User talk:Voorts/Archive 36
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Voorts. 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 30 | ← | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | Archive 36 | Archive 37 | Archive 38 | → | Archive 40 |
TFA
 | |
| story · music · places |
|---|
Thank you today for Cora Agnes Benneson, introduced: "Cora Agnes Benneson was a late-19th and early-20th century American attorney. She was one of the first women to open her own law practice in New England, a member of several organizations, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and an accomplished writer and lecturer. Benneson was also a complicated figure; she held nativist beliefs and her feminism saw marriage and raising children as natural for women (although she herself never married nor had children)."! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Continuing from her talk, because it's not just that article. In encyclopedias, written or web, I am used to seeing four things right at the beginning of a biogaphy: when and where born, when and where died. Look at the German Wikipedia, for example de:Mozart. In the English Wikipedia, however, these facts are expected to be in the infobox, and therefore the places of birth and death can be omitted from the lead, look at Mozart. Can we agree so far? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that the average reader of Wikipedia expects there to be an infobox or certain facts to be in it. To figure that out, I think we'd have to look at something like what percentage of the most-visited articles have infoboxes. Both the German and English Mozart articles look fine to me; it's just a different way of presenting the same information. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps I wasn't clear, - English is not my first language. I believe German and English have different concepts, German has the info (DOB, POB, DOD, POD) in the first sentence, English has it in the infobox. The English MoS seems to rely on an infobox, and can thus do without the places in the prose. I believe that an article without infobox should have this information in the first sentence, like the Germans (and Italians ...) do. I also believe that the English system is better, freeing the prose from clutter and offering the facts on the side (only) for those who care. - Did you know that the infobox for Mozart was the result of several RfCs over a decade, the last closed in 2023. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:38, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yesterday I listened in concert to Mozart's Clarinet Quintet, with Sabine Meyer: a delight (yt with same people). - Today's story is about Ruth Hesse, with a pic in the article only, sadly. I found it difficult to point at a YouTube sample, because yes, her signature roles - the Nurse and Brangäne - exist in great full-length operas with great casts, but hard to find her. - Talking of YouTube: today I was pointed at Elijah by a friend who performed in the concert of the Dessoff Choirs in their centenary year, and I'm quite impressed by samples (beginning and No. 32 where I linked it) - enjoy! --(forgot to sign)
- Congrats to another GA! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for improving article quality in July! - Today's story is about a photographer who took iconic pictures, especially View from Williamsburg, Brooklyn, on Manhattan, 9/11, yesterday's was a great mezzo, and on Thursday we watched a sublime ballerina. If that's not enough my talk offers chamber music from two amazing concerts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:18, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Main Page history/2024 July 30b will have a baritone, a violinist, a composer and a Bach cantata, - almost too much, and the composer's article, Wolfgang Rihm, should be better, help wanted. - Plenty of music on my parents anniversary day ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:14, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Closure math
In this close, you include as part of your rationale that Consensus for both sides had about equal numerical support
. I count roughly 12 supports and 4 opposes, which does not seem at all equal. There are other comments I could make about the strength of the arguments presented (WP:NOTVOTE of course being a thing), but given the level of support, I was wondering if you'd be willing to withdraw your close and let someone else make one independently? I will be inclined to raise the discussion for a close review if you are not. Best, Sdkb talk 02:46, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, that was a bit unclear and I've clarified it now. That comment was supposed to be referring to the argument over page size, not the total number of !votes. Since arguments on both side of that issue had about equal support, I think it's a wash. voorts (talk/contributions) 14:43, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Sdkb talk 15:32, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – August 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2024).
Technical news
- Global blocks may now target accounts as well as IP's. Administrators may locally unblock when appropriate.
- Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.
Arbitration
- The Arbitration Committee appointed the following administrators to the conflict of interest volunteer response team: Bilby, Extraordinary Writ
You've got mail!
Message added 04:48, 8 August 2024 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
WP:CLOSECHALLENGE for Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Designated RfA monitors#Striking votes
Hi Voorts! First, I want to say thank you for closing Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Designated RfA monitors. Closing is a thankless task, and for the most part I think you did fabulously (from this very much INVOVLED editor's perspective). I do think you misread the consensus at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Designated RfA monitors § Striking votes. Statement 5 says Whether or not the !vote itself can be struck is not specified in this statement
(emphasis mine), but statement 3 only concerns the circumstances in which a !vote itself can be struck from the tally. I don't see those as incompatible with one another
– I see them as two halves of a whole, one dealing with striking !votes themselves and one dealing with !vote rationales. I will add that I intended to support both statements passing simultaneously, and Valereee said so in her !vote for statement 5 (she said Support, although I also do support being able to strike the vote itself too
and supported statement 3) Therefore, I think there is consensus for both statements 3 and 5. Best, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:56, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think I misread these as mutually exclusive statements, where only one would be adopted. I guess I misunderstood the intent. I will amend my close. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:11, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- @HouseBlaster:
Done voorts (talk/contributions) 02:30, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you :) HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 02:33, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- @HouseBlaster:
The Signpost: 14 August 2024
- In the media: Portland pol profile paid for from public purse
- In focus: Twitter marks the spot
- News and notes: Another Wikimania has concluded.
- Special report: Nano or just nothing: Will nano go nuclear?
- Opinion: HouseBlaster's RfA debriefing
- Traffic report: Ball games, movies, elections, but nothing really weird
- Humour: I'm proud to be a template
GA review
Hey voorts, mind if I give Fan wiki a review? I understand you might want to get some variety in reviewers. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 19:45, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Please do, thanks! voorts (talk/contributions) 19:48, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fan wiki you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Rollinginhisgrave -- Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 21:44, 17 August 2024 (UTC)