User talk:CaptainEek/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Administrators' newsletter – February 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2023).

Administrator changes

Gimmetrow

• Bjelleklang
• Bob the Wikipedian
• Leithp
• WhisperToMe
• 100 inactive admins

CheckUser changes

• BDD
• Bradv
• Donald Albury
• Maxim
• MusikAnimal

Oversighter changes

• BDD
• Bradv
• Donald Albury
• Maxim

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, the administrator policy now requires that prior written consent be gained from the Arbitration Committee to mark a block as only appealable to the committee.
• Following a community discussion, consensus has been found to impose the extended-confirmed restriction over the topic areas of Armenia and Azerbaijan and Kurds and Kurdistan.

Technical news

• The Vector 2022 skin has become the default for desktop users of the English Wikipedia.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Armenia-Azerbaijan 3 has been opened and the proposed decision is expected 24 February 2023.
• In December, the contentious topics procedure was adopted which replaces the former discretionary sanctions system. The contentious topics procedure is now in effect following an initial implementation period. There is a detailed summary of the changes and administrator instructions for the new procedure. The arbitration clerk team are taking suggestions, concerns, and unresolved questions about this new system at their noticeboard.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2023 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• Voting in the 2023 Community Wishlist Survey will begin on 10 February 2023 and end on 24 February 2023. You can submit, discuss and revise proposals until 6 February 2023.
• Tech tip: Syntax highlighting is available in both the 2011 and 2017 Wikitext editors. It can help make editing paragraphs with many references or complicated templates easier.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:37, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Question from DoremusSchau (17:40, 4 February 2023)

Greetings!

I have a hobby of plotting geolocation paths specifically for trains and roadways, and saving them as KML files

I would like to know - is attaching KML files to train and transportation pages is permitted and or even welcome?

If so, I would appreciate guidance on approaching those types of page communities, specifically European train/rail pages to begin with.

Thank you - Doremus --DoremusSchau (talk) 17:40, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

@DoremusSchau Gosh, I don't think I'm the right person to ask. I'm not really sure what a KML file is. You'll have better luck asking at the Helpdesk or Teahouse I imagine. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 18:46, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Question from Saarshalom (14:11, 8 February 2023)

Can you make sure to find someone else to replace you , since you don't have time. FOR: assigned for ME an experienced editor to answer questions about editing? --Saarshalom (talk) 14:12, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

@Saarshalom I suggest you try User:Nick Moyes or User:Cullen328 :) CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 18:02, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

@Saarshalom I have left a welcome message on your talk page, with links to helpful guidance and a 'Teach Yourself' introduction to the basics of editing. You can ask us specific questions about editing if you cannot find the answers yourself. You can do this either at the Teahouse where a number of 'hosts' are available to give you answers or point you in the right direction 24/7. Alternatively, you may leave a question on my own userpage (noting I will not be available between 10th to 13th February) and I will do my best to assist you. The more specific you can be about the help you need, the better we can assist you. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:43, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Question from Jawaad Hussaiyn (00:58, 14 February 2023)

I can't edit the article related to Malhun Hatun. How can I? There are many changes that are needed there. --Jawaad Hussaiyn (talk) 00:58, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Jawaad Hussaiyn I'm afraid your account is too new to edit about her yet. What are you looking to write about regarding her? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 01:13, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

note re active item

hi. just want to let you know, I have marked the wikiproject below as semi-active. thanks.

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Navigation templates

thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 16:35, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Question from Wagtail66 (16:56, 17 February 2023)

Hi CaptainEek!

Due to my usage of tor I was unable to create an account in the conventional way so I submitted an account creation request form.

Today my request was accepted and an account was created for me.

I received the following message on my account: "Your user rights were changed. You have been added to: ‪IP block exemptions‬.".

However when I tried publishing my first edited article today but got autoblocked immidiately and got an error message due to my usage of tor.

I am able to access my Wikipedia account normally. The only issue is when I try publishing my edit I get this error.

I use tor to access Wikipedia because I live in a country where human rights are violated.

I hope you can help me resolve this issue.

Thank you very much. --Wagtail66 (talk) 16:56, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed that I only recieve this error when I try to edit a non-english Wikipedia article. I would like to contribute to Wikipedia by editing articles in other languages as well. Thanks again. Wagtail66 (talk) 08:33, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Wagtail66 IP block exemption is language by language, as each is their own separate wiki. So you'll have to ask on the other languages you wish to edit. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:57, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Question from The Original Benny C (12:11, 19 February 2023)

Hi Captain Eek, I've had a positive experience with Wikipedia for the most part but am having trouble in one area that I am seeking input on. I wrote the article on Synthography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthography but there seems to be a witch hunt out to discredit the article as something that needs to be merged with another article, making questionable claims that there aren't enough sources or content, which I believe to be false. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Artificial_intelligence_art#merging_synthography_article_proposal

I believe the Synthography article is about a distinct term with distinct content whereas the Artificial Intelligence Art page is a much broader overall category. I even show this in a Venn diagram in my article. Can you please review, let me know what else I can do to improve my article, and if you agree, close the merge request and message about merging on the Synthography page? I know I can do some of that myself but I want to make sure that there is objectivity here and no potential conflicts of interest. If anything is in need of clarification, please let me know. Thanks! --The Original Benny C (talk) 12:11, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

The Original Benny C So I can't give you an authorizatative yes/no. First, I suggest you read about dispute resolution processes. Second, the merge discussion hasn't been very well attended, and I don't see a WP:CONSENSUS for any particular action. Third, I think the article (not your article, nobody WP:OWNs articles) may have a problem with WP: NEOLOGISM. I'm just not sure "synthography" is in wide enough use to qualify for an article. The difficulty in describing it seems to be a symptom of that. Like, what really is synthography? I don't think the article or the sources answer that. So it's a bit of a buzzword, and we don't tend to write about buzzwords. But if you can explain it better/find some more sources that talk about it, that'd be helpful! CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 05:09, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Ok thank-you! The Original Benny C (talk) 05:33, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Question from Glowingantelope (01:13, 20 February 2023)

Hi! Nice to meet you.

Quick question - How does Wikipedia determine which articles to suggest I edit? Is there an algorithm that detects the most poorly written articles? Just curious! Thank you. --Glowingantelope (talk) 01:13, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Glowingantelope The suggestions are pulled using maintenance templates and some algorithm work, I believe. The maintenance templates are the things you'll see on top of articles like "not enough citations." Hope that helps! CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:52, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Glowingantelope (talk) 02:19, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

FAC?

Moved here, as it was getting pretty off topic.

Speaking of which CaptainEek, when might FAC expect to be graced again with one of your nominations? Gog the Mild (talk) 22:22, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Gog the Mild, Well I was hoping to take Gallic Wars but it has way too much citation work :( I tried to take it to A but it just didn't work out. But I'm working on Capture of Columbia, which I think will be FA worthy! CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 22:43, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

I've had a look at Gallic Wars too . But decided that I would need to FAC half a dozen of its battles and sieges first as a warm-up exercise. I may get round to it, but at the moment I am kept busy working through the battles of the Second Punic War. Columbia looks pretty interesting, although currently its very dependant on a single source, and a nearly 50-years-old one at that. Remember for FAC you need "a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature". Otherwise it seems in good shape. Good luck with it. If you have queries, Hog Farm is both very helpful and up to speed with that war. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:21, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Gog the Mild hehe yeah the sourcing will be a challenge. I'm going through this book first, as it is the most dedicated. But I'll be trying to find some other works to supplement it. The trouble is it hasn't been very well written about in the last 50 years. But I wanted to at least write and expand the article; the previous version was pretty incorrect. I actually got put into this topic in the first place cus I saw a TikTok claiming Sherman had ordered the city burned to the ground, which seemed clearly wrong. In fact it was TikTok that got me to redo Gallic Wars, so shout-out to TikTok misinfo I guess? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 23:41, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red March 2023

Women in Red Mar 2023, Vol 9, Iss 3, Nos 251, 252, 258, 259, 260, 261 Online events: New: Geofocus Mediterranean | Art + Activism | Alphabet run Q & R Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman | Folklore See also: #Visible Wiki Women Wikimedia challenge to add more images of women to Commons Tip of the month: Mobile phone readers may only see the article "lead" – take some time to make it shine! Include something to keep people reading. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 12:52, 26 February 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Question from Theseodoctors (05:06, 28 February 2023)

Hello Sir,

I want to create my profile here. Please help me, how to create. --Theseodoctors (talk) 05:06, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

@Theseodoctors What do you mean create a profile? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 05:30, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2023).

Administrator changes

The Wordsmith

• Fuhghettaboutit
• Spinningspark (deceased)

CheckUser changes

Callanecc

Oversighter changes

Callanecc

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, F10 (useless non-media files) has been deprecated.
• Following a request for comment, the Portal CSD criteria (P1 (portal subject to CSD as an article) and P2 (underpopulated portal)) have been deprecated.
• A request for comment is open to discuss making the closing instructions for the requested moves process a guideline.

Technical news

• The results of the 2023 Community Wishlist Survey have been posted.

Arbitration

• Remedy 11 ("Request for Comment") of the Conduct in deletion-related editing case has been rescinded.
• The proposed decision for the Armenia-Azerbaijan 3 case is expected 7 March 2023.
• A case related to the Holocaust in Poland is expected to be opened soon.

Miscellaneous

• The 2023 appointees for the Ombuds commission are AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, JJMC89, MdsShakil, Minorax and Renvoy as regular members and Zabe as advisory members.
• Following the 2023 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Mykola7, Superpes15, and Xaosflux.
• The Terms of Use update cycle has started, which includes a [p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:18, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup 2023 March newsletter

So ends the first round of the 2023 WikiCup. Everyone with a positive score moved on to Round 2, with 54 contestants qualifying. The top scorers in Round 1 were:

• Unlimitedlead with 1205 points, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with two featured articles on historical figures and several featured article candidate reviews.
• Epicgenius was in second place with 789 points; a seasoned WikiCup competitor he specialises in buildings and locations in New York.
• FrB.TG was in third place with 625 points, garnered from a featured article on a filmmaker which qualified for an impressive number of bonus points.
• TheJoebro64, another WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points gained from two featured articles on video games.
• Iazyges was in fifth place with 532 points, from two featured articles on classical history.

The top sixteen contestants at the end of Round 1 had all scored over 300 points; these included LunaEatsTuna, Thebiguglyalien, Sammi Brie, Trainsandotherthings, Lee Vilenski, Juxlos, Unexpectedlydian, SounderBruce, Kosack, BennyOnTheLoose and PCN02WPS. It was a high-scoring start to the competition.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. The first round finished on February 26. Remember that any content promoted after that date but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:36, 2 March 2023 (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.Loki (talk) 05:53, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Japanese chemical weapons in World War II

Hello, CaptainEek. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Japanese chemical weapons in World War II, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:01, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

ANI closure request

Hi CaptainEek,

Sorry if this is a breach of protocol, but frankly I just want the ANI case to be over with as I've spent the last 10 days stressed out of my mind over it and no admin has stepped in yet so I figured I should just ask directly. Could you review and close it? Or ask another admin to? Seems to be stable at this point. Sorry it's a novel lol TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 22:42, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

@TheTranarchist I've seen this. I'll get back to you as soon as I can :) CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 20:13, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

@CaptainEek Thank you for your detailed thorough close. If it's not too late to ask, might it be possible that the TBAN be on GENSEX BLPS/BLPGROUPS specifically, since nobody raised issues with my GENSEX edits outside that intersection, despite repeated requests that people point to them if they called for a full GENSEX ban? TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 20:31, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

I saw your message on my talk page just after I posted this lol. Also, to clarify, does the TBAN extend to talk pages as well or just mainspace? TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 20:35, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

@TheTranarchist I understand your concern. But that was not the community consensus. Editors felt that your problematic editing extended to the topic area as a whole, and I did not see convincing evidence that the problem was limited to BLPs. Certainly, some aspects were more problematic in the BLP realm. But that was not the sole issue. To your second reply, yes, that extends to talk pages as well. In general, topic bans are "broadly construed", which means that you should not touch any aspect remotely related to your topic ban, be it talk pages, user pages, internal discussions, and so on. The penalty for breaking a topic ban is escalating blocks depending on the severity of the breach. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 20:37, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

I understand that Editors felt that your problematic editing extended to the topic area as a whole - but none provided any evidence that was the case, and consensus depends on arguments as well as proportion.

Also, an additional question since I don't want to run afoul of the TBAN, does it extend to my personal draft space? TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 20:41, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Also, does it extend to GENSEX related ANI cases? Since I was planning to file a case against Springee based of their tendentious editing in the area.

Sorry for the questions lol, I just want to make sure I know exactly what is and isn't covered. TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 20:44, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) This may have been answered privately, but I want to make sure the question about filing conduct cases related to the topic area doesn't get lost in the shuffle. I'm pretty sure the answer is yes, that's something covered by your TBAN. Eek can speak up if I'm wrong. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:43, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't think that's an accurate characterization. Editors pointed out that you had issues on non-BLP pages like Genspect and Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism. And yes, it includes draft space. If you have current drafts, no need to delete them. But just don't touch them. And no worries, I'm happy to answer questions :) CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 20:45, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Per Genspect and FAIR though, those are BLPGROUPS, many editors commended my editing in the topic area generally. I recognize I fucked up on BLPs and BLPGROUPs, but none raised concerns with articles/edits that weren't specifically either a BLP or BLPGROUP, and I thought if a ban were to happen it would be on those and I could still be able to carry on my uncontroversial GENSEX work like WP:USALGBT, Conversion therapy, Detransition, etc. TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 20:49, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

And I'm 100% sure none raised issues on non-BLP / non-BLPGROUPs because I extensively listed every article/edit people raised concerns about (on my own notepad) and repeatedly challenged editors (including those who left dozens of comments on my behavior for anything they could think of) to list a single edit outside of the intersection there were issues with, to which none ever did. TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 20:52, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

@TheTranarchist I think I might have a solution. A number of editors at the thread suggested a timed topic ban. So would you object to a six month topic ban from all of GENSEX, and an indefinite BLP/BLPGROUP ban? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 21:12, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Since the current close is for an indefinite (at least 6 month) GENSEX ban, that seems more restrictive than the original close, and restricts me from editing BLP/BLPGROUPS completely unrelated to GENSEX, which nobody raised issues about.

Additionally, while I don't have the bandwidth atm for a review of the votes, would it be acceptable for me to present you sometime tonight/tomorrow with a breakdown that lists the acceptable closes and issues raised by each later? TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 21:27, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

@TheTranarchist In that case, then I will let the current close stand. And no, I would not like an analysis. I am open to reasonable concerns about the action taken, and have expressed a willingness to tweak it. But since you find that still objectionable, then there is nothing I can do for you. This is not a negotiation. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 21:36, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

That's fair. I am not completely opposed to a TBAN, I just want it to be in the areas that editors actually raised concerns about and not overly broad. I would even be fine with an indefinite general BLP/BLPGROUP TBAN as long as my uncontroversial unrelated GENSEX edits are taken into consideration. Could you independently do a review to see if any editors have raised any edit/article outside the intersection of BLP/BLPGROUP and GENSEX that has issues? If you find a single one I have no issues with the full GENSEX TBAN, but otherwise I would hope you reconsider narrowing the TBAN to the specific area editors expressed concerns about. Red-Tailed Hawk, who IMO provided the best evidence of issues, later amended their vote to be clear they thought the intersection was the issue rather than all of GENSEX, after many had cited them in favor of a GENSEX ban. TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 21:48, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi CaptainEek, sorry to both you again, don't worry I'm not here to re-litigate lol, I wish the whole mess could have gone through AE at the start, but I respect your difficult close and you for making it and bringing the whole sorry ordeal to a close! I just have a few questions for moving forward:

• 1) Could you leave your thoughts on my question at the Administrator's noticeboard? I want there to be a centralized list of what I'll need to have demonstrated by my appeal and would greatly appreciate your input!
• 2) Could you point me to where I can ask whether topics would fall under GENSEX? I don't want to run afoul of the TBAN so want to know where I can make sure things I write about aren't covered.
• 3) Per the comments from other contributors at the AN (and ANI for that matter), could you strike the RGW comment from the close? While I certainly fucked up, particularly on anti-trans WP:BLPs and WP:ORGs, I'm not alone in believing that RGW was not the applicable WP:UPPERCASE, as I have thus far taken great pride in combating WP:FRINGE and WP:RGW, not promoting it.
• 4) Does the Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism count as GENSEX? Talk page consensus there was that they are not an anti-trans organization and their dealings with trans topics are not notable enough for the lead, so I want to be sure whether I should avoid it or not.

• Relatedly, please look into the COI at that page with JWeiss11 I emailed arb-com details of over a month ago. While my behavior was problematic, I think a review would show they have edited with a COI that has clearly effected their editing, and it should at a minimum be disclosed. I'm still not over the fact that an editor who deadnamed Brianna Ghey, pushed race science, and edited with an undisclosed COI, has yet to face any sanctions of any kind and was able to accuse me of having polar political perspectives that merited a full GENSEX ban.

• 5) Finally, since it seems to have gotten lost in the mix, could you confirm whether or not the TBAN extend to GENSEX-related ANI cases? If allowed, I would restrict my comments to just 1 per case.

Best, TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 17:38, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

@TheTranarchist

1. I'm not sure its my place to do so, but will consider if I have anything of value to add.
2. There is no noticeboard on point. It is left to the common sense of users. I would err on the side of caution. The precise area, as defined in GENSEX, is "any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people."
3. I have read through the comments on point, and I appreciate the contributors perspectives, but no, I will not strike it. Many editors used RGW in their rationales at the thread, and the text and idea of RGW seem to apply quite well in this matter.
4. When it comes to the gender aspect of FAIR, certainly. Further, as a matter of becoming a better editor, I would advise you stay away from controversial topics for the time being, so I'm not sure that touching the rest of the FAIR article is a good idea either. With regards to the editor you reported, the Committee is discussing the matter. Unfortunately, the Committee is not always the fastest, since we have to coordinate 15 members. I've reminded the Committee that an outcome is needed on that matter.
5. My intuition is yes. I can't imagine the Community granting you that sort of one comment exception either. Also, I think it would be a bad look to focus on ANI's in the GENSEX topic area. Even if you're right, folks are going to assume you're on a witch hunt.

CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:40, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! For the first, feel free to leave it on my talk or wherever if you feel appropriate. I genuinely want to hear 1) what you want to see from me in the next few months and 2) any specific tips/advice you feel I should know! And final question, which I forgot to ask the other day, would it be appropriate for me to leave a comment in the AN discussion about whether GENSEX should be covered by ANI or AE? It was originally a subsection of the close review, but I didn't touch it because I didn't know about WP:BANEX and was erring on the side of caution, and since it seems pretty universally agreed my ANI case was a mess, I think I have some insights as to how it could've been better formatted. I'd just want to leave 1 comment and be done with it, I'm finishing up the Crown Heights Tenant Union article today, tagging in a someone to help me review it, and want to not worry about anything GENSEX or the case for a long time. Tbh, I'm leaning more towards a more standardized process for ANI as opposed to moving to AE. TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 14:52, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

As a heads up, I've logged the relevant sanction at Wikipedia:Editing restrictions/Placed by the Wikipedia community in line with your close. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 18:21, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

CaptainEek, I firmly believe that discussions related to, even venting about a tban immediately after enactment is permissible. Thus I think replies like TheTranarchist made here [1] are fine. However, I do agree with a concern Red-tailed hawk made regarding adding this commentary and "count down clock" to TTA's home page [2]. I think in the spirit of their question about how can they do better[3] is the right attitude. However, the count down timer looks like a violation of the tban. I agree with RTH's request that it be removed (without prejudice against TTA). Springee (talk) 12:41, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Let me be clear: I don't think a countdown timer violates the TBAN. I do think that continued posting of GENSEX polemics, such as this comment, is a bright line violation of the TBAN. TheTranarchist does not seem to understand this, and I think a simple formal reminder on her talk page would be enough for her to understand this. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 14:22, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

"I'm a trans person in a world that's scary for trans people, hard to leave GENSEX but goodbye" - is not a "bright line" violation of GENSEX. WP:TBAN: The purpose of a topic ban is to forbid editors from making edits related to a certain topic area where their contributions have been disruptive, but to allow them to edit the rest of Wikipedia. Unless clearly and unambiguously specified otherwise, a topic ban covers all pages (not only articles) broadly related to the topic, - unless you consider the fact I'm a trans person makes my userpage a page broadly related to the topic, this is just petty, barely following the letter of the law, and certainly not following the spirit. In the TBAN examples, nowhere do I see the TBAN extends to saying "I like rainy weather" or "I believe in climate change" on the user-page.

The only useful thing that can come of this: someone should update the TBAN policy to be clear that userpages are not considered part of TBANs. TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 14:45, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

I have repeatedly stated that I don't think that a simple declaration of one's own gender identity violates the TBAN. That is very different than the statement States are making it illegal to be gender-noncomforming in public. Banning medical transition they started at "just the kids" and have moved onto the adults, either under 26 or everyone covered with public funding... Banning social transition in public schools public and private, sometimes because "parents rights" and sometimes just no matter what the kid and parents say. Banning teaching that trans people exist (including just talking about or training doctors in providing gender-affirming care even in higher education). Banned from even the fucking bathroom. Politicians are calling for federally forcing all that, and more. Did I mention the increase in murders? Because you don't see all of it in the news but feel it in the community. Also, mass shootings, calls for armed violence, extermination, elimination, etc. Organized white supremacists, far-right politicians, and anti-trans activists, are working together on all that (ellipsis in original), which is clearly within the scope of WP:GENSEX, broadly construed. Broad means broad, not that only disruptive contributions are banned. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 14:52, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

I didn't say you did, I pointed out the full context of my statement was "I'm trans, it was a minefield to edit GENSEX as trans people are undergoing escalating systemic violence." Which is bluesky, and unless I can't mention details about my own life on my userpage it's just silly to call that a TBAN violation. That statement you just quoted was in a meta-discussion covered under WP:BANEX where I was trying to illustrate you took me to AE over a WP:BLUESKY statement on my own userpage. Kinda funny, when you left me the AE notice Licks-rocks said And is she allowed to talk about it? or does that count as a violation of her TBAN to you, too? apparently your answers were "no" and "yes"...

In fact, WP:BMB only has 1 comment on userpages: Banned editors' user and user talk pages should be updated with a notice of the ban, linking to any applicable discussion or decision-making pages. The purpose of this notice is to announce the ban to editors encountering the banned editor's edits. Indefinitely site-banned editors may be restricted from editing their user talk page or using email. - only site-banned editors are specifically restricted from editing their own user page. TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 15:00, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

You are allowed to take necessary actions to appeal your TBAN (or at least you will be eligible to, in six months) or to participate in other dispute resolution as necessary. None of this is in question. What I fail to understand is why you take it that the >140 words I quoted in green above is somehow within the scope of WP:BANEX, and I am curious what you are reading that leads you to that conclusion. In any case, this could be very easily resolved by the admin who closed the discussion (whose user talk page we are on) simply confirming this, and I see no point to continue this discussion until that time. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 15:16, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

TT, that would be a very bad idea. We don't want TBANned editors to be able to continue posting about the given topic area anywhere on the project. Please contrast the value of posting your views on your user page with the value of being able to say, when you post an unblock request, that you stayed well away from even potential violations. I don't know that it makes sense to revert your comment, but I urge you to commit to abstaining from comment on GENSEX matters in every namespace. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:57, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

In full context, I said roughly "I have to leave GENSEX, it was hard as a trans woman in a world with escalating transphobia, but I'll miss it. Goodbye." That didn't seem like a potential violation at all. Just per WP:BMB, user pages should contain notice of the ban, and per WP:BANEX a meta-comment on how editing as a trans person was hard due to transphobia that exists and what editing meant to me there is not out of the question. With the chain of events 1) RTH dragged me to AE (over some blatant WP:BANEX exceptions with this as an afterthought), accused me of canvassing AN by notifying AE (where I'd apparently violated the ban) with a short sentence, doubled down on the issue being with my comment ("dispute or controversy" not stated fact). Then, when I explain how "I'm a trans person, we experience transphobia" and how the comment on genocide was just a fact, he drags me here for explaining myself being part of the TBAN. I should also note, in that "polemic" I just listed a bunch of true things to justify that a genocide is happening to back up the statement he found to be engaging in a "gender related dispute or controversy", leaving the conversation collapsed. He re-opened it and just won't let it go after multiple people have weighed in and said this is overkill.

This is partially why the GENSEX ban upset me so much and so many editors described it as chilling. I made sure to keep out WP:FRINGE from medical articles and articles about pseudo-medical organizations, and my articles about anti-trans ORGs/BLPs did have issues, but those were from being bloody careless with sourcing, adding to many details, and in one case getting into a personal feud with them after writing the article, not stretching the facts about them. Even KJK contains most of the details in the original version and my later updates, after Beccaynr's improvements. All evidence was to problems in that specific region, and the editors who raised the most evidence of problems, including RTH for that matter, called for a targeted ban there.

I do feel to prevent editors being targeted this way in future we should add some kind of clarifying comment and examples, imagine if users can be taken to WP:AE for just adding on their user page "I'm X minority and I experience oppression", or "this user opposes racism/sexism/transphobia/etc", or "as someone who experiences and writes about X oppression, it was hard to write about and will be hard to stop", on the ban notice you should have on your user page anyways.

Of course, you shouldn't write mini articles on your userpage or discuss future/current GENSEX work on talk. Really clear examples of pushing the limits of userpage/talk exceptions should be clear, but the language is obviously currently confusing and doesn't address userpages/user talks well.

P.S. you distracted me from collating the sources on the 2022/2023 activities for the Crown Heights Tenant Union lol - just want to say I'll have them up by tonight, polish up the lead, go over once or twice for copy-edits, and ask you for that reviewing help you offered! I actually developed a really cool tool for automating my source collection 3 days before my ban and was able to collect all the sources for an anti-trans group in a day (which I'm not about to publish don't worry lol), and just applied it grab the sources for today. It creates a nested template of years and months where each (sub)heading links to the google news search for that particular year/month, meaning I can quickly open, read, and index sources - It's sped up my collation process to about twice it's old speed! I also created a master doc containing links to all my completed/in-progress articles with notes on their progress, to use for my future articles too! Sorry for the software info-dump it just reminds me how much I love wikipedia lol, something I need a reminder of these days. TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 16:46, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

TheTranarchist, do you feel that these edits[4] where you emphasize your tban and ask others to act for you are in line with a GENSEX tban broadly construed? This was done after Firefangledfeathers suggested you abstain from further comments. Springee (talk) 13:00, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

You mean where I:

1) clarify what my username stands for

2) fix a typo

3) add articles I've worked on to my "articles worked on" section

4) On my to-do list section, which is nearly all GENSEX, clarify that I can't get to them since I'm no longer allowed in GENSEX

5) fix a broken link to the ANI case

6) clarify the scope of my ban by quoting how WP defines GENSEX

7) say feel free to nominate any past articles I've written for GA, since I can't, in a section where I ask editors to protect articles from vandalism and exercise their independent judgement taking care of them.

Springee, you chased me to ANI since I pushed back against your WP:FRINGE apologia and WP:WHITEWASHing, brought every little thing you could think of as evidence against me (including blatantly ridiculous nonsense like claiming I'd removed details by restoring incredibly pertinent removed details), and other editors pointed to your own tendentious behavior on that talk page. Now I'm out of GENSEX, you're still going after me? For being open about being banned from GENSEX? WP:DROPTHESTICK.

CaptainEek, if there's one good thing to come out of this whole ANI case, I'd say it's a WP:BOOMERANG for Springee's behavior, in the ANI case and on the Chloe Cole article and others, since @Maddy from Celeste and @Historyday01 independently confirmed their poor behavior in the GENSEX area and how disingenuous their comments were in the case. TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 14:05, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Just for the record, I think you've been a good editor when its come to LGBTQ topics and it seems that, from reading the previous ANI discussions this morning, that Springee was a big advocate of the TBAN, claiming you are engaging in bad editing and made other charges which are just not true. In any case, I wish you the best with editing, either Crown Heights Tenant Union or other pages on here. Historyday01 (talk) 14:42, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

To be clear, community consensus said they were disruptive in this area. The accusations of white washing etc are borderline civil issues. Claiming I chased them to an ANI I didn't open and involved articles where their editing was an issue is also a questionable claim. Continuing to violate the tban is also an issue. Springee (talk) 14:49, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Community consensus was split actually, you can't write off half the editors, particularly those experienced in GENSEX, defending my conduct there. Those who provided the best evidence of issues called for a targeted sanction/TBAN on BLPs/ORGs. I have more than enough diffs to prove your tendentious editing and whitewashing on just 1 article, I'm just restrained from introducing them. Notably, when you removed text there was a clear consensus to include and accused me of edit-warring, I gave a much longer list of your issues and said I'd take you to ANI if you responded, and you remained uncharacteristically silent[5]. You repeatedly brought up non-issues with my Chloe Cole edits (funny how you repeatedly tried to claim Cole just opposes transition for minors, and accused me of "removing details" by restoring well-sourced material that proved otherwise). You said I was bludgeoning by participating in a discussion with @Tristario, where we compromised and collaborated to create a good lead, and then you opposed and tried to create one that didn't actually follow the body and was horribly failed IMPARTIAL. I'll quote Maddy on your most recent attempt at ANI to try and call for my ban: I generally agree with your post [my reply to Springee], so I won't restate it in full. It suffices to say I find Springee's accusations here highly disingenuous, and their complaints about this wall of text even more so. They complain about you making "proposals which don't have consensus" as if that wasn't the whole point of a proposal. On Talk:Chloe Cole, they have also upheld useless, WP:IDHT-esque tangents such as insisting that "gender affirming care" includes both medical and non-medical, or baselessly insinuating that some sources are misrepresenting some bills but refusing to actually show how. ... And most recently, it is in fact Springee who is working against a consensus on the lead emerging among the other participants in that discussion. And now you're following me like a PO officer and trying to find any slip up you can use to hurt me further - including nonsensically claiming that acknowledging I've been tbanned from GENSEX is a violation of the ban... TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 15:06, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Again this looks like a violation of your Tban. Springee (talk) 15:08, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

When you ask editors to review and possible nominate your GENSEX articles for GA status you are in the broadly construed area of your Tban. I don't think you should be further sanctioned at this point however, I think you do need to be clear about not touching the area at all. This is what Red-tailed hawk was asking for and I agree. Springee (talk) 15:07, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

@Springee You've made an astounding number of edits/comments about this whole drama over the last couple weeks (or however long it's been). Please just drop the stick already. 🙢 Sativa Inflorescence (talk) 00:59, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Sativa, you joined Wikipedia just 5 months back. Based on your time here do you think it's a violation of a tban, widely construed, to ask people to tend to articles for which a tban has been issued? Keep in mind, I'm not asking for any additional sanction. I'm only asking that the rules be clarified. Springee (talk) 01:23, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

It was just friendly advice. This is already wildly off-topic. 🙢 Sativa Inflorescence (talk) 03:08, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

<spongebob>168 hours later...</spongebob> Levivich (talk) 03:18, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

DYK for S. H. M. Byers

On 10 March 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article S. H. M. Byers, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that S. H. M. Byers not only coined the phrase "Sherman's March to the Sea", but also wrote Iowa's state song? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/S. H. M. Byers. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, S. H. M. Byers), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:03, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Sometimes you just feel that spark of passion! [6] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:33, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red April 2023

Women in Red Apr 2023, Vol 9, Iss 4, Nos 251, 252, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266 Online events: New: Gender studies | Health | Dance | Alphabet run S & T | Books by women Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman | See also: Women in Red is supporting Every Book Its Reader through our Books by women event. Tip of the month: When writing about a book, check WP:NBOOK for notability, then see MOS:NOVEL, WP:NONFICTION or WP:POETRYSTANDARDS for guidance. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:51, 27 March 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Draft:Abutilon hulseanum

I tried to look this subject up on Wikipedia but didn't find anything, so I started an entry on it but it's not a field where I have expertise. Could you help or just start fresh if that works better? I left a note on the draft's talkpage about possible images. Thanks. FloridaArmy (talk) 14:30, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with this one. I noted on the talkpage some photos on Wikipedia Commons I think are synonymously titled. Not sure if they should be retitled, but I think they are appropriate to use. Do you want me to pick one(s) to add or do you want to do it? Thanks again. FloridaArmy (talk) 01:13, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

GENSEX TBAN clarifications

Hi CaptainEek, I hope you're doing well! I was originally going to just ask about the first, but decided to list some more articles to check whether they're under the scope of the ban since it seems easier to ask them all in one go.

1. Monstrous Regiment (novel): I'd like to add a section on themes, which will go into discussions of the book deals with gender since that's the biggest part of the book
2. Discworld (world): This seems more fine but I want to check just to be sure, I'd like to add more info on the species' cultures (most likely sourced to my personal copy of the Folklore of Discworld lol), and for each of them that will go into how gender roles are set up in that culture
3. Angela Lynn Douglas: As a famous trans activist, her and her activities seem to fall under GENSEX, but since she's been dead a decade and a half I'm not sure. The specific changes I want to make are 1) fill out a little of the personal life section with her autobiography 2) generally gnome the article and 3) get an image since I'd been in discussions with the ONE archives about lending their image to Wikipedia. Generally want to try and move that article up to a B or maybe even GA.
   1. Relatedly, I was thinking about condensing the section on TAO on Douglas's page and moving the currently existing content to an article on TAO itself (last active about 50 years ago)
4. Tri-Ess: A controversial now mostly defunct cross-dressers association with a lot of historical significance. I saved it from deletion shortly before my topic ban and haven't touched it since, but want to check if I could finish working on it. That would consist of 1) double-checking if I missed any sources 2) gnoming the article and matching the lead to the body 3) add the logo and see if there are historical images and 4) possibly move the page to "Society for the Second Self" since "Tri-Ess" is an abbreviation and not the only one (like "Tri-Sigma")
5. Quentin Van Meter: Add an infobox and tag for someone to add an image
6. Novae Terrae Foundation: Add the logo
7. Gloria Hemingway: 1) Gnome the article 2) add details about her work/life/relationship with Hemingway(this last one will probably be the most gender-related) 3) try and get images / remove the current ones per MOS:GIDINFO and 4) generally try and get that to GA
8. LGBT rights in New York: Before the ban I was gnoming the article and trying to make sure it's up to date and organized in a good way. It's currently very lacking on info about trans rights, and I'm wondering if purely factual statements about the state of trans rights and related legislation, both past and present, fall under the "disputes or controversy" meaning of the ban. I'd been really hoping to continue work on WP:USALGBT so I'd really appreciate this one being cleared (or a more general go ahead for [[LGBT rights in <State X>]]).
9. LGBT rights in the Commonwealth of Nations: I'd check on the talk page to see if anyone objects first if cleared to do so, but I'd like to reformat it so it isn't a confusing list and is a clearly presented table, like the update I made at LGBT rights in La Francophonie (the original is here and reminiscent of how the Commonwealth article looks now). That'd entail no content changes just a change of format from how it's currently presented.
10. Guardians of Divinity: This seems like the biggest stretch so I want to check. 1) Not so much a stretch, I wanted to add a logo to the infobox and see about finding images for the article 2) Review the sources on the talk page since it got tagged as possibly not notable just before I got banned and I don't want to make other editors have to go through the sources for me 3) I believe there was a NYT article that named the leader but not the org and a different RS noted the article discussed the org without mentioning their name so including info from that (or just noting that on talk for other editors to include as they see fit) and 4) the stretchy part, they recently were invited to speak by the NYYRC on drag, so the question is whether protests of drag also fall under GENSEX and whether I can include that detail. I'm guessing 1 and 2 are a bigger possibility and 3 and 4 are more of an ask.

Sorry for dumping all that on you lol, don't worry and take your time replying because there's a few there and I'm currently drafting Identity Dixie. Additionally, while I'm here, a deserved but overdue

A Barnstar for you!

		The Admin's Barnstar
		Generally for your wonderful work as an admin, I've seen you addressing people's concerns on various articles and giving well-thought out and detailed replies in arbitration cases/discussions and to editors seeking help (I'm not sure if this commendation is worth as much as the one from Jimbo!). But particularly in recognition for your tough close of my case (which I respect as a valid and difficult call to make while admittedly not necessarily being happy about it lol) and your help making sure I don't accidentally toe over my ban! TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 23:36, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 23:36, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Interjecting here, but my guess is: 1, 2, and 7 are probably/mostly fine, and the rest are somewhere between probably and definitely not. Per WP:TBAN a topic ban covers all pages (not only articles) broadly related to the topic, as well as the parts of other pages that are related to the topic, as encapsulated in the phrase "broadly construed".

(I continue to object to this topic ban, FWIW, and the fact that they're "broadly construed" is part of why.) Loki (talk) 03:10, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

@TheTranarchist 1 & 2 are fine. 7...I'd say probably not. The article is itself mentioned in The Atlantic in the context of the culture wars, so that looks like a GENSEX dispute for sure. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 00:36, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification! I want to note about 7 though,

• The "culture wars" bit was specifically the name change; there was absolutely no doubt she was trans and MOS:GENDERID obviously applied; none of the arguments against the move really held any water (some were personal attacks, others questioned whether the fact she used the term "transsexual" instead of "transgender" meant GENDERID didn't apply, etc) [7]
• From the Atlantic: Yet the discussion on the Talk page was about facts and Wikipedia policies and guidance, not politics. “It didn’t seem culture warrior–ish,” Reagle said.[8]

The "dispute or controversy" was which name to use, and that's already been long settled (and considering wiki-policy shouldn't have been remotely controversial, as it was well documented she was trans and transitioned, her latest expressed name was Gloria, and she died in a women's prison). Considering that, is the entire article really GENSEX? TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 16:11, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

I mean, if you think that there are parts of the article that don't fall under GENSEX, that's your prerogative. But I think that article spells trouble there, with a capital T, and if you run afoul of your topic ban there, I can't offer help. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 17:02, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply, I'll stay away from the article to be on the safe side! I was incredibly confused by the video clip lol, not so much the meaning just what he had against pool. Sorry for the kvetching below, still a little more raw than I thought it would be lol, but could you clarify whether the scope of the ban extends to feminism/feminists/abortion or whether it should be interpreted as trans-related stuff only? As the closing admin I believe that's your decision to make going forward here, and I'd been operating under the assumption that it was trans-related stuff and that's the way the case seemed to go so want to make sure (I share Loki's confusion as to why we seem to have 3 distinct topic areas covered under 1 lol). Also, since I forgot to mention this detail in my initial request for clarification, is 9 still off the table considering it only mentions trans people in the acronym LGBT? It contains nothing about any kinds of trans rights whatsoever. Which is a pretty glaring omission that should be rectified to be fair, but I don't intend to add those details myself, just tabularize the pre-existing data.TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 05:43, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Your topic ban is from "Gender-related disputes or controversies and associated people", not trans-related stuff. Now the discussion was about trans-related stuff, and I personally think that if a topic ban were to be passed it should've been only regarding that scope, but what people put forward and what CaptainEek put down in their close was a topic ban from WP:GENSEX which would include feminism and feminists. Unless CaptainEek recloses with a narrower topic ban, you'll have to avoid the whole of WP:GENSEX stuff. Or in other words, you have to follow the letter of the word of the restriction at Wikipedia:Editing restrictions#TheTranarchist to be safe. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:04, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, TheTranarchist, I planned to follow up with you today to mention I had not forgotten my promise to share some general ideas on editing and such (still on my to-do list to finish up before I disembark for my wikibreak!), and then noticed this discussion, so in the meantime, I would like to encourage you to consider how 'broadly construed' could be perceived by other editors.

For example, I had considered suggesting Emma Goldman: A Documentary History of the American Years as an article for you to work on (the AfD has even more sources that could be incorporated into a book article), but because of what the subject matter may include, and from my view, more importantly, because of what others might perceive as a TBAN violation, I did not make the suggestion. Perhaps my thoughts on that article are overly cautious, but my point is that my hope for you is to get through this sanction as quickly and productively as possible, without the further distraction and stress that could happen if another editor raises a possible TBAN violation.

From my view, a generally cautious approach is to consider any organization or individual or topic that could be considered substantially related to LGBT rights to be part of the 'dispute or controversy' topic area. Also, from my view, Gloria Hemingway's life and legacy includes a variety of gender-related disputes or controversies, including her 1951 arrest, some of her communication with her father, her portrayal in the media after her death, and legal proceedings that followed, so I think this article would be better considered broadly within the scope of the TBAN.

I also think it will serve you well in an appeal of the indef TBAN to show clear distance from this topic area, along with constructive editing in other topic areas. I personally kvell at your interest in housing law and community organizing, and wonder if you are also interested in labor unions and related organizing. There is much to do outside of the broad TBAN topic area, so I encourage you to focus on those other areas for now. Beccaynr (talk) 21:50, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Beccaynr, I saw your message while out celebrating the completion of my last midterm and only just got home lol. Thank you for the advice and looking forward to the future tips! I've been operating under that principle that anything remotely LGBT is covered under the ban but wanted to know if there were exceptions for these cases for the reasons provided. I forgot to mention that for example 9 doesn't mention transgender issues once apart from the acronym "LGBT". I know some would probably try and sanction me for any perceived violation and have been keeping an extremely wide berth, but I just want to be marginally closer to my home shore so to speak. And I'm indeed interested in other forms of labor organizing as well, I'm a proud wobbly and my first article was Boots theory! I'm trying to focus on other areas, but its' really hard, especially with the knowledge the focus didn't come about naturally.

To be honest, I'm still recovering from the emotional whiplash of the case in a lot of ways. I never expected to actually get a full GENSEX ban. The ban clarifies that Gender and sexuality discretionary sanctions apply to any dispute regarding the proper article title, pronoun usage, or other manner of referring to any individual known to be or self-identifying as transgender[9] but "any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people" broadly construed becomes anything vaguely trans related at all. The majority of my edits to that point had been in GENSEX. That included articles about historic figures or organizations, articles about medical transition (with my academic training, I am very good at using scholarly sources, especially ensuring WP:MEDRS are used, as many people spoke about how I kept out FRINGE from articles), articles about simply the status and history of transgender rights, ie purely factual historical statements were the reliable sources are abundant, and yes anti-trans BLPS/ORGS. All problems raised were in that last category and were, in order of descending severity:

• KJK - where I most obviously I fucked up after I let her publicly directing transphobic insults at me and calling me a liar cloud my judgement
• FAIR - My dumb mastodon post, I used an improper source considering them to be a SME and recognized I was wrong before the case, I used a source that consensus was split on for reliability which was cited in a RS, I bungled an RFC and was also chided for fixing it, I referred to the whitewashing of an article in a topic section when referring to rsomeone eplacing the lead with just the org's mission statement, and an editor said it was SYNTH to categorize an organization that was known for opposing a specific LGBT right as an org opposing LGBT rights, which many other editors considered an overreading of synth
• Cole: Mostly one editor complaining, such as accusations of SYNTH for saying the lead should describe her as an anti-trans activist based on a large number of RS 1) directly calling her that, 2) saying she was a speaker at "anti-trans rallies", 3) saying she supported "anti-trans legislation", 4) noting the positions she endorses have been said by reputable medical organizations to be harmful to trans people, which other editors noted to not be SYNTH
• Genspect: A social media post where I'm glad about making sure they're documented according to WP:FRINGE and WP:RS. The only issued raised with the article itself was the very first version seemed biased. All info is still in there it just read poorly since it was one of my first articles so I wrote it chronologically before sectioning it (and I've for a long while published articles in better formats from the get-go)
  • SEGM: Related, as the same post referred to SEGM but nobody commented on the article itself apart from to note they are indeed a fringe group, and local consensus there has continued to defend the state of the article as it had been since before the case
• GAG: Some MREL sources, which I'd already been trying to cut back on to use less, and one listed at RSP as no consensus. Ppt91 defended my conduct and noted my efforts to work collaboratively on the article to maintain NPOV and generally improve it.
• Guardians of Divinity: Might not be notable

I also got more heated than I should have as the case went on because all the stress was getting to me, but I didn't imagine a few problems with just some of my articles on anti-trans BLPs/ORGs would result in a complete ban from anything vaguely trans related at all and it still hurts since I was passionate about writing about trans stuff in a lot of different ways, not just documenting hateful people/orgs, the specific place issues were raised. Especially given that half the editors commenting, particularly those within GENSEX, opposed a full ban having come across my general editing in the topic area. I just wish the case got DENIED or taken to AE lol TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 02:18, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh, it's even dumber than you think it is. A GENSEX topic ban applies to all articles about feminism. Not gender-critical feminism or transfeminism. Feminism. Or notable feminists, for that matter.

In fact, this is the core of what GENSEX is intended to apply to (it was originally Gamergate sanctions), and LGBT topics were added after the fact. Why they weren't broken out into their own DS area / contentious topic is still a mystery to me. Loki (talk) 03:21, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi TheTranarchist, I am glad you have been celebrating, and congrats on getting through your midterms! I have been under the impression that the TBAN broadly applies to "Gender-related disputes or controversies and associated people" and I think your perspective on the more narrow scope for discretionary sanctions outlined in the February 2021 Motion helps explain why it seems possible to include articles that would otherwise seem to be within the broader topic area. I think it would be helpful if CaptainEek could clarify this fundamental scope issue.

I have had a very long day, so maybe I am misunderstanding the gist of your request for clarification. I am also not able to address everything in your comment right now, but I do think you have been exhibiting a lot of resilience in response to these hardships and challenges, and this is both impressive and commendable. And my hope is that with time and further opportunity for reflection as you continue editing, the emotional whiplash will subside. Beccaynr (talk) 03:36, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! To be honest, half that last reply was just me kvetching about how huge a scope the TBAN entails by either definition when the evidence of issues was very limited and within a very particular subset of GENSEX rather than the entirety of GENSEX, which is where nearly all of my edits had been up to that point in various ways and wholly uncontroversial. I suppose I can best summarize my feelings as it feels like treating a broken finger by amputating off an arm instead of putting a cast on the finger or even just cutting off only the finger. I hadn't even realized that feminism is off the table, and I'm even more down about it since I had been mulling over a few feminist and pro-abortion groups to document.

I doubt the whiplash will subside fully, and even if I eventually succeed in an appeal I don't think this will ever stop hurting a little. The most I've learned from reflection so far has been that:

cynical reflections

1) My Mastodon posts were stupid, as editors are allowed to bring my posts up as evidence without showing my opinions on BLPs/ORGs effected how I wrote their article (like SEGM and FAIR) or that my views diverged from how RS themselves considered the organizations. I can't be remotely mean/uncouth to groups or individuals that literally have no notability outside of campaigning to strip the rights of people like me on a social media account I mention on my userpage. I can't point out they sell pseudoscientific nonsense, which RS unequivocally point out about them (imagine if Jimbo got dragged to ANI for calling the the holistic healing movement "lunatic charlatans" lol) 2) I should have held myself to a higher standard than most editors as a few bad sources on a few articles I wrote could be used to damn me despite being a newbie editor with a mostly good sourcing track record. I should never let myself make any mistakes in GENSEX, or just anywhere, lest I get mobbed again. I should have known that 1000+ gensex edits in various subfields of GENSEX could result in a complete ban for about a dozen actually problematic diffs in 1-3, maybe at a stretch 4, articles in a very narrow subfield of it. 3) I should have sought more advice from admins and people involved in ANI to handle the case properly as it was happening and get the ins and outs of how they actually work (in theory and practice, both the written and unwritten rules) 4) My notes in the close review should have taken to heart WP:NOTTHEM - instead of pointing out how some transphobic editors who sought to ban me skewed the count I should have, for example, pointed out that while SYNTH was cited in the close, only 3 people raised issues with SYNTH, none of which were actually SYNTH (FAIR & Cole as described above, which many experienced editors explicitly said were not SYNTH, and the misreading of a source for a minor detail on KJK we discussed) 5) I should have known better than to let my exasperation with some editors plainly seeking me to ban me on spurious grounds let them bait me into being uncivil. 6) ANI is filled with editors who can leave essays about a topic area they don't have experience in about an editor they never encountered till a sock launched some ridiculous accusations against them 7) RGW now apparently means documenting fringe groups in accordance with FRINGE and RS based on about 1-2% of sources I've ever used, usually for minor details, being problematic. Did removing them actually majorly change the articles or the fact that the coverage the subject gets is overwhelmingly critical? No. I dealt with editors pushing RGW, I didn't do it myself. I did not engage in OR. I did not say anything without RS (and rarely sources I mistakenly believed were RS, usually echoing/adding details to what RS already agreed on). Every article I wrote was based off what every RS on them had to say about them taken together. And we see, like at SEGM, people trying to add and defend FRINGE citing my supposed bias writing about them. 8) ANI deserves the redirect WP:CESSPIT and I never want to get dragged there and much less stuck there for a month ever again, ...

TheTranarchist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 16:28, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).

Administrator changes

Aoidh

KillerChihuahua

CheckUser changes

Ferret

Guideline and policy news

• A community RfC is open to discuss whether reports primarily involving gender-related disputes or controversies should be referred to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

Technical news

• Some older web browsers will not be able to use JavaScript on Wikimedia wikis starting this week. This mainly affects users of Internet Explorer 11. (T178356)
• The rollback of Vector 2022 RfC has found no consensus to rollback to Vector legacy, but has found rough consensus to disable "limited width" mode by default.
• A link to the user's Special:CentralAuth page will now appear in the subtitle links shown on Special:Contributions. This was voted #17 in the Community Wishlist Survey 2023.

Arbitration

• The Armenia-Azerbaijan 3 case has been closed.
• A case about World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been opened, with the first evidence phase closing 6 April 2023.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Japanese chemical weapons in World War II

Hello, CaptainEek. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Japanese chemical weapons in World War II".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:59, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, CaptainEek,

Of course, feel free to restore if you'd like to continue to work on this draft. Maybe the good folks at the Military History WikiProject could offer some of their expertise on possible sources. Good luck! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:01, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi! Seeking help from the high seas!

I LOVE your page. I am asking for help although I don't know if you have the time. Forgive if this is kind of long. Will try to keep it as brief as I can.

There is a media website called Palmer Report. They lean left. I read them. For awhile now, their wikipedia page has read "Palmer Report is a liberal fake news website." I noticed this and got pulled in to discussions. Through research I found the person who wrote that is a Republican with a bone to pick. (There were two of them but one got banned.) I asked them to take it down. That does not sound like an authentic Wiki voice, it sounds like a partisan editor. But he locked the page down. I still have access to talk and demanded to know what was going on. So did about 50 or 6o other people. We also asked for the sources.

Nobody ever gave me any. They just said they could only change it if I came up with article saying "Palmer Report is not fake news." I mean -- nobody is going to write an article like that. It felt like guilty until proven innocent.

I also asked them even if one source DID say that how does that overide all the ones who didn't? Nobody answered. In addition another editor told me a few of them are out to rid Wiki of Liberalism. And they did it to another liberal site called Raw story. They only stopped when another editor got involvled and basically did an override and called them out.

Giving them sources does not work as they say things like "that doesn't prove their not fake news." example -- Brian Williams of MSNBC once did a segment involving Palmer Report.

Can you please take a look at it? That is NOT Wiki's voice and though I'd love to join Wiki and try to help, I just do not have the time to do anything but let editors know what's going on and ask for help. I hope you'll consider taking a look and thank you either way.

 2600:6C65:7E7F:B93E:1082:3612:B07F:54F7 (talk) 02:59, 8 April 2023 (UTC) Nora

Hi Nora. I understand that can be frustrating. I'm also glad you like the pirate theme :) I've gone ahead and taken a look at the article. There seem to be 11 sources being cited in the article to support the "fake news" claim, and five to support the "liberal" claim. It also seems to have been very well discussed on the article's talk page throughout time. Just because a website does at times publish true news does not exculpate them of publishing lots of fake news. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 03:13, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Victory lap?

Heh, maybe I'm tempting fate here by calling it a "victory lap", but this is an invitation to join us over at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of nitrogen-fixing-clade families/archive1, when that link turns blue (prob'ly soon). This finishes up the flowering plant families (for me ... the campanulids and probably the malvids will be finished up by other people). Your early support (for List of alismatid monocot families) was vital and appreciated. - Dank (push to talk) 19:20, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

kudos?

Regarding this edit: thanks, sure, but kudos? (Maybe a fractional kudo.) Edited diff to be more precise. isaacl (talk) 21:13, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

@Isaacl perhaps my understandings of the connotations of kudos are incorrect, my bad. I view it as stronger than a thanks, if still rather weak. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 21:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Sure, to me it implies acknowledgement of some exceptional effort (in an above-average sense), and the first definition in Wikitionary says "Praise; accolades". Doing something that should have been done in the first place, as you put it, doesn't to me ring out as kudo-worthy. (It's not a big deal though; if you had said "praise" or "credit" I wouldn't have said anything. I was just taking the opportunity to make fun of how "kudos" looks like a plural word. ;-) isaacl (talk) 21:41, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2023 Karnataka Legislative Assembly election on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Question from Dtknowles (05:16, 25 March 2023)

I have worked in the U.S. space programs and have tested firearms and ammunition as a hobby. I have a great deal of personal experience in these areas. How would you suggest I begin to use that knowledge to improve Wikipedia articles? --Dtknowles (talk) 05:16, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Dtknowles: Please improve SpaceX Starship because despite my effort a while ago it is still not rated “good” as it should be Chidgk1 (talk) 13:50, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Edit to Pepe Julian Onziema

Hello,

I just saw your edit to Pepe Julian Onziema, and was confused by the edit reason, as I can't access that link. I'm sure it's something that's commonly known to more frequent editors, but I edit infrequently at best. I'm sure the edit was proper, I'm just hoping to understand the reason, so I can know what it means for the future. Thanks! Lkb335 (talk) 23:13, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

The WP:VRT deals with email communication to Wikipedia, which takes the form of Tickets, as you noted on that article. They are only accessible to members of the VRT. Usually they take the form of someone asking for something in some article, and sometimes the correct response as a VRT member is to implement a certain edit based on the request. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 23:18, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Ah, got it. Thanks! Lkb335 (talk) 17:44, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Lkb335 Courtesy ping. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 23:22, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Duties of the Arbitration Committee

Hi,

Just a few questions.

Can the Arbitration Committee change policies or guidelines?

Can the Arbitration Committee remove any policies or guidelines?

If so, can you please send me a log of amendments (changes) to the rules, or any discard of policies and/or guidelines.

This is only of my personal curiosity rather than anything.... sus.

Thanks,

BillClinternet (talk) 02:24, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@BillClinternet The Committee has no power over community policies or guidelines. The duties of the Committee are defined in WP:ARBPOL, which may be amended only through community support. The Committee also maintains internal procedures(Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures), which it may itself amend. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 02:48, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Jumping in here to note that ArbCom decisions are sometimes seen as precedent-setting, both by future ArbComs and by the community (e.g. see WP:ASPERSIONS). Loki (talk) 18:32, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Procedural notification

Hi, I and others have proposed additional options at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#RfC_on_a_procedural_community_desysop. You may wish to review your position in that RfC. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:32, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Henry Smith's office staff

According to Jennifer Millar-Smith's profile on the borough council website, cited as a reference on the page, "She currently works for Crawley's Member of Parliament." Do you have any evidence this is not the case? Recent Runes (talk) 23:02, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@Recent Runes Good spot, I self reverted. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 00:00, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red May 2023

Women in Red May 2023, Vol 9, Iss 5, Nos 251, 252, 267, 268, 269, 270 Online events: New: Alphabet run U, V, W | Disability | Women in Education | CEE women Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman | See also: Wikimedia CEE Spring 2023/CEE Women - Wikimedia contest with postcards and prizes The Wikipedia Library: #1Lib1Ref - May 15th to June 5th Tip of the month: Use the Google translate app and camera on your phone to translate text from an article or book Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:27, 27 April 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

WikiCup 2023 May newsletter

The second round of the 2023 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to have scored 60 points to advance into round 3. Our top five scorers in round 2 all included a featured article among their submissions and each scored over 500 points. They were:

• Iazyges (1040) with three FAs on Byzantine emperors, and lots of bonus points.
• Unlimitedlead (847), with three FAs on ancient history, one GA and nine reviews.
• Epicgenius (636), a WikiCup veteran, with one FA on the New Amsterdam Theatre, four GAs and eleven DYKs
• BennyOnTheLoose (553), a seasoned competitor, with one FA on snooker, six GAs and seven reviews.
• FrB.TG (525), with one FA, a Lady Gaga song and a mass of bonus points.

Other notable performances were put in by Sammi Brie, Thebiguglyalien, MyCatIsAChonk, PCN02WPS, and AirshipJungleman29.

So far contestants have achieved thirteen featured articles between them, one being a joint effort, and forty-nine good articles. The judges are pleased with the thorough reviews that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:14, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Endemic COVID-19 on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).

Administrator changes

Spicy

• Ale jrb
• Dbachmann
• DGG (deceased)
• Jimbo Wales

CheckUser changes

Jimbo Wales

Oversighter changes

Jimbo Wales

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.

Technical news

• Progress has started on the Page Triage improvement project. This is to address the concerns raised by the community in their 2022 WMF letter that requested improvements be made to the tool.

Arbitration

• The proposed decision in the World War II and the history of Jews in Poland case is expected 11 May 2023.

Miscellaneous

• The Wikimedia Foundation annual plan 2023-2024 draft is open for comment and input through May 19. The final plan will be published in July 2023.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:22, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Request to have a look at my ANI request

Hello. I have chose you randomly to ask you to have a look at my ANI request made days ago: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Arkenstrone: baseless accusations. Veverve (talk) 19:07, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Happy adminship anniversary!

Wishing CaptainEek a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! -ASHEIOU (THEY/THEM • TALK) 13:05, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Japanese cruiser Yūbari assessment banner shells

Hi Captain:

I noticed in my review of military history project contest entries that you promoted Japanese cruiser Yūbari to GA and the overall banner shows that it is listed as a good article. The military history project banner shell still shows it as B as of the time of this note. The other two projects also are shown as B and C. As information and for any further handling that might be necessary. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 02:45, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

@Donner60 Ah my bad, meant to go back and update it with Rater after the bot made its pass. Thanks for the reminder :) CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 03:00, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your pre-emptive close

I'm working on closing that maps RFC (almost 2 tomats of discussion!) and saw this. It was like mana from heaven, an oasis in the desert. As I just kept scrolling down and down and down, seeing even more proposals, noting that one, at least, was already closed gave me the strength I needed to stick it out. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:54, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Oh crap, I just scrolled down a bit further and saw 4a. :( ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:56, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish Well thank you for taking on that daunting close! Glad I could be of a little assistance, but alas only so much I could do :) CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 18:37, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Resign

Regarding this edit: a hyphen in the edit comment might have been helpful :-) isaacl (talk) 21:43, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Hehe, how multiple meanings can come together. Yes, I meant I was signing it again (as I overtilded it), not doing a Nixon. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 21:46, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:White nationalism on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:34, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

iban/L+VM

Thank you for being willing to look at the issue with fresh eyes. Valereee (talk) 19:47, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Should I ask for a new reviewer for agriculture in Turkey?

Happy to wait but if you prefer I can ask for another reviewer Chidgk1 (talk) 07:43, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

@Chidgk1 I've seen this. I started a new job this week so I've ended up rather busy! I'll try to take a look this weekend, but you're free to seek another reviewer :) CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:21, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red - June 2023

Women in Red June 2023, Vol 9, Iss 6, Nos 251, 252, 271, 272, 273 Online events: New: Alphabet run X, Y & Z | LGBTQ+ women | Wiki Loves Pride | Women in Music Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman See also: Women in Green: June 2023 GA Editathon event page Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Pride/2023 global campaign The Wikipedia Library: #1Lib1Ref - May 15th to June 5th Tip of the month: Looking for new red links? Keep an eye out for interesting and notable friends, family, or associates of your last article subject, and re-examine group photos for other women who may still need an article. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 09:15, 28 May 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Usernames with non-Latin characters

Regarding We've tolerated these names, but it should be recognized that they are not conducive to a common editing environment. from [10]: particularly since the advent of Wikimedia's single unified login, I feel it's a bit onerous to create separate accounts for different Wikimedia sites, which also makes it harder to trace contributions across the different projects. Thus I disagree that such names are just tolerated. I think the advice given at Wikipedia:Username policy § Usernames with non-Latin characters is reasonable: users are encouraged to use Latin characters in their signature. I appreciate there are practical challenges in accommodating such usernames. It's something I think is worth doing, nonetheless, in a global community. isaacl (talk) 21:19, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

@Isaacl I agree with you, and have struck the relevant bits. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 03:02, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the revised statement. isaacl (talk) 03:38, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).

Administrator changes

Ingenuity

• Ddstretch
• Prodego
• Resolute

CheckUser changes

Courcelles

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
• As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.

Technical news

• Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.

Miscellaneous

• Following a community referendum, the arbitration policy has been modified to remove the ability for users to appeal remedies to Jimbo Wales.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:32, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Casual discussion

Good day Captain and everyone Ajxrhaider (talk) 13:35, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@Ajxrhaider Can I assist you in a particular way or? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 14:15, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

I am planning on writing a novel and i would really appreciate some advice Ajxrhaider (talk) 14:34, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@Ajxrhaider I'm afraid we're not Google, and we're WP:NOTAFORUM. Being an editor here is about editing Wikipedia itself. If you have questions about that, I'd be more than happy to help. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 22:35, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Question from Lando4ever (08:24, 8 June 2023)

Hey I want to edit NASCAR results on team pages and driver pages from now on. To make the changes I have to edit each page separately right, they won't automatically update based on the changes from one page. --Lando4ever (talk) 08:24, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

@Lando4ever I'm not quite sure what you're asking, but no, pages do not generally update based on changes made to other pages. There are exceptions to this that can be coded, but they're a lot of work and not super useful (usually). If you clarify what you're talking about I could probably answer your question better? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 03:33, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

I meant like the statistics in driver page and team page (results after each race). Anyway I guess it's not automatic. Lando4ever (talk) 13:23, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Talk:Agriculture in Turkey/GA1

CaptainEek, the original reviewer of this GA nomination—you'd had issues with the quality of their review—has been blocked as a sock. If you are still interested in taking over, please do so. If you aren't interested any longer, a new reviewer will need to be found, so it would be great if you could ping me should that be the case. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:58, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset I'm afraid I have not had the time I hoped I would. I disclaim the review. Though for what its worth, the article still seems pretty barebones at a mere 13kb of readable prose. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 03:14, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:WikiProject Telecommunications/Area codes RfC on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:31, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Question re item

Ahoy there! hope you don't mind if I ask you a question. I was going to post the mesage below at Village Pump, but then I decided not to do so. I am truly not seeking any public notoriety for my posting; I simply would like to try to address this constructively. could you please tell me what you think of my question below?

I have a question about usage of WP:BLP. we currently have articles on two individuals below the age of ten, highlighting ther royal status. these two individuals have had absolutety no voice in whether these articles should be established or not. their parents have publicly distanced themselves from the royal family.

I am wondering if BLP can be used to preserve the privacy of individuals who have not reached adulthood, and hopefully please remove the articles until they reach adulthood. I am sincerely trying to consider the long-term well-being of these two minors. eventually they will presumably gain access to the Internet once they are old enough to do so. furthermore, they do not reside in the country where they are supposedly royalty.

I don't feel that wikipedia should be increasing their public visiblity, before they've had a chance to decide what public role they wish to have, if any. can anything be done to help with this situation? --Sm8900 (talk) 14:07, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

@Sm8900 Well right off the bat I can guess who you have in mind. You can certainly raise the idea, though I doubt you'll get very far with it. There are plenty of notable minors, and if the press is writing about them, their lives are already well known. I think it would make more sense for barely notable minors. But for celebrity minors, such as royals, it would be hard to make that argument. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 16:48, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

ok. your points on this are totally valid. it just seems too bad that these kids have an entry about themselves, without them having any say in the process. anyway, I will give your points on this some thought. thanks. Sm8900 (talk) 16:57, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red July 2023

Women in Red June 2023, Vol 9, Iss 7, Nos 251, 252, 274, 275, 276 Online events: New: Women in Red's 8th anniversary | Alphabet run A & B | Sports Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman Tip of the month: Look out for contributors interested in writing about women and invite them to join Women in Red Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:42, 27 June 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Sockpuppetry case request

Anuj Choudhary Ror and Rudradaman127 (talk) are making similar disruptive edits on Aror, are probably the same. Kindly acknowledge the issue. Nirmohiji (talk) 06:25, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

@Nirmohiji I don't currently have the time. Please file a WP:SPI case. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 15:30, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

hi

CaptainEeke.

Thanks for your response. SPI case has been filed Nirmohiji (talk) 15:59, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Question from Leaziin on Jeffrey Budoff (20:09, 27 June 2023)

Hello how do I start editing --Leaziin (talk) 20:09, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

@Leaziin Hiya. I've left some instructions on your talk page, accessible at User talk:Leaziin. If you have followup questions, let me know! CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 02:29, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Question from Jpdfive (22:51, 29 June 2023)

Heya, i had a page draft i couldn't publish for whatever reason and I cant find it anywhere now. it was a whole article I had ready to go and I cant find it --Jpdfive (talk) 22:51, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

@Jpdfive It was deleted because you made no edits to it for more than 6 months. I can restore it if you wish to keep working on it. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 23:04, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes please thanks very much, I didn't have time for it before, but that would be great. Ta Jpdfive (talk) 23:05, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

@Jpdfive I've undeleted it and also submitted it to the review queue for you. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 00:57, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

amazing, thanks very much Jpdfive (talk) 01:23, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol needs your help!

New pages awaiting review as of June 30th, 2023.

Hello CaptainEek,

The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:

• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).

Administrator changes

Novem Linguae

• Deckiller
• Electionworld
• MBisanz
• Penwhale
• Raul654
• Roadrunner
• Viridae
• Yannismarou

Bureaucrat changes

MBisanz

Guideline and policy news

• Contributions to the English Wikipedia are now released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0) license instead of CC BY-SA 3.0. Contributions are still also released under the GFDL license.

Technical news

• Discussion is open regarding a proposed global policy regarding third-party resources. Third-party resources are computer resources that reside outside of Wikimedia production websites.

Arbitration

• Two arbitration cases are currently open. Proposed decisions are expected 5 July 2023 for the Scottywong case and 9 July 2023 for the AlisonW case.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:57, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup 2023 July newsletter

The third round of the 2023 WikiCup has come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round had at least 175 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• Thebiguglyalien, with 919 points from a featured article on Frances Cleveland as well as five good articles and many reviews,
• Unlimitedlead, with 862 points from a high-scoring featured articles on Henry II of England and numerous reviews,
• Iazyges, with 560 points from a high-scoring featured article on Tiberius III.

Contestants achieved 11 featured articles, 2 featured lists, 47 good articles, 72 featured or good article reviews, over 100 DYKs and 40 ITN appearances. As always, any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:17, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of Oceanian countries by area on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Hunter Biden on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:31, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

WikiConference North America scholarship

Hello, CaptainEek. Please check your email; you've got mail!
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.

OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 04:40, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red 8th Anniversary

	Women in Red 8th Anniversary
	In July 2015 around 15.5% of the English Wikipedia's biographies were about women. As of July 2023, 19.61% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women. That's a lot of biographies created in the effort to close the gender gap. Happy 8th Anniversary! Join us for some virtual cake and add comments or memories and please keep on editing to close the gap!

--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:00, 18 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging