User talk:Newyorkbrad/Archive/2019/Nov

A plea for you!

	Dear Newyorkbrad,
	Please run for Arbcom. Thank you for your kind consideration of this request. EllenCT (talk) 21:22, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Hmmm... What are we to make of the fact that the original caption to the illustration above was “GET AWAY FROM HERE BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE”??? EEng 00:54, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Well-spotted, sir. I was searching earlier for the perfect quotation from ENGR, but I didn't think to check the caption! (I'll respond to the suggestion about ArbCom later in the week.) Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:08, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

When AGF is exhausted

If you want an ENGR quote epitomizing the ArbCom experience, let me suggest any of

I have not much in the way of proof with which to back it up; and, even if they believe me, the clews which I can give them are so vague that it is a question whether justice will be done.

or

He was off in one of those hysterical outbursts which come upon a strong nature when some great crisis is over and gone. Presently he came to himself once more, very weary and pale-looking. "I have been making a fool of myself," he gasped.

or (perhaps most fittingly and pithily)

It was useless, however.

(All stalkers who know what ENGR is, give The Sign.) EEng 07:00, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

I had a clews once, but it was scrapped after a nasty accident at ArbCom. Victor Hatherley 123 (talk) 10:58, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

@EEng:

1. It is a barbarism to mix the Paget Strand illustrations with the American version of the text.
2. Today's trivia question: what do the coiner of abbreviations such as "ENGR" and I have in common?
3. And back on the subject of Sidney Paget's illustrations, see here. Newyorkbrad (talk) 13:11, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

I went for some barbarism once..... but I got put off by all those East European accents. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:19, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Both lawyers. You're going to have to try harder than that. EEng 16:37, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Not the answer. Hint: There are five of us in the category. Newyorkbrad (talk)

Not the answer you had in mind I guess, but still, you have to give me some credit. EEng 22:28, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

People who are technically in breach of WP:COI for editing the page of a society which he founded and of which you're a member? ‑ Iridescent 17:28, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Wait... Newyorkbrad is Christopher Morley? EEng 18:19, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Our founder

-EEng

Ah, I thought Christ was a founder member, but apparently he only joined in 1949. Mea culpa. ‑ Iridescent 18:23, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

The founding was in 1934 but the first investitures were in 1944. Christ was in the third investiture class, together with others including Rex Stout, Anthony Boucher, and Jim Montgomery. (And there are a heck of a lot more than five people on-wiki with COIs or pseudo-COIs.) Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:25, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

How very dare you!! --Yours sincerely, Looking for £2m 123 (talk) 20:39, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Brad, I know it's a big ask, like a REALLY big ask. But please do consider this request. I'm not going around asking many people to fulfil this role, but you should be a choice for those of us who are looking for real, accessible, circumspect Arbs, not just hat-gathering, "might as well"ers. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 21:41, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

I was a circumspect hat-gatherer once, but I found out I was too Jewish. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:47, 8 November 2019 (UTC) p.s. but what Ramblo says above does make sense.

Newyorkbrad, ("the Committee's longest-serving member") before...

...and after.

-EEng

• • I get the impression you're going to decide today-ish, and you're leaning against. I already said this, but (a) you archived that thread, and (b) it bears repeating, so you hear it once more before deciding: this year, we could REALLY use someone wise, kind-hearted, and with a long institutional memory. No matter what, we're probably going to get a lot of newbies; there are are only 4 arbs continuing their term, and we're re-expanding. I've seen others say we need lots of new blood; I'm not sure I agree. But no matter what, newbies need help getting their bearings. I know we'll likely have Dave as well (who wouldn't vote for Dave?), but we could really use one more veteran, and I worry Opabinia is more obstinate than you and so more likely to decline. If you just want to do it for 1 year, until they've gained experience, resign next December and we'll elect a replacement then. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:44, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

I should probably add, per TRM, it's a big ask and I know it's a big ask. I don't do it lightly; I know it would probably involve making someone I respect incrementally more miserable. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:00, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Fully endorse what Floquenbeam says. You know it makes sense. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:56, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone who weighed in on this and the prior thread. I'm traveling this weekend and will follow up on this probably on Monday. Another trivia hint: H. C. Potter is the third member of the group of five. Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:10, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Does it sound like an Algonquian word? ("it" being what you and those guys have in common) And I, too, would like to see you back on the committee). ---Sluzzelin talk 18:58, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

• Well this is bloody good news! – SchroCat (talk) 18:10, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

You don't get my golden ticket, but you get my unmitigated support. Thanks for stepping up. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 18:30, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

You're welcome to have mine. Enjoy the ride! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:21, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Tom Spurgeon

On 14 November 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Tom Spurgeon, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Thryduulf (talk) 20:24, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

lecture notes

Thank you for the voice of reason at AE, and particularly for your comments about the said lecture notes. Please see my comment there about why a block declaring that source unreliable and warranting a block is very problematiuc.In my professional judgement, and I have published peer review papers on history topics, such a source is acceptable in peer review works (it is in fact used in a number of peer reviewed journals). If one can get blocked for using a source that is acceptable in academia, this is very problematic. In fact I wonder if I should ask an arbitrator, or an admin who frequents AE, to review every source I intend to use in this topic area (to avoid POINT, of course I wouldn't submit sources that are obviously fine, like an average academic book or journal; but even looking at some of my recent articles from the last two months related to WWII I can think of several sources I would like to hear a second opinion on now - I actually listed some of them in my ARBCA comments, through nobody has so far commented about any source there, explicitly). The alternative is risking being reported for the first violation and getting a block, and I am not willing to risk that. Will the committee or AE or even an individual admin enjoy this kind of requests, the volume of which can quickly become overwhelming? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:25, 20 November 2019 (UTC)