User talk:Llll5032/Archive 2
The Signpost: 28 November 2022 edit
- News and notes: English Wikipedia editors: "We don't need no stinking banners"
- In the media: "The most beautiful story on the Internet"
- Disinformation report: Missed and Dissed
- Book review: Writing the Revolution
- Technology report: Galactic dreams, encyclopedic reality
- Essay: The Six Million FP Man
- Tips and tricks: (Wiki)break stuff
- Recent research: Study deems COVID-19 editors smart and cool, questions of clarity and utility for WMF's proposed "Knowledge Integrity Risk Observatory"
- Featured content: A great month for featured articles
- Obituary: A tribute to Michael Gäbler
- From the archives: Five, ten, and fifteen years ago
- CommonsComix: Joker's trick
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message edit
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Just a thanks edit
Llll, I just wanted to say thanks for disagreeing in a respectful way. A lot of these topics can get heated. An editor who stays respectful even after an extended disagreement is something to be acknowledged. Springee (talk) 22:45, 10 March 2021 (UTC) The above was typed out before your post here [[1]] and still stands after Springee (talk) 22:46, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, Springee. I often like your ideas, and I appreciate our respectful discussions too. Llll5032 (talk) 07:21, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
- This may come across as odd since I just reverted one of your edits but yesterday I was thinking I wanted to reiterate my message above. I find that even if I don't agree with the edits, I feel that I can have good faith that your edits are generally a positive and if I disagree in any particular case it's probably a difference not big enough to worry about. So again, kudo's to you. Springee (talk) 13:49, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
- Of course and same to you, Springee — I just tried some compromise language in the article that may work for you. We may have occasional differences in interpreting WP:DUE and WP:NPOV, but we can work these out. Llll5032 (talk) 15:28, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
Vandalism/Warning edit
- Llll5032 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Continuous reverts, of which edit summary does not match given do not match edits. Wikipedia:Edit warringMachiavellian Gaddafi (talk) 05:14, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Reported with this and examples including, but not limited to, past violations/warnings from other accounts. (e.g. edit warring, biased vandalism).
All edits reverted to @Llll5032
- Please review WP:BESTSOURCES, WP:ABOUTSELF, WP:ONUS, and WP:EPTALK (editing is not warring, but reverts are), and discuss on the article talk page why the disputed content should stay in the article. Llll5032 (talk) 05:21, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
That's not the entire issue though, hence the report. Wikipedia guidelines clearly state that although multiple sources from one website need secondary reference, it's not a reason to warrant complete deletion; in this case, you deleted the entire show section. Also, it looks like you deleted the report from your talk page, which also violates Wikipedia guidelines. I'm not going to send another report, but a simple look through your talk page shows that you're notorious for this, as well as biased editing. The previous request is already submitted, along with every other example of these type of actions coming from your account, and there's no reason to continue warring. Machiavellian Gaddafi (talk) 05:29, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- For example, erasing Wikipedia admin posts are against the guidelines, as you did here:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Llll5032&oldid=prev&diff=1126409909 Machiavellian Gaddafi (talk) 05:32, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- Please WP:AGF. I thought your repeat post was a mistake so I mistakenly deleted it, although deleting content from a user talk page is probably allowed. I will respond at the board. Llll5032 (talk) 05:39, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
You're continuing to assume that I haven't read these articles. If you look through the pages history, you'll see that I'm chipping away at validating and giving secondary references to several different topics within the article. Again, although many of these references come from the same website, they are not invalid or against guidelines. There was also an issue with deleting valid references, one being the association to vice media that was given in a very valid article from and approved source. I understand that cleaning up is part of what we do here, but you're overreaching. As aforementioned, you have a history of that. I didn't request for a total ban, but rather that you're locked out from editing this one page for at least some time. I don't want to argue about it, as we're both editors that are doing what we can to make Wikipedia better, and I would never go into any of your edits and change anything based on my personal feelings. I guess we're going to have to leave it up to the board to review my complaint. You do a good job on a lot of your edits, but you do tend to overreach. It's not a big deal, but I'm asking you to let me please fix the minor reference issues. Expecting an email with various articles included in it tomorrow, and I will implement them once I receive them. Machiavellian Gaddafi (talk) 05:55, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for saying that I do a good job on many of my edits. I take WP:PRESERVE seriously for established articles and well-sourced content. I would not object to your re-inclusion of Vice if it is sourced to a RS that also describes Censored.TV (otherwise it can be considered WP:SYNTH). Llll5032 (talk) 06:07, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- Llll5032, Machiavellian Gaddafi is incorrect, which isn't surprising as he is a very new editor, you can remove any messages you want from your talk page except for unblock requests should you find yourself blocked. And these comments have bordered on being a personal attack that you are handling very gracefully. If he hadn't mellowed his words in his last message to you I was going to post a warning on his talk page about casting aspersions. Liz Read! Talk! 07:51, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for saying that I do a good job on many of my edits. I take WP:PRESERVE seriously for established articles and well-sourced content. I would not object to your re-inclusion of Vice if it is sourced to a RS that also describes Censored.TV (otherwise it can be considered WP:SYNTH). Llll5032 (talk) 06:07, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Important Notice edit
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Doug Weller talk 08:53, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
The Signpost: 1 January 2023 edit
- Interview: ComplexRational's RfA debrief
- Technology report: Wikimedia Foundation's Abstract Wikipedia project "at substantial risk of failure"
- Essay: Mobile editing
- Arbitration report: Arbitration Committee Election 2022
- Recent research: Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement in talk page disputes
- Featured content: Would you like to swing on a star?
- Traffic report: Football, football, football! Wikipedia Football Club!
- CommonsComix: #4: The Course of WikiEmpire
- From the archives: Five, ten, and fifteen years ago
The Signpost: 16 January 2023 edit
- Special report: Coverage of 2022 bans reveals editors serving long sentences in Saudi Arabia since 2020
- News and notes: Revised Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines up for vote, WMF counsel departs, generative models under discussion
- In the media: Court orders user data in libel case, Saudi Wikipedia in the crosshairs, Larry Sanger at it again
- Technology report: View it! A new tool for image discovery
- In focus: Busting into Grand Central
- Serendipity: How I bought part of Wikipedia – for less than $100
- Featured content: Flip your lid
- Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2022
- From the archives: Five, ten, and fifteen years ago
Disambiguation link notification for January 30 edit
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gavin McInnes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salon.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 4 February 2023 edit
- From the editor: New for the Signpost: Author pages, tag pages, and a decent article search function
- News and notes: Foundation update on fundraising, new page patrol, Tides, and Wikipedia blocked in Pakistan
- Disinformation report: Wikipedia on Santos
- Op-Ed: Estonian businessman and political donor brings lawsuit against head of national Wikimedia chapter
- Recent research: Wikipedia's "moderate yet systematic" liberal citation bias
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Organized Labour
- Tips and tricks: XTools: Data analytics for your list of created articles
- Featured content: 20,000 Featureds under the Sea
- Traffic report: Films, deaths and ChatGPT
The Signpost: 20 February 2023 edit
- In the media: Arbitrators open case after article alleges Wikipedia "intentionally distorts" Holocaust coverage
- Disinformation report: The "largest con in corporate history"?
- Tips and tricks: All about writing at DYK
- Featured content: Eden, lost.
- Gallery: Love is in the air
- From the archives: 5, 10, and 15 years ago: Let's (not) delete the Main Page!
- Humour: The RfA Candidate's Song
Your draft article, Draft:Steven S. Biss edit
Hello, Llll5032. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Steven S. Biss".
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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 14:09, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 9 March 2023 edit
- News and notes: What's going on with the Wikimedia Endowment?
- Technology report: Second flight of the Soviet space bears: Testing ChatGPT's accuracy
- In the media: What should Wikipedia do? Publish Russian propaganda? Be less woke? Cover the Holocaust in Poland differently?
- Featured content: In which over two-thirds of the featured articles section needs to be copied over to WikiProject Military History's newsletter
- Recent research: "Wikipedia's Intentional Distortion of the Holocaust" in Poland and "self-focus bias" in coverage of global events
- From the archives: Five, ten, and fifteen years ago
The Signpost: 20 March 2023 edit
- News and notes: Wikimania submissions deadline looms, Russian government after our lucky charms, AI woes nix CNET from RS slate
- Eyewitness: Three more stories from Ukrainian Wikimedians
- In the media: Paid editing, plagiarism payouts, proponents of a ploy, and people peeved at perceived preferences
- Featured content: Way too many featured articles
- Interview: 228/2/1: the inside scoop on Aoidh's RfA
- Traffic report: Who died? Who won? Who lost?
The Signpost: 03 April 2023 edit
- From the editor: Some long-overdue retractions
- News and notes: Sounding out, a universal code of conduct, and dealing with AI
- Arbitration report: "World War II and the history of Jews in Poland" case is ongoing
- Featured content: Hail, poetry! Thou heav'n-born maid
- Recent research: Language bias: Wikipedia captures at least the "silhouette of the elephant", unlike ChatGPT
- From the archives: April Fools' through the ages
- Disinformation report: Sus socks support suits, seems systemic
The Signpost: 26 April 2023 edit
- News and notes: Staff departures at Wikimedia Foundation, Jimbo hands in the bits, and graphs' zeppelin burns
- In the media: Contested truth claims in Wikipedia
- Obituary: Remembering David "DGG" Goodman
- Arbitration report: Holocaust in Poland, Jimbo in the hot seat, and a desysopping
- Special report: Signpost statistics between years 2005 and 2022
- News from the WMF: Collective planning with the Wikimedia Foundation
- Featured content: In which we described the featured articles in rhyme again
- From the archives: April Fools' through the ages, part two
- Humour: The law of hats
- Traffic report: Long live machine, the future supreme
The Signpost: 8 May 2023 edit
- News and notes: New legal "deVLOPments" in the EU
- In the media: Vivek's smelly socks, online safety, and politics
- Recent research: Gender, race and notability in deletion discussions
- Featured content: I wrote a poem for each article, I found rhymes for all the lists; My first featured picture of this year now finally exists!
- Arbitration report: "World War II and the history of Jews in Poland" approaches conclusion
- News from the WMF: Planning together with the Wikimedia Foundation
The Signpost: 22 May 2023 edit
- In the media: History, propaganda and censorship
- Arbitration report: Final decision in "World War II and the history of Jews in Poland"
- Featured content: A very musical week for featured articles
- Traffic report: Coronation, chatbot, celebs
When are will you be ready... edit
to remove the need for more citation and better citations to be added to the page on Francis Parker Yockey? StrongALPHA (talk) 18:19, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
- Most of the article has better citations now, so I moved the template to a section that still needs better sources. Thanks. Llll5032 (talk) 00:36, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 5 June 2023 edit
- News and notes: WMRU director forks new 'pedia, birds flap in top '22 piccy, WMF weighs in on Indian gov's map axe plea
- Featured content: Poetry under pressure
- Traffic report: Celebs, controversies and a chatbot in the public eye
The Signpost: 19 June 2023 edit
- News and notes: WMF Terms of Use now in force, new Creative Commons licensing
- Featured content: Content, featured
- Recent research: Hoaxers prefer currently-popular topics
The Signpost: 3 July 2023 edit
- Disinformation report: Imploded submersible outfit foiled trying to sing own praises on Wikipedia
- Featured content: Incensed
- Traffic report: Are you afraid of spiders? Arnold? The Idol? ChatGPT?
Thanks for improving the Murray Rothbard article edit
I just skimmed it, but it looks like you did a lot. Prezbo (talk) 13:24, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
huge list of non-notable people on article 'Hudson Institute' edit
Hello User:Llll5032, you may be able to help me with an article where I think that some editor (have not even looked at who they are yet) went crazy -- in my small opinion -- and created a huge list of people that they thought were notable enough to list in a section (dedicated to this list of people) on the article Hudson Institute. Can you please take a short look at the section Notable personnel over at the article and let me know your opinion on the appropriateness of including such a (huge) list. My view is that the entire section (list and all) should be removed. All of those people are listed somewhere on the website of the organization itself and my view is that such a list has no place in an encyclopedic article. My view is also that the list simply provides gross and inappropriate advertisement for the organization, which is completely and entirely inappropriate for any encyclopedia and also for WikiPedia (as encyclopedic as it claims to be). If you agree with me, can you express your opinion over on the Talk page of that article (Talk:Hudson Institute) and bring some friends along with you if you can, to help squash this madness. I will defer to your opinion and those of other accomplished contributors if this kind of madness is deemed to be appropriate for WikiPedia (as I tend to always do anyway). My comments on this matter are already on the Talk page. Thanks for any help in this matter. --L.Smithfield (talk) 10:47, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, L.Smithfield, I may not be able to participate after being contacted because of WP:CANVASS. I know you don't want to violate the rules, so you should look at the canvassing guideline.
- It is a very long list, and in my opinion it was much more proportionate before those recent edits. There is good guidance about such lists at WP:NOTDIRECTORY #1, WP:LISTCRITERIA, MOS:USEPROSE, and WP:LISTDD. "Notable" on Wikipedia means "notable enough for their own article"--another good reason to revert to the prior stable text. Articles with links to personnel with Wikipedia articles are common, and WP:ABOUTSELF rules allow some limited citations of the group's website, so I doubt that you could gain consensus for removing the whole section including the notable names. But the WP:ONUS policy would be on your side for reverting, and other editors of the article appear to agree with you. Llll5032 (talk) 13:33, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advice (very useful). I am deferring to (settling for) the reduced list produced by User:Iskandar323. Thanks again. --L.Smithfield (talk) 15:38, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Should PragerU's description include their own stated purpose? edit
"...advances Judeo-Christian values" is one of the most common ways they describe themselves in many places, but even though that is also covered by secondary sources it does all derive from their self-published description, is that all good for being in the lead? I feel like it's all good if I just cite a source but it is a bit of an odd one now that I think about it. MasterTriangle12 (talk) 06:04, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, MasterTriangle12. In my opinion, it would be most DUE if secondary or tertiary RS use the description in their own voice. But if BESTSOURCES are noting the self-description, then it could be DUE if the RS are cited and the article notes it is the subject's self-description. Could it also could be more DUE for a later sentence or paragraph in the top section instead of the first sentence? Perhaps more editors will have opinions at the article talk page. Llll5032 (talk) 06:22, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
- Cheers, I'm thinking it might be better just left as the mention in the body, especially since reading about how the term was kinda a political construction and there are less nebulous terms that are more applicable. It would probably be good to have some mention of the prominent theological messaging though, I'll go through the sources at some point since several comment on it. MasterTriangle12 (talk) 06:24, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 17 July 2023 edit
- In the media: Tentacles of Emirates plot attempt to ensnare Wikipedia
- Tips and tricks: What automation can do for you (and your WikiProject)
- Featured content: Scrollin', scrollin', scrollin', keep those readers scrollin', got to keep on scrollin', Rawhide!
- Traffic report: The Idol becomes the Master
Invitation edit
Hello Llll5032!
- The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
- We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
- Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
- Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
- If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.
Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!
Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 07:50, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 1 August 2023 edit
- News and notes: City officials attempt to doxx Wikipedians, Ruwiki founder banned, WMF launches Mastodon server
- In the media: Truth, AI, bull from politicians, and climate change
- Disinformation report: Hot climate, hot hit, hot money, hot news hot off the presses!
- Tips and tricks: Citation tools for dummies!
- In focus: Journals cited by Wikipedia
- Opinion: Are global bans the last step?
- Featured content: Featured Content, 1 to 15 July
- Traffic report: Come on Oppie, let's go party
The Signpost: 15 August 2023 edit
- News and notes: Dude, Where's My Donations? Wikimedia Foundation announces another million in grants for non-Wikimedia-related projects
- Tips and tricks: How to find images for your articles, check their copyright, upload them, and restore them
- Cobwebs: Getting serious about writing
- Serendipity: Why I stopped taking photographs almost altogether
- Featured content: Barbenheimer confirmed
- Traffic report: 'Cause today it just goes with the fashion
Oliver Anthony edit
Hi there! Just here to say: I love this kind of competing to achieve the best copy edit in this article. Well, not exactly competing, but I guess you know what I mean. Have fun! ;) Boscaswell talk 06:15, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, Boscaswell, thanks for the friendly competition, and the friendly note too. Llll5032 (talk) 15:44, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
- No worries, Llll5032! ;) Boscaswell talk 22:23, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 28 edit
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Paul Gottfried, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Intelligencer.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 31 August 2023 edit
- From the editor: Beta version of signpost.news now online
- News and notes: You like RecentChanges?
- In the media: Taking it sleazy
- Recent research: The five barriers that impede "stitching" collaboration between Commons and Wikipedia
- Draftspace: Bad Jokes and Other Draftspace Novelties
- Humour: The Dehumourification Plan
- Traffic report: Raise your drinking glass, here's to yesterday
The Signpost: 16 September 2023 edit
- In the media: "Just flirting", going Dutch and Shapps for the defence?
- Obituary: Nosebagbear
- Featured content: Catching up
- Traffic report: Some of it's magic, some of it's tragic
The Signpost: 3 October 2023 edit
- News and notes: Wikimedia Endowment financial statement published
- Recent research: Readers prefer ChatGPT over Wikipedia; concerns about limiting "anyone can edit" principle "may be overstated"
- Featured content: By your logic,
- Poetry: "The Sight"
The Signpost: 23 October 2023 edit
- News and notes: Where have all the administrators gone?
- In the media: Thirst traps, the fastest loading sites on the web, and the original collaborative writing
- Gallery: Before and After: Why you don't need to know how to restore images to make massive improvements
- Featured content: Yo, ho! Blow the man down!
- Traffic report: The calm and the storm
- News from Diff: Sawtpedia: Giving a Voice to Wikipedia Using QR Codes
The Signpost: 6 November 2023 edit
- Arbitration report: Admin bewilderingly unmasks self as sockpuppet of other admin who was extremely banned in 2015
- In the media: UK shadow chancellor accused of ripping off WP articles for book, Wikipedians accused of being dicks by a rich man
- Opinion: An open letter to Elon Musk
- WikiCup report: The WikiCup 2023
- News from Wiki Ed: Equity lists on Wikipedia
- Recent research: How English Wikipedia drove out fringe editors over two decades
- Featured content: Like putting a golf course in a historic site.
- Traffic report: Cricket jumpscare
The Signpost: 20 November 2023 edit
- In the media: Propaganda and photos, lunatics and a lunar backup
- News and notes: Update on Wikimedia's financial health
- Traffic report: If it bleeds, it leads
- Recent research: Canceling disputes as the real function of ArbCom
- Wikimania: Wikimania 2024 scholarships
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message edit
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 4 December 2023 edit
- In the media: Turmoil on Hebrew Wikipedia, grave dancing, Olga's impact and inspiring Bhutanese nuns
- Disinformation report: "Wikipedia and the assault on history"
- Comix: Bold comics for a new age
- Essay: I am going to die
- Featured content: Real gangsters move in silence
- Traffic report: And it's hard to watch some cricket, in the cold November Rain
- Humour: Mandy Rice-Davies Applies
The Signpost: 24 December 2023 edit
- Special report: Did the Chinese Communist Party send astroturfers to sabotage a hacktivist's Wikipedia article?
- News and notes: The Italian Public Domain wars continue, Wikimedia RU set to dissolve, and a recap of WLM 2023
- In the media: Consider the humble fork
- Discussion report: Arabic Wikipedia blackout; Wikimedians discuss SpongeBob, copyrights, and AI
- In focus: Liquidation of Wikimedia RU
- Technology report: Dark mode is coming
- Recent research: "LLMs Know More, Hallucinate Less" with Wikidata
- Gallery: A feast of holidays and carols
- Comix: Lollus lmaois 200C tincture
- Crossword: when the crossword is sus
- Traffic report: What's the big deal? I'm an animal!
- From the editor: A piccy iz worth OVAR 9000!!!11oneone! wordz ^_^
- Humour: Guess the joke contest
The Signpost: 10 January 2024 edit
- From the editor: NINETEEN MORE YEARS! NINETEEN MORE YEARS!
- Special report: Public Domain Day 2024
- Technology report: Wikipedia: A Multigenerational Pursuit
- News and notes: In other news ... see ya in court!
- WikiProject report: WikiProjects Israel and Palestine
- Obituary: Anthony Bradbury
- Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2023
- Comix: Conflict resolution
The Signpost: 31 January 2024 edit
- News and notes: Wikipedian Osama Khalid celebrated his 30th birthday in jail
- Opinion: Until it happens to you
- Disinformation report: How paid editors squeeze you dry
- Recent research: Croatian takeover was enabled by "lack of bureaucratic openness and rules constraining [admins]"
- Traffic report: DJ, gonna burn this goddamn house right down
The Signpost: 13 February 2024 edit
- News and notes: Wikimedia Russia director declared "foreign agent" by Russian gov; EU prepares to pile on the papers
- Disinformation report: How low can the scammers go?
- Serendipity: Is this guy the same as the one who was a Nazi?
- Traffic report: Griselda, Nikki, Carl, Jannik and two types of football
- Crossword: Our crossword to bear
- Comix: Strongly
A barnstar for you! edit
|
The Barnstar of Diplomacy |
| Thank you for being a voice of reason on Talk:Weaponization of antisemitism, directing discussion back to P&G instead of fighting to push a point of view. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 07:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC) |
The Signpost: 2 March 2024 edit
- News and notes: Wikimedia enters US Supreme court hearings as "the dolphin inadvertently caught in the net"
- Recent research: Images on Wikipedia "amplify gender bias"
- In the media: The Scottish Parliament gets involved, a wikirace on live TV, and the Foundation's CTO goes on record
- Obituary: Vami_IV
- Traffic report: Supervalentinefilmbowlday
- WikiCup report: High-scoring WikiCup first round comes to a close
Merging weaponization of antisemitism edit
It's becoming clear to me that this article's supposed topic is barely present in literature, and its valuable content belongs on Criticism_of_Israel#Criticism_of_Israel_and_antisemitism (which has a broader and more real scope that can receive lots of the information on the weaponization article that doesn't belong there). Do you agree with proposing a merge there? I ask because I've never proposed a merge before, and I don't know about the process. Zanahary (talk) 02:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Zanahary, I'm not certain and I have never merged an article. But it is probably better to keep discussion about all this centralized on the article talk page. Llll5032 (talk) 03:29, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- The formatting of your comments is going to pot in the ongoing discussion. There's a part out of alignment and two unsigned parts now. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:46, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
The Signpost: 29 March 2024 edit
- Technology report: Millions of readers still seeing broken pages as "temporary" disabling of graph extension nears its second year
- Recent research: "Newcomer Homepage" feature mostly fails to boost new editors
- Traffic report: He rules over everything, on the land called planet Dune
- Humour: Letters from the editors
- Comix: Layout issue