User talk:MJL/Archive 33

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Archive 33

Full clerk

Heya, I thought a bot would have notified you, but I wanted to let you know that clerks and ArbCom have promoted you to full clerk. Thanks for your hard work in the past and in the future. Primefac (talk) 08:48, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Welcome back!

Hope you had a nice vacation from Wikipedia. NOW GET BACK TO WORK. QRep2020 (talk) 12:22, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

@QRep2020: lol love the reference. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 13:53, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

ARCA insta-archiving

I got a ping to that ARCA today by an arb; I sent a couple in response. Kinda feels like you shut that discussion down too soon (for no apparent reason). It's only been up for a week, so... why? El_C 21:54, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

@El_C: Arbitrators requested the discussion be closed via the clerks-l list. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 22:00, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Oh, thanks for letting me know. I guess they heard enough from me, then, which is fair. Take it easy. El_C 22:06, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

lol just poor timing, I guess –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 01:34, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Sure... "timing." ;) It's okay, I can annoy ArbCom elsewhere, and I do (do). El_C 06:02, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions review: proposed decision and community review

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions review process. The Proposed Decision phase of the discretionary sanctions review process has now opened. A five-day public review period for the proposed decision, before arbitrators cast votes on the proposed decision, is open through November 18. Any interested editors are invited to comment on the proposed decision talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:56, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

2020 Santa Cruz graduate students' strike

Is the 2020 Santa Cruz graduate students' strike still going on? (There's a new strike now.) I assume not but I was surprised it wasn't updated. —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 02:50, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

@Lights and freedom: Updated now. Thank you! –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 03:34, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

CENT

Hi MJL. I noticed that you recently reverted my edit to CENT by claiming that the RFC is almost over. Typically, RfCs last for a bit longer than two weeks, and I'm wondering if you'd be willing to self-revert to ensure that the discussion is well-advertised. Given that it affects the main page of Wikipedia, I think that this is relevant enough to include in CENT. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 05:08, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

@Red-tailed hawk: Sorry Red-tailed hawk, but the RFC started 2 weeks ago. We're well past the point that it would be useful to get wider input. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 05:15, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Message moved from VPM

Hello. I'd like to ask you to move Maryana's message back to its original location on VP/M. The location was chosen on purpose and VPWMF does say that "Wikimedia Foundation currently does not consider this page to be a communication venue." I'm not going to revert your change but I hope you can see the reasoning for asking you to do so. Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 23:43, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

@Guillaume (WMF):  Done I don't agree with the Foundation not just using the forum we set up for them, but that's not in my power to change I guess.
Apologies, BilledMammal. I believe I moved your comment, but the ping is gonna be messed up. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 00:14, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

@Guillaume (WMF): Can you explain why the Wikimedia Foundation does not consider VPW to be a communications venue? And if it is not, what is the enwiki-WMF communications venue?

I agree with MJL that communication between the WMF and enwiki should be done on the relevant noticeboard. BilledMammal (talk) 00:18, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

I was curious about that and it seems the relevant edits are special:Diff/961933024 following special:Diff/961870116, which maybe should be revisited. Levivich (talk) 01:25, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

I know that barkeep49 posted a status check on the VP's talk page which had most people in agreement that the board isn't working. Despite having a bit of a rocky history, I do think the board would work a lot better if there was a concerted effort by folks on the WMF-side of things to use it for announcements (even if they don't use it for feedback). To me, it just doesn't logically make sense that the CEO's very important announcement about the WMF itself is located on the Misc. Village Pump (where this was the preceding post) rather than the Village Pump exclusively dedicated to WMF affairs as they concern English Wikipedia. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 06:50, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

For the record, I'm not mad at anyone specifically for not using WP:VP (WMF). I just see this as an accessibility issue for new users (who won't know they'll need to check every Village Pump for important updates). The board was also supposed to make life easier for WMF staff trying to contact the English Wikipedia community, but it obviously isn't doing that very well. It's a sad affair... –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 07:08, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

In my view we should nominate the WMF Village Pump for deletion if the WMF isn't using it. As it is, it just leads to people being lured into a venue where they will fail to get the response they're hoping for. Andreas JN466 12:04, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

I supported marking VPWMF as historical in April and still do now. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:20, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

November 2022

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Roman Reigns Fanboy (talk) 20:00, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Contentious topics procedure adopted

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions review process.

The Arbitration Committee has concluded the 2021-22 review of the contentious topics system (formerly known as discretionary sanctions), and its final decision is viewable at the revision process page. As part of the review process, the Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:

The above proposals that are supported by an absolute majority of unrecused active arbitrators are hereby enacted. The drafting arbitrators (CaptainEek, L235, and Wugapodes) are directed to take the actions necessary to bring the proposals enacted by this motion into effect, including by amending the procedures at WP:AC/P and WP:AC/DS. The authority granted to the drafting arbitrators by this motion expires one month after enactment.

The Arbitration Committee thanks all those who have participated in the 2021-22 discretionary sanctions review process and all who have helped bring it to a successful conclusion. This motion concludes the 2021-22 discretionary sanctions review process.

This motion initiates a one-month implementation period for the updates to the contentious topics system. The Arbitration Committee will announce when the initial implementation of the Committee's decision has concluded and the amendments made by the drafting arbitrators in accordance with the Committee's decision take effect. Any editors interested in the implementation process are invited to assist at the implementation talk page, and editors interested in updates may subscribe to the update list.

For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:47, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Contentious topics procedure adopted

Merry Christmas

Nosebagbear (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks

Hello, and Thank you for reviewing Maui (Moana) and moving from Draft to Article form. In case you feel like it, Here's another draft to review: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Melody_(The_Little_Mermaid) 114.75.146.6 (talk) 11:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, MJL!

Happy New Year!

MJL,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 21:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 21:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Hope you’re doing well MJL! Best wishes, The Night Watch (talk) 20:41, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Contentious topics procedure now in effect

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's contentious topics procedure revision process.

In December, the Arbitration Committee adopted the contentious topics procedure, which replaces the former discretionary sanctions system. The contentious topics procedure is now in effect following an initial implementation period.

• For a detailed summary of the changes from the discretionary sanctions system, see WP:DSVSCT.
• A brief guide for administrators may be found at Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Administrator instructions.
• Updated templates may be found at Template:Contentious topics.
• Suggestions and concerns may be directed to the arbitration clerk team at WT:AC/C.

The drafting arbitrators warmly thank all those who have worked to implement the new procedure during this implementation period and beyond. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 19:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Contentious topics procedure now in effect

Suggestion

Hello, MJL! You might be interested in endorsing an essay in which creation I participated – WP:NOCONFED. Of course, this is just a suggestion, nothing more. Cheers! — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 22:56, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Notability (politics)

Can you please start discussion for making this proposed essay into a notability guideline. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 15:47, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Returning

I had a weird impromtu wikibreak for various personal reasons, but I should slowly be coming back now. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 16:58, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for merger of Template:Infobox Indian state legislative assembly constituency

Template:Infobox Indian state legislative assembly constituency has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox Lok Sabha Constituency. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Prarambh20 (talk) 20:54, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thanks for closing that RFC. Andre🚐 20:25, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

@Andrevan: Thank you! I'm always happy to help close those kinds of discussions. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 16:05, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

"Template:Not talk quote inline" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Template:Not talk quote inline has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 23 § Template:Not talk quote inline until a consensus is reached.

Technically it's not a redirect you created, but it goes through {{!tq}}. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:58, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

IMDb (identifier)

Why the change to IMDb (identifier)? Gonnym (talk) 22:44, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

@Gonnym: Same reason for {{YouTube}}. It'll help de-clutter WhatLinksHere for that page. It's a WP:BOLD change, but I think it's worth doing. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 01:04, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Talk header templates

Template:Talk header templates has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:33, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tfdr

Template:Tfdr has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:30, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Comment out of place

In the AlisonW case request, SecretLondon has responded to Deepfriedokra in the latter's area instead of in their own area. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:52, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:26, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Question for you

I think the user you raised an issue with here is yet another sock of this person. Are you aware of them enough to weigh in? If you'd rather not, that's fine; I'll keep trying to figure this out. Thank you! CityOfSilver 19:49, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

@CityOfSilver: I am not, sadly. If I had an idea as to any of their other accounts, then I would've just taken it to WP:SPI. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 21:30, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Sorry

Thanks for reverting me there. I'm not sure what I was thinking. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 19:17, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

@Clovermoss: All good! Just be more careful with editing arbspace since you aren't a clerk. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 19:19, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I should likely avoid it entirely since a reread says it should only be edited by ArbCom members and clerks. If I see what I think is a typo in arbspace at some point again, a comment on the related talk page would likely be a better idea. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 19:24, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Notification of request for Arbitration

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#BrownHairedGirl at CFD and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, RevelationDirect (talk) 21:46, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

MJL, for clarification I listed you as "involved" based on the ANI nomination within a nomination for Laurel Lodged not becasue of any interactions at CFD. (Not sure if those concerns will be handled separately or together though.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 21:46, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I didn't realize you were a clerk there, until you recused yourself! - RevelationDirect (talk) 22:03, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@RevelationDirect: It's all good! I appreciate you putting the case request together. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 05:00, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Talk:Sound of Freedom (film)

ToBeFree won't do a thing to help anyone. The page I was sent to at the Help Desk won't WORK to ask for an edit to the talk page. You look like you're a person who might actually give a damn. Will you be willing to post comments for people who are shut out by the talk page protection? Saikyoryu (talk) 23:35, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@Saikyoryu: I mean sure if there's something you need to say, I'll copy anything you want copied. I can't say I'll do it for everyone or in a timely manner, but I can try my best. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 03:47, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Could you add my reply to Grahaml's comment that started "Zero reasons? They arrested child traffickers."

My comment is, neither the historyvshollywood site or the heavy.com site articles count as Reliable Sources. All they do is repeat self-promotional claims from Ballard and OUR without fact checking. The reliable sources on this topic are also clear that Ballard is at best "inconsistent" with his claims to whether he believes QAnon or not, whether he knows what QAnon is or not, and quite often he claims to not know or not be affiliated with QAnon right before using exact QAnon talking points. He is therefore not credible on this topic just as the fact checkers have shown his claims about his past and his organization's conduct are not reliable. Saikyoryu (talk) 03:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@Saikyoryu:  Done. Also, please try not to let your recent experiences color your judgement of ToBeFree too much. He tries his best, but we're all a little stretched thin when it comes to what we're able to do as volunteers. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 04:02, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Is this really proper, MJL? The page was protected precisely so that editors like this one would NOT be able to participate in the discussion. I personally think that it was a very bad idea to do that, but it is what it is - and now you are acting as a backdoor for some of these editors to get back in. I think you should either delete that comment form the article's talk page, or unprotect the page, so that everyone will be able to participate (especially since you already say above that you won't do this for everyone) Red Slapper (talk) 13:21, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

"precisely so that editors like this one would NOT be able to participate in the discussion." I'm reading the rules and I don't think so. I'm not being disruptive and I'm not being uncivil which is more than I can say for the tone of your comment here or most of what I see you posting there. I'll try to be better than your example. Saikyoryu (talk) 13:54, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Re-read my comment. I think protecting page was a bad idea, and that you (or anyone) should be able to post there. But rightly or wrongly, the page was protected to stop IP users and new users from posting - and what MJL did enabled you to bypass that restriction, in a way that I think is improper. BTW, do you have any relationship to the IP that User:ToBeFree blocked? Red Slapper (talk) 14:01, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

"Trivial edits" [1] Learning and practicing is trivial? You're coming across as very stuck up and uncivil Red Slapper. Saikyoryu (talk) 14:02, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I think edits like this one are trivial, yes. I think comments like the ones you made above are uncivil. I still think you should be able to edit the talk page, but not while it is protected. Do you mind answering the question I aksed you about the IP editor? Red Slapper (talk) 14:37, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I think your insinuation and your attacks on my edits are insulting and violations of Wikipedia:Civility requirement. I was referred to ToBeFree by Wikipedia:Help desk. I see from your talk page that you regularly make personal and uncivil attacks on other people so I am asking MJL here to make you stop. Saikyoryu (talk) 15:29, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I don't think MJL is in a position to "make me stop" whatever it is you think I'm doing, other than posting on their page. But your aggressive tone has solidified my intention to investigate the origins of this account further. Stay tuned. Red Slapper (talk) 16:44, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@Red Slapper: I am allowed to fulfil edit requests if I feel they are not disruptive to the conversation happening. I especially was willing to do it for Saikyoryu because she gains (autoconfirmed) in 2 days anyways. Making her wait that time to just make the same comment she would anyways when Saikyoryu clearly feels frustrated in this exact moment is not productive. The protection was to prevent users from making WP:NOTFORUM comments which this clearly wasn't was. Please, do not bite the newcomers. Also, if you are going to accuse an editor of being a sockpuppet of an IP, then you should probably at least specificy the IP you are talking about because TBF makes a ton of IP blocks.
@Saikyoryu: I can't make Red Slapper stop anything more than you can. However, if you have issues with specific comments that they have said to other users, it's always helpful to include diffs (per Wikipedia:Provide diffs). –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 16:46, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I am sure you are allowed to do this, I just don't think it is proper, for the reasons I outlined above. But I'll have a word with the admin who protected the page and see what they think. Red Slapper (talk) 16:48, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I don't like the fact that Red Slapper just clearly made a threat. If anything they are definitely the aggressive and uncivil one here. Saikyoryu (talk) 18:13, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

MJL, you might want to read this comment from the admin who originally protected the page, and reconsider your actions. Red Slapper (talk) 18:36, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Drama drama :) Thanks MJL, both for dealing with the edit request and for the kind words. Red Slapper, this isn't a fight worth fighting, please disengage. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:17, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

This [2] scares me. It looks like Red Slapper is doing something behind the scenes and is doing so just because they think I will not join their "side" about that talk page. Saikyoryu (talk) 21:26, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Dealing with uncivil behavior and all

First I want to say thank you for your help. Second I want to address the insinuations from Red Slapper above because I don't like the uncivil comments and threats they are making. When my middle school teacher had us do a wikipedia edit camp for a few weeks we were taught that the thing we were supposed to do if we didn't have a specific page to edit was to click the random article link and look for things we could improve. I remembered that there is a help desk page and some of how to do things like putting a link in brackets or that we were taught how to do since asking for citations is important. I am remembering others or looking up the listing pages when I don't remember how to do something or I try something and think I didn't get it right.

If you have any other advice on what I should or shouldn't do I am open to hearing it because I want to make sure I do things right even when wikipedia is confusing or people are saying things that are contradicting each other. Saikyoryu (talk) 19:33, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

If you know of a good spot to ask for some people to help with Alliance Against Sexual Coercion also please? I can tell that the page has writing problems but I am not sure I am good enough to fix them all. Saikyoryu (talk) 19:49, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@Saikyoryu: You more-or-less got it right with adding {{Copy edit}} to the article.

Don't worry too much about the sockpuppetry allegations. It's pretty much a given that any person who displays an iota of competence with Wikipedia gets accused of being a sockpuppet. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 22:20, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I had an idea, would you be willing to give me your perspective on something I'd like to propose for the Talk:Sound of Freedom (film) page? I think it might be helpful to have a list of the key points in the Talk:Sound_of_Freedom_(film)#RfC:_QAnon section and then a couple of subsections for people to post specific Reliable Sources related to each point to try to reduce all the pile up.

For example I think there should be a section where people post to specific dates listed, where the star (Jim Caviezel) the writer/producer (Timothy Ballard), the director, or other people in the promotion for the film made QAnon connected claims at appearances they were specifically involved in to promote the film. That way it can be shown that there are multiple times and the sources can be clearly labeled so we can see "On X day Y person made q-anon references while promoting the film" and it doesn't get all messed up with stuff like Red Slapper and Fred Zepelin and HandThatFeeds over how Red Slapper is arguing "did you see the film."

I am also confused though shouldn't any argument about "did you see the film" [3][4][5] be considered violating the Wikipedia:No original research policy? Saikyoryu (talk) 00:14, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

@Saikyoryu: That seems like a little much. If you want to add something to your sandbox with that kind of information, then you could maybe share it in a comment.

As for the diffs you presented, I'd just ignore what Red Slapper is saying on that talk page. More experienced editors will deal with that if it needs to be addressed. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 03:38, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm confused that link went to something with a "hey" and "hey lol" but it doesn't seem to be mine it has a big list of history? Saikyoryu (talk) 03:41, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Sounds like it sent you to Wikipedia:Sandbox? You can create yours at User:Saikyoryu/sandbox. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 04:11, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

I think I made it. Can you look? I'll try to fill it in tomorrow it's after 11 and Im tired af.. Saikyoryu (talk) 04:20, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Yep, it's been created. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 08:20, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Also should this source be proposed? Is it reliable? https://english.elpais.com/culture/2023-07-17/the-sound-of-qanon-conspiracy-echoes-through-the-most-unexpected-blockbuster-of-the-summer.html Saikyoryu (talk) 01:29, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Almost certainly – it's not on WP:RSPS, and it's a pretty important newspaper (2nd-most circulated in Spain), so I imagine if there was a problem it would be noted there. A quick search of WP:RSN doesn't pull up any concerns, either. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 03:02, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

@Skarmory THANK YOU. I will see what I can do with it once I am able to or if you think you can please try to at that page since it is relevant. Saikyoryu (talk) 03:05, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

@Skarmory and @MJL can I ask you for any help? I am trying to read the sources from the talk page and the article to build the list but it is slow. If you don't want to that's ok too. Saikyoryu (talk) 14:33, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm generally trying to remain uninvolved in the dispute happening over there. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 17:54, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry to say I think I still need your help. It looks like Red Slapper is following me to different pages like [6] now. And he left me a message accusing me of what he did to me. [7]Saikyoryu (talk) 14:22, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

It takes quite some gall to follow me to a page within an hour (my first edit: 01:09, 19 July 2023 , your first: 02:19, 19 July 2023) , and then come complaining that I'm following you. You won't last long here if you continue on this path. Red Slapper (talk) 14:34, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

@Saikyoryu: I have to agree with Red Slapper here. Like I said earlier, please leave them alone and let more experienced users handle any potential misconduct that may arise. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 17:44, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Modern Express Post

ok I need help. This article is messed up, most of the articles don't really have anything to do with it. But it has 11 sources to something? Random stuff? Should it be fixed or just suggested to delete? Saikyoryu (talk) 04:15, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

@Saikyoryu: If an article can be improved rather than deleted, generally go with that. Articles are generally only deleted if they fail WP:Notability. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 17:52, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Can you maybe help with putting the right tags on the top of it? I will try to re-read the sources and see what is valid later today. Saikyoryu (talk) 18:22, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

I added {{expand language}} since it doesn't really fall under any one specific issue (and using the zh-wiki article would probably help). –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 18:41, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Talk:Sound of Freedom (film) request again

Can I ask you to forward my clarification reply to FMSky's question in the Use of "however" in an argumentative fashion thread?

To FMSky on the question of "How is it related to the film or how does it prove ties to the QAnon conspiracy theory?", the interview which includes both Ballard and Caviezel making connections to QAnon conspiracy theories was Peterson interviewing both Ballard and Caviezel for the purpose of promoting the movie. The first line of the Apple Podcast description states "Dr. Jordan B. Peterson discusses the new film “Sound of Freedom,” with star Jim Caviezel and real life inspiration Tim Ballard" and the podcast page also directly promotes the movie. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/372-the-fight-against-worldwide-child-slavery-the/id1184022695?i=1000619149837 Saikyoryu (talk) 16:44, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

@Saikyoryu:  Done. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 17:52, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Sadly it looks like FMSky ignored the talk and deleted the entire part about the interview from Sound of Freedom (film). I left them a message asking them to reconsider. [8] Saikyoryu (talk) 18:34, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

@Saikyoryu: Alright, but don't get your hopes up. If FMSky felt that removing that part was what was best after being the one to write it, then it's highly unlikely he is going to change his mind about it at this point. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 18:43, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

I am going to try to be a little hopeful. [9] Thank you for the suggestion about the sandbox because it made it easier to provide what FMSky asked for. Saikyoryu (talk) 18:59, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Little help?

Hey how do you do the thing where you add a signature showing that it's someone else's comment who didn't sign? Saikyoryu (talk) 01:21, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

I use {{subst:xsign}} to do it. Cheers, –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 03:58, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks but it's not working, it's not adding the signature name and time for them. Any idea what I am doing wrong? Saikyoryu (talk) 12:40, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

@Saikyoryu: If you don't include the name and timestamp in the template, it won't work. For example, to sign my previous post it would have to included like so: {{subst:xign|03:58, 21 July 2023‎ MJL}} (which I got by copying part of a line in the article history). I hope that helps! –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 04:57, 22 July 2023 (UTC)