User talk:SlimVirgin/June 2017

Orphaned non-free image File:BeastandMan1.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BeastandMan1.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:12, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).

Administrator changes

Doug Bell • Dennis Brown • Clpo13 • ONUnicorn

ThaddeusB • Yandman • Bjarki S • OldakQuill • Shyam • Jondel • Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

An RfC proposing an off-wiki LTA database has been closed. The proposal was broadly supported, with further discussion required regarding what to do with the existing LTA database and defining access requirements. Such a tool/database formed part of the Community health initiative's successful grant proposal.
Some clarifications have been made to the community banning and unblocking policies that effectively sync them with current practice. Specifically, the community has reached a consensus that when blocking a user at WP:AN or WP:ANI, it is considered a "community sanction", and administrators cannot unblock unilaterally if the user has not successfully appealed the sanction to the community.
An RfC regarding the bot policy has closed with changes to the section describing restrictions on cosmetic changes.

Technical news

Users will soon be able to blacklist specific users from sending them notifications.

Miscellaneous

Following the 2017 elections, the new members of the Board of Trustees include Raystorm, Pundit and Doc James. They will serve three-year terms.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Sherwood

Template:Sherwood 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?)} 03:53, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

TenPoundHammer, I would normally delete this myself, but I see others have edited it. If there are no objections and you need someone to delete it, give me a shout. SarahSV ^(talk) 05:19, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing: Agree

I totally agree, clean up first and foremost. I am going to handle it in 3 steps 1) eliminate certain sources and replace with something that is easier to verify 2) rework the book sources and 3) tackle foreign language web sources. I am not afraid of roll up my sleeves and yes I agree on holding off on new nominations or wikicup work, MPJ-DK 23:06, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk to keep the discussion in one place. SarahSV ^(talk) 23:19, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:40, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SV, I'm hoping to hear your response to my last ping before the section break or my e-mail before opening the ARCA to get clarification on the scope of the DS. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 03:18, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ARCA

You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Clarification request: GamerGate and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks, ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 03:55, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A note of thanks

As you will have guessed, I reached philoSOPHIA after seeing (and being appalled by) the aggression at WP:AN. It was merely for my own interest, however, that I looked at the article. I now see that my technical correction was to an earlier (erroneous) change of referencing style so your thanking me was very forbearing!

A week or so back I rather carefully read Hypatia transracialism controversy. I had known nothing about the issue at all and it set me thinking a lot. Why do we react so strongly (and in many cases differently) to transitions in gender and race? The article is fascinating. It is of course greatly to your credit that, after reading it, I was left having no idea of what your opinion is on the matter. I'm very glad you have been able to write articles on difficult topics like this over the years and I hope you continue to do so. Very best wishes. Thincat (talk) 09:38, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thincat, thanks very much for the kind words. Much appreciated. All the best, SarahSV ^(talk) 05:23, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Hey Sarah, sending some wikilove your way just because I think you are awesome. I was pretty dismayed to see that in 2017, we still tolerate vulgar slang on public noticeboards -Dispute over philoSOPHIA article- but you carry yourself with style and grace through all of it. Thanks for being you.

Rosiestep (talk) 20:13, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rosiestep, I really appreciate this. Thank you. SarahSV ^(talk) 05:24, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your change to the WP:BLP policy

SlimVirgin, on January 17 2017 you changed "must be explicitly attributed to a reliable, published source, which is usually done with an inline citation" to "must be supported by an inline citation to a reliable, published source". Was this discussed? I didn't see it on the talk page in that period. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 14:45, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:54, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for arbitration clarification! - When do you think would be a good time for Ezra Pound to appear as TFA? His next birthday? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:13, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

help people

Thank you for quality articles such as Ezra Pound, Female genital mutilation and Night, performed in collaboration, for defense against self-promotion, for clarifying and amending, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:43, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this, Gerda. Re: your note above about Pound as TFA, it would be better to check with Ceoil and Victoriaearle as the main authors. SarahSV ^(talk) 05:26, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gerda, I'm hesitant to move on this; its a very contentious article on a very difficult, complex man. It would likely draw a wide variety of opinion, and require careful meditation, re-examination of deeply (during the FAC) examined sources, further research and refutation of recent writings, and a few weeks clean up afterwards. It took us (Victoria, Sarah, and myself) a long, long time to get to the current broad, stable, overview of mainstream academic literature. Victoria is retired for health reasons; the last thing I want is for her to unretire to argue on a TFA. My own time on wiki is also limited, so very focused, ahem, on 15th c art. Maybe in the future Gerda, not now. Very sweet of you to think though. Ceoil (talk) 02:49, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Understand, well said. Cheers to all involved, and many thanks for the enormous joint venture! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:54, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Prodblp-request

Template:Prodblp-request 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?)} 04:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:RomanichildrenAuschwitz.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:RomanichildrenAuschwitz.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The issue we talked about

I am still waiting for you to look into it. I understand you are busy (can see it in your contribs), but at the same time writing a simple 'let's be friends' letter in the spirit of WP:TEA, WikiLove and such shouldn't take more than few minutes, right? Cheers, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:07, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am sad that you never found the time to get back to me :( --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:53, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I just saw this. I've had limited time recently. As it was about sourcing, I'd prefer to discuss it on the RSN, rather than here. I have that page watchlisted, so I'll look out for it. SarahSV ^(talk) 23:16, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

In the general spirit of WikiLove, because your continued effort should not go unappreciated. Cheers,

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:08, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes - Issue 22

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 22, April-May 2017

New and expanded research accounts
Global branches update
Spotlight: OCLC Partnership
Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you commented on

This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you commented on (2 RfCs, actually, one less than six months ago and another a year ago). The new RfC is at:

Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Allow private schools to be characterized as non-affiliated as well as religious, in infobox?

Specifically, it asks that "religion = none" be allowed in the infobox.

The first RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:

15 June 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.

The result of that RfC was "unambiguously in favour of omitting the parameter altogether for 'none' " and despite the RfC title, additionally found that "There's no obvious reason why this would not apply to historical or fictional characters, institutions etc.", and that nonreligions listed in the religion entry should be removed when found "in any article".

The second RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:

31 December 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion in infoboxes.

The result of that RfC was that the "in all Wikipedia articles, without exception, nonreligions should not be listed in the Religion= parameter of the infobox.".

Note: I am informing everyone who commented on the above RfCs, whether they supported or opposed the final consensus. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:23, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]