Jump to content

User talk:Ikeshut2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome

[edit]
Here are some lamingtons to welcome you to WikiProject Australia!

G'day Ikeshut2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; they have helped improve Wikipedia and made it more informative. I hope you enjoy using Wikipedia and decide to make additional contributions.

As a contributor to Australian articles, you may like to connect with other Australian Wikipedians through the Australian Wikipedians' notice board and take a look at the activities in WikiProject Australia and associated sub-projects. Wikimedia Australia your local chapter organises editor training workshops, meetups and other events. If you would like to know more, email help@wikimedia.org.au.

If you are living in Australia and want to subscribe to location-based notices, you can add location userboxes to your user page.

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~; this will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you have any questions, please see Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, try the Wikipedia:Help desk, or ask me on my talk page. Or you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Some other resources to help new Wikipedians include:

How to edit a page
Editing tutorial
Picture tutorial
How to write a great article
Article titles
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Thank you for signing up! JarrahTree 00:16, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Morgan

[edit]

Hi, it's nice to see Morgan's page being expanded, however I think much of the new content is problematic in a stylistic sense, namely the overuse of quotations. Per MOS:QUOTE, "While quotations are an indispensable part of Wikipedia, try not to overuse them. Using too many quotes is incompatible with an encyclopedic writing style and may be a copyright infringement. It is generally recommended that content be written in Wikipedia editors' own words. Consider paraphrasing quotations into plain and concise text when appropriate". - HappyWaldo (talk) 04:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By "expanded", I was referring to increase in article length. Perhaps instead I should have said "overhauled". Tbh I hadn't properly read article prior to your edits. Anywho, keep up the good work. - HappyWaldo (talk) 04:52, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
One other suggestion: reduce images to standard thumbnail size (width at 220px). You'll notice the majority of featured articles follow suit. - HappyWaldo (talk) 04:56, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image sizes & captions

[edit]

MOS:IMGSIZE "As a general rule, images should not be set to a larger fixed width than 220px (the initial base width), and if an exception to this general rule is warranted, the resulting image should usually be no more than 400px wide (300px for lead images) and 500px tall, for comfortable display on the smallest devices "in common use" (though this may still cause viewing difficulties on some unusual displays)." It's worth remembering that many different devices with varying screen resolutions are used by Wiki readers, so while it might look optimal on your device, for someone else it will be awkwardly oversized. Hence standard is usually the right choice, unless the image is a panorama or map or something. Note that the 300px images in the articles that I created are all lead images. This image you uploaded looks fine at standard size, although more detail would come through if the borders and text were cropped out. As for caption, the other image is clearly an artist's interpretation. No one can mistake it for a photograph. MOS:CAPSUCCINCT relevant. No need to add the source either, if reader wants to know they can click on the image. - HappyWaldo (talk) 04:16, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The image size I chose is warranted because of the loss of image detail in a smaller image and the size I chose (upright=1.25 or 280px) is completely within the bounds described in the sentence you quoted (i.e., it is a lot less than 400px wide and 500px tall).
As for the caption: (1) ’Encounter with Bushrangers – Mrs. Wills Interceding for Doolan’ is the name of the image (not ‘Mrs Wills begs Bluecap to spare the life of Doolan’). It’s pretty much universal within Wikipedia that an artwork has its correct name attached to an image of the artwork. (2) My use of the phrase “an artist’s interpretation” is a reference to the extensive coverage of the incident in colonial newspapers (as described in the text of the article) and the sentimentalised artistic depiction in this image, typical of mid-Victorian art. Your attempt to trivialise the expression by claiming that “No one can mistake it for a photograph” is just nonsense and completely misses the point. (3) The source of the illustration is important for the reason outlined in point 2 above. Your contention that the source is not required and “if reader wants to know they can click on the image” is unsupported by the Wikipedia style guide and taken to its logical extent would mean no captions would be required for any image (because, after all, “if reader wants to know they can click on the image”). Furthermore, the source detail also answers the question “When was the piece completed?” (see MOS:CAPLENGTH ‘Tips for describing pictures’). Ikeshut2 (talk) 20:15, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What crucial detail is being lost by reducing to standard thumbnail size? It's an illustration of men on horseback, one shooting the other. Simple. Maybe it looks cooler on your device at 280px, but that's not the point. It doesn't even depict a real event, so not sure why it matters. As for captions, I guess it's a difference of taste. I prefer simple captions that keep the story flowing. Details like the exact date of publication and artistic medium (woodblock print) are often superfluous, except on Commons, where they are essential. - HappyWaldo (talk) 21:33, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It’s extremely frustrating trying to communicate with a person who either does not read what I have written, or cannot comprehend what was written. From my first communication and subsequently I have made it very clear that the image I was referring to is “Bluecap Gang of Bushrangers.jpg” (an image that you yourself uploaded to Wikipedia Commons). Please note: this image does not include any horses and it does purport to represent a “real event” (in fact it could be described as an artist’s impression of a real event as reported). I have no idea how you have become confused about which image was the subject of this discussion. Nevertheless I will address your general question about image size as it relates to this image. An image in Wikipedia is measured by its width, so images in landscape format can appear particularly small when displayed using standard base width. Images in portrait format don’t have this problem; for example, I don’t have any problem with the photo of John Williams in the Bluecap article being displayed at standard base width. The image in question is in landscape format and has a lot of fine detail that is completely lost when displayed at standard base width, and so warrants expansion. It’s not a question of looking “cooler” on my device, it’s to do with improving the overall experience of somebody reading the article. In regard to the caption you once again seem profoundly confused. In my very first communication about this issue I proposed a compromise caption which, it should be noted, does not include “the exact date of publication” nor does it include any reference to the “artistic medium” (i.e., “woodblock print”). Your latest communication did, however, include a statement that makes some sense: “As for captions, I guess it's a difference of taste”. The difference in this case is that my taste in captions conforms closely with the requirements outlined in WP:CAP whereas your preferred style is to use captions “that keep the story flowing” (whatever that means). Ikeshut2 (talk) 19:11, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neither image warrants expansion beyond standard thumbnail size. Both show up fine on many devices, a point of mine which you ignored. Taking Daniel Morgan as an example, the images may appear fine to you, but for readers using other devices may look way oversized, causing severe cases of MOS:SANDWICH. That's why standard is always the safest bet, and makes the site appear more consistent and reliable overall. And by keeping the story flowing, I mean succinct captions that relate directly to something in the adjacent text, and don't distract the reader with clunky and irrelevant details. - HappyWaldo (talk) 23:42, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The great strength of Wikipedia is its collaborative and constructive environment. Your responses to my concerns about this issue have been negative, erratic and misleading. Your wilful obstinance and continued refusal to address the valid issues I have raised leave me with no choice in this matter. Ikeshut2 (talk) 19:56, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As an experiment, go nominate the Morgan page for a Good Article review. The first thing the reviewer will do is readjust the images to standard size. Are you going to accept their reasons for doing so, or take it as some deeply wounding personal attack? - HappyWaldo (talk) 00:10, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

John Foley

[edit]

Really outstanding expansion! Kingoflettuce (talk) 05:41, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, comments such as yours make the effort worthwhile. Much appreciated. Ikeshut2 06:39, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ikeshut2 Cheers mate, I know talent when I see it. Would be happy to collaborate with you anytime on topics that catch both our fancies--but you are definitely more than capable going it alone! Kingoflettuce (talk) 19:04, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ancestry.com

[edit]

HappyWaldo, before you start deleting references to sources you need to familiarise yourself and follow Wikipedia guidelines rather than relying on your own opinion. Please refer to: “Finding secondary sources is a large topic but make use of Google Books, News and Scholar; find local newspaper archives; go to a library; if you have access, use pay/subscription services like JSTOR, Newspaperarchive.com; Ancestry.com, etc.” (Help:Maintenance template removal], ‘Primary sources’ section). Ikeshut2 19:47, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ikeshut2, hope you're well. Sorry but I find your point confusing. The line you quoted recommends users find "secondary sources" via Ancestry.com, not link to or cite Ancestry.com itself. And it specifically says "secondary sources", not primary source material, such as "Gaol Description and Entrance Books, Parramatta, 1858, page 95 (State Archives NSW, 4/6536; Roll: 176, per Ancestry.com)". If you'd like more reasons why Ancestry.com is problematic, see here and here. Basically, primary sources should be avoided if the same information has been covered in a reliable secondary source, such as a peer reviewed academic paper. Old newspapers can be turned to from time to time but they can be very unreliable, especially a sensationalist tabloid like Truth (which you cite), which, if around today, would be ridiculed as fake news. P.S. I'm not doubting your passion for and expertise on bushranging, but the topic does attract quite a lot of scholarly attention, so think those sources should be prioritised. - HappyWaldo (talk) 00:00, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • My point about Ancestry.com is that you described it as an “unreliable source”, but neither link you provided supports that contention. Ancestry.com is useful mostly for providing on-line access to primary source documents, that would otherwise only be obtainable by spending considerable time at places such as NSW Archives at Kingswood (for example). I agree that user-generated content on Ancestry.com can be unreliable, especially when unsupported by linked documents. I use Ancestry.com as a tool, totally aware of what should be used and what should be avoided. I could easily quote the source details, without including “per Ancestry.com”, pretending that I spent a couple of days gathering research material at (say) NSW Archives, but I would prefer to be honest and up-front about the reference. It is incorrect to conclude Ancestry.com = unreliable source. It can be useful and I have the skills and judgment to use it properly. Your black-and-white position about Ancesty.com is not supported by Wikipedia guidelines.
  • I used the Truth newspaper as an example of how Lowry’s words to Detective Camphin were transformed to represent his last words, formulated as “Tell ‘em I died game”. Yes, it’s a dodgy tabloid source, but that’s the whole point; it entered the public imagination precisely through sources such as that. There is no pretence that the Truth is a reliable source. A cited source needs to be read in connection with the section of the article it refers to.
  • As it was you who initiated the article, I assume you have no issue with Lowry’s notability. You say: “Basically, primary sources should be avoided if the same information has been covered in a reliable secondary source, such as a peer reviewed academic paper”. That assumes that the “same information has been covered in a reliable secondary source”. I have access to a University library and a large range of on-line resources, including academic papers, and in my experience there are very few reliable secondary sources on Lowry (not for want of trying). To my knowledge a biography of Lowry has not been written; the modern books on bushrangers I’ve consulted either don’t mention Lowry or basically paraphrase and summarise information out of Boxall, White or Clune; Boxall is riddled with mistaken assumptions and inaccuracies, and I have used White and Clune at appropriate places in the article. If there’s any high-quality article and/or book on Lowry I’ve missed, please let me know, otherwise I stand by the primary sources I have cited.
  • When I compare the original article initiated by you (no citations; multiple factual errors) with the extended, corrected and fully-referenced version that I am responsible for, I proudly stand by my version whatever “scholarly attention” it receives. Prior to my major overhaul the article had just two cited sources (added by others and both retained), and included many of your unsourced original errors of fact.
Furthermore:
  • You removed the word “sensational”, claiming it to be WP:PUFFERY (i.e., using praise-filled adjectives). 'Sensational' means “causing great public interest and excitement” which is a factually correct description of the coverage of Lowry’s bushranging career. Accounts of his deeds elicited much public interest and were extensively covered in local newspapers, as well as in other New South Wales country districts and in Sydney, and in other colonies as well (extensively covered because it sold newspapers). You appear to have read the word as its informal sense, meaning “very impressive or attractive”. The context made it obvious I was using the formal meaning of the word and I am completely at a loss how you could misinterpret the word. Ikeshut2 06:51, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Points taken about lack of hard scholarship on Lowry. Maybe you should write on this stuff more in depth and take it to an Australian historical journal or something(?) Then secretly cite your own work here, hehehe. Sensational is still an odd choice for a lead sentence, formal definition included. The informal use of the word is probably more common these days, so might ring as some kind of endorsement. It would confuse many non-native English speakers at least, who I imagine only know the informal definition. Lead sentences for bios should be as plain as possible. Daniel Day-Lewis is "an English retired actor with dual British and Irish citizenship", not "a renowned actor known for his mastery the Method". - HappyWaldo (talk) 11:06, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I must admit it’s crossed my mind to write and publish an article first, but the thought of having to paraphrase myself fills me with horror. I accept your point about ‘sensational’, and have no problems with your amendments to the lead. I brought it up because I perfectly understand the concept of ‘puffery’ and to be accused of using it is an affront. We clearly share a few areas of interest and are likely to intersect into the future. Can we at least call a truce and enter into some sort of rapprochement? All I ask is for you to give me the benefit of the doubt. For example, if there had’ve been some quality secondary source on Lowry out there, I would have liked nothing better than to use it, but there wasn’t and so I did it the hard way. Apart from a few differences in taste, I think we basically want the same thing, so I’m proposing we accept there will be some differences but trust the big picture stuff is being taken care of (unless there is incontrovertible evidence to the contrary). Ikeshut2 19:00, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure Ikeshut2, I appreciate the time and energy you're spending on these neglected figures. Admittedly I've created a few articles based almost solely on old newspapers and such, due to a dearth of reliable secondary sources. If that's all we've got for now, then it will make do. Keep up the good work you're doing. - HappyWaldo 11:14, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

[edit]
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) 01:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Possible help for a new Wikipedia editor

[edit]

Hello! I am currently new to Wikipedia editing, having taken up a university course where we are encouraged to work on a stub article and turn it into a B- or C-class article. I have noticed that you are relatively active on here, and are a member of the Australian history WikiProject. I have chosen Peter Nicol Russell who was a Scottish/Australian engineer and philanthropist in the 1800's. If you had the chance, would you mind assisting me with providing some advice on the article via its talk page? I'm also looking for someone to review and grade the article per the Australian history WikiProject or the Biography WikiProject guidelines if you (/you know anyone who) can help Many thanks!! Chasseur99 (talk) 07:32, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hello, Ikeshut2

Thank you for creating Robert David Bennett.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:50, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stephanie Deste

[edit]

Dear Ikeshut2,

I am the person who started the Stephanie Deste page, and I write to heartily congratulate of the modifications and additions that you have made to this page. They add so much to the story!

I have made only one minor change to what you've written, and that I to again add a note about Budica's death.

I am particularly impressed with the photos of Deste that you've added. To be honest, I have trouble in downloading photos, and it is in that context that I request that you add a photo the section that talks about Deste's influence on the creation of the Edna Everage character, and that shows Deste wearing flamboyant spectacle frames. The photo that I recommend can be found at https://www.ancientfaces.com/person/remigio-budica-birth-1899-death-1944-australia/143843008.

Again, thanks for your major contributions. I look forward to hearing from you.

Regards Albert Isaacs (talk) 22:40, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Albert Isaacs
Thank you for your encouraging comments, they are really appreciated.
In regard to your addition re Budica's death, I already had a reference to his death in the 'Return to Melbourne' section (citing the same reference to the one you cited).  I structured the article to read chronologically, which is why I had it in that section.  I've made changes so his death is not mentioned twice, plus added a bit about where he was buried.
In regard to the photo of Deste wearing the flamboyant spectacles, I agree it would make a really good addition to the article.  I tried to work out a way to include it, but ran into a few problems.  As far as I can tell the only online sources of the photo is Twitter and Facebook, and a very small (unattributed) image on the Australian Dictionary of Biography webpage (reference 1 of the article).  I estimate the photo probably dates from the 1960s or 1970s (possibly 1976 - see reference 89 of the article).  The main problem is that Wikipedia is particularly touchy about the copyright for images.  Generally any photo prior to 1955 is OK under Australian copyright law, so this one presents a problem there, plus it's not available from a reputable source.  It's a question of finding a category to fit it into under Wikipedia's rules.  I've uploaded images before dated after 1955, and they very quickly get rejected.  Clearly there are plenty of images on Wikipedia later than 1955 and there must be a category this image could fall under, but I'll have to do some research to find out how to do it.  If I find something that will work, I will add the image to the article.
Regards Ikeshut2 (talk) 12:03, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dear ikeshut2,
I'm sorry that I missed the reference to Budica's death.
It sounds as if you're really having trouble downloading that photo of Deste wearing glasses, and it certainly appears to be the only such photo of Deste. However here is another possible suggestion: amongst the revolving photos at the head of this page https://mivision.com.au/2012/06/our-unofficial-optical-ambassador-retires/ is a photo of spectacle frames in the Deste/Everage style. Perhaps we can use that illustration.
Again, thanks for your work. Albert Isaacs (talk) 22:42, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

[edit]
Hey, Ikeshut2. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 20:39, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 January 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:45, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am a relative of Robert David Bennett

[edit]

Just wondering if you were related too. He is my great grandmother’s brother. Very thorough article! My email address is nikkibbond@gmail.com if you want to make contact. Thanks! Auschicnikki (talk) 08:54, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 January 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:13, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 February 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:44, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Charles Warner, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page His Majesty's Theatre.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 February 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:02, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 March 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:41, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 March 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:16, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 03 April 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 April 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:17, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 8 May 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:24, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 May 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:39, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 5 June 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:21, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 June 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:09, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 July 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:14, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 July 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:01, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 August 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:37, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 August 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:16, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 August 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 September 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:36, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 October 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:30, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 October 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:00, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 November 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:43, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 November 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:43, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 December 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:08, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First Edit Day

[edit]
Happy First Edit Day, Ikeshut2, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Ezra Cricket (talk) 03:21, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

[edit]

Hello, Ikeshut2. Thank you for your work on 1874 Victorian colonial election. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hello my friend! Good day to you. Thanks for creating the article, I have marked it as reviewed. Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 20:40, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

[edit]

The Signpost: 24 December 2023

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:57, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dorothy Brunton

[edit]

Quite impressive work on the Dot Brunton article - well done! Nickm57 (talk) 05:43, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I appreciate the feedback. Ikeshut2 (talk) 10:24, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 January 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:13, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 February 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:35, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

[edit]
Hello, Ikeshut2. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Scottyoak2 (talk) 00:32, 2 March 2024 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

The Signpost: 2 March 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eric Campbell (political activist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Western Front.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Original barnstar – Harold GYE (Mar 2024)

[edit]
The Original Barnstar
Extensive revision of Australian caricaturist Harold Frederick Neville Gye (1887—1967), with good citations; from what was a semi-stub article, to the recognition and contribution of the individual. Thank you. Q8682 (talk) 10:34, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, your recognition and comments are very much appreciated. I have read through your excellent Will Ogilvie article with great interest. On a tangential matter, I note your interest in the Australian banking crisis of 1893. I am presently working on an expansion of the Henry Gyles Turner article, which will have a major section on the banking crisis (Turner was the general manager of the Commercial Bank of Australia, the first major bank to suspend payments). I expect to upload the finished expansion in the next few weeks. Ikeshut2 (talk) 19:20, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 March 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:39, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 April 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:48, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 May 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:57, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 8 June 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tom Carrington (illustrator), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Glenrowan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:20, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 July 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:38, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Henry Roughton Hogg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Natural History Museum.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 July 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:30, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 August 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:48, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 September 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 September 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 October 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in a research

[edit]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

The Signpost: 6 November 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:04, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research

[edit]

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

The Signpost: 18 November 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:42, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:43, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ikeshut2&oldid=1258293517"