User talk:Kevin McE/Archives/2017
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Kevin McE. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The Signpost: 17 January 2017
- From the editor: Next steps for the Signpost
- News and notes: Surge in RFA promotions—a sign of lasting change?
- In the media: Year-end roundups, Wikipedia's 16th birthday, and more
- Featured content: One year ends, and another begins
- Arbitration report: Concluding 2016 and covering 2017's first two cases
- Traffic report: Out with the old, in with the new
- Technology report: Tech present, past, and future
The Signpost: 6 February 2017
- Arbitration report: WMF Legal and ArbCom weigh in on tension between disclosure requirements and user privacy
- WikiProject report: For the birds!
- Technology report: Better PDFs, backup plans, and birthday wishes
- Traffic report: Cool It Now
- Featured content: Three weeks dominated by articles
Re: UAD
Long time no speak, Kevin. Hope all is well with you. In regards to the suffixes; as far as I am aware, the issue with the {{cyclingteamlist}} template created by Sander.v.Ginkel in March 2015 appears to be the inability for suffixes to be used. I know BaldBoris and Severo (shall ping for further words) had voiced their concerns on teamlist talkpage, but I don't think anything had resulted further from this. The suffixes in the ct templates predate my involvement in such templating, but I do see from the Cannondale ct page history when it was created in 2009 by Theilert, there was no blank line. Only "a" and "b". I think it may have been deemed duplication especially with the active current name at the top of the ct; that's how I have always interpreted since I've started updating such templates. Craig(talk) 21:57, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Cs-wolves: Fine thanks, but probably better for spending less time on Wiki.
- I was halfway through putting a message on the Cycling Project talkpage about the problem of cyclingteamlist when I realised you had solved it. Maybe we should move the discussion there to widen it.
- I would consider duplication to be a very minor drawback, compared to the expectation that every editor using the UAD template for the rest of the year remember the short lived Abu Dhabi name. Kevin McE (talk) 22:23, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
- Good to hear. I must admit, I have been trying to wean my way off here, but the Wikidata debate fuelled a lot of fire to me, so I have been picking it up again ever so slightly. Who knows what may occur in the coming months though - but as you say, it may be for the best for spending less time on here.
- It had only came to my light, with the ongoing review in Sander's articles - mainly stub creations, that are undergoing a community review, that several members of the Cycling project have been looking into. While looking through the archives for the above discussion, I have noted previous discussions about the cyclingteamlist template, and also the suffixes here between September 2015 and January 2016 and also here in July 2016. Craig(talk) 22:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 February 2017
- From the editors: Results from our poll on subscription and delivery, and a new RSS feed
- Recent research: Special issue: Wikipedia in education
- Technology report: Responsive content on desktop; Offline content in Android app
- In the media: The Daily Mail does not run Wikipedia
- Gallery: A Met montage
- Special report: Peer review – a history and call for reviewers
- Op-ed: Wikipedia has cancer
- Featured content: The dominance of articles continues
- Traffic report: Love, football, and politics
Disambiguation link notification for March 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ion Izagirre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Castillian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:54, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Precious five years!
Five years! |
---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:01, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Advice
Got a warning I'll be banned for putting the fact that Rob Young was determined by the report to have tried to hide his data and was proven to have cheated. How the hell do you get the actual report linked without this fella banning Woodywing (talk) 15:47, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
- Woodywing, I have a name. Again I'm telling you to read the policy at WP:BLP since you don't seem to get it yet. I told you, at Talk:Robert_Young_(endurance_runner), that it's the tone of your edit. Mind you, that policy applies throughout Wikipedia: on talk pages too. Drmies (talk) 20:12, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
- Drmies (he has a name, apparently, but hides behind a pseudonym here) seems to have serious wp:own issues (he is willing to admit that the biography might not be true, but not to let me remove it, and is defensive of what he himself describes as "the Worst Stub In History"), and very little experience of the subject. He seems to believe that Wikipedia serves its readers by appearing naive. Kevin McE (talk) 06:27, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Kevin McE, I have tried to explain to you how important a policy the BLP is, but it seems to have made little impression on you. Please see the arbitration request I filed against you. Thank you, and I wish it didn't have to come to this. Drmies (talk) 02:28, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Don't bother to respond to this as I won't see it for a couple of weeks. I've ummed and ahed about weighing in on the AE report but decided not to because I won't be able to respond further. However, I want to give you some advice. Going to the BLPN noticeboard to make gross BLP violations ("serial liar") is not a clever way of making yourself popular, either there or at AE. Quite a bit of what you wrote there appears to me to be trying to insinuate that Drmies is another in a line of socks on the Robert Young article; whether that's what you intended or not, it's how it read to me. Drmies is one of our more active admins (I started looking through his logs to see how long he's been an admin, but got bored when a few thousand admin actions only got me to the start of the year), not a sock trying to recreate a crap article. Treating him as though he is such is, again, not a clever way to make friends at AE. Your comments on the article talk seem to be almost willfully misunderstanding WP:RS. As the "anonymous admin" who initially thought you maybe kinda had a point and pestered Drmies about it, I came into this dispute thinking Drmies had got the wrong end of the stick and asked him to reconsider and drop things at AE. But you're fast losing my support here. In fact, if it'd been me that saw your comments at BLPN today, I'd have just blocked you for it.
So here's my advice: Tone it down. Work civilly and collegially with other editors to improve the encyclopaedia. Don't make gross BLP violations on talk pages or in edit summaries. Make a statement at AE that commits to working with other editors and tries to conciliate and resolve the conflict rather than exacerbate it.
As with all my advice so freely given, you're absolutely free to ignore it. I am in the happy position that this is almost certainly my last edit before a break of a week and a bit so whatever you decide to do, it will not be my problem. However, if you ignore it, I will not be answerable for the consequences. Please accept that it is advice given in a spirit of good will and with the intention of helping you to avoid sanctions at AE and the Robert Young article to come to a satisfactory state. GoldenRing (talk) 18:35, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- He made some pretty reprehensible accusations against me: that set the tone. I have absolutely no intention of suggesting that Drmies is another in that series of sockpuppets, nor am I sure how anything I said looked as if I was saying that. It is simply unfortunate the Drmies seems determined to ignore what we can learn about someone from them. Kevin McE (talk) 19:08, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- The request for Arbitration enforcement has been closed. Please read the advice given in the Result section. In particular, if you make more edit summaries such as "What a proven liar tells a journalist is not necessarily true" you are risking a block under our WP:BLP policy. You are on safer ground if you stop editing this article, though you can still contribute on the talk page. It is possible that someone will nominate the article Robert Young (endurance runner) for deletion, which would reduce the risk of BLP problems. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 02:38, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 9 June 2017
- From the editors: Signpost status: On reserve power, help wanted!
- News and notes: Global Elections
- Arbitration report: Cases closed in the Pacific and with Magioladitis
- Featured content: Three months in the land of the featured
- In the media: Did Wikipedia just assume Garfield's gender?
- Recent research: Wikipedia bot wars capture the imagination of the popular press
- Technology report: Tech news catch-up
- Traffic report: Film on Top: Sampling the weekly top 10
Nomination for deletion of Template:Flag usage advice
Template:Flag usage advice has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:22, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 23 June 2017
- News and notes: Departments reorganized at Wikimedia Foundation, and a month without new RfAs (so far)
- In the media: Kalanick's nipples; Episode #138 of Drama on the Hill
- Op-ed: Facto Post: a fresh take
- Featured content: Will there ever be a break? The slew of featured content continues
- Traffic report: Wonder Woman beats Batman, The Mummy, Darth Vader and the Earth
- Technology report: Improved search, and WMF data scientist tells all
The Signpost: 15 July 2017
- News and notes: French chapter woes, new affiliates and more WMF team changes
- Featured content: Spectacular animals, Pine Trees screens, and more
- In the media: Concern about access and fairness, Foundation expenditures, and relationship to real-world politics and commerce
- Recent research: The chilling effect of surveillance on Wikipedia readers
- Gallery: A mix of patterns
- Humour: The Infobox Game
- Traffic report: Film, television and Internet phenomena reign with some room left over for America's birthday
- Technology report: New features in development; more breaking changes for scripts
- Wikicup: 2017 WikiCup round 3 wrap-up
The Signpost: 5 August 2017
- Recent research: Wikipedia can increase local tourism by +9%; predicting article quality with deep learning; recent behavior predicts quality
- WikiProject report: Comic relief
- In the media: Wikipedia used to judge death penalty, arms smuggling, Indonesian governance, and HOTTEST celebrity
- Traffic report: Swedish countess tops the list
- Featured content: Everywhere in the lead
- Technology report: Introducing TechCom
- Humour: WWASOHs and ETCSSs
Summaries
I resent your calling my summaries amateur. I worked media for the IAAF for the better part of two decades. This is not COI, I am not working for them now, but I know what I'm doing. Trackinfo (talk) 19:21, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- In terms of writing in an encyclopaedic tone, I really don't think that you do. If you have been paid for journalism, I apologise for calling it amateur (although technically, if you are not being paid for writing on Wikipedia...), but this is not the place for such prose and cliché. A journalistic style is not appropriate in an encyclopaedia. Kevin McE (talk) 19:30, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- In your zeal to remove the color from my prose, you are removing a great deal of information--actual content as well as making mistakes. You too need a great deal of coaching in your writing style. Trackinfo (talk) 20:29, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- This is not the place for detailed sports reports: that is not the function of an encyclopaedia, so much of the detail you wnt to include is redundant to the purposes of this publication. If you want to submit something to Bleacher reports or similar, that is a more suitable destination for your wish to give detailed reports on an event. Kevin McE (talk) 21:31, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- In your zeal to remove the color from my prose, you are removing a great deal of information--actual content as well as making mistakes. You too need a great deal of coaching in your writing style. Trackinfo (talk) 20:29, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 6 September 2017
- From the editors: What happened at Wikimania?
- News and notes: Basselpedia; WMF Board of Trustees appointments
- Featured content: Warfighters and their tools or trees and butterflies
- Traffic report: A fortnight of conflicts
- Special report: Biomedical content, and some thoughts on its future
- Recent research: Discussion summarization; Twitter bots tracking government edits; extracting trivia from Wikipedia
- WikiProject report: WikiProject YouTube
- Technology report: Latest tech news
- Wikicup: 2017 WikiCup round 4 wrap-up
- Humour: Bots
The Signpost: 25 September 2017
- News and notes: Chapter updates; ACTRIAL
- Humour: Chickenz
- Recent research: Wikipedia articles vs. concepts; Wikipedia usage in Europe
- Technology report: Flow restarted; Wikidata connection notifications
- Gallery: Chicken mania
- Traffic report: Fights and frights
- Featured content: Flying high
Disambiguation link notification for October 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gallagher Stadium, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page M20 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:54, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 23 October 2017
- News and notes: Money! WMF fundraising, Wikimedia strategy, WMF new office!
- Featured content: Don, Marcel, Emily, Jessica and other notables
- Humour: Guys named Ralph
- In the media: Facebook and poetry
- Special report: Working with GLAMs in the UK
- Traffic report: Death, disaster, and entertainment
List of Presidents of the Generalitat de Catalunya
Obviously, we have to agree that we disagree when it comes to the color issue. You are saying they are "unkeyed", and asking for a "key" to be provided in order to reinstate the colors. Please be more specific, what do you mean by "key"? I am afraid that I don't understand you. --Sundostund (talk) 02:07, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
- I think it wouldn't harm you if you show some more politeness in your behavior and responses. I didn't engage in an edit war with you - after just a few edits, I started a discussion with you on your talk page in order to solve this issue. I don't find edit war OK in any situation, and it is quite strange that you think its OK to engage in edit warring after some sort of "education over the terms of the disagreement", according to your response on my talk page.
- Anyway, it would be more productive to solve the issue in question. If I understood you correctly, you want some sort of explanation/guide regarding the colors, and with it you would accept to have the colors reinstated as part of the article, right? No problem - please be more specific about what kind of explanation/guide you want, and I would be happy to add it to the article, and to reinstate the colors afterwards. --Sundostund (talk) 15:34, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
- eg, from your own recent contribution history, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deputy_Prime_Minister_of_Croatia#List_of_Deputy_Prime_Ministers Kevin McE (talk) 12:48, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- So, if I add the "Parties" key, as it exist in the Croatian article (or in some similar way), you will accept the restoration of colors in the Catalan article? If your answer is yes, I can only say - wonderful! There would be absolutely no problem to do that. I just want your confirmation of this. --Sundostund (talk) 16:01, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- Of course. There is no objection to the use of colours if they mean something, and that meaning is made clear to the reader. Otherwise it is just pointless decoration. It is all in the MoS. Kevin McE (talk) 16:10, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- I added the key you wanted, and I hope you like it. If you want some changes to it, I'm sure it will be possible to do that. --Sundostund (talk) 17:42, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 24 November 2017
- News and notes: Cons, cons, cons
- Arbitration report: Administrator desysoped; How to deal with crosswiki issues; Mister Wiki case likely
- Technology report: Searching and surveying
- Interview: A featured article centurion
- WikiProject report: Recommendations for WikiProjects
- In the media: Open knowledge platform as a media institution
- Traffic report: Strange and inappropriate
- Featured content: We will remember them
- Recent research: Who wrote this? New dataset on the provenance of Wikipedia text
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Kevin McE. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 18 December 2017
- Special report: Women in Red World Contest wrap-up
- Featured content: Featured content to finish 2017
- In the media: Stolen seagulls, public domain primates and more
- Arbitration report: Last case of 2017: Mister Wiki editors
- Gallery: Wiki loving
- Recent research: French medical articles have "high rate of veracity"
- Technology report: Your wish lists and more Wikimedia tech
- Traffic report: Notable heroes and bad guys
Spancil Hill
If the song isn't about the Gold Rush, then that speculation should be removed from the lede paragraph. Cheers. --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 23:18, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Season's Greetings
Share these holiday wishes by adding {{subst:User:Shearonink/Holiday}}~~~~ to your friends' talk pages.