
- The May Flowers can't be flowers if they are roses!
Please find CanadianOtaku's Humour Section below
- Sadly, there was no edit war of 2021, maybe next year.
- This joke space is up for rent!
- You too can be a hacker by removing everything in an article!
- Error 410: I dropped this joke and I can't find it.
Editor's Notes
- Just a reminder that TWW is delivered between the 16th to the 20th of each month
- Like this Issue? Got Feedback? Spot a mistake? Discuss this issue here
To change your subscription, or to subscribe click Here. Enjoy this Issue and stay safe! --つがる Talk to つがる:) 🍁 23:53, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
- This Issue was delivered to you by --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:56, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
The Signpost: 25 April 2021
- From the editor: A change is gonna come
- Disinformation report: Paid editing by a former head of state's business enterprise
- In the media: Fernando, governance, and rugby
- Opinion: The (Universal) Code of Conduct
- Op-Ed: A Little Fun Goes A Long Way
- Changing the world: The reach of protest images on Wikipedia
- Recent research: Quality of aquatic and anatomical articles
- Traffic report: The verdict is guilty, guilty, guilty
- News from Wiki Education: Encouraging professional physicists to engage in outreach on Wikipedia
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:32, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Amendment request: India-Pakistan closed and archived
The amendment request you filed, Amendment request: India-Pakistan, has been closed and archived. You can view a permalink of the amendment request here. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 23:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC)