User talk:Atsme/Archive 36

Archive 30

←

Archive 34

Archive 35

Archive 36

Archive 37

Archive 38

→

Archive 40

COVID time

Hi Atsme, hope you are staying safe and observing quarantines as best you can in this time of coronavirus! -Darouet (talk) 02:32, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for thinking of me, sweet Darouet - my hopes for you are the same. Being somewhat of a hermit in RL, I find that being quarantined is not too difficult a task, but I must confess...I am currently quarantined on a beautiful little island in the Dutch Caribbean where I'm enjoying an oceanfront view. Take care, my wikifriend! ^Atsme _Talk 📧 11:40, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Your location is hardly conducive to prolific editing on Wikipedia, at least in my eyes. I cannot think of many other locales better to shelter in place. Enjoy! dawnleelynn^(talk) 17:41, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Indeed. That island still has not confirmed cases of COVID-19 within its borders, and they've barred the doors so nobody with it can get in! wbm1058 (talk) 21:10, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Maybe we should consider having a Caribbean editathon here when flu season is over. 😷🤒 ^Atsme _Talk 📧 21:27, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Oh, nooooooooooooooooo!!! 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Bonaire! Who are the contributors to this article? Maybe y'all can get together for an editathon after this thing is vanquished! wbm1058 (talk) 22:36, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

How's it going, wbm1058? I spoke to one of the local reporters here for Live 99 FM, and he said the 1st case (person who had visited Aruba) tested positive but has already recovered. The 2nd case was iffy - they couldn't tell if the person was + or - so they called it + and quarantined. That's all I know at this point. As for the editor of that article, I don't have a clue. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 00:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

redo ping Wbm1058 ^Atsme _Talk 📧 00:24, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Can I be your student for NPPSCHOOL?

Hi, Can I be your student for NPPSCHOOL? :) - Tatupiplu'^talk 01:37, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Sure you can. I'll ping you when it's time. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 02:20, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Or better yet, tatupiplu, you let me know when you're feeling up to it. We can take it slow - there's no deadlines on WP. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 02:25, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

^Atsme, We can start from today :) - Tatupiplu'^talk 09:54, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

That is wonderful news, Tatupiplu' - I am happy to know you are feeling better. My internet issues appear to be fixed now...I can't remember the exact steps I took to fix the problem but it's working as it should so I'm good to go on my end, too. I will ping you when the first set of lessons are ready for you. Remember, there are no stupid questions, so please feel free to ask me about anything. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 12:24, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Innocent Paki

Hi Atsme! I want to owe you an apology and request you to withdraw from the decision of resigning as my mentor. Under your teachings, I've learnt alot, and you are one of my inspirations on Wikipedia. I also have used your style of inserting images on Wiki articles, and now I really want to learn more from you. I am really very sorry for any type of disobedience. I have unlimited respect for my each and every teacher. Give me at least one chance. Please withdraw from decision of resignation and let me help in seeking guidance from you🙏. I shall be very grateful to you. Yours obediently, Innocent Paki (talk) 12:11, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

It's ok, Innocent Paki - I don't expect "obedience"...I expect discussion, collaboration, and respect for consensus. Having said that, we must also keep in mind that consensus can change which is why discussion is important. I happily accept your olive branch, and will be your mentor once again. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 12:19, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for being my mentor once again. I can't express my happiness on your positive response. You have actually a heart of gold. I assure you that I'll try my best to learn maximum from your teachings and shall follow them all while editing on Wikipedia. Thanks once again. :) Innocent Paki (talk) 15:21, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Willa Brown

On 28 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Willa Brown, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Willa Brown's efforts to train African-American pilots in the United States led to the creation of the Tuskegee Airmen? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Willa Brown. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Willa Brown), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

ABC islands or ABC Islands?

Talk:ABC islands#Requested move 28 April 2020 – wbm1058 (talk) 20:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Our brief discussion

Guy Macon, sometimes the thoughts I'm trying to express are very clear in my head, but my typing screws-up the translation. I will also add that most of my adult life has been void of political and religious discussion, so something must have happened after I took early retirement (maybe too early) that gave those two taboo topics the breath of life. Hopefully, it will be short-lived. Anyway, I brought our brief discussion here because it's a more relaxed environment - it's my happy place - and I can better explain the point I was trying to make. I did not look at the content, or the sources because I considered sources a content issue for which we have inline templates, and we have article TPs for discussion. I looked only at the diffs to see if they supported the allegations, and I wasn't convinced. It appeared to me the conflict was more about the editor's POV than his behavior - which is something I can relate to - and quite frankly, I take issue with that being a reason for any form of admin action. I don't think it's our place to ridicule a person's spiritual or political beliefs. It's fine to discuss them in a collegial manner - not unlike my religious discussion with MPants over his insistence that Picard was a better captain than Kirk, see User_talk:MjolnirPants/Archives/Archive_4#hot diggity break#1. He carried on and on, and my mind was not changed one iota...but we did share some laughs. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 02:17, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Yep, I agree with you. The OP just replied to me with this comment, "This is offensive to Christians, obviously, and there is no defense for it, just because you dislike Messianic Judaism" and that is his reason for trying to TBAN Izak. This is, as I said, one of the most egregious examples of how consensus shows how Wikipedia can get it so wrong. If something is offensive, that doesn't mean you TBAN someone. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 16:37, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Sad about IZAK, but at the same time I was actually pleasantly surprised by Bish's reasonable decision to limit her admin action to just that article & its TP, which I believe will serve in a productive way, even if it is forcing him to take time away. Jiminy Cricket, Sir Joseph, that editor has been here for 17 years, and his block log is still pretty amazing considering the topics he edits in. It's almost impossible to escape some of the craftily executed POV railroadings. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 01:26, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Yep, it was the same thing with me and I highlighted that on my user page, and I could probably expand that into an essay. And IIRC, Izak no longer edits the IP area, something I try to do as well, I strip my watchlist every so often. The downside to that, is just like our politics pages, the encyclopedia is very biased and one-sided because the way any ARBCOM enforced area works is you need numbers and it's all a game with 24 hour, 1RR, etc. so it's just not as fun as it used to be to edit. It is funny you mention railroading, you might want to take a look at my userpage, ever since I got railroaded, I changed my page. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 02:34, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Reply

Yes, she's splendid. However there are 3 of us on the current shindig. Why d'you ask? Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:16, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I was just referencing her adminship. It was a drive-by quickie. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 21:17, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I just saw her talk page. Quite a surprise. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:22, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

You are amazing, too, CC!! I have admired your work and selfless contributions to the project. It has always been a pleasure to collaborate with both of you. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 21:25, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

That's very kind. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:32, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. Sent at 08:45, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Removal from RfC feedback service

Hi. I see you removed yourself from the RfC feedback service shortly after Yapperbot was fired up. Because the old bot (Legobot) had stopped handling the service, Yapperbot was created. Unfortunately, because of a backlog, the bot dumped the maximum number of monthly notices. A number of editors, including me, were unhappy to be deluged by so many notices on one day. This is being addressed, and you should be able to restore yourself without it happening again. This issue is being discussed here:

Further information: User_talk:Yapperbot § Frequency_functionality_continued

Also, thx for the kind words at WP:ARCA. --David Tornheim (talk) 01:18, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Thx for update, David!! ^Atsme _Talk 📧 13:34, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Daniel DiSalvo

What do you think of Draft:Daniel DiSalvo? Ready for mainspace, or still needing work? Cheers! BD2412 T 23:15, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

BD2412 - I fixed the title of his paper (see edit summary) and cited the source. I think it's ready to go. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 15:00, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! It is now live. BD2412 T 15:10, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

New vacation destination

I've been to 48 of the 50 states but now I see we have a new state available to go vacation at, namely the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone. Sounds like a great place...no police, they want to replace prisons and treat the convicts with "transformative care"...what great ideas. I also like the whole plan to ensure all get "free public housing, because housing is a right, not a privilege" plan which means I can finally live in a state where I can get free housing.--MONGO (talk) 02:57, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

That is sooo Washington! The voters are getting exactly what they voted for and now have cause to celebrate. A safe space with no guns ... except for the one big gun toted by the area's mob boss who is there to keep order over his tenants and protect them from harm ... unless they do or say something he doesnt like. Yay, no police! No law and order .... just anarchy!! It must be the Utopia they've always wanted! ^Atsme _Talk 📧 06:34, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Part of the defunding the police ideas must make many a battered wife very happy. Sending social workers to deal with a drug or alcohol induced angry husband instead of those gun toting police will surely make for a calmer situation, especially if the husband is about to slit his wife's throat. They can show up with flowers and read poetry to calm things down. And it's really a violation of a persons civil rights to get arrested for DUI...drunks pay road taxes too most of the time. Oh and hey...I dont see what the problem is if BLM wants to deface the monument of the Massachusetts 54th Regiment...makes perfect sense!--MONGO (talk) 20:25, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Firstly, they instituted a border wall and immigration controls at the border, (which is very ironic) so who knows if they'll let you in. As for defacing statues, in Philadelphia, the protesters defaced the statue of Matthias_W._Baldwin, an abolitionist, who gave money to establish a school for African-American children and who lost money to competition because of his position on slavery. And this was in the 1830's, well before it became popular. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 00:43, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

It has no end. Before long, since they owned slaves, Washington and Jefferson will be stripped of their American citizenship, their homes boarded up then burned, their graves desecrated, their statures destroyed. These monuments are all better left in place, not necessarily as a place for veneration but as a place for education. Otherwise, we are no different than the Taliban who when deciding ancient Buddist statues offended them, blew them up. Or ISIS who sought to destroy history that offended them.--MONGO (talk) 04:27, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

As said, now they are indeed tearing down statues of Washington. This is an inevitable outcome.[1]--MONGO (talk) 11:27, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Talk page watchers

I realize the bulk of my tpw have varying political views, some don't have any political views at all, so in a very neutral manner, I wanted to advise everyone that there is an RfC at Talk:Turning Point USA#RfC: Concerning removal of material from this article that might interest you. Happy editing. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 17:02, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Proud to be a talk page stalker here! El_C 18:15, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

And I am proud to have you as a tpw, even if we don't agree!! I consider ALL input, and I take it to heart. Anyone who knows me, knows that. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 18:19, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

File names

When you are correcting capitalization of words such as "Iron Age", please take care not to break links to files which use lower case, such as File:Iron age hillfort, Sudbrook.jpg. Correcting the name of the file itself breaks the link. I've reverted your change in that case, but I'm sure there are others not on my watchlist. Thanks. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:05, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

My apologies Ghmyrtle - I do try to catch image names and will try harder - this is the first one that got by me to date. Similar issues crop-up in the misspellings of names and I’ve caught those. I wonder if correcting 300+/- miscapitalizations/misspellings at a time is worth the risk of letting 1 or 2 errors inadvertently slip thru...??? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 11:33, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Probably - but I only caught that one because it's local and on my watchlist. Is it not possible to do a search for file names with lower case titles? Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:31, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I just posted a question on the TP of Redrose64. If the modification I asked about is feasible, it will save hours of volunteer time. That way, we'll have all that extra time to fight vandals and get into trouble cracking jokes on the dramah boards. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 13:08, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) THIS is the edit with the gotcha. Delighted to see another editor using JWB, even if they haven't yet officially joined our little club. I think I have an answer, let me test it and then I'll document the solution. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:08, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Documenting how to skip filenames when using JWB to fix miscapitalizations

• Go to the "Skip" tab in JWB.
• In the "When page contains:" box enter \[\[(File|Image):.*ron age.*\]\]
  • ron age will catch both "Iron age" and "iron age". This will stop it from capitalizing the "a" within filenames. Just change this part when working on a different miscap fix.
• Check the box for Regular expression.
• You're good to go. You will need to manually fix the pages that this check skips.
• P.S. Generally editors put user categories on their user pages rather than user talk ;) wbm1058 (talk) 17:50, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Joe Biden

Just letting you know that I ended up opening a community reassessment for Joe Biden. You can find it at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Joe Biden/1 AIRcorn (talk) 23:37, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Ooh! We can just reassess people like that? I vote that we reassess Ryan Seacrest, he's really overexposed considering his complete lack of personality. creffett (talk) 23:52, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Not something to joke about, Creffett - having an article like that one with a GA symbol on it is the joke because it makes a mockery of the process. It certainly lessens the credibility of your first GA and what you went through to get it promoted, don't you think? Go back and see how that article got promoted 12 yrs ago, and how prior noms didn't get off the ground, but a short 2 days after the Sept 17 2008 fail, it was promoted to GA. It should have had a GAR when it first doubled in size. If we're going to start ignoring our GA criteria, we might as well slap a GA symbol on all our articles and to hell with the process or just get rid of the process all together. COI editors will love that, but then what purpose will it serve if all articles have a GA symbol? There has to be some criteria met and maintained in order to make it worth the effort to promote an article to GA. I followed the GAR process in good faith when I filed for delisting - GA/FA has always been my focus on WP - and my reasons for delisting the Biden article were validated by the delist arguments. To say a 12 yr old GA should not be delisted despite it being expanded to over twice its size to a point that it goes beyond accepted WP:Article length, has maintenance tags, was under full PP and is now under semi-PP with 1RR restrictions and DS because of edit warring and instability, not to mention that it fails NPOV, is an extremely weak argument. Happy editing! ^Atsme _Talk 📧 01:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Reading over the GAR I'm a bit troubled...it feels like you are using the Good Article status as a cudgel in a content dispute and steamrolling over the questions/objections of the uninvolved people who specialize in GAR. At a minimum you should probably allow someone else who is less involved at the article to close the reassessment. (It looks like you and Petrarchan47 were leading the charge in getting the Tara Reade allegations covered in the article.) ~Awilley (talk) 23:57, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

I think you might be mistaken. I understand how you feel on the Biden stuff but that is not really a fair assessment given the broad community support. PackMecEng (talk) 00:07, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Awilley, I am very disappointed in your comment - you made it political for no reason, and it further proves your bias against me. You came here with a preconceived notion. The reason I can say that is supported by the following diffs - in particular, look at my comment in #3:

1. Talk:Donald Trump/GA3
2. Talk:Donald Trump/Archive_55#Can we nominate Donald Trump as a Good Article?
3. Talk:Donald Trump/Archive 102#GA nomination - see my comment.

^Atsme _Talk 📧 01:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't see Atsme and the other editor "leading the charge". That sounds kind of as if they would be WP:NOTHERE. Also there are a handful of editors with serious behavioral problems on those articles who have fomented the interminable discussions by introducing lots of extraneous assertions. Not Atsme or Petrarchan. SPECIFICO talk 16:51, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

No, Atsme was not "leading the charge". As for Petra, since when do we casually use such suggestive-of-ill-intent language about our fellow editors? Petra has worked long and hard to improve this encyclopedia and should not be referred to as one who is "leading the charge" at the Biden article. Gandydancer (talk) 17:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Awilley Why am I just seeing this now? Would you please ping me the next time you cast aspersions my way? Thanks man. petrarchan47คุก 16:24, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Petrarchan47: If if it is the phrase "leading the charge" that you think is "aspersions", then perhaps there's a disconnect between what I thought the phrase means and how you interpreted it. I meant it in the sense of being one of the early and more vocal advocates for the change. I will try to remember to ping you if I happen to mention your username in the future. ~Awilley (talk) 21:35, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hmmm...#2 in my appeal to you, Awilley - "MelanieN (taking her to WP:AN without making any attempt to resolve the issue with her first, and then not even notifying her about the thread. Got double standards? It just keeps adding up. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 21:41, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

This isn't WP:AN. ~Awilley (talk) 22:04, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

It wasn't within 10 minutes, either. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 22:10, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Underwater domain awareness

Hi Atsme,

I hope you are holding onto your sanity and in good health otherwise. I have transferred Underwater domain awareness to mainspace after the latest OTRS ticket covering permissions. There are two apparent violations of the same text reported by Earwig, and both sources are by the same author, so we can reasonably assume that the one in the ticket covers the work.

I have found it necessary to revert a reversion of the cleanup work done by Wikipedians to content which was excessively biased/India-centric, to make the article reasonably neutral. There are still a few items that lack adequate references, but they do not look highly controversial, so fixing slowly. I also deleted a "Conclusions" section as inherently unsuitable for an encyclopedia, but there may be good content and references that went out with the bathwater, so I am going to see if there is anything salvageable.

Please take a look and see if I have missed anything important. I am struggling with poor and intermittent internet connectivity and my efficiency is down the tubes.

Otherwise I remain well. Cheers,· · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 08:51, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Peter - I will try to review it today and let you know. Happy to hear you remain well, and are staying busy. As for salvageable, I would not expect anything less from a commercial diver or you as an admin. 😊 Good luck with the internet. I recently went through something similar, so you have my sympathy. Best always ^Atsme _Talk 📧 11:52, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Have you seen ......

This from Fox about this from Sanger? Smallbones_(smalltalk) 01:05, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Not until I read your comment. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 01:19, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Atsme, well, just look at the Joe Biden talk page and the discussion about his latest gaffe about black people who vote for Trump aren't black enough. We all know that would have been in the Trump article within minutes. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 01:36, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

There's quite the spirited discussion about it on Jimbo talk, should you feel the desire to wade directly into the fray... CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 01:42, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

CaptainEek, don't forget this one: [2] Biden has a history of making statements like this, or this, [3] but because he's a D it's noticeably absent from the article. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 01:52, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

My new favorite is about his rival from when he was a pool security guard, the imposing CornPop. I heard he was a real bad dude.[4] PackMecEng (talk) 02:49, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

• So I start User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 240#Where political bias is taking us on April 29, 2020 and on May 14, 2020 Larry S. does this. Ya think maybe he's watching Jimbo's page? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 02:53, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

NHL Amateur Drafts

Allow me to enlighten you. As it happens, the NHL Amateur/Entry Draft (depending on the year) is the formal name of the event, which a simple glance at the articles from which you were doing hundreds of automated changes -- or, as readily, discussed what you contemplated doing with the ice hockey WikiProject if you are not yourself knowledgeable about the subject -- would have revealed. The redirects as they stood were proper, and I invite you to promptly reverse them. Ravenswing 05:44, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the redirect for 1977 NHL Amateur Draft goes to 1977 NHL amateur draft, so there is an obvious disagreement in what you believe should be shown as uppercase, and unless you can get all of those article names changed to uppercase, we are obliged to not link to miscapitalized names that use redirects to the correct article name - and there are a lot them Ravenswing as Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked miscapitalizations will support. I believe wbm1058 can probably explain it better as he does quite a bit of work in that area, and will let me know if I am incorrect. If that does turn out to be the case, I will promptly revert my edits and apologize for the misunderstanding. Thank you - ^Atsme _Talk 📧 14:39, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry I have let this issue incubate without addressing it sooner. Atsme has done nothing wrong, she has just been gnoming in an area where I also work. Let's take this matter off her talk page and follow up at WT:WikiProject Ice Hockey#Amateur Draft redirects. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

FYI, some background from a recent ANI discussion I just found. wbm1058 (talk) 18:48, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Now it's official: "There is a clear absence of consensus for the moves proposed." – wbm1058 (talk) 14:20, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

It's not often

that I describe somebody (via a link) as similar to Socrates and a horsefly (and all in one word)! Please let me know what you think of my intro. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 17:24, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Atsme. You have new messages at Bri's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

😂 A horsefly is something I can readily relate to, Smallbones. We raise them in Texas. As for philosophy, my Socrates is Will Rogers, but you've probably already guessed that by now. Oh, and I enjoyed reading your Meltdown May article!! ^Atsme _Talk 📧 22:50, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Handy links to find your subpages

• Subpages
• Talk subpages

Thought you might find these useful. – wbm1058 (talk) 13:48, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Absolutely!! Thank you!! ^Atsme _Talk 📧 13:54, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Wbm1058 - Can you move User:Atsme/Canine notability to Draft space so others can contribute, and when/if we move it to WP:WikiProject Dogs/Sources and notability the history goes with it, or can that also happen if we keep it in my user space and then move it? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 14:01, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

I dunno, draft namespace is primarily for incubating articles, not new project guidelines. Why not just move it straight to the dogs project. It's an "essay" while it's a work in progress, then when it's "done" you can have a discussion to get a consensus to promote it to guideline status.

– wbm1058 (talk) 14:33, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

There are various subject-specific notability guidelines such as Wikipedia:Notability (people), and Wikipedia:Notability (canine) would follow that pattern. There are also a few reliable source guides such as Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine). I'm not seeing much overlap – there are no Wikipedia:Notability (medicine) or Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (people). Not sure how a hybrid combination of the two would work, are there any precedents for that? wbm1058 (talk) 15:16, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

It's a work in progress - see this diff, which is where I proposed 2 different approaches. My main concern is making sure that all who contribute to the draft(s) are credited and that when the final move is made to whatever title the project decides, all the history will go with it. I couldn't remember if that can be done from userspace, and why I suggested draft space which makes it more available to others to contribute. As for the combined title - my initial thought was that two separate sections would comprise the page - Reliable sources (list of RS, questionable, deprecated, etc. ), and another section explaining what kind of RS would be acceptable to establish notability, but we can do that by creating WP:N (canine) if the project chooses to do so. The diff above is my most recent proposal which is much different from where I first began. Apologies for any confusion it may have caused. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 15:33, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

You should be able to move it directly from user space to project (Wikipedia:) space; I don't think you need admin help to do that. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:39, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Apologies, Wbm1058 - looks like you were a little wrong because I did need your help - and probably should not have, had I done it right the first time - blame Corona, the liquid form of the disease has done damage to my brain...^Atsme _Talk 📧 17:08, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I think you were bitten by your WP:Page mover rights; those include the privilege of moving subpages. If you weren't an official Page Mover those pages wouldn't have accidentally moved. Just stick to Amstel Bright – I think that comes from Curaçao so it should be safer ;) wbm1058 (talk) 17:23, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Sssh...first time ever that I forgot to uncheck that little box, not that page moves is something I do often like an admin would be doing. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 17:48, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

We already have a proposed guideline at Wikipedia:Notability (breeds) initiated in 2015 by {U|JTdale}}, and now being actively developed by SMcCandlish. It has a section on dogs, butt hat part is still very sketchy. DGG ( talk ) 22:37, 1 June 2020 (UTC) �

Thanks for that bit of info, DGG. We've got a lot of work to do in order to bring those articles up to standards. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 22:40, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

butt hats are always sketchy. PackMecEng (talk) 22:47, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

PME, I think it's the same as asshat, but I could be wrong. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 22:52, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Hmmm that sounds uncomfortable for everyone involved. PackMecEng (talk) 03:09, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, the WP:Notability (breeds) page has already gotten pretty far. I would rather see it fleshed out and finished, than start from scratch. The community is more likely to accept a guideline about breeds in general than one specific to dog breeds (then what? chicken breeds and goat breeds and cat breeds and horse breeds and guinea pig breeds and ...). I wrote most of the current page, and have gone to some pains to try to put every general principle in general rules, and keep species-specific material to a bare minimum, to avoid it becoming repetitive with the same points being made over and over for each species. It's also careful to make it clear that it's a predictive guide to what is likely to pass WP:N; it is not attempting to circumvent WP:N and invent a new, independent kind of notability criterion, which is the no. 1 way for a subject-specific notability draft to get rejected (the only one that's ever been accepted is WP:NPROF, and even that is controversial and may not survive).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:31, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

SMcCandlish, my goal initially was focused more along the line of acceptable sources for establishing notability. In retrospect, that goal will be achieved when we are able to provide a RS rating chart, which is basically all that's needed. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 11:33, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Question for my talk page watchers

Do you find this comment by QEDK to be offensive because I certainly do? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 12:13, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Atsme, I'd say it's more sarcastic than it needed to be, and given current events that particular reference maybe wasn't the best choice. GeneralNotability (talk) 12:59, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, GN, but whenever I see those words, I fall apart just thinking about the injustices and the terrible things that happened. I'm sitting here crying just thinking about it. It was so wrong for him to say, and I am not one who easily falls apart, but that was the worst thing anyone has ever said to me, and I have withstood a lot of insults. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 13:04, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes it strikes me as offensive and I'm not feeling the sarcasm, if that's what was intended. I'm feeling more of a personal attack than sarcasm, though I'm not sure a personal attack was intended. Mostly I'm feeling disgusted, particularly on seeing a wall-of-text RfC about Fox News. What do we say, "Focus on article content during discussions, not on editor conduct; comment on content, not the contributor. Wikipedia is written through collaboration, and assuming that the efforts of others are in good faith is therefore vital." This RfC is anathema to that policy. Rather than focusing on the content of Fox News reports, and determining the reliability of each report on a case-by-case basis, the RfC focuses on the contributor, the contributor being Fox News itself. We shouldn't be turning policies on their heads. Sorry you don't have my shoulder there to cry on, Atsme, I guess you'll just have to settle for my virtual shoulder. – wbm1058 (talk) 14:47, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

It was totally over the top; an ad hominem remark like that was not appropriate. It is also a false analogy and false attribution of your motives, none of which helps a discussion. If someone is unhappy with the direction of a discussion, they can just comment on the discussion, they don't need to start on personal attacks. Hugs. Montanabw^(talk) 16:57, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I agree with the above - the response was ill-thought and ill-timed. However, I would offer you solace in that you have been able to give as good as you have gotten in that discussion, with its numerous tendrils running in many directions. BD2412 T 19:12, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I stayed on point, BD2412 - all I did was state facts and I supported my facts with RS. If there was something in particular that you think even comes close what was said to me, please provide the diffs and I will apologize. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 20:08, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Not such a bad way to knock the edge off and let go of a stressful day.

I meant that in the positive sense, that you have indeed been consistently effective in participating in the discussion. BD2412 T 20:12, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for that clarity, BD2412. My apologies to you in advance of ever saying anything that you would find offensive - it is not in my nature to ever do anything like that but I will stand in my defense when I feel that I'm being judged unfairly. I can't even imagine you doing anything like that, which is why my heart sank when I misread your comment. I felt so bad...but I'm much happier now. Again, thank you. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 20:17, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

• The comment is logically unsound, because of course we are going to evaluate the journalistic practices of other outlets when considering whether Fox should be deprecated. But in the current political context, the comment is also deeply offensive and misplaced on multiple levels. For what it's worth, I don't think the poster realized what they were doing, and I don't think that their comment was thrown your way with malice. So I think it's OK to let it go. -Darouet (talk) 19:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

  As always, your wise words are a comfort. Thank you, Darouet. I agree that letting it go is the best option. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 20:45, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

• The comments here are not an accurate representation of what I commented. I have explained myself on the page of the RfC and will justify myself no further, I'm only replying here because you pinged me, which I am guessing was for a response. Just to clarify to you (Atsme) personally that I never meant you any ill-will and my comment was solely regarding your content (see the article and my clarification). I apologize for the distress I caused you and I hope you will recant your comments wherein I'm addressed as a racist, that's deeply hurtful to me. If you choose to not do so, that's your call. --qedk (t 愛 c) 19:51, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

  QEDK - you said I hope you will recant your comments wherein I'm addressed as a racist, - you need to provide the diffs because I don't recall ever saying that to anyone. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 20:08, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

  It's alright, I was just here to apologize. So, I'm going to take my leave now, hope you have a good day. --qedk (t 愛 c) 20:11, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

• Yes. Deeply offensive on multiple levels: (1) given the Killing of George Floyd and the world-wide protests it spawned. (2) Atsme was comparing multiple news errors and retractions of mainstream American media outlets. That is hardly comparable to self-serving nationalistic propaganda from world powers trying to pretend like their human rights violations and war crimes are inconsequential. By using this metaphor, it suggests Atsme is making an argument so bad that is as if she said, "My war crimes don't count." Not acceptable metaphor. Needlessly hyperbolic. For both reasons it is an extremely insensitive and unnecessary remark that should be stricken.

This comment I hope you will recant your comments wherein I'm addressed as a racist did not help. --David Tornheim (talk) 11:25, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

@David Tornheim:, you must have missed Atsme's clear personal attack and false accusation that QEDK accused her of being racist. See my comment below. -- Valjean (talk) 16:11, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Queen Elsa, sharing my page with Queen Máxima.
God save the queens!
My soul is spiraling in frozen fractals all around, like an icy blast of Amstel Bright!🍺
Where is Martinevans123 when I need a tune?

You can't miss what isn't there, Valjean. And now you're casting aspersions. I do hope you didn't come here to bludgeon editors who disagree with you. I will say that you have an incredible imagination. Have you ever considered writing fiction? You may have missed your calling. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 20:29, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

• Sorry, Atsme, but I think you're reading something in QEDK's comments that he didn't intend. Like I said earlier, referencing "and you are lynching Negroes" was not a great decision given recent events, and might have been hyperbolic, but I don't think he picked it with the intent of calling you racist. I also think the use of the wikilink was just to make the reference clear to people not familiar with the phrase rather than just a CYA. You have every right to feel upset about what he said, but I don't think that this was actually a calculated personal attack. Per Darouet, might be best to just make like Queen Elsa here. GeneralNotability (talk) 02:46, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
• Atsme, your umbrage is misplaced. There was no accusation of racism in QEDK's comment. None at all. Your comments are the only ones that implied racism, with your response being a direct frontal accusation that QEDK made "racist comments", something which did not happen, so it is your comments which were clear personal attacks which should be stricken.

Queen Máxima of the Netherlands. God save the Queen!!

@QEDK: is correct when they stated: "I never said that Atsme made racist comments, I said that they (implicitly) labeled me a racist, racist comments like yours..., ...advise you to strike your racist comment...,.." I don't see them making any kind of racist comment or racist accusation against you. They used a famous example of the tu quoque fallacy, which you have been using, and also mentioned "borderline whataboutism", which you also use in your arguments. That was their point, and your response immediately derailed and deflected from their point by throwing a bomb which implying directly accused them of accusing you of racism. I don't see it. You need to calm down and retract that accusation. We need less heat here.

The point which got buried by your response was that your comments in the Fox News RfC constantly use tu quoque and whataboutism fallacious arguments, thus weakening them. -- Valjean (talk) 16:11, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Well now, thanks for sharing your POV, Valjean. As you might have guessed, I strongly disagree with your perception of events, as do other editors in the discussion above, but what better way to demonstrate your POV than letting you describe it, so I'll simply point to your tendentious editing as the author of this polemic essay from which I will quote (my bold underline): By contrast, it is Trump's falsehoods which are examples of right-wing political bias and opinions that are not reality-based or reliably sourced. Trump is not a reality-based person, and neither are a subset of editors here who have a strong pro-Trump bias, at least not when it comes to our political articles. Well, well, well...a subset of editors with a strong pro-Trump bias, nonetheless. Off with their heads! How dare the American citizenry show support for the United States President. Geez, Louise! God save Queen Máxima of the Netherlands (and she's a beauty). Back on point - some of your worst ad hominems against a subset of editors are in the section titled Editors with strong Trump bias. Whew!! I'm not going to waste anymore of my valuable time explaining what you should already know about why your essay is considered polemic and a giant ad hominem attack against a large number of WP editors. Ta ta, Valjean. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 20:22, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Double check?

May I kindly ask you to take a look at Talk:Mustang#Final_draft? As you were pinged in the earlier debate and we now need consensus to unlock the article and fix it, your input will help. Montanabw^(talk) 16:43, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

No problem, happy to take a look. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 17:54, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I think we got to where we needed to be. Montanabw^(talk) 01:07, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

No problem. All the geology, paleontology, DNA, clade stuff is more up your alley - you're the brains. There were some really good editors helping there, too. As for me - it's casino night tonight!!! ^Atsme _Talk 📧 01:24, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

It's gonna take 6 mos. to recover from that one. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 22:22, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Sigh

I just became aware of Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#RfC:_Fox_News. That it is even a close call is very discouraging.--S Philbrick(Talk) 22:12, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Sphilbrick...it is a dilemma, indeed. News is news, facts are facts, and opinions are opinions. I never imagined something that simple would be so difficult to get across, but here we are. All we can do is wait and see what happens. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 02:54, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Actually, I am working on something.

You might be interested in this - Draft:Federal Commission on School Safety. I started working on it when we fixed up Whitaker, as he was on it. BD2412 T 01:53, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Y ^Atsme _Talk 📧 02:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks. It is, of course, difficult to find sources that don't put one kind of political spin on it or the other. BD2412 T 03:31, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Journalism today, I’m afraid...but experienced editors recognize it and filter out opinion from facts, or at the very least include substantial views with balance/due, as I try to do and know you do in a nonpartisan way. It is a highly commendable trait which is why I truly enjoy collaborating with you. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 14:14, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, by the way - it's a good little piece now. BD2412 T 23:37, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

You are very welcome, it was a fun little quickie. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 23:53, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

My very first mute

For the record - I just muted a user because the harassment was too much. We'll see how that works. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 01:09, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your kind words in support of my appeal, which just closed and was successful. --David Tornheim (talk) 00:42, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Last warning

In this [5] comment you make several false allegations and BLP violations. In particular you assert, without sources or any evidence that Biden has used "racial slurs". Over past few weeks you have returned to engaging in exactly the sort of behavior which you have been warned about previously and this is really getting out of hand. Volunteer Marek 05:27, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

And just in case you haven't been notified recently:

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Volunteer Marek, no comment regarding whether or not this warning is correct, but giving someone a behavioral warning followed by a a DS notification doesn't seem appropriate to me (the notification has become an implied threat, regardless of the template's wording). Also, Atsme has a message at the top of her TP which, though not the recommended ds/aware template, is pretty clear about her awareness. GeneralNotability (talk) 06:04, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

You’re right, I didn’t read the top of her page. Volunteer Marek 06:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Then self revert.--MONGO (talk) 07:15, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Not sure what I'm suppose to self revert here, but if it makes you happy MONGO, then sure, I can strike through the DS notice, esp. since we all now know that we all, including you, are now aware of it. Volunteer Marek 07:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

:::::Hugs and kisses sweetheart.--MONGO (talk) 07:55, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Not only is VM's "Last warning" based on a false allegation, it's a PA. And as GeneralNotability so wisely alluded to, VM also violated Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions#Awareness and alerts as follows (my bold underline): Editors issuing alerts are expected to ensure that no editor receives more than one alert per area of conflict per year. Any editor who issues alerts disruptively may be sanctioned. VM has been engaging in passive aggressive behavior toward me and has made unwarranted threats when he runs short of a substantive argument in a discussion as evidenced here, a false statement and PA against me, and to show he knew I was aware and why this warning is pure disruption, he followed up with this comment.

So why am I having to deal with drama, threats and PAs despite limiting my participation in those articles? It's an election year, and as BD2412 kindly stated in a prior discussion: I meant that in the positive sense, that you have indeed been consistently effective in participating in the discussion. As for the unwarranted allegation that brought VM to my TP, it begins with the primary reason I began the discussion on Jimmy's TP; i.e., mainstream media's criticism of WP editors scrubbing Kamala Harris and Joe Biden articles. I actually did provide diffs in that discussion, which VM failed to see as a late arrival there:

...there's more than one alleged racist statement/action by Biden - he's all over the place: NYMag, Snopes, CNN, Mother Jones, and NPR. I couldn't help but laugh at NPR's headline: Biden Pulls Back On 'Cavalier' Remarks About Black Voters. It's cavalier when it's Biden saying it, but a racist slur when it's Trump. We see more labels on Trump than we see in WalMart. The real question here is do you not understand why such remarks have been whitewashed from Joe Biden? As for the statues, I'm not going anywhere near that topic.

And that's how the cow ate the cabbage. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 09:18, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

None of these support your false assertion that Biden has used racial slurs. THAT is a BLP violation (and it's false). If you meant to write something else, ok, but that's not what you wrote, and with BLP you have to be careful. The fact that you keep insisting on the accuracy of your statement makes this worse, because you're doubling down on having made a false accusation against a living person. Volunteer Marek 15:35, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Atsme, I don't think you violated BLP with your cavalier-vs-racist argument. I'm not saying you're correct about, say, the sheer scale and scope (per WP:WEIGHT) of that comparison, but I think you should be entitled to express your view about the subject at hand and how it impacts those articles. If there is a personal attack, from anyone, I have not picked up on it. I would advise Volunteer Marek to be more judicious with their warnings, final and otherwise. El_C 10:19, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, El C - I've grown weary of all the drama and misconceptions of things I've said, so I'm going to pay less attention to the criticism in mainstream media about WP scrubbing certain AP articles and pay more attention to WikiProject Dogs where there is a welcoming collegial environment and, ironically, less biting and barking. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 10:37, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

@El C: No, this was a textbook violation. Atsme said, quote " This was all about diverting attention away from Biden's racial slurs " which is a claim that Biden has used racial slurs. This isn't a matter of opinion. Either he has, or he hasn't. If he has, you better show sources which support that. If he hasn't, you're violating BLP 100%.

NONE of the sources that Atsme presented above (but not initially), which is her doubling down on the BLP smear, say that Biden has used racial slurs. Not this one. Not this one. Not this one. Not this one. Not this one. You can certainly criticize Biden's remarks regarding race. Nobody here has a problem with that. But to falsely pretend that he made use of "racial slurs" is 100% false and as such, a BLP violation. Volunteer Marek 15:33, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Fair enough, the word "slur" was probably not ideal, unless there is mention of actual slurs — quote of and not just RS for a racial slur would be needed to remove the specter of BLP, which I still would wary to enforce here, for a whole host of reasons. But I do partially concede the point. El_C 15:48, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

;) -Roxy the elfin dog . wooF 10:41, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Too funny!! 😂 ^Atsme _Talk 📧 10:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

e/c all I wanted to do was put a smiley face, like that. Grrr. -Roxy the elfin dog . wooF 10:46, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

El_C 10:47, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

fixed. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 10:51, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

is also the bestest. El_C 10:56, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

😂 What a wonderful way to start a beautiful day!! ^Atsme _Talk 📧 11:00, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Atsme, are you willing to strike your false assertion that Biden used racial slurs? Yes or no? Here on and on Jimbo's talk page. Volunteer Marek 15:34, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Enough with the WP:CRYBLP. This was over when I reverted you and posted eight sources supporting "slur". Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 15:41, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Except you didn't and it's actually not your job to swoop in and save Atsme after she made false accusations against a living person. I'm also very puzzled why you inserted your own text in the middle of her comment. At best, that makes it difficult to respond to. Volunteer Marek 15:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Volunteer Marek, it's time to drop the stick. Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 15:46, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Actually, it's time for Atsme to strike her BLP violation. I don't know about you but I take BLP pretty seriously. Volunteer Marek 15:47, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

And if you're seriously gonna sit there and pretend that when Atsme referenced Biden's (non-existent) use of "racial slurs" she was thinking about Biden making a joke about Irish protestants (which is the source you "posted") then we've got a problem Levivich. Volunteer Marek 15:45, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Atsme, it would probably be best if you were to strike the "slurs" part and supplant it with less pointed term, because Volunteer Marek argument about BLP may not be without basis. I'm not sure my original assessment was as sound as I originally considered. El_C 15:52, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Here it is again: Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 15:56, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

References

And it's not one slur, it's slurs. He has been reported, widely, to have said--and apologized for--multiple slurs: racial, ethnic, and religious. Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 15:57, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

To quote myself: quote of and not just RS for a racial slur would be needed. El_C 16:01, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

El C, a quote of the slur, or a quote of an RS saying Biden said a slur? Here's the headline from the first link: "Biden launches presidential bid - then walks into race row over Obama 'slur'", which goes on to say, "In the interview with The New York Observer, Mr Biden cast doubt on the youthful Mr Obama's credentials, even as he called him "a mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean". The last adjective above all caused a furore, as an implied slur on other black candidates such as civil rights leader Jesse Jackson who also sought the Democratic nomination 19 years ago." Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 16:03, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

The second on my list: "Biden Apologizes for Anti-Semitic Slur". The slur was "Shylock". Now, anybody want to split the hair that Shylock is an ethnic slur and not a racial slur? The third is also about "shylock". The fourth reads "A British member of parliament on Tuesday called on U.S. Vice President Joe Biden to apologize for casting a “slur” on Protestants by joking to an Irish delegation that no-one wearing orange was welcome in his house on St. Patrick’s Day." Again, a religious slur, not a racial slur. The rest are about "racist" or "racial" comments. It's there, man, the sourcing is there to support the statement.

By way of comparison this is far and away stronger sourcing than the recently-discussed sourcing for "Tucker Carlson is a friend to white supremacists". Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 16:12, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Please stop falsely pretending that Atsme was referring to Biden's making jokes about Protestant Irish or use of the word "shylock". She accused him, falsely, of using racial slurs. Volunteer Marek 16:59, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

• HAHAHA! VolunteerMarek claiming he takes BLP pretty seriously made me almost spit out my coffee! VolunteerMarek, do you do stand up comedy? Its not lost on me when a serial offender has the audacity to issue a "LAST WARNING" (add neon flashing light to that). I mean, MONGO aint no angel but I don't issue warnings. Maybe time to take a red instead of blue pill and do a little self reflection?--MONGO (talk) 16:11, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry about the waste of perfectly good coffee, but yeah, I do take BLP seriously and don't particularly care for your personal attacks. I particularly don't appreciate your false smear about me being a "serial offender". I'm not any kind of offender when it comes to BLP, serial or otherwise and have never been sanctioned or even warned (afaicr) in that regard. Most of my offenses involve me getting warned or sanctioned for telling people who are full of shit that they're full of shit, which is, you know, supposedly incivil.

But here I'm more concerned with you using a metaphor of the red pill, commonly used and popularized by "misogynists" and "white supremacists" [6]. MONGO... are you sure that you want to traffic in white supremacists and misogynist tropes? I mean, I thought I had a rough idea of what your political views were, but this is surprising even to me. Volunteer Marek 16:42, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

If VM was concerned about verification in RS, he could have asked or tagged the comments with . Any disagreement about what the sources say is up for discussion - open an RfC. What he just demonstrated is WP:BATTLEGROUND, WP:DIDNTHEARTHAT and a WP:PA by accusing me of a BLP vio. There was NO BLP vio because (1) WP:PUBLICFIGURE and (2) I furnished the sources when I first brought it up on July 4, 2020 as this diff proves, so my claim was sourced and verifiable. He needs to stop the WP:HOUNDING. It's obvious what he's up to and it isn't productive collaboration to benefit the project - it's to push his POV and scrub the Biden article of criticism which is why mainstream media has rightfully criticized WP for scrubbing articles. If he doesn't think those articles portray racist comments, well...read the attacks against me and apply them to him. If he needs something to do, he can go tag all the accusations against Reagan that are unsourced, or is it ok to leave them unsourced because Reagan is dead and the politics don't align with VM's POV? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 16:14, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

That's not how BLP policy works. If you make a false defamatory accusation against a living person, it's YOUR job to provide the sources, not wait for someone to come along and tag the BLP vio. Your continued insistence that you furnished sources is very troublesome because it means you're doubling down on the BLP vio and keep falsely pretending that these sources support the notion that Biden used a racial slur. They don't. Are you going to strike your BLP vio or not? Volunteer Marek 16:48, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Hahaah red pill commonly used by misogynists and white supremacists... It's from The Matrix. God that is so pathetic Marek. Everybody knows red pill and blue pill is from The Matrix. There's a frickin' Wikipedia article about it. It's hard to tolerate this level of insincerity... someone who tries this hard to paint other editors as racists/sexist/etc. Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 16:46, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Are you being serious? Yes, it's from the Matrix, but it is a trope that has been adopted by white supremacists and misogynists. Are you seriously pretending not to know that (while having making personal attacks by calling me pathetic?) Note that our article red pill and blue pill, that you reference without apparently having read it, is in the Category:Misogyny. You also didn't read the Wired article I linked which specifically refers to white supremacists (unlike you and Atsme, I back up my claims with sources). Here's the ADL on the topic. The guy who shot up the synagogue in Poway referenced being "red pilled" [7].

Please stop gaslighting me and others. Being "red pilled" is commonly used as way to signal adherence to white supremacist and/or misogynist ideas, this is common knowledge by now, and MONGO telling me to get "red pilled" is quite disturbing. As is your defense of it. This is f'ed up man. Seriously. Volunteer Marek 16:56, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

The article is Red pill and blue pill. Might I suggest that this is going nowhere good and give Atsme's talk page some reprieve...? El_C 16:51, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

@El C: Sure, as soon as she strikes her "slur" comment. I'm sorry but I'm going to insist on that. BLP and all. Volunteer Marek 16:59, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Actually, Volunteer Marek, I think you're outliving your welcome on this user talk page at this time. I suppose you could take it to AE, but I don't think much will come of it. BTW, I've never heard of Red pill serving as a white supremacist trope (I guess I learned something new). If it's news me to me, perhaps it's also news to MONGO. El_C 17:18, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

I had no clue. Red pill and blue pill is from the Matrix movie. The allegory about it was also a joke...folks need to not take me to seriously, really. I jest much. The only "white supremacy thing" I have heard of as of late I was unaware of was when watching the movie Mississippi Burning the other week, Gene Hackman enlightens one FBI agent by telling him that three fingers held outside the pocket of ones pants stands for KKK. I didn't know that till then.--MONGO (talk) 17:48, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

For the record, I've also never heard of any red blue pill thing outside The Matrix. Also @Volunteer Marek:, I don't see any gaslighting going on here, and that's a pretty serious accusation. Please strike. ~Awilley (talk) 18:20, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Type "red pill" into google. Your ignorance of how this phrase is used in political discourse, is not my problem. This here is political discourse so this is the context where "red pill" is used exactly in that way. And as the source(s) I provided indicated in that context "getting red pilled" refers to adopting misogynist and increasingly, white supremacist views. Here is more sources: [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23]. Is that enough or should I keep going? How do you not know this? Volunteer Marek 18:43, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

News to me. I used it to infer the pill would lead you to enlightment as portrayed in the movie The Matrix and as used in the movie, not as some alt-right mysoginst manner at all. It wasn't intended that way rest assured.--MONGO (talk) 19:27, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Levivich, I see. "Clean" is borderline, at the very least, I would grant you that. El_C 16:16, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

We all need to get together and share a group hug!--MONGO (talk) 16:18, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Like. El_C 16:19, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

---

Some things are hard to swallow. --Tryptofish

Sorry everyone for my failing in being less than decisive here. This is a complicated topic, with a lot of historical background and nuances, to which my familiarity is admittedly limited. El_C 16:22, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

I've been accused of things I didn't do - sorry, but the only hugs I've been getting of late feel more like male hands squeezing my neck. You guys may think wrestling with each other is fun, but it's choking me. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 16:25, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

El C, no apologies necessary, we don't expect you to referee every game ;-) Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 16:26, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Atsme, I'll just say that seeing you distressed is distressing to me. El_C 16:30, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Atsme, thanks for mentioning me here. A few weeks ago I made a decision that, outside of gnoming (typo fixing, disambiguation fixes, spacing around commas), I am not going to do any work of substance relating to the current American political situation. Making that decision has lifted quite a weight from my shoulders, and I heartily recommend it. I have always felt that the degree to which Wikipedia content informs real-world political (and commercial) behavior is vastly overestimate even in normal circumstances, and in this cycle it seems that most people have already locked in their opinions at a very early stage in the cycle, so I have found it a much better use of my time to work up articles on people who lived and died decades ago. Cheers! BD2412 T 16:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

What BD412 said. Discussions about modern politics go nowhere good, and we don't want to get there any faster than we absolutely have to. --GRuban (talk) 18:13, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

I wish there were a way for en-wiki to simply not cover present-day US politics at all, omit it entirely. There isn't any way that I can think of, but we would all be so much better off without it. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

There are plenty of areas where we lack coverage. That our coverage of this particular topic is so pervasive is a matter of priorities for those who choose to edit in them. Frankly, anyone inclined to right great wrongs through such work is basically giving free labor to the political parties, thanklessly, and with nothing to show for it at the end of the day. The resources we create in numerous other areas are more enduring and more appreciated. BD2412 T 19:36, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

|}