User talk:BrownHairedGirl/Archive/Archive 078

click here to leave a new
message for BrownHairedGirl

List of archives

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on my current talk page

Sorry to see this

Hello BHG,

We never met, but I saw your name many, many times in my travels here. Still I was shocked when I saw your page. Years ago I was at a question/answer site and I know that it's not a good feeling when things like this happen.

Hopefully I'll see you around again. Chin up and stay well!

Regards, Bringingthewood (talk) 05:41, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:German expatriates in Overseas France has been nominated for discussion

Category:German expatriates in Overseas France has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 15:10, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § X by Y in Z

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § X by Y in Z on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkl talk 11:31, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:1280s establishments in Germany has been nominated for merging

Category:1280s establishments in Germany has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –Aidan721 (talk) 16:43, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bhutanese musicians by instrument has been nominated for merging

Category:Bhutanese musicians by instrument has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 02:06, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jewish sportsmen has been nominated for deletion

Category:Jewish sportsmen has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Edward-Woodrow • talk 20:05, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Edward-Woodrow: I'm sorry but BrownHairedGirl cannot edit any page on Wikipedia or indeed email anyone due to the link AquilaFasciata provided above. Therefore BrownHairedGirl is unable to discuss this category for deletion. Thanks for your understanding, Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 20:54, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Iggy the Swan: I know, my apologies, I was using twinkle and it sent an automated notice. Edward-Woodrow • talk 21:51, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, no worries about this. I think we don't know who we're notifying until the edit takes place and then we see who we are notifying. But at least on the plus point other people know something is in discussion. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 09:22, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 9 § Building collapses

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 9 § Building collapses on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. + Qwerfjkl talk 21:01, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Villages in Çamlıyayla District

A tag has been placed on Category:Villages in Çamlıyayla District indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 14:10, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Explicit: I suggest that you not post these deletion notices now that BrownHairedGirl has been banned by ArbCom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:11, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:State of Palestine–Uzbekistan relations

A tag has been placed on Category:State of Palestine–Uzbekistan relations indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 14:10, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Villages in Vezirköprü District

A tag has been placed on Category:Villages in Vezirköprü District indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 12:25, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ambassadors of Guatemala to Taiwan has been nominated for deletion

Category:Ambassadors of Guatemala to Taiwan has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. LibStar (talk) 00:51, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Expatriates in Overseas France by nationality has been nominated for merging

Category:Expatriates in Overseas France by nationality has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 03:03, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	So sorry to just notice from an article page history that Wikipedia won't have our second Wikipedian reaching 3 million edits as soon as I thought. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 20:33, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to see you go

I don't usually keep up very well with controversies and such around here so this has all caught me by surprise. Just wanted to say sorry to see you go and thank you for your service. Shearonink (talk) 19:01, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @BrownHairedGirl: I hope you have a great time outside Wikipedia and your life will be a bit less stressful. I'm sorry to see you go. You did a great deal of work on Wikipedia and the editors on here, all for the better of the project. You'll be missed. scope_creep^Talk 01:13, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also very sorry to hear this, and wish you all the best. Mathglot (talk) 04:27, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You just need a well-deserved break. Everyone requires a wiki holiday from time to time. JMK (talk) 20:33, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But I must clarify that you are not accused of simple fatigue, as what you experience is not at all imagined. Has there lately been a change in the operational and healthy functioning of wikipedia? YES. Is there a perceivable downward trend in this situation? YES. Is there a brashness in the way these people are operating, and are they impervious to basic reasoning? YES, and YES. Are decisions that should take half a second to adjudicate stretched out to infinity by time wasters with ulterior motives and conflicts of interest? YES.
Consequently I placed a note on mr JW's user page on 29 November last year: "I have been active on the wikimedia projects since 2006, and generally encountered people who make good decisions and make the projects pleasant places to contribute to. In 2022 I feel something has changed. Suddenly there are people who cannot understand what you say, force their poor, infantile choices on you, and cannot communicate. All executed like a trickster that employs loaded statistics to get their foot in the door, then bulldoze their way in, and don't flinch when asked to explain themselves. Something has changed."
Unfortunately the problem is not limited to the Randy in Boise type, but has a foothold in the WM Foundation. I think productive editors (only) should be able to plant a red flag in a situation where a) the ethic of the encyclopedia is impinged and b) normal process don't work. A red flag

would mean, I walk away, but only because the system is failing here. This official red flag must be linked to a category and description page, so that the situation is not forgotten, and others can follow up. JMK (talk) 09:18, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My 2c. We disagreed, but as I wrote before, I did not think the nuclear option was needed. Hope to see you again in ~12 months or a bit later, when we all will be older and wiser. Take this as a learning experience, if unfairly painful, and remember - there are plenty of other Wikimedia projects which would benefit from your expertise and activity, where you could demonstrate you can collaborate peacefully, paving way for your eventual return here. Cheers, _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:15, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A Sincere Apology On Behalf of An Ungrateful and Undeserving Community

Already closed by an admin, and doesn't deserve to be the last discussion visible here.Mathglot (talk) 22 September 2023

There is no value in continuing this back-and-forth on the userpage of a banned user. — Amakuru (talk) 12:00, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Dear BrownHairedGirl,

Like other editors have stated in previous sections here on your talk page, I am deeply sad to hear of your semi-retirement. To my recollection, I have never interacted with you on any talk page but likewise have noted the countless contributions you have made to this project on articles to which I have also made contributions and for your service as an administrator. I sincerely doubt that I could ever be as prolific as you have been, and have nothing but the deepest gratitude to those such as yourself who have taken the time out your days and lives to serve as administrators on this project considering the vile and despicable trolling that is sadly too common here. Along with the development of generative artificial intelligence, the departure of people such as yourself will be the end of this project.

I believe that the Wikimedia Foundation should have a greater obligation to verify the identities of editors to prevent those with a track record of trolling from continuing to make edits to the site and by law if necessary (just as social media companies should be required to do with their user accounts). I only hope the Foundation recognizes the problems with arbitration and dispute resolution and chooses to address them because this is unacceptable. People such as yourself have contributed far too much to this project to be given nothing but contempt, insincerity, incivility, and harassment in return. As such, I tender to you a sincere apology on behalf of an ungrateful community undeserving of someone to speak on its behalf, but for the sake of basic decency must be tendered to someone who clearly deserves far better.

Sincerely,
CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 15:25, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You know, when the committee sanctions a long-term prolific user like BHG, it is normal and expected that there will be disagreement, and that people will post the sort of messages we see above, along the lines of "I'm so sorry this happened and I still think of you fondly" and that's totally fine. In fact I think it is a good thing, we always need to remember that every name we see on the screen has a real person behind it. And it is also normal that a certain segment will feel the need to decry the sanction, and the committee as a whole, that we're the worst committee in the history of the project, etc.

On the other hand, I don't believe I've ever seen a message like this one before, one where the user claims to speak for the entire community, and then insults the entire community. Frankly this so-called apology is absurd and pathetic. If you really have such a low opinion of your fellow editors, you should probably find something else to do. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:04, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I echo this statement, the committee have the final say, whether it is necessarily the correct say is different, but they still have the final say. The foundation have basically no say in community matters. I apologise to the community for this above message, and I apologise to BHG for being a host of the message. Zippybonzo | talk to me | what have I done (he|she|they) 17:13, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I echo Beeblebrox and Zippybonzo. There is no call for denigrating the community for correctly identifying a problem and doing what was needed to protect the community. While BHG's contributions were certainly significant, her interactions with many people were highly problematic. I was sorry to see that she could not accept how her behavior was perceived by the community, but I was not sorry to see her go. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:48, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Collapsed, per... oh, I dunno, how about simple decency. Mathglot (talk) 04:20, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ouch!

Never expected this! that any awesome editor like yourself could be so at odds with the community. You taught us a lot, BHG, and I sincerely hope that "indefinite", for you at least, is only for a very short moment in time. You will always be awesome in my eyes! Paine 16:35, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confused

Can someone please explain to me what exactly happened?
I was wondering why I stopped seeing her name everywhere I go, I feel proud to say that I have learned a lot from her and I believe most of us did.

What did she violate? What exactly happened?
(please ping me, but I'll also be on the lookout for the response(s)). dxneo (talk) 14:47, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dxneo: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute. It's not any one single thing. That's why there was an entire arbitration case. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:29, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dxneo: I was wondering the same myself. It appears that it stems from this ANI and escalated through the above arbitration case. - AquilaFasciata (talk | contribs) 17:00, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What's up?

As noted below, we're all friends here and there's nothing further to be said in this thread, particularly so when it resides on the page of a veteran and sadly banned editor who probably doesn't want to be disturbed by such minutiae... — Amakuru (talk) 10:37, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

It appears this page has been purged by editors who are not BHG. Can anyone please explain who is doing it? Why? By what authority? Sarah777 (talk) 03:51, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarah777 The bot archived several threads, routinely, at 04:19 today (see page history): is that what you are worried about?

This new thread should be at bottom, not top, but I'm on my phone and can't move it myself. PamD 04:14, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarah777: PamD is right. The talk page archiving bot is instructed to archive discussions after they are idle for at least 28 days. This includes now some of the threads opened during the arbcom case. You will find the recently archived threads at User talk:BrownHairedGirl/Archive/Archive 077. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 13:47, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kind of puzzled why someone using the exact same bot to archive their own talk page would be surprised by this. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:57, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are easily puzzled. To the others - thanks for the explanation. Sarah777 (talk) 17:15, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the personal attack. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:30, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously? Sarah777 (talk) 23:39, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Folks, let's call this one a joke gone wrong and walk away? We're all friends here.--v/r - T P 03:58, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I second that! Sarah777 (talk) 03:24, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hope to see you back soon

I've just come across your recent problems and understand you are pretty upset for the time being. I've always appreciated your useful work and hope that after a short break you'll be back contributing as actively as ever. I've recently come across several other cases in which highly active contributors have run into similar difficulties. In your case, there seem to have been a number of misunderstandings. Wikipedia has greatly benefitted from your work, especially all you have done in connection with categories and on articles related to Ireland. Take a month or two off and you may feel like coming back to continue your useful work.--Ipigott (talk) 06:39, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

She's been banned. She won't be back. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:08, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I thought technically it was an indef block subject to community review every year, if we want to review. Edward-Woodrow • talk 13:17, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry yes, I misspoke. Still, I don't expect she will be back. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:20, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the ArbCom decision says BrownHairedGirl is indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter. Doesn't that mean she is banned but she could be back! DeCausa (talk) 13:21, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you did misspeak; an indef block subject to community review is exactly what a ban is. Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:31, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure it is subject to community review. WP:BAN says "Site bans imposed by the Arbitration Committee can only be appealed to the Committee by email." There's no mention of a community review in the decision wording i quoted above. DeCausa (talk) 13:38, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct, I was thinking of a community site ban. Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:22, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Module:Navseasoncats with decades below year

Module:Navseasoncats with decades below year has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 13:04, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]