User talk:Eyer/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Welcome

Hello, Eyer! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! The Utahraptor Talk 02:54, 23 June 2010 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: Edit a page • Upload and use images • Create your first article Intuitive guide to Wikipedia • Article Creation Wizard Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Help desk: A Wiki Styled page to ask questions on Help directory: A comprehensive list-style help contents page Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons List of policies • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Simplified manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Peer review • Featured content Miscellaneous User pages • Talk pages Awards a registered contributor can achieve and award Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

GOCE June newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors June 2019 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the June newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since March 2019. You can unsubscribe from our mailings at any time; see below. Election time: Nomination of candidates in our mid-year Election of Coordinators opened on 1 June, and voting will take place from 16 June. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. June Blitz: Our June blitz will soon be upon us; it will begin at 00:01 on 16 June (UTC) and will close at 23:59 on 22 June (UTC). The themes are "nature and the environment" and all requests. March Drive: Thanks to everyone for their work in March's Backlog Elimination Drive. We removed copyedit tags from 182 of the articles tagged in our original target months October and November 2018, and the month finished with 64 target articles remaining from November and 811 in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 22 requests for copyedit in March; the month ended with 34 requests pending. Of the 32 people who signed up for this drive, 24 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. April Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the April Blitz; the blitz ran from 14 to 20 April (UTC) inclusive and the themes were Sports and Entertainment. Of the 15 people who signed up, 13 copyedited at least one article. Participants claimed 60 copyedits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: As of 04:36, 3 June 2019 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have completed 267 requests since 1 January. The backlog of tagged articles stands at 605 articles. May Drive: During the May Backlog Elimination Drive, Guild copy-editors removed copyedit tags from 191 of the 192 articles tagged in our original target months of November and December 2018, and January 2019 was added on 22 May. We finished the month with 81 target articles remaining and a record low of 598 articles in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 24 requests for copyedit during the May drive, and the month ended with 35 requests pending. Of the 26 people who signed up for this drive, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Reidgreg and Tdslk. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

MOS:JOBTITLES

Please take a closer look at the examples in the Manual of Style. When saying "the first lady", lower case is correct. When saying the same thing without a definite or indefinite article in front, First Lady would be correct. There are a couple places in the article that should be capitalized (although the rest of your changes look fine). Examples:

• as First Lady
• as the first lady
• is First Lady
• is the first lady
• (then the confusing one): "as the first first lady" is correct (but messy) so thank you for rewording it.

Does that make sense? Orville1974 (talk) 22:35, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi there. I read the style as lowercase when referring to the position of first lady, and uppercase only when referring to the title of First Lady. Your examples above fit with my understanding of the style. Eyer (talk) 23:15, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Actually... "as First Lady" seems odd to me. It seems this construction might be lowercase. See the following examples:

• "As president, Nixon went to China." (referring to the office of president)
• "As the president, Nixon went to China." (referring to the office of president)
• "Nixon was President of the United States." (referring to the title "President of the United States")
• "Nixon was the president." (referring to the office of president)
• "Nixon was U.S. president." (referring to the office of president)
• "Before Nixon was president, he was called Senator Nixon." (referring to the office of president and the title "Senator")
• "Nixon was the United States senator from California." (referring to the office of senator)
• "Nixon was promoted to lieutenant in the war." (referring to the rank of lieutenant)
• "In World War II, Lieutenant Nixon never thought he would become president of the United States." (referring to the title of "Lieutenant" and the office of president)

Eyer (talk) 23:31, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

The guideline still leaves some ambiguity, which I alluded to at the Clinton article. It's unclear to me whether the words "president" and "first lady", by themselves, would be considered titles in any context, with or without a modifier. Perhaps it's never a title unless you say what they are a president or first lady of.

However, don't miss MOS:JOBTITLES bullet 2, "When a title is used to refer to a specific and obvious person as a substitute for their name, e.g., the Queen, not the queen, referring to Elizabeth II". Thus it would be "the President" when referring to Trump or Harry Truman, or "the First Lady" when referring to Melania or Bess. This is the exception to the modifier rule. ―Mandruss ☎ 21:19, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Mandruss: I agree that there is still some ambiguity. Regarding that bullet 2 text... I’ve been trying to come up with a way to help me decide if it applies. Maybe if a sentence would read okay if you substituted the title-holder’s name, then capitalizing the title would make sense? Whenever there is ambiguity, though, I’m trying default to lowercase and fall back on the statement Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization. Eyer (talk) 21:29, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Define "necessary". None of this JOBTITLES stuff has anything particular to do with understanding the meaning of the words. ―Mandruss ☎ 21:36, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Defining “necessary” is, indeed, the challenge. Eyer (talk) 21:40, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

In any case, I think choosing to deviate from JOBTITLES with other reasoning, e.g. come up with a way to help me decide if it applies, makes it very hard to point to JOBTITLES when somebody else does something inconsistent with it. To my mind the goal of MOS is site-wide consistency on style, and that's impossible unless editors agree to aim at a common target, that target being our MOS. ―Mandruss ☎ 21:48, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

I’m glad that my goal is to not deviate from MOS:JOBTITLES, then. If you find that I do, somewhere, it’s likely an error. Please let me know. Eyer (talk) 21:54, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I thought you suggested you might deviate from bullet 2 as the exception to the modifier rule. ―Mandruss ☎ 22:26, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

No worries. It's not my intent to deviate from that rule... it's just that if I'm not sure whether it applies, I'm going to default to lowercase. Eyer (talk) 22:29, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

LOL. We're going in circles. It's not complicated or unclear, if you're referring to Trump specifically, it's "the President". Full stop. ―Mandruss ☎ 22:32, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

I can go with that. Eyer (talk) 22:35, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

To be clear, I can go with that when "the President" takes the place of the name. If "the president" is referring to the office of the president, it should be lowercase. Eyer (talk) 22:39, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

My mind is blown. I thought I knew, but your "as" example has thrown me for a loop. :) Orville1974 (talk) 22:43, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Can you give a hypothetical where you would say "the president" when referring to Trump specifically? A picture is worth a thousand words. ―Mandruss ☎ 22:51, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

I am struggling to come up with an example in an encyclopedic context. The best I can come up with is "Before his visit to Washington, D.C., French prime minister Édouard Philippe expressed interest in meeting the president of the United States. When he arrived at the White House, his ambassador said 'Prime Minister Philippe, may I present the President.'" (I'm not a very good creative writer, obviously....) Eyer (talk) 22:57, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Ok. Well, if we can agree that this edit was correct, perhaps that's good enough at this juncture. ―Mandruss ☎ 23:02, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

And BTW, in your example, bullet 2 does not apply to "the president of the United States" by virtue of "of the United States". ―Mandruss ☎ 23:10, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

I wouldn't say that that edit is correct. I would write "the President" only if the words "the President" take the place of Trump's name.

# "the President's physician" doesn't meet that criterion. Yes, by context we are talking about Trump, but "the president's" doesn't stand in place of Trump's name, it's talking about the physician who cares for any-and-all presidents. (It just happens to be President Trump today.)

# "persuade the President" also doesn't meet that criterion. Yes, by context we are still talking about Trump, but we're talking about the office of the president and not the specific man with the title President.

To be fair, I would rewrite both to "Trump's physician" and "persuade him" to avoid unnecessary capital letters (and conflict).

Regarding the example, you're right. Based on my knowledge of MOS:JOBTITLES and its Talk archives, I would still write "Before his visit to Washington, D.C., French prime minister Édouard Philippe expressed interest in meeting the president. When he arrived at the White House, his ambassador said 'Prime Minister Philippe, may I present the President.'"

Eyer (talk) 23:27, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Who else might we ask to weigh in? I do want to make sure that I'm calibrated, but all of my readings of WP:MOS seem to point me lots of lowercase letters.... Should I take this conversation over to the MOS talk page? Eyer (talk) 23:31, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

My sense is that much of the community is suffering from JOBTITLES fatigue at this point, and so I wouldn't take it to MOS right now. But User:SMcCandlish might be willing to honor us here with his enlightened opinions, I don't know. ―Mandruss ☎ 00:01, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

He seems to be less active of late - Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish - possibly busy IRL. Ping me if he hasn't posted here in, say, a week from now. ―Mandruss ☎ 00:13, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Will do. BTW: Thanks for the good conversation on this topic. Eyer (talk) 00:15, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

What Happened?

I reverted the edit to Puck (A Midsummer Night's Dream), so the reversion history showed that I reverted the edit. Why did the message to that user whose edits I reverted came from you though you haven't reverted it? --LPS and MLP Fan (LittlestPetShop) (MyLittlePony) 22:02, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I hit the revert button in TW, added content to the editor's talk page, and only then realized that my reversion attempt failed. I've removed my message on the editor's talk page. Feel free to replace it.  Eyer ^contact  22:06, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Um excuse me

Sorry but you said I did something bad to my own user page and um it's my page and I did nothing wrong so please refrain from telling me what I can and can't say about myself

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thicccjake (talk • contribs) 03:59, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you for writing. In short, your user page is not yours. "You should avoid substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a general hosting service, so your user page is not a personal website. Your user page is about you as a Wikipedian, and pages in your user space should be used as part of your efforts to contribute to the project." See What may I not have in my user pages? for more information.  Eyer ^contact  04:01, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Crystal Geyser Water Company

Why was my information removed? I got it from their website, geology about volcanoes, and news articles listing it as having high levels of arsenic. I don't know how to add references KodineTots (talk) 11:14, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi. The information was removed because you didn't cite any reliable sources for your claim. For more information on reliable sources and references, see the help at Your first article.  Eyer ^contact  11:30, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

OMG!

They just were not going to give it up. Glad they finally got blocked. S0091 (talk) 00:52, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

No kidding. Thanks for your help!  Eyer ^contact  00:53, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

FAMU Royal Court

Thank your for your editing help. I was debating the best way to put it but you beat me to the punch. The Royal Court is a big part of FAMU.Broadmoor (talk) 13:32, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

@Broadmoor: I am familiar with similar traditions at other Florida schools, was happy to learn about FAMU's tradition. Glad the copy-editing was okay.  Eyer ^contact  14:25, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Reply to you

Wikipedia should not be used to elevate politically-motivated character assassination blog posts. Deleting them is appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JimboLimbo (talk • contribs) 16:53, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Precisely, stop the madness. I just searched and there is no "Michelle Obama is a Tranny Conspiracy Theory" page on Wikipedia, because there should not be one, even though the conspiracy exists. It should be the same thing about some idiots building some degenerate statues in the middle of a few cities.

Your thread has been archived

Hi Eyer! You created a thread called Editor with COI behaving like s/he "owns" page. at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

July 2019

Hello Eyer. Your account has been granted the "rollbacker" and "pending changes reviewer" user rights. These user rights allow you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes and quickly revert the edits of other users.

Rollback user right

Please keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin).

Pending changes reviewer user right

The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection enabled is located at Special:StablePages. You may find the following pages useful to review:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes.
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of reviewer or rollback. If you no longer want either of these user rights, contact me and I'll remove it, alternatively you can leave a request on the administrators' noticeboard. Happy editing! GAB^gab 00:18, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Moon Jae-in

~ hi, nice to meet you ~ thanks for your summary ~ usually when I see an IP make a brief change like that ~ I research ~ but today I did not have the time ~ so I figured better safe than sorry ~ thanks again ~mitch~ (talk) 14:13, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

@Mitchellhobbs: Sure thing, mitch. All the best,  Eyer ^contact  14:15, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Seinfeld

How can you not know how Germanophobe is spelled?? Look up the spelling. 2003:C2:371E:5E33:D401:2A84:2344:11AF (talk) 17:18, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

germaphone ≠ Germanophobe  Eyer ^contact  17:19, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Reply to your Message

Hello,

I am contacting you regarding you taking down my edit on the Wikipedia Page Sheperdstown, West Virginia. I think that it should stay up because there is a man in the town named Jim, who indeed has a Mustache, and does invest in Denim.

Kind Regards,

Shawn — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ldontknow (talk • contribs) 19:39, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

@Ldontknow: Thank you for your message, Shawn. Do you have a reliable source that supports your claim? If so, please post it. If not, then that particular claim doesn't fit Wikipedia's standards.  Eyer ^contact  19:41, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Reply Ashmitha Edit.

My Recently Edited/Added All Information about Ashmitha are 100% true and Having Evidence. I mean not edited or added any wrong or controversial information from my side. But i mean the actually the truth is your Added or edited information s are wrong, and some false about this living person Ashmitha. Before say My Edited Information is false without verification, Please check or verify the Background about the Respected Person Ashmitha. Please note actually writing/adding/editing any false or wrong information s are violates the Wikipedia s terms and condition. I mean Actually the violation was happening from your side not from myside. Thanks you for your understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.164.80.13 (talk) 19:47, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

@122.164.80.13: Please provide reliable sources for the following assertions: (1) she was employed at a mobile phone shop, (2) she was employed at a Levis Store, and (3) she worked as an escort. Thank you. 19:52, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Reply: Yes i Can Provide the Reliable Sources or and Evidences for her 3 Employments. Also You don't want the Sources/Evidence for Her Cast (Muslim), And Real Name 'Sameera' And Father's Name Evidence With Date of Birth Proof ? if you want it I Can Provide you. Waiting for Reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.164.80.13 (talk) 22:59, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

@122.164.80.13: I don't need them personally. They just need to go to the page you're editing. Ideally, each sentence or paragraph would have one or more citations. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for more information.  Eyer ^contact  23:03, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Reply : Yes i will Provide and edit with the Sources. Sorry i can't Understand why you are monitoring this Ashmitha Page in Wikipedia, Please explain. I mean I Want to know why and how you are Admin admin for this Page ? (Ashmitha Page) Please explain Because i Dont Know about this. I Don't have more Knowledge about Wikipedia. Waiting for Reply.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.164.80.13 (talk) 23:30, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

@122.164.80.13: I didn't undo your last changes. Another editor did. I am not an admin for Wikipedia, but Wikipedia depends on lots of editors reviewing lots of pages. You may not have received a welcome message with tips about how to cite sources. I'll send a welcome message your way so you can learn more.  Eyer ^contact  23:33, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Change at Greenville

Greetings. If you look carefully at my change, all I did was change a blanket, inaccurate statement to a more specific one. I did a graduate degree at GU this year and was never required to make the affirmation. Now, you may say that Wikipedia is based on documentation rather than truth and original research. In that case, the entire assertion that the lifestyle statement MUST be agreed to needs to be removed. Why do I say this? My reason is that I have just read through the reference and see nothing at that site (http://www.greenville.edu/about/foundational_documents/lifestyle_statement.html) that says any students must sign. The closest I see is "When individuals join Greenville University, they freely and willingly choose to take upon themselves the responsibilities outlined in this statement." (current, 2015, version -- the Wikipedia article gives an access date of 2009 -- maybe things have changed). I'm not a legal scholar, but that does not seem to me to say that all students must sign.67.209.128.98 (talk) 02:26, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

@67.209.128.98: I am inclined to agree that what's currently in the article should change or be removed. Perhaps something like "Students attending Greenville University are expected to adhere to a lifestyle that is codified and asks that the student agree to certain principles that the school calls 'Christ-honoring', outlined in a document known as the Lifestyle Statement."?  Eyer ^contact  02:30, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Your suggested change looks good to me. 67.209.128.98 (talk) 04:05, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

@67.209.128.98: Great! Thanks for the collaboration!  Eyer ^contact  04:06, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Summit betchel reserve edit

The world jamboree is currently going on. I will be attending. If you look on there website it starts today.

@173.73.189.94: that was my fault. I didn't mean to undo your work. Thanks for bringing it to my attention and enjoy the summit.  Eyer ^contact  04:53, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Overt whitewashing and lying

You are clearly lying to whitewash these articles. Do you work for a PR company? Because no one will buy the flimsy excuse you are using to whitewash these articles.

I don't have sources? The articles literally state the crimes, convictions, and already have "Criminal Status" in the bio. They are criminals, not businessmen. Businessman implies you are not doing illegal things, we don't call Pablo Escobar a businessman do we? You are either lying or are not equip to judge due to lack of intelligence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.60.186.231 (talk) 04:25, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pablo_Escobar Notice how he is not called a businessman? Now follow the logic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.60.186.231 (talk) 04:27, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Use a dictionary before making any further edits to ANY pages or just stop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.60.186.231 (talk) 04:28, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Chopin protection

Hi,

Can you please back me on the request for protection of Frederic Chopin article due to the persistent "vandalism" by IPs? (Wikipedia:Requests for page protection) Much appreciated :) Oliszydlowski (talk) 12:39, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

@Oliszydlowski:, I am new enough to Wikipedia that I haven't had to request page protection before... and I'm not familiar with that page. I did leave a comment in support, though. I hope it helps. Thank you.  Eyer ^contact  12:42, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much Oliszydlowski (talk) 12:45, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

@Oliszydlowski: — there is another insertion of "French" that I can't undo without violating WP:3RR. It looks like an intermediate edit has been made by another editor. Can you help address this (if you haven't already)? Thanks.  Eyer ^contact  12:47, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Disregard. You already got it. :).  Eyer ^contact  12:47, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

vacilão

não edite minha talk page, eu não autorizo, não vou avisar de novo, vacilão do caralho. Porcofederal (talk) 00:43, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Indecent exposure

I quoted the criminal in that case as set out in that judgement (Indecent exposure). He did NOT say "wee-wee". Wikipedia is NOT censored. --Deus omnipotens sum (talk) 02:40, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

@Deus omnipotens sum: Do you have a secondary source that has this quote? Wikipedia's policy states "Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person." I don't care to censor anything... I just want to see an appropriate secondary (not primary) source for the claim. Thanks. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 02:47, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Note that the policy says "to support assertions about a living person" (i.e. usually stuff of the form, N.N. said that cows are blue with green stripes, and usually on biographies of living persons, to avoid "putting stuff in people's mouths" that they didn't say). This is not a biography of the specific flasher in Boston, and in any case takes the words straight out of his mouth (i.e. is a direct quotation) - the source isn't the judge, but rather that specific perp (he's directly quoted in the judgement and thus is really the end source). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deus omnipotens sum (talk • contribs) 04:15, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

You know ~ Wiki could care less whether it's true or not, so long as it is properly sourced ~ so find that statement in all your policy quotes ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 04:29, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

@Mitchellhobbs: Do you mean Verifiability and its essay counterpart Truth? —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 13:22, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes~ ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 13:35, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

@Deus omnipotens sum: My mission, when I initially reverted that edit, was patrolling recent changes for vandalism. We've established that expanding the quote to include profanity wasn't vandalism. Wikipedia doesn't censor, so having the profanity in the article doesn't concern me (though it is a red flag for possible vandalism, which is why I got involved at all). We've now had a brief discussion about reliable sources: secondary sources are preferred, though primary sources aren't forbidden. I am left with two questions: (1) is using only a primary source sufficient here? and (2) does the quote add anything of value to the article? Those two points are beyond my sphere of concern for this article, so I'll leave it to other editors from here. Thank you both for your time. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 13:22, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

You know ~ ~ I met a goose one time ~ (at the park) ~ she had a lot of feathers ~ but I didn't think she was exposing herself ~ just a comment ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 03:34, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Wendy Murphy Update

@Eyer:

I made a change recently and cited the book that the information came from as well as where the quote came from. Yet it was taken down. Was there a mistake in how I cited? I was trying to correct it when the correction was removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.255.49.4 (talk) 23:35, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

It was less the citation, and more a potential violation of Wikipedia's biographical policies. I didn't think the statement "She is also a supporter of "guilty-until-proven-innocent" in the American Judicial system." was appropriate to state in Wikipedia's voice. I re-added your content in the voice of the author of the book... and I improved the citation by adding more detail from the book's ISBN. I'm still not sure that it fits Wikipedia's biographical policies, but I'll leave that to editors to decide. If I can help more, I'm happy to. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 23:42, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Michael Redman

I suggest you delete the post in reference to Trish Duke immediately. Michael Redman Jr TheFourPreps (talk) 22:26, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

@TheFourPreps: ? —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 22:28, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Do you know how to delete the other post in reference to Trish Duke. I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks Michael Redman Jr TheFourPreps (talk) 23:25, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

@TheFourPreps: Which post is that? I'm happy to look. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 23:26, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Eyer

Please delete post that says I am not same mind or heart

TheFourPreps TheFourPreps (talk) 02:11, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@TheFourPreps: Which post is that? I'm happy to look. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 02:14, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Reply to Eyer

It is the post Michael RedmanJr

That 5:07 and added content +118

and 4:54 and added content +434

Please take care of this TheFourPreps (talk) 03:02, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

@TheFourPreps: Perhaps the information at Wikipedia:Requests for oversight can help. There is a process for removing potentially libelous content. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 03:11, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I've been seeing you doing vandalism reversion on some of the same articles as me, keep up the good work and thanks for reviewing recent changes! PohranicniStraze (talk) 01:41, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

My partial revert

I can't be certain this generated a notification to you, and I wanted to make sure you saw it—especially since I see you're doing the same thing at other articles. I'm about as fervent a defender of de-caps per JOBTITLES as anybody, but I think there is a strong case that that particular line of an infobox should be treated as title case; i.e. all words capitalized except for a few exceptions like "of" and "the"; hence exempt from the JOBTITLES modifier clause. ―Mandruss ☎ 19:55, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

It did and I did. I had read somewhere that infoboxes were to be set in sentence case, but I can't find it now. If it's custom to pick and choose which parts of infoboxes are title case vs. sentence case, then that's fine by me. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 20:20, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

It would be really nice if officeholder infoboxes were consistent on this, and I haven't seen anybody else de-capping that line of the infoboxes. Have you? My hope was to convince you to refrain (and perhaps even revert some of the other changes) and see if that unwritten convention can be sustained in the long term. ―Mandruss ☎ 21:07, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

I don't personally like those lines being title case, but I don't feel strongly enough about it to push for a change. (Too much other work to do.) I'll refrain from further uncapitalizations of that line. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 22:29, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

I have watched original movie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imransaifimrt (talk • contribs) 19:00, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Raaste ka patthar

I watched original.movor Imransaifimrt (talk) 19:03, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Job titles

I just made a proposal about job titles on MoS Biography talk page. I'd greatly appreciate your input.

Cheers! --Woko Sapien (talk) 17:17, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

First and foremost, it is no my intention to undo all of you hard work as a personal attack against what you believe is right in interpenetrating the MOS:JOBTITLES. Clearly we are in disagreement here. With that being said, I have no intention on starting a revert war with you, but I would like to try to understand your justification on removing the capitalization of those articles. In my perspective, the words that are capitalized are done sentence-by-sentence of the subject matter. If the "title" in the sentence is in reference to the person who holds that title, with stating the person's name, the it should be capitalized. If the sentence is in reference to the position itself, then it should not. For me, this is a gray area since the positions that we're working on, are positions that only one person holds at a time. So I just wanted to get your perspective interpenetration on this. Neovu79 (talk) 19:11, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi, there. I don't remember what all I changed to go point-by-point, but the general trend is to avoid unnecessary capitalization. Further, MOS:JOBTITLES states that a job title that is modified by an article or adjective shouldn't be capitalized. I am happy to engage in more conversation if you'd like. If so, give me some specific examples to work on... we can even work through them together since I'm not always correct in my interpretation of the style guide. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 15:23, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

User page typo?

...especially inappropriate edits no articles about...

should be?:

...especially inappropriate edits to articles about...

Corrected. Thanks! —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 15:24, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Capitalization at List of nicknames used by Donald Trump

I have reverted you. If you still disagree, please explain your position in the talk page. Please don't edit war. Banana Republic (talk) 20:00, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Reversion of "good faith edits"

Hi there, I noticed your interests in Florida and Government & government officials. It looks as though you reverted my edits on 2020 US House of Representatives elections in FL because there were no source and I wanted to clarify a few details. Re: TPUSA, there was no source she was currently in the position, but here https://www.turningpoint.news/anna-paulina-announces-her-resignation-from-turning-point-usa/ is the proof she stepped down (it's also on social media). Regarding using a true, full name, I previously mentioned in a previous revision that I was not sure how to even show proof of someone's real name. and there are pictures of her in uniform with her real last name. I hope this convinces you. I thought Wikipedia typically included true, full names, not only pseudonyms. What do you think? Shall the edits be reverted? Please let me know how to address the issue of pseudonyms in a more graceful manner next time. Thank you!A2pa (talk) 22:11, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

@A2pa: Hi, there. I'm not an expert here, but I think you should look for information published in reliable sources than links Anna Paulina to her real name. As for the TPUSA claim, maybe add "former" to the information about TPUSA and back that claim up with information from a reliable source too? An odd thing about Wikipedia is that it's less concerned about truth than it is about verifiability. No matter how true your edits are, they have to be verifiable in reliable sources before they'll stick. Hope this helps some. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 03:02, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

@Eyer: Interesting, got it! I am going to remove the above links for privacy. Thanks for the info!A2pa (talk) 16:08, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

September 2019 GOCE Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors September 2019 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the September newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2019. June election: Reidgreg was chosen as lead coordinator, and is being assisted by Baffle gab1978, Miniapolis, Tdslk, and first-time coordinator Twofingered Typist. Jonesey95 took a respite after serving for six years. Thanks to everyone who participated! June Blitz: From 16 to 22 June, we copy edited articles on the themes of nature and the environment along with requests. 12 participating editors completed 35 copy edits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. July Drive: The year's fourth backlog-elimination drive was a great success, clearing all articles tagged in January and February, and bringing the copy-editing backlog to a low of five months and a record low of 585 articles while also completing 48 requests. Of the 30 people who signed up, 29 copyedited at least one article, a participation level last matched in May 2015. Final results and awards are listed here. August Blitz: From 18 to 24 August, we copy edited articles tagged in March 2019 and requests. 12 participating editors completed 26 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: As of 03:00, 23 September 2019 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors had processed 413 requests since 1 January. The backlog of tagged articles stood at 599 articles, close to our record month-end low of 585. Requests page: We are experimenting with automated archiving of copy edit requests; a discussion on REQ Talk (permalinked) initiated by Bobbychan193 has resulted in Zhuyifei1999 writing a bot script for the Guild. Testing is now underway and is expected to be completed by 3 October; for this reason, no manual archiving of requests should be done until the testing period is over. We will then assess the bot's performance and discuss whether to make this arrangement permanent. September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today! Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Baffle gab1978, Miniapolis, Reidgreg, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:58, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Edits to Assumption College School

Hi Eyer, I was attempting to disambiguate the page as information about the current high school was a wreck and wikipedia was going to delete the page because that thought it had been vandalized. I am unclear regarding what you felt was not neutral, since the content was pretty much just quotes from resources. I don't wish to rollback the page but how do I tell exactly what you considered not neutral and thus removed with out doing so. Do you know of an approach? Or once I rollback, do I have the option of reverting? I'm a newbie, fyi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Squirrel2017 (talk • contribs) 14:50, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

@Squirrel2017: — Hi there, and welcome. The only thing I reverted was an anonymous edit back in July where someone changed the name of the school from "Assumption College Catholic High School" to "Assumption College Catholic High School is bad". I've had no other involvement with this page. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 15:52, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

First mention in the first sentence...

I want to notify you that I have posted a question that you may be interested in at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography#First mention in the first sentence.... --- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:11, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

MOS:JOBTITLES

I am reviewing your reading of MOS:JOBTITLES. I reverted your edits on a couple of articles and then self-reverted some of my reverts. I continue to disagree with some of your edits, which appear to defy the recommendation of MOS:JOBTITLES to use "President Nixon" rather than "president Nixon". I think that "U.S. Secretary of Labor Tom Perez" and "U.S. Representative Bernie Sanders of Vermont" are correct. —BarrelProof (talk) 18:57, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

@BarrelProof:, they are incorrect because "Senator" and "Secretary of Labor" are modified by "U.S.". They should be lowercase or you should remove "U.S." —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 19:17, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

I don't believe that "U.S." is a modification of the title of "Secretary of Labor". I believe it is part of the title. For example, the article on that position is United States Secretary of Labor, not United States secretary of labor or Secretary of Labor (United States). And similar for U.S. Representative. —BarrelProof (talk) 19:46, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

That'd be a good thing to discuss at the talk page for MOS:JOBTITLES. Since it's established that "U.S." describes "president" in "U.S. president", I'm pretty sure the same is true for "U.S. secretary", "U.S. senator", "U.S. representative" and the like. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 20:02, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

The "U.S. president" example is different, because the title for that position is President of the United States, not United States President. That case is similar to "Indiana Governor" (incorrect) versus "Governor of Indiana" (correct). But in these other cases, "U.S." is part of the title of U.S. Secretary of Labor or U.S. Representative. —BarrelProof (talk) 20:21, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

I disagree. Again, that'd be a good thing to discuss at the talk page for MOS:JOBTITLES. I encourage you to discuss it there. 20:58, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Please stop making these changes as it is clear at MOS:BIO that consensus does not exist for lower case Slywriter (talk) 02:57, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

@Eyer: Hi Eyer, it is inaccurate to use MOS:JOBTITLES to support your position, when the section in and of itself is in dispute. In addition, there has been no substantial progress made on the capitalisation debate as can be seen in the current discussion, and no clear consensus.--Tærkast (Discuss) 21:46, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Eyer. 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.

If possible, could you reply with a copy of the article by Winters (2006) attached? The original link you posted here is expired. Thanks. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 08:13, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

GOCE December 2019 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors December 2019 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the December 2019 GOCE newsletter, an update of Guild happenings since the September edition. Our Annual Report should be ready in late January. Election time: Nominations for the election of a new tranche of Guild coordinators to serve for the first half of 2020 will be open from 1 to 15 December. Voting will then take place and the election will close on 31 December at 23:59 UTC. Positions for Guild coordinators, who perform the important behind-the-scenes tasks that keep our project running smoothly, are open to all Wikipedians in good standing. We welcome self-nominations so please consider nominating yourself if you've ever thought about helping out; it's your Guild and it doesn't run itself! September Drive: Of the thirty-two editors who signed up, twenty-three editors copy edited at least one article; they completed 39 requests and removed 138 articles from the backlog, bringing the backlog to a low of 519 articles. October Blitz: This event ran from 13 to 19 October, with themes of science, technology and transport articles tagged for copy edit, and Requests. Sixteen editors helped remove 29 articles from the backlog and completed 23 requests. November Drive: Of the twenty-eight editors who signed up for this event, twenty editors completed at least one copy edit; they completed 29 requests and removed 133 articles from the backlog. Our December Blitz will run from 15 to 21 December. Sign up now! Progress report: From September to November 2019, GOCE copy editors processed 154 requests. Over the same period, the backlog of articles tagged for copy editing was reduced by 41% to an all-time low of 479 articles. Request archiving: The archiving of completed requests has now been automated. Thanks to Zhuyifei1999 and Bobbychan193, YiFeiBot is now archiving the Requests page. Archiving occurs around 24 hours after a user's signature and one of the templates {{Done}}, {{Withdrawn}} or {{Declined}} are placed below the request. The bot uses the Guild's standard "purpose codes" to determine the way it should archive each request so it's important to use the correct codes and templates. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators; Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Miniapolis, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. >>> Sign up for the December blitz! <<< >>> Participate in the Coordinator elections! <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:05, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Hello Eyer: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Everedux ^(talk) 19:35, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Happy New Year Eyer!

Happy New Year!

Hello Eyer:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Donner60 (talk) 00:15, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks (static)}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

A kitten for you!

Having seen all the horrors of en.wikipedia's over-capitalization, this frightened kitten is here to thank you for your effort to combat this scary practice.

Surtsicna (talk) 01:26, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors 2019 Annual Report

Guild of Copy Editors 2019 Annual Report Our 2019 Annual Report is now ready for review. Highlights: Overview of Backlog-reduction progress (a record low backlog!); Summary of Drives, Blitzes, and the Requests page; Automated archiving of requests; Membership news and results of elections; Annual leaderboard; Plans for 2020. – Your Guild coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, Reidgreg, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:10, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Uh ...

Why? --Brogo13 (talk) 22:26, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Your copy edit removed information about who did the acquitting (and that he was acquitted of both charges). I've re-added that text. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 22:34, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

DS alert: AP

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-1932 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.

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.

Hello, here's your friendly DS alert for the AP2 topic area. You are supposed to receive one annually as long as you are editing in the AP2 area, but the history of this page indicates that you have never received one. ―Mandruss ☎ 00:24, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Please don't removed sourced text unless you can show the source is incorrect or some other policy based reason

I'm referring to your edit at Augustus Sol Invictus.[1]. Your edit summary said "last good" but that was clearly not accurate, you reverted a very experienced editor to a deletion made by an editor with 4 edits total, who gave the reason for deleting the text "removed incorrect information" although the text was just a summary of sourced information in the body of the article. The editor made a similar edit in 2017 as their first edit. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 07:53, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

I may have been working quickly, but I didn't see that the text *was* sourced. It looked like an unsourced assertion. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 14:58, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

It was in the WP:LEAD, sources aren't needed there if they are in the article. See the section "Personal life". Doug Weller talk 16:07, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

I didn't find the information about the multiple arrests in Personal life. I *did* just find it under Views and moved it to Personal life, where it fits better. I'm good now—just didn't see the info on the article because it was in a funny place. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 16:09, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

My Oviedo Edit

Stephen Deleonardis: SteveWillDoIt is a notable person from Oviedo. A simple google search will show that he is an internet celebrity and dig a little deeper and find out he’s from Oviedo. Please stop removing it now. NELKBOYZZ (talk) 02:54, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

@NELKBOYZZ: He's not notable enough to have his own Wikipedia page, so he's not notable enough to be included in this list. Also, even if he were, you'd have to cite sources that he is a celebrity and from Oviedo. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 02:57, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

@Eyer: The man who named Oviedo doesn’t have a wiki page and if you do your research you can easily see that he is notable.~ stop changing the edit and do you research NELKBOYZZ (talk) 03:01, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

@NELKBOYZZ: All other people in the list have their own Wikipedia page. This is the criteria established for lists on this page. See WP:LISTBIO for the Wikipedia guideline covering this. Also, unsourced material will be removed. See WP:V and WP:CITE for information about verifiability and citations. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 03:08, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

@Eyer: Just because a Wikipedia page isn’t present for him doesn’t mean he isn’t notable, in fact, he is the most famous person on the list besides Blake Bortles. Research before removing posts please, it’s rude and quite annoying. NELKBOYZZ (talk) 03:19, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

@Eyer: Someone else will be along to remove the entry soon, as it doesn't meet Wikipedia's standards. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 03:21, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

@Eyer: I fail to understand how you’ve become entitled to alter what I put. It’s correct whether a page is present for him or not. I’m beginning to question your maturity and a report will be filed if it is removed once more. Have a great day... NELKBOYZZ (talk) 03:35, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Improving Baptist Health's Wikipedia Article

Hey Eyer, I noticed you are active on WikiProject Florida. Would you be interested in collaborating on the Baptist Health Wikipedia article to correct some errors and inaccuracies? I have recently sorted through digital media and newspaper clippings at the Jacksonville library to curate the secondary sources to improve the article. Since I am familiar with the subject and I have COI, I can supply verifiable secondary sources. Any thoughts on this? --Chefmikesf (talk) 19:08, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Please review before publishing

See this edit and this edit. If you are going to go on a spree of de-capitalisation, I would recommend reviewing before publishing any changes. Editing with Eric (talk) 08:19, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

GOCE March newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors March 2020 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the March newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since December 2019. All being well, we're planning to issue these quarterly in 2020, balancing the need to communicate widely with the avoidance of filling up talk pages. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. Election results: There was little changeover in the roster of Guild Coordinators, with Miniapolis stepping down with distinction as a coordinator emeritus while Jonesey95 returned as lead coordinator. The next election is scheduled for June 2020 and all Wikipedians in good standing may participate. January Drive: Thanks to everyone for the splendid work, completing 215 copy edits including 56 articles from the Requests page and 116 backlog articles from the target months of June to August 2019. At the conclusion of the drive there was a record low of 323 articles in the copy editing backlog. Of the 27 editors who signed up for the drive, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. February Blitz: Of the 15 editors who signed up for this one-week blitz, 13 completed at least one copy edit. A total of 32 articles were copy edited, evenly split between the twin goals of requests and the oldest articles from the copy-editing backlog. Full results are here. March Drive: Currently underway, this event is targeting requests and backlog articles from September to November 2019. As of 18 March, the backlog stands at a record low of 253 articles and is expected to drop further as the drive progresses. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the backlog. Help set a new record and sign up now! Progress report: As of 18 March, GOCE copyeditors have completed 161 requests in 2020 and there was a net reduction of 385 articles from the copy-editing backlog – a 60% decrease from the beginning of the year. Well done and thank you everyone! Election reminder: It may only be March but don't forget our mid-year Election of Coordinators opens for nominations on 1 June. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, Reidgreg, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Julian Weinstock Wikipedia page

I removed a libelous claim from an author that asserts that Julian Weinstock was a racist who did not rent his properties to African Americans. This is patently untrue and is a personal attack on the character of a deceased man and his legacy. The claim the author makes is in NO way based in any fact whatsoever. The accusation is based on an unnamed source's opinion -- without any proof or verification. To include this information on this page is defamatory. To permit someone to smear a man's character on a Wikipedia page simply because he has a personal vendetta against this subject is morally wrong and should not be permitted.

Below is the link to the quote in the book: https://books.google.com/books?id=iacwDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA107&lpg=PA107&dq=Josh+Sides,+julian+weinstock&source=bl&ots=aGFv4yFiaZ&sig=ACfU3U1D6cSKNl3ugEjEX1vRXGARlbz8_w&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjDzqKgiLnoAhW8HDQIHQdrBl4Q6AEwAnoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=Josh%20Sides%2C%20julian%20weinstock&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrtrusdale (talk • contribs) 21:25, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

GOCE June newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors June 2020 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the June newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since March 2020. You can unsubscribe from our mailings at any time; see below. All times and dates stated are in UTC. Current events Election time: Nomination of candidates in our mid-year Election of Coordinators opened on 1 June, and voting will take place from 00:01 on 16 June. GOCE coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought about helping out at the Guild, or you know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. June Blitz: This blitz begins at 00:01 on 14 June and ends at 23:59 on 20 June, with themes of articles tagged for copyedit in May 2020 and requests. Drive and blitz reports March Drive: Self-isolation from coronavirus may have played a hand in making this one of our most successful backlog elimination drives. The copy-editing backlog was reduced from 477 to a record low of 118 articles, a 75% reduction. The last four months of 2019 were cleared, reducing the backlog to three months. Fifty requests were also completed, and the total word count of copy-edited articles was 759,945. Of the 29 editors who signed up, 22 completed at least one copy edit. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. April Blitz: This blitz ran from 12 to 18 April with a theme of Indian military history. Of the 18 people who signed up, 14 copyedited at least one article. Participants claimed a total of 60 copyedits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. May Drive: This event marked the 10th anniversary of the GOCE's copy-editing drives, and set a goal of diminishing the backlog to just one month of articles, as close to zero articles as possible. We achieved the goal of eliminating all articles that had been tagged prior to the start of the drive, for the first time in our history! Of the 51 editors who signed up, 43 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Other news Progress report: as of 2 June, GOCE participants had processed 328 requests since 1 January, which puts us on pace to exceed any previous year's number of requests. As of the end of the May drive, the backlog stood at just 156 articles, all tagged in May 2020. Outreach: To mark the 10th anniversary of our first Backlog Elimination Drive, The Signpost contributor and GOCE participant Puddleglum2.0 interviewed project coordinators and copy-editors for the journal's April WikiProject Report. The Drive and the current Election of Coordinators have also been covered in The Signpost's May News and Notes page. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, Reidgreg, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 15:46, 5 June 2020 (UTC).

Thanks

Thanks are nice, but why don't you also chime in on discussions when they're open? Dicklyon (talk) 01:07, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

I do occasionally, but I'm more of a WikiGnome. I'll try to be more vocal when this semester ends. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 01:36, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm pretty much in gnome mode myself. Good luck with the semester (are you student, or teacher?). Dicklyon (talk) 01:40, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, sir. Grad student working on two master's degrees: instructional design and data science. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 01:42, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Good on ya. I got my masters 45 years ago. Just one, EE. Dicklyon (talk) 05:28, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

I a, foolish for taking on a second, but I found a statistics professor whom I really like. She rekindled my love of mathematics. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 05:30, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

VCJS Caps

A discussion thread was started on Talk:Vice_Chairman_of_the_Joint_Chiefs_of_Staff#Capitalization? regarding your edit. — MrDolomite • Talk 05:03, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, find my response there. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 05:04, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

August 2020

Next time, please check what an edit did BEFORE reverting it. I don't want to have to fix that file link again. - Sumanuil (talk) 02:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Assume positive intent. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 02:40, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Capitalization of job titles on 2020 United States Postal Service crisis

The first criterion of MOS:JOBTITLES is that when a title precedes a name, as in "President Nixon" or "Postmaster General DeJoy", the title should be capitalized. Fullmetal2887 ^{(discuss me)} 16:21, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

That's not what MOS:JOBTITLES says... It does say "When followed by a person's name to form a title", but then goes on to say that it the phrase is unmodified, it denotes a title, and if it is modified or reworded, it denotes an office. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 16:41, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

@Eyer: Even if that is so, it wouldn't apply to "United States Postmaster General" or "Senate Minority Leader". Those are the unmodified, official titles. Fullmetal2887 ^{(discuss me)} 16:45, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

@Eyer: Furthermore, clearly the criterion allows for some modification of the title: Nixon's full title was "President of the United States", not "President". The third criterion, for when a title is used by itself, explicitly calls out "conventional translation thereof" - which would seem to encompass "House Speaker" for "Speaker of the United States House of Representatives". Fullmetal2887 ^{(discuss me)} 16:49, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

@Eyer: Other articles, such as 115th United States Congress, use the phrase "House Speaker Paul Ryan". Fullmetal2887 ^{(discuss me)} 16:54, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

"Postmaster General" is the title. "United States" is an adjective that describes "postmaster general". See the example in MOS:JOBTITLES: "Mao met with [United States] president Richard Nixon in 1972." (I expanded "US" to "United States" in the example for clarity.) In this case it's "United States president Richard Nixon". If we left out the "United States" part, then in would be capitalized as "President Nixon". Likewise, it's "U.S. senator" (what kind of senator? a "U.S." senator); "Senate majority leader" (what kind of majority leader? the Senate one); "Florida state representative" (what kind of representative? a state one from Florida); "former vice president" (what kind of vice president? a former one); "British queen" (what kind of queen? the British one); and so on. Whenever there are words before the title that answer the questions "what kind?" or "which one?", then the title is modified and should properly be lowercase. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 16:55, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

MOS:JOBTITLES and MOS:Rank

I wanted to reach out to you to see if we can come to an understanding on how to apply ranks. Now in general, I normally agree with your application of MOS:JOBTITLES in removing capitalization on job titles in many articles. I'm actually conflicted with the application of rank when in immediately precedes a person's name, i.e. General Joe Smith. I've noticed on your main page that you recognize not capitalizing the rank, if there is a modifier, i.e. U.S. Army general Joe Smith, which contradicts MOS:Rank application that titles directly juxtaposed with the person's name, should be capitalized. I wanted to better understand your reasoning. Thanks. Neovu79 (talk) 21:52, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

I would say "General Joe Smith is in the U.S. Army" but I would say "U.S. Army general Joe Smith is retiring soon". It's that modifier that makes the difference. Looking at MOS:Rank, it says "for fuller details..." and points to MOS:JOBTITLES which has all of the examples about modified and unmodified titles. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 21:59, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

"United States Secretary of the Treasury" edit

Hello Eyer,

I am messaging you regarding my edits on the United States Secretary of the Treasury where I capitalised "Secretary" and "Treasury", as you reverted it and deemed it a good faith edit, and your reason is one I question: "modified by "THE"". To me, that has an ambiguous meaning because of how simple it is, but it implies that because it has "The" at the start of the title, it shouldn't be capitalised? I do not see how saying "the" is enough of a reason for the title to be lower case, it shouldn't degrade the officiality of the terms. And by going onto the official website of the United States Department of the Treasury: https://home.treasury.gov/ You can find many instances where they refer to the title with the required capital letters, one particular example being the first sentence found on the page regarding the incumbent secretary Steven Mnuchin: https://home.treasury.gov/about/general-information/the-secretary#:~:text=Hi%2DResolution%20Photo-,Steven%20Terner%20Mnuchin%20was%20sworn%20in%20as%20the%2077th%20Secretary,Treasury%20on%20February%2013%2C%202017.

Since you ask on your page to use your talk page if people have doubts on your differences with capitalisations, I believe that with all of the evidence from official sources, it should be recapitalised, and as such I have reverted your edit. However, I'm open regarding your feedback.

Sincerely,

James Gretton, Grettoonist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grettoonist (talk • contribs) 18:57, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

@Grettoonist: Hi there. MOS:JOBTITLES states that if a title is modified by an adjective (including "The"), it should be set in lowercase. We don't capitalize "The president of the United States", so we wouldn't capitalize "The secretary of the treasury". I can see capitalizing "Treasury" if you're claiming that it's a proper noun that's short for "Department of the Treasury". Even still, "secretary" would be lowercase. Thoughts? —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 19:02, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Eyer, what gave you the idea that "the" is an adjective? It is not an adjective. It is a grammatical article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:48, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Depending on where you look, "the" is a determiner or an article. Both determiners and articles are types of adjectives. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 13:28, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors September 2020 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors September 2020 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the September GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2020.                  Current and upcoming events September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today! Election reminder: our end-of-year Election of Coordinators opens for nominations on 1 December. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. Drive and Blitz reports June Blitz: An uncorrected typo (even copy editors make copy editing mistakes!) led to an eight-day "leap blitz" from 14 to 21 June, focusing on requests and articles tagged in May. 19 participating editors claimed 54 copy edits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. July Drive: Over 750,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event, keeping pace with the previous three self-isolated drives. Of the 38 people who signed up, 30 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here. August Blitz: From 16 to 22 August, we copy edited articles tagged in June and July 2020 and requests. 12 participating editors completed 37 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Other news June election: Jonesey95 was chosen to continue as lead coordinator, assisted by Baffle gab1978, Tdslk, Twofingered Typist, and first-time coordinator Puddleglum2.0. Reidgreg took a break after serving for a couple years. Thanks to everyone who participated! Progress report: As of 01:33, 18 September 2020 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors had processed 532 requests since 1 January and there were 38 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 433 (see monthly progress graph above). Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, Puddleglum2.0, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Capitalization of "Archbishop of Canterbury"

You and I had the nerve to change the Archbishop of Canterbury article to agree with the MoS, and now they're talking about our work on the talk page of MOS:JOBTITLES. Thought you should know. Happy editing! Chris the speller ^yack 22:52, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

super interesting!!! I have some questions for you!!!!

Wow, I was super interested by getting your reply on my talk page, it is amazing!!! let me explain my feelings and then I have a few very very small questions for you :D

Before I got your message

I was thinking (but just a little bit), that maybe 331dot is CCP-connected because the CCP's online division is pretty active and he seemed very very interested in answering all of my contributions - but I didn't have a strong feeling about it. I thought maybe he might have some connection to a group, I thought he could just be a strong Democrat. He seemed very obsessed with (very very interested in) using the word "false", he even replied to where I asked about a camera video of a ballot counting center that shows travel luggage (like you use at an airport) filled with ballots hidden under a desk taken out from under desks after all the poll watchers have left, he says maybe we need to know more circumstances :). I thought it was a little strange to be so interested in using the word "false", on an encyclopedia, when we can see with our own eyes.

At that time I thought maybe I will ask him if he has any affiliation (connection to a group) but I didn't have a good opportunity, and the real reason I didn't ask his affiliation (any connection to a group?) is because I just didn't mind if he has strong political views or, to be honest, I didn't care if he's an employee of Biden - so I didn't want to ask him and maybe he has to lie or be uncomfortable in case he is working for Biden, it really didn't bother me so much. So I just didn't ask him. I really didn't mind it, it didn't bother me. After he started harrassing me though, and I asked him to stop harrassing me, he did stop, so for me this is fine! I didn't think about our interaction anymore.

now that I got your message

Now it is amazing that a totally unrelated user showed up, you, and used a typical form of a threat, exactly 100% matching CCP method: "I'd hate to see such a passionate contributor (you) be blocked from editing", this is what you wrote! Amazing! (This is a typical form of a threat, it is very very typical such as 'wow real nice restaurant you have here, would be a shame if anything happened to it...') This is amazing!!! WOW!!!!!

Now instead of thinking maybe a user has some unknown connection, but I don't know what, now I know 100% it's ccp! Very awesome!!! I have a lot of questions for you!!! (the questions are from most important to least important). these questions are for just you, an individual person, it is not about any group!!

some questions (please answer!!! thank you!!!!)

1. Where are you working from? (like where, in what city, what country are you sitting right now?) What is your nationality?
2. When did you start working on influencing the discussion about the United States election, such as exact date? I am not interested in what you worked on before that date.
3. What hours do you work? Do you work from home or in a sweat shop? (large center.)
4. How do you hide your IP? Do you use software CCP gave you, a VPN, or what? (maybe you don't know.)
5. Do you work through a "fake" company that does something unrealted - like a normal employer that is not related to politics or elections?
6. Do you have an alternative person or group to blame in case you are caught, such as blaming George Soros or something like that?
7. How do you get instructions (told what to do)? Do you have a live chat system you use?
8. How often do you get instructions or information about if you are doing a good job or a bad job?
9. Are you one person who uses your account or sometimes several people use your same account? (Eyer)

I am so amazingly happy that you made this threat, we never do this in America. I don't mind your threat at all but it would be so amazing if you can reply to me. You can reply here or on my talk page. Afterward we can erase this discussion. Please mention my username (include Marvinmarsupial: ) so I get a notification. Thank you so much!!! I am really interested in your answers!! I love it. I didn't ask you for any screenshots and I didn't ask about any training materials, so after you answer we can delete it and say this is just a joke (it's not.) I didn't ask you about anyone else or how many people you work with etc! Nothing important. Thank you!!!!! After you answer I will remove it and I will not contribute anymore. Fantastic!! Marvinmarsupial (talk) 06:30, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

December 2020 Guild of Copy Editors Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors December 2020 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the December GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since September 2020.                  Current and upcoming events Election time: our end-of-year Election of Coordinators opened for nominations on 1 December and will close on 15 December at 23:59 (UTC). Voting opens at 00:01 the following day and will continue until 31 December at 23:59, just before Auld Lang Syne. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. December Blitz: This will run from 13 to 19 December, and will target all Requests. Sign up now. Drive and Blitz reports September Drive: 67 fewer articles had copy-edit templates by this month's close. Of the 27 editors who signed up, 15 copy-edited at least one article, and 124 articles were claimed for the drive. October Blitz: this ran from 18 to 24 October, and focused on articles tagged for copy-edit in July and August 2020, and all Requests. Of the 13 who signed up, 11 editors copy-edited at least one article. 21 articles were claimed for the blitz. November Drive: Of the 18 editors who signed up, 15 copy-edited at least one article, and together claimed 134 articles. At the close of the drive, 67 fewer articles were in the backlog and we had dealt with 39 requests. Other news Progress report: As of 09:05, 3 December 2020 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors had processed 663 requests (18 from 2019) since 1 January and there were 52 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 494 (see monthly progress graph above). Annual Report for 2020: this roundup of the year's activity at the Guild is planned for publication in late January or early February. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Seasonal tidings and cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, Puddleglum2.0, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:46, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Antony Blinken and MOS:JOBTITLE

Seems you're the expert 'round these parts in MOS:JOBTITLE, my new favourite section of the MOS. I wondered what you think of the lede in the current version of Antony Blinken. It says:

Antony John Blinken (born April 16, 1962) is an American government official and diplomat. He served as Deputy National Security Advisor from 2013 to 2015 and Deputy Secretary of State from 2015 to 2017 under President Barack Obama.

I think that deputy national security advisor and deputy secretary of state should be lowercase, but I'm not positive. (My rule of thumb is that if "the" could be inserted between "as" and the title at issue, then the phrase denotes an office and should be lowercase.) Would love to hear what you think! AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 18:18, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

That's my rule of thumb too, but... enough people get up in arms about it that I usually don't change the case unless the "the" is actually there. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 20:26, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

MOS:JOBTITLE for Cabinet secretaries?

Are you sure that's the way to go with those? I don't want to just revert without hearing your reasoning, but it seems extremely incorrect to change "United States Secretary of Education" to "United States secretary of education". jp×g 11:54, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

The title is "Secretary of Education". In "United States secretary of education", "United States" modifies "secretary of education". This is a similar construction to the line "Mao met with US president Richard Nixon in 1972" in MOS:JOBTITLES. In that example, we wouldn't say "US President Richard Nixon" because "US" modifies "president". Thoughts? —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 15:44, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

MOS:JOBTITLES re: Secretaries of Defense

Hi Eyer! New to editing, and just wanted some additional clarification regarding why edits of "27th United States secretary of defense" and "23rd United States secretary of the Army" were not capitalized. I made the edits because the titles used in a similar context for the Gates, Carter, Hagel pages are all capitalized.

Were my edits not following the set rule? Just seeking some help before I make any other similar edits. Thanks! Sensei-erasmus (talk) 22:25, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, there. The title "secretary of defense" should be lowercase there because "secretary of defense" is modified by "the", "23rd/27th", and "United States". Hope this helps. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 22:41, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

@Eyer: To continue the discussion a bit more then, should the capitalizations for the Gates, Carter, and Hagel pages be undone to reflect that standard then? Thanks! Sensei-erasmus (talk) 16:36, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

@Sensei-erasmus: I'd say yes. There are so many articles, I haven't been able to update them all. I've been focused on current office-holders, primarily. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 16:37, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

I was going to ask for you to explain the nuances of changing it from "United States Secretary of Transportation" to the lowercase, but you've covered it well already with others. Just wanted to say thanks for graciously and politely explaining it, rather than assuming bad faith on my part. We need more editors like you. Packer1028 (talk) 01:09, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

MOS:JOBTITLES discussion

Hi, came across your account reading some discussion at the Australian GG talk page. Like you, I have a strange fascination with MOS:JOBTITLES and going around un-capitalizing everything in articles.

From your user page though, it appears we have a different understanding of the MOS, so just wanted to clarify some things.

• "In World War II, Lieutenant Nixon never thought he would become president of the United States." (referring to the title of "Lieutenant" and the office of president)

Would this not be: "In World War II, Lieutenant Nixon never thought he would become President of the United States", as it does not have a modifier (a, an, the, etc.) before it as the "Theresa May became Prime Minister of the United Kingdom in 2016" box (first column, second row) in the examples of the MOS indicates? Since the office itself is a title.

• "The pen was used by the president of the United States."

Would this not be: "The pen was used by the President of the United States" as it is being used as a substitute for the person holding the title during their time in office, since: "When a title is used to refer to a specific person as a substitute for their name during their time in office, e.g., the Queen, not the queen (referring to Elizabeth II)" (second bullet point).

As well, we are having a discussion about this issue at Talk:Deputy prime minister of Canada, and your insight would be appreciated.

Thanks, WildComet (talk) 07:19, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Help explaining MOS:JOBTITLES

Hi Eyer! Looks like we're both Floridians and MOS:JOBTITLES enthusiasts. If you have the time, could you please help me explain the rule to a user over on my talk page? Wallnot (talk) 19:12, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@Wallnot:: It looks like you've got things under control for now. I'll watch your page and jump in if needed, though. —Eyer (he/him) If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message. 12:54, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks—I just realized I don't really have an explanation for why the titles of pages about offices get headline style capitalization (as they universally do), in spite of the rule that page titles get sentence-style capitalization. Wallnot (talk) 19:26, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Honestly, they shouldn't. "President of the United States" should be headline style because the "P", "U", and "S" are all in proper nouns. "White House Chief of Staff" should be "White House chief of staff" because it's modified by "White House". I just know that I won't win that fight, so I ignore it. —Eyer (he/him) If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message. 21:12, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

@Eyer: Yeah, that's what I thought too. I can think of a prudential reason to leave those headline-capped: it makes it easier for readers to find the generic article (e.g., "secretary of state") out of the list of predictive results, which usually comprises mostly specific instances of the office. But apart from that I guess weight of custom ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Wallnot (talk) 22:22, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

"Advice and consent" versus "advise and consent"

Hi. Just saw that your reverted my edits to the P.R. AG's page.

With respect to titles, I had capitalized them because, after all, they are normally capitalized. Still, if Wikipedia's style guide says otherwise, then I stand corrected.

I do disagree, however, with the reversion of my change from "advise" to "advice." The term used in the official English translation of the Constitution of Puerto Rico is "advice" (the noun), not "advise" (the verb). See, e.g., P.R. Const. Art. IV, sec. 4 ("[a]ny such appointments that require the advice and consent of the Senate or of both houses shall expire at the end of the next regular session.") Moreover, "advice" is also the term used by the U.S. Constitution. See, e.g., U.S Const., Art. II, sec. 2 ("and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors . . . ."). I would urge you to reverse this particular reversion.

Finally, since I'm new here and you evidently know your way around, I'd like to ask if you know how to change the title of the page? In the case of a related page (the one on the Solicitor General of Puerto Rico), it's simply wrong; it currently reads "Prosecutor General of Puerto Rico," which is not merely an incorrect translation of "Procurador General" (which is, itself, a translation into Spanish of "Solicitor General"), but is also confusing, since there is another position in the P.R. Department of Justice whose title in Spanish ("Fiscal General") is the one that truly should be translated as "Prosecutor General." Any advice (see what I did there?) would be welcome.

MTCiceronPR (talk) 23:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)MTCiceronPR

You're correct, of course, about "advice and consent". I reapplied that change seconds after reverting the capitalization issue, so I think we're good. I don't know my way around page moves all that well... There are instructions, though, at WP:MOVE. If I can be helpful, please let me know. —Eyer (he/him) If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message. 13:38, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Jamesecombs

Is there anything we can do to stop an ongoing disaster like this one? This is going to take forever to clean up. Wallnot (talk) 15:53, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

RfC: application of MOS:JOBTITLES has an RFC

RfC: application of MOS:JOBTITLES has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. WildComet (talk) 04:21, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

GOCE June 2021 newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors June 2021 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the June newsletter, our first newsletter of 2021, which is a brief update of Guild activities since December 2020. To unsubscribe, follow the link at the bottom of this box. Current events Election time: Voting in our mid-year Election of Coordinators opened on 16 June and will conclude at the end of the month. GOCE coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Have your say and show support here. June Blitz: Our June copy-editing blitz is underway and will conclude on 26 June. Drive and blitz reports January Drive: 28 editors completed 324 copy edits totalling 714,902 words. At the end of the drive, the backlog had reached a record low of 52 articles. (full results) February Blitz: 15 editors completed 48 copy edits totalling 142,788 words. (full results) March Drive: 29 editors completed 215 copy edits totalling 407,736 words. (full results) April Blitz: 12 editors completed 23 copy edits totalling 56,574 words. (full results) May Drive: 29 editors completed 356 copy edits totalling 479,013 words. (full results) Other news Progress report: as of 26 June, GOCE participants had completed 343 Requests since 1 January. The backlog has fluctuated but remained in control, with a low of 52 tagged articles at the end of January and a high of 620 articles in mid-June. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Tenryuu and Twofingered Typist, and from member Reidgreg. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 12:37, 26 June 2021 (UTC).

Commandant

Better fix the capitalization of the Commandant of the Marine Corps while you are at it. Just saying. Cheers! Cuprum17 (talk) 17:00, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

September 2021 Guild of Copy Editors newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors September 2021 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the September GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2021.                  Current and upcoming events September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today! Drive and Blitz reports June Blitz: From 20 to 26 June, 6 participating editors claimed 16 copy edits, focusing on requests and articles tagged in March and April. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. July Drive: Almost 575,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event. Of the 24 people who signed up, 18 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here. August Blitz: From 15 to 21 August, we copy edited articles tagged in April and May 2021 and requests. 9 participating editors completed 17 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Other news June election: Jonesey95 was chosen to continue as lead coordinator, assisted by Dhtwiki, Tenryuu, and Miniapolis. New maintenance template added to our project scope: After a short discussion in June, we added {{cleanup tense}} to the list of maintenance templates that adds articles to the Guild's copy editing backlog categories. This change added 198 articles, spread over 97 months of backlog, to our queue. We processed all of those articles except for those from the three or four most recent months during the July backlog elimination drive (Here's a link to a "tense" discussion during the drive). Progress report: As of 18:26, 24 September 2021 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 468 requests since 1 January and there were 60 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 433 (see monthly progress graph above). Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Dhtwiki, Tenryuu, and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Campus

You're not right however I'll say you could adjust the part with "most population is on campus". You could say online students aren't included. The other edits are fine. Justanother2 (talk) 23:48, 30 November 2021 (UTC)