User talk:Jmill1806

File source problem with File:John Stuart Mill.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:John Stuart Mill.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 13:38, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Magog. I have added description information about the portrait, originally produced in 1873. Please let me know if you need additional source information. Jmill1806 (talk) 14:37, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Elliot Page EDIT

Hello, so I saw you edited Elliot Page wikipedia informations. May can you also use they pronouns for him? Their pronouns are he/they. :) Eliskapokorna52 (talk) 19:25, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Eliskapokorna52, could you be more specific in what edit you think should be made? The page already lists "he" and "they" as pronouns. Jmill1806 (talk) 19:27, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

I mean, when you talk about them, you only use he/him pronouns. May you could use both? Eliskapokorna52 (talk) 19:30, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

In English, we don't refer to people by using two pronouns in the same phrase, such as, "He/they went to the store." The specification of "he/they" means that either of those is acceptable to the subject, so you should write, "He went to the store," or, "They went to the store." Jmill1806 (talk) 19:33, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Transgender Male category

I saw 2020 (UTC) this edit, citing this tweet. True, that tweet does not say "nonbinary" but it also does not say "male" or "transman". Now I don't get involved in category disputes, but which do you think is a larger unsupported assertion: that GLAAD is right in saying Elliot came out as nonbinary, or that everyone who uses "he/him" pronouns identifies as "male"? Newimpartial (talk) 20:05, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

I don't see your question as synonymous with the category dispute. Elliot identifies as trans, and therefore the trans category is applicable. You can be non-binary and trans at the same time. That's all there is to it. Jmill1806 (talk) 20:09, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

The binary thinking embedded in most category use is why I don't generally engage with categories. But if you have a person who identifies as Trans and Nonbinary but not as male, it seems wrongheaded to me to place them in a "Trans male" category because they were AFAB. I'm not saying Page will end up identifying as nonbinary trans, but it is a real identity, and forcing people with that identity into Transman and Transwoman cats seems profoundly wrong-headed to me. Newimpartial (talk) 20:21, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly what your point is, but I think the categories are in the right place now. Trans and non-binary, but not listed as male, man, female, or woman. Jmill1806 (talk) 21:59, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Love the quote

Jmill1806, I love the John Stuart Mills quote. Now I get your handle!

Thank you Jjwilliamson! I'm a fan. Jmill1806 (talk) 18:21, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Hallo

Hallo. Thank you for your edits to Nathan J. Robinson.The reason I changed the wording from ‘currently’ is that if this article were to say where Mr Robinson ‘currently’ lives, then you would have to constantly obtain information on where he lives, and update the article if he moves. Please see Wikipedia Manual of Style, Dates & Numbers, under ‘Statements likely to become outdated’. MOS:CURRENT. I have no objection to your change from ‘As at’ to ‘As of’ but as far as I am aware, these are alternatives which are equally acceptable, so I don’t understand your reference to copy editing. Perhaps this is a matter of WP:ENGVAR Regards. Sweet6970 (talk) 18:08, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Sweet6970. Thank you for the message. I'm okay with it as it is. Personally I would prefer no "as of 2021," "as at 2021," or "currently" in that sentence. It is not a short-term residency, as far as I know. Usually we do not flag residences as such. They are not something you expect to have to update every year. That's my understanding. Regarding "as at," that is usually used when it is followed by a phrase requiring the preposition "at," such as, "He described the stock market as at an inflection point." You can see this fits all the examples on the first page of Google. I don't know of any English-speaking locale where it is the norm for years, such as, "As at 2021, Robinson lives in New Orleans." Perhaps that is the case in Nigeria, where I found one example. Does that make sense? Regardless, I am happy with the current version if you are. Jmill1806 (talk) 11:54, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. When I go to the Google link, I get these as the first 2 results: [1] [2] These are both British, (as I am) and both use ‘as at’ in the way I would. If you are in the USA, I doubt that Google would offer you the Uckfield News, which is an obscure publication even in England. So it looks like we are working in different internet environments.

Since I started editing Wikipedia I have discovered that there are subtle differences in English usage which don’t get mentioned in the usual sidewalk/pavement type lists. For instance, if I came across ‘He described the stock market as at an inflection point.’ my instinct would be to “correct” it to ‘He described the stock market as being at an inflection point.’ So I’m glad that we can at least agree that we both accept the current wording on Nathan J. Robinson. Regards Sweet6970 (talk) 13:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

'Inclusion eligibility criteria' for lists and sublists

@Jmill1806

(a) Can members of a project establish inclusion criteria (inclusion eligibility criterion) for their project? (b) I would think that inclusion in the Vegetarian and Vegan Project WikiProject could possibly be a checklist, where (i) current practice of vegan or vegetarian diet or (ii) past long well-known practice of vegan or vegetarian diet (e.g. Paul Obis, who returned to vegetarian diet, maybe vegan, after a tragically well-publicized deviation), or (iii) advocacy of vegan or vegetarian diet (but no observation of personal practice of plant-based diet (e.g. Pythagoras, whom no one living today could observe, and we may not have surviving written record of 'credible testimony' in any of his followers). Another possible eligibility criterion might be (iv) creator or producer of conditions or products that are foundational to the expansion of practice of plant-based diets (e.g. whoever invented soymilk may have paved the way for vegan diets, whether or not the ancient Chinese were total vegetarians - though Buddhist monastics likely were). MaynardClark (talk) 17:06, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

This all looks good to me! Are you referencing a current debate about this somewhere on Wikipedia? Or just the debates like WP:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_vegetarians_(4th_nomination)? I am happy to help out as my schedule allows. Jmill1806 (talk) 13:56, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Jeopardy!/Mike Richards

Please stop removing information about the details regarding the recent news on both articles. The information you keep removing is literally what is said in the source itself- continuing to remove said information and claiming that he is the only leading candidate is original research at this point, especially when the source literally says, "A source close to the situation cautioned that there’s no certainty that the sides will close a deal and that other candidates remain in the mix..." Continuing to remove this information is the exact opposite of 'sticking to the facts' (as you've used yourself here).

You also keep saying in your edit summaries to go discuss on the talk page- I have already, you haven't. Please see both Talk:Jeopardy!#Infobox and guest hosts and Talk:Mike Richards (television personality)#Permanent host on Jeopardy before you revert the information again. Thank you. Magitroopa (talk) 18:10, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Magitroopa. Thank you for your contributions to these pages. I don't think this qualifies as WP:OR because we are just repeating what the WP:RS said. There is no inference occurring. Fortunately, I think this debate will be resolved soon as news comes out, so I don't think we need to worry about perfecting the wording in the meantime. I appreciate your time. Jmill1806 (talk) 13:54, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

"Fortunately, I think this debate will be resolved soon as news comes out..." Might be quite soon. :P Magitroopa (talk) 15:57, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm a psychic, apparently! I will try to expand the page in the coming weeks when I find time. Thanks for your hard work on the page during this hectic time. Jmill1806 (talk) 18:40, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jeff Sebo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BA. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, DPL bot. It was indeed an error. Jmill1806 (talk) 11:02, 2 October 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) 00:58, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Invitation to support the creation of WikiProject Effective altruism

Hello, I've created a proposal for WikiProject Effective altruism to help coordinate efforts to create and articles related to effective altruism. I saw that you made significant improvements to the articles Wild animal suffering and The Good Food Institute, so I thought you might be interested. If you'd like, please support the WikiProject proposal here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Effective Altruism. Enervation (talk) 06:44, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello Enervation! Thank you for thinking of me. I have signed up and made a couple small edits. This is a really interesting topic, so I will try to contribute more in the coming months. Please inform me if anything is a particular priority. Jmill1806 (talk) 02:42, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for joining and for creating the page The Alignment Problem! Among the items on the to-do list, I think it would be most helpful to improve the page Information hazard with information from "Information Hazards in Biotechnology" (2018) and to remove examples that involve inappropriate synthesis. The Doing Good Better section of the William MacAskill article could be improved as well, as I don't think it summarizes the main points of the book. —Enervation (talk) 23:31, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

DYK for The Alignment Problem

On 26 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Alignment Problem, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The Alignment Problem, a book discussing existential risk from AI, was one of five "books that inspired Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella" in 2021? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Alignment Problem. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Alignment Problem), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:03, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on Josh Balk

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Josh Balk, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:23, 12 February 2024 (UTC)