User talk:Tr3ndyBEAR
Hello, Tr3ndyBEAR, and welcome to Wikipedia! | |
 Introduction 5 The five pillars of Wikipedia |
 How to write a great article |
| If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or get instant online help at IRC. You can also place | |
Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:44, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Pannonian mixed forests
[edit]
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Pannonian mixed forests requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.worldwildlife.org/ecoregions/pa0431. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. S Philbrick(Talk) 12:06, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
Text as requested
[edit]| Pannonian mixed forests |
|---|
The Pannonian mixed forests ecoregion (WWF ID: PA0431) constitutes 307,716 km2 over the countries of Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Ukraine, and Croatia. It is an ecoregion within the Palearctic ecozone and is of the temperate broadleaf and mixed forests biome as defined by WWF. The ecoregion is based on the complex of vegetation in the Pannonian basin. This complex includes subcontinental thermophilous (mixed) pedunculate oak and sessile oak forests, sub-Mediterranean subcontinental thermophilous bitter oak forests, as well as mixed forests, mixed oak-hornbeam forests, sub-Mediterranean-subcontinental lowland to montane herb-grass steppes, and azonal floodplain vegetation.[1]
Flora
[edit]Fauna
[edit]See also
[edit]References
[edit]Disambiguation link notification for March 15
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Regents of the University of California, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Cohen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 13:38, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 3
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Monoamine oxidase inhibitor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Harman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:22, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
May 2020
[edit]
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Wrightia tinctoria, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Use WP:SCIRS sources for botany and taxonomy, and WP:MEDRS sources for medical content. Ayurvedic nonsense has no place in a fact-based encyclopedia. Zefr (talk) 16:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Afrocarpus gracilior, you may be blocked from editing. Read WP:MEDRS and find high-quality reviews from reputable publications before adding medical content. Zefr (talk) 16:42, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Your edits
[edit]You said the following on my talk page (discuss here on your page):
Hi, you recently undid some major contributions I made to Afrocarpus gracilior and Wrightia tinctoria without any discussion. First of all, let's talk about Afrocarpus gracilior.
Ethnobotanical uses are an important source of information, and it is understood that there is a separation between ethnobotanical medicinal uses vs western medical uses. You removed the statement:
Which is an ethnobotanical claim, not a medical one. It is a fact that the Marakwet use it this way. I see absolutely no reason to remove the claim. Perhaps you had issue with the sentence, "Additionally, a dry powder of the bark can be used to treat eye ailments." What I intended to say is that it can be used in that way by Marakwet not that it's been proven in Western science to have those uses. The other change you removed was:
I also don't see any issue with this statement either. If you don't like the source, I can point out others, but it is a fact that paclitaxel was isolated from its bark and a simple visit to its own wiki page shows plenty of supporting evidence for its anti-cancer properties (it's a fucking patented drug!). The anti-tumor properties of Podolactone D was also investigated by this paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12608867 which is from the highly regarded journal Journal of Natural Products which has an impact factor of 4.257
Neither of these changes were warranted or justified. I've modified the text and restored the contents (added sources, change woreding, etc). If you would like to actually discuss any perceived issues, please discuss it here, but if you continue to make unjustified changes with no explanation, I would like to report this behavior and discuss with some higher administration/mods. I find papers by looking through for the most highly cited literature on plants using tools like Scopus, Microsoft Academic, and Publish or Peril. Many times, these journals can be less know, but I always try to make sure they are the most cited and highest regarded literature on the given papers.
Your revisions to Nepetalactone were also completely unwarrented. All I did was look up papers that managed to extract the chemicals from other plant sources and listed some of those plant species. It's useful information, because most people regard the chemical as being unique to catnip, but it has also been extracted from other plants. I have no idea why you would remove that information (because you didn't even attempt to leave any information in the talk page!)
The edits to Zanthoxylum schinifolium were completely well cited from very reputable journals. Something tells me you didn't even bother to check that though. The more I dig into your revisions, the more I feel your behavior is bordering on bullying. I put a lot of effort and research into finding those papers. I combed through Scopus, Microsoft Academic, Google Scholar, and Publish or Perish to find the most cited literature and made sure it was from reputable journals. This is honestly really aggravating so i need to take a break from going through the rest of your edits, but I think I'm going to ask for administrator attention for this
Responses
[edit]It is not enough to use any published source. An editor has to assess source quality, as my edit summaries indicated. For botany, use WP:SCIRS reviews. For medical content, do not cite alternative medicine sources or non-WP:MEDRS references. The encyclopedia requires high-quality scientific sources to support its science content. Zefr (talk) 19:07, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, all of the sources are in compliance with the manuals you cited. It is you who is failing to verify that this is true. Please do so. Spend the time and look through the sources as I did... Tr3ndyBEAR (talk) 19:20, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- You said: This is ridiculous. I actually spent the time to look through the most cited literature and made sure all the sources were from reliable, peer-reviewed journals. You're letting some strange bias you have guide you. I spent hours verifying their credibility, you judged it after 1 minute and yet have the gall to point me to the manual of style... Please verify them yourself before deleting them — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tr3ndyBEAR (talk • contribs) 19:23, 11 May 2020 (UTC) There's a difference between ethnobotany and medical claims. If information is clearly presenting it as ethnobotanical usage, there is absolute no reason to delete it as an "unsourced medical claim" Tr3ndyBEAR (talk) 19:27, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- These are not WP:MEDRS reviews, but are publications from low-quality journals. This is not encyclopedic content, particularly for medical science topics. Zefr (talk) 19:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- Not medical science topics. Many of the sources you deleted were about ethnobotanical uses. This is completely different. Saying "these people were known to use this plant for this reason" is not the same as saying "this plant cures cancer". I don't understand how you could mix the two. There is no justification for removing such information
- Also, see: [1] for an example of ethnobotanical reviews of plants from a highly respected journal.
- Ethnobotany is based on traditional medicine, unscientific practices, and speculation. It is not a useful encyclopedic source to support statements on disease. A critical review is needed - that where a WP:MEDREV source comes into use. If you can't find one, leave it out. Zefr (talk) 19:49, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- This is just a straight up racist comment.Tr3ndyBEAR (talk) 20:06, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- I'm sorry you can't see the value in understanding the ways indigenous peoples have utilzied the plants around them. That's no reason to delete the information though. Like I said, this is not about medical claims. This is about ethnobotanical uses. There's a clear difference, and dismissing them as bs is narrow-minded at best, and racist at its roots. Furthermore, many of the other stuff you deleted was basically, "this chemical was found in this plant" with a clear, high-quality source that that compound was indeed extracted in that plant. Why would you delete that? That's also not a medical claim. That's a phytochemistry claim. I don't understand what makes you think you can interpret everything as a medical claim. It's insane
- WP:PRIMARY - leads to uncertainties and disputes. That's why we rely on WP:SCIRS reviews and WP:MEDRS for anything related to treating diseases. Read WP:WHYMEDRS. Zefr (talk) 20:26, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- what exactly is it that leads you to uncertainty? Maybe I could make it even more clear for you? Tr3ndyBEAR (talk) 20:32, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- WP:PRIMARY - leads to uncertainties and disputes. That's why we rely on WP:SCIRS reviews and WP:MEDRS for anything related to treating diseases. Read WP:WHYMEDRS. Zefr (talk) 20:26, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- Ethnobotany is based on traditional medicine, unscientific practices, and speculation. It is not a useful encyclopedic source to support statements on disease. A critical review is needed - that where a WP:MEDREV source comes into use. If you can't find one, leave it out. Zefr (talk) 19:49, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- These are not WP:MEDRS reviews, but are publications from low-quality journals. This is not encyclopedic content, particularly for medical science topics. Zefr (talk) 19:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- You said: This is ridiculous. I actually spent the time to look through the most cited literature and made sure all the sources were from reliable, peer-reviewed journals. You're letting some strange bias you have guide you. I spent hours verifying their credibility, you judged it after 1 minute and yet have the gall to point me to the manual of style... Please verify them yourself before deleting them — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tr3ndyBEAR (talk • contribs) 19:23, 11 May 2020 (UTC) There's a difference between ethnobotany and medical claims. If information is clearly presenting it as ethnobotanical usage, there is absolute no reason to delete it as an "unsourced medical claim" Tr3ndyBEAR (talk) 19:27, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Wrightia tinctoria
[edit]On the topic of Wrightia tinctoria. First of all, I wasn't even the person who added information about its use in Ayurvedic traditions. Second of all, it is one of the 50 fundamental herbs of Chinese traditional medicine. Outside of that culture, there is very little interaction with the plant. It is insane for an encyclopedia to not include that information when it's the primary fact about the plant. It is primarily known for its roles in that medicine system.Tr3ndyBEAR (talk) 21:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- Additionally, I did a lot more than add sources about scientific trials and evidence for its properties. I also added information about its taxonomy, cleaned up things throughout the page, and did a lot more. you undid all of that work. I spent all day working on it and reading through sources, and you spent a minute to delete it all without bothering to do any of your own research or even have the decency to post about it in the talk page. Tr3ndyBEAR (talk) 21:03, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- Additionally, the main source used WAS a review A review on phytochemical, pharmacological, and pharmacognostical profile of Wrightia tinctoria: Adulterant of kurchi. Please take at least a second before judging based on zero research whether or not something is "nonsense". Also, you can't call a culture's medical system "nonsense". Ethnopharmcology is NOT the same thing as western essential oil pyramid schemes. Do some research on that as well. If you look at any pharmacology journal, you'll see they borrow a lot from traditional knowledge of plant uses. In fact, over 90% of our medicines ultimately are derived from ethnopharmacology (everything from adderall (Ephedra) to aspirin (willow bark)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tr3ndyBEAR (talk • contribs) 21:07, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- Pharmacognosy Reviews is a dubious journal listed among Medknow Pub., #4 on WP:CITEWATCH. See the disclaimer - we don't use these journals here, and Pharmacognosy Rev is not listed on Medline, meaning it does not have a sufficient record or reputation to be catalogued. Again, it's a matter of choosing high-quality reviews from reputable sources for Wikipedia content. That was not done for this article or the others you edited. You may have a sincere interest in these topics, but your choice of sources has not been to scientific standards the encyclopedia uses.
- I've responded enough on this matter. Please don't make further comments on my talk page or infer anything about my motives other than trying to make Wikipedia better. See WP:NPA. Zefr (talk) 22:25, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
May 2020
[edit] Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Nepetalactone, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Zefr (talk) 19:11, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Edits to Tulbaghia violacea
[edit]Hi, any claims of medical efficacy must be sourced to the standards of WP:MEDRS. You can report, with a reliable secondary source, that a plant or its extracts are used in traditional medicine. Any claim that they are efficacious requires sources such as "review articles (especially systematic reviews) published in reputable medical journals". We don't report preliminary or in vitro studies; this is an encyclopedia, not a news source. Please review WP:MEDRS carefully. Peter coxhead (talk) 05:55, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Hey, you're talking to the wrong user. I'm not the one who added any of the stuff you removed. The only edits I made to (one of) those sentences were formatting the citations. Also the source I used was a review article from a reputable journal, but I did not make any medical claims Tr3ndyBEAR (talk) 13:50, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Whoops, apologies. The bit you added was indeed fine. I removed some stuff from Tulbaghia violacea#Medicinal uses, a section you had edited, but as you rightly say, I left the bit you actually added. My fault entirely. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:28, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello Tr3ndyBEAR,
Thanks for your work! I agree that according to Plants of the World Online, both Solanum glaucescens and Solanum glaucophyllum are accepted species.[1][2] If you're interested in writing the S. glaucescens article, all that's necessary is for you to overwrite the redirect. Gderrin (talk) 23:21, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
References
- ^ "Solanum glaucescens Zucc". Plants of the World Online. Retrieved 24 February 2021.
- ^ "Solanum glaucophyllum Desf". Plants of the World Online. Retrieved 24 February 2021.
- Hey, thanks so much for the response. I just created the page of a related species (Solanum pachyandrum) and had a wikilink to that plant. I don't know if I'll get around to making the page for that species as well any time soon (unless I make a simple, bare-bones version of it), but it's good to hear it's a simple fix. What's the usual taxonomic authority for plant pages? I usually rely on Catalogue of Life which seems to use Plants of the World Online for most of it's plant taxonomy, but I noticed PlantList is also very commonly cited despite being dead. Is there any agreed upon taxonomic authority for Wikipedia:WikiProject Plants pages? Tr3ndyBEAR (talk) 23:43, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
- This page (under "Appropriate citations") is a good start, although a bit out-of-date I think. POWO is excellent. Most of the articles I write are about Australian Plants, so I generally use the Australian Plant Census. I have a message from WCSP that "TPL is outdated and should no longer be used. All updated data are on WCSP or POWO." Gderrin (talk) 06:59, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 22
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pteleopsis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Terminalia.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
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 |
The Signpost: 29 November 2021
[edit]- In the media: Denial: climate change, mass killings and pornography
- WikiCup report: The WikiCup 2021
- Deletion report: What we lost, what we gained
- From a Wikipedia reader: What's Matt Amodio?
- Arbitration report: ArbCom in 2021
- Discussion report: On the brink of change – RFA reforms appear imminent
- Technology report: What does it take to upload a file?
- WikiProject report: Interview with contributors to WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers
- Recent research: Vandalizing Wikipedia as rational behavior
- Humour: A very new very Wiki crossword
The Signpost: 28 December 2021
[edit]- From the editor: Here is the news
- News and notes: Jimbo's NFT, new arbs, fixing RfA, and financial statements
- Serendipity: Born three months before her brother?
- In the media: The past is not even past
- Arbitration report: A new crew for '22
- By the numbers: Four billion words and a few numbers
- Deletion report: We laughed, we cried, we closed as "no consensus"
- Gallery: Wikicommons presents: 2021
- Traffic report: Spider-Man, football and the departed
- Crossword: Another Wiki crossword for one and all
- Humour: Buying Wikipedia
The Signpost: 30 January 2022
[edit]- Special report: WikiEd course leads to Twitter harassment
- News and notes: Feedback for Board of Trustees election
- Interview: CEO Maryana Iskander "four weeks in"
- Black History Month: What are you doing for Black History Month?
- WikiProject report: The Forgotten Featured
- Arbitration report: New arbitrators look at new case and antediluvian sanctions
- Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2021
- Obituary: Twofingered Typist
- Essay: The prime directive
- In the media: Fuzzy-headed government editing
- Recent research: Articles with higher quality ratings have fewer "knowledge gaps"
- Crossword: Cross swords with a crossword
The Signpost: 27 February 2022
[edit]- From the team: Selection of a new Signpost Editor-in-Chief
- News and notes: Impacts of Russian invasion of Ukraine
- Special report: A presidential candidate's team takes on Wikipedia
- In the media: Wiki-drama in the UK House of Commons
- Technology report: Community Wishlist Survey results
- WikiProject report: 10 years of tea
- Featured content: Featured Content returns
- Deletion report: The 10 most SHOCKING deletion discussions of February
- Recent research: How editors and readers may be emotionally affected by disasters and terrorist attacks
- Arbitration report: Parties remonstrate, arbs contemplate, skeptics coordinate
- Gallery: The vintage exhibit
- Traffic report: Euphoria, Pamela Anderson, lies and Netflix
- News from Diff: The Wikimania 2022 Core Organizing Team
- Crossword: A Crossword, featuring Featured Articles
- Humour: Notability of mailboxes
The Signpost: 27 March 2022
[edit]- From the Signpost team: How The Signpost is documenting the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine
- News and notes: Of safety and anonymity
- Eyewitness Wikimedian, Kharkiv, Ukraine: Countering Russian aggression with a camera
- Eyewitness Wikimedian, Vinnytsia, Ukraine: War diary
- Eyewitness Wikimedian, Western Ukraine: Working with Wikipedia helps
- Disinformation report: The oligarchs' socks
- In the media: Ukraine, Russia, and even some other stuff
- Wikimedian perspective: My heroes from Russia, Ukraine & beyond
- Discussion report: Athletes are less notable now
- Technology report: 2022 Wikimedia Hackathon
- Arbitration report: Skeptics given heavenly judgement, whirlwind of Discord drama begins to spin for tropical cyclone editors
- Traffic report: War, what is it good for?
- Deletion report: Ukraine, werewolves, Ukraine, YouTube pundits, and Ukraine
- From the archives: Burn, baby burn
- Essay: Yes, the sky is blue
- Tips and tricks: Become a keyboard ninja
- On the bright side: The bright side of news
The Signpost: 24 April 2022
[edit]- News and notes: Double trouble
- In the media: The battlegrounds outside and inside Wikipedia
- Special report: Ukrainian Wikimedians during the war
- Eyewitness Wikimedian, Vinnytsia, Ukraine: War diary (Part 2)
- Technology report: 8-year-old attribution issues in Media Viewer
- Featured content: Wikipedia's best content from March
- Interview: On a war and a map
- Serendipity: Wikipedia loves photographs, but hates photographers
- Traffic report: Justice Jackson, the Smiths, and an invasion
- News from the WMF: How Smart is the SMART Copyright Act?
- Humour: Really huge message boxes
- From the archives: Wales resigned WMF board chair in 2006 reorganization
The Signpost: 29 May 2022
[edit]- From the team: A changing of the guard
- News and notes: 2022 Wikimedia Board elections
- Community view: Have your say in the 2022 Wikimedia Foundation Board elections
- In the media: Putin, Jimbo, Musk and more
- Special report: Three stories of Ukrainian Wikimedians during the war
- Discussion report: Portals, April Fools, admin activity requirements and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject COVID-19 revisited
- Technology report: A new video player for Wikimedia wikis
- Featured content: Featured content of April
- Interview: Wikipedia's pride
- Serendipity: Those thieving image farms
- Recent research: 35 million Twitter links analysed
- Tips and tricks: The reference desks of Wikipedia
- Traffic report: Strange highs and strange lows
- News from Diff: Winners of the Human rights and Environment special nomination by Wiki Loves Earth announced
- News from the WMF: The EU Digital Services Act: What’s the Deal with the Deal?
- From the archives: The Onion and Wikipedia
- Humour: A new crossword
The Signpost: 26 June 2022
[edit]- News and notes: WMF inks new rules on government-ordered takedowns, blasts Russian feds' censor demands, spends big bucks
- In the media: Editor given three-year sentence, big RfA makes news, Guy Standing takes it sitting down
- Special report: "Wikipedia's independence" or "Wikimedia's pile of dosh"?
- Featured content: Articles on Scots' clash, Yank's tux, Austrian's action flick deemed brilliant prose
- Recent research: Wikipedia versus academia (again), tables' "immortality" probed
- Serendipity: Was she really a Swiss lesbian automobile racer?
- News from the WMF: Wikimedia Enterprise signs first deals
- Gallery: Celebration of summer, winter
The Signpost: 1 August 2022
[edit]- From the editors: Rise of the machines, or something
- News and notes: Information considered harmful
- In the media: Censorship, medieval hoaxes, "pathetic supervillains", FB-WMF AI TL bid, dirty duchess deeds done dirt cheap
- Op-Ed: The "recession" affair
- Eyewitness Wikimedian, Vinnytsia, Ukraine: War diary (part 3)
- Community view: Youth culture and notability
- Opinion: Criminals among us
- Arbitration report: Winds of change blow for cyclone editors, deletion dustup draws toward denouement
- Deletion report: This is Gonzo Country
- Discussion report: Notability for train stations, notices for mobile editors, noticeboards for the rest of us
- Featured content: A little list with surprisingly few lists
- Tips and tricks: Cleaning up awful citations with Citation bot
- On the bright side: Ukrainian Wikimedians during the war — three (more) stories
- Essay: How to research an image
- Recent research: A century of rulemaking on Wikipedia analyzed
- Serendipity: Don't cite Wikipedia
- Gallery: A backstage pass
- From the archives: 2012 Russian Wikipedia shutdown as it happened
The Signpost: 31 August 2022
[edit]- News and notes: Admins wanted on English Wikipedia, IP editors not wanted on Farsi Wiki, donations wanted everywhere
- Special report: Wikimania 2022: no show, no show up?
- In the media: Truth or consequences? A tough month for truth
- Discussion report: Boarding the Trustees
- News from Wiki Education: 18 years a Wikipedian: what it means to me
- In focus: Thinking inside the box
- Tips and tricks: The unexpected rabbit hole of typo fixing in citations...
- Technology report: Vector (2022) deployment discussions happening now
- Serendipity: Two photos of every library on earth
- Featured content: Our man drills are safe for work, but our Labia is Fausta.
- Recent research: The dollar value of "official" external links
- Traffic report: What dreams (and heavily trafficked articles) may come
- Essay: Delete the junk!
- Humour: CommonsComix No. 1
- From the archives: 5, 10, and 15 years ago
The Signpost: 30 September 2022
[edit]- News and notes: Board vote results, bot's big GET, crat chat gives new mop, WMF seeks "sound logo" and "organizer lab"
- In the media: A few complaints and mild disagreements
- Special report: Decentralized Fundraising, Centralized Distribution
- Discussion report: Much ado about Fox News
- Traffic report: Kings and queens and VIPs
- Featured content: Farm-fresh content
- CommonsComix: CommonsComix 2: Paulus Moreelse
- From the archives: 5, 10, and 15 Years ago: September 2022
The Signpost: 31 October 2022
[edit]- From the team: A new goose on the roost
- News from the WMF: Governance updates from, and for, the Wikimedia Endowment
- Disinformation report: From Russia with WikiLove
- Featured content: Topics, lists, submarines and Gurl.com
- Serendipity: We all make mistakes – don’t we?
- Traffic report: Mama, they're in love with a criminal
The Signpost: 28 November 2022
[edit]- News and notes: English Wikipedia editors: "We don't need no stinking banners"
- In the media: "The most beautiful story on the Internet"
- Disinformation report: Missed and Dissed
- Book review: Writing the Revolution
- Technology report: Galactic dreams, encyclopedic reality
- Essay: The Six Million FP Man
- Tips and tricks: (Wiki)break stuff
- Recent research: Study deems COVID-19 editors smart and cool, questions of clarity and utility for WMF's proposed "Knowledge Integrity Risk Observatory"
- Featured content: A great month for featured articles
- Obituary: A tribute to Michael Gäbler
- From the archives: Five, ten, and fifteen years ago
- CommonsComix: Joker's trick
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) 01:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
The Signpost: 1 January 2023
[edit]- Interview: ComplexRational's RfA debrief
- Technology report: Wikimedia Foundation's Abstract Wikipedia project "at substantial risk of failure"
- Essay: Mobile editing
- Arbitration report: Arbitration Committee Election 2022
- Recent research: Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement in talk page disputes
- Featured content: Would you like to swing on a star?
- Traffic report: Football, football, football! Wikipedia Football Club!
- CommonsComix: #4: The Course of WikiEmpire
- From the archives: Five, ten, and fifteen years ago
The Signpost: 16 January 2023
[edit]- Special report: Coverage of 2022 bans reveals editors serving long sentences in Saudi Arabia since 2020
- News and notes: Revised Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines up for vote, WMF counsel departs, generative models under discussion
- In the media: Court orders user data in libel case, Saudi Wikipedia in the crosshairs, Larry Sanger at it again
- Technology report: View it! A new tool for image discovery
- In focus: Busting into Grand Central
- Serendipity: How I bought part of Wikipedia – for less than $100
- Featured content: Flip your lid
- Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2022
- From the archives: Five, ten, and fifteen years ago
The Signpost: 4 February 2023
[edit]- From the editor: New for the Signpost: Author pages, tag pages, and a decent article search function
- News and notes: Foundation update on fundraising, new page patrol, Tides, and Wikipedia blocked in Pakistan
- Disinformation report: Wikipedia on Santos
- Op-Ed: Estonian businessman and political donor brings lawsuit against head of national Wikimedia chapter
- Recent research: Wikipedia's "moderate yet systematic" liberal citation bias
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Organized Labour
- Tips and tricks: XTools: Data analytics for your list of created articles
- Featured content: 20,000 Featureds under the Sea
- Traffic report: Films, deaths and ChatGPT
The Signpost: 20 February 2023
[edit]- In the media: Arbitrators open case after article alleges Wikipedia "intentionally distorts" Holocaust coverage
- Disinformation report: The "largest con in corporate history"?
- Tips and tricks: All about writing at DYK
- Featured content: Eden, lost.
- Gallery: Love is in the air
- From the archives: 5, 10, and 15 years ago: Let's (not) delete the Main Page!
- Humour: The RfA Candidate's Song
The Signpost: 9 March 2023
[edit]- News and notes: What's going on with the Wikimedia Endowment?
- Technology report: Second flight of the Soviet space bears: Testing ChatGPT's accuracy
- In the media: What should Wikipedia do? Publish Russian propaganda? Be less woke? Cover the Holocaust in Poland differently?
- Featured content: In which over two-thirds of the featured articles section needs to be copied over to WikiProject Military History's newsletter
- Recent research: "Wikipedia's Intentional Distortion of the Holocaust" in Poland and "self-focus bias" in coverage of global events
- From the archives: Five, ten, and fifteen years ago
The Signpost: 20 March 2023
[edit]- News and notes: Wikimania submissions deadline looms, Russian government after our lucky charms, AI woes nix CNET from RS slate
- Eyewitness: Three more stories from Ukrainian Wikimedians
- In the media: Paid editing, plagiarism payouts, proponents of a ploy, and people peeved at perceived preferences
- Featured content: Way too many featured articles
- Interview: 228/2/1: the inside scoop on Aoidh's RfA
- Traffic report: Who died? Who won? Who lost?
The Signpost: 03 April 2023
[edit]- From the editor: Some long-overdue retractions
- News and notes: Sounding out, a universal code of conduct, and dealing with AI
- Arbitration report: "World War II and the history of Jews in Poland" case is ongoing
- Featured content: Hail, poetry! Thou heav'n-born maid
- Recent research: Language bias: Wikipedia captures at least the "silhouette of the elephant", unlike ChatGPT
- From the archives: April Fools' through the ages
- Disinformation report: Sus socks support suits, seems systemic
The Signpost: 26 April 2023
[edit]- News and notes: Staff departures at Wikimedia Foundation, Jimbo hands in the bits, and graphs' zeppelin burns
- In the media: Contested truth claims in Wikipedia
- Obituary: Remembering David "DGG" Goodman
- Arbitration report: Holocaust in Poland, Jimbo in the hot seat, and a desysopping
- Special report: Signpost statistics between years 2005 and 2022
- News from the WMF: Collective planning with the Wikimedia Foundation
- Featured content: In which we described the featured articles in rhyme again
- From the archives: April Fools' through the ages, part two
- Humour: The law of hats
- Traffic report: Long live machine, the future supreme
The Signpost: 8 May 2023
[edit]- News and notes: New legal "deVLOPments" in the EU
- In the media: Vivek's smelly socks, online safety, and politics
- Recent research: Gender, race and notability in deletion discussions
- Featured content: I wrote a poem for each article, I found rhymes for all the lists; My first featured picture of this year now finally exists!
- Arbitration report: "World War II and the history of Jews in Poland" approaches conclusion
- News from the WMF: Planning together with the Wikimedia Foundation
The Signpost: 22 May 2023
[edit]- In the media: History, propaganda and censorship
- Arbitration report: Final decision in "World War II and the history of Jews in Poland"
- Featured content: A very musical week for featured articles
- Traffic report: Coronation, chatbot, celebs
The Signpost: 5 June 2023
[edit]- News and notes: WMRU director forks new 'pedia, birds flap in top '22 piccy, WMF weighs in on Indian gov's map axe plea
- Featured content: Poetry under pressure
- Traffic report: Celebs, controversies and a chatbot in the public eye
The Signpost: 19 June 2023
[edit]- News and notes: WMF Terms of Use now in force, new Creative Commons licensing
- Featured content: Content, featured
- Recent research: Hoaxers prefer currently-popular topics
The Signpost: 3 July 2023
[edit]- Disinformation report: Imploded submersible outfit foiled trying to sing own praises on Wikipedia
- Featured content: Incensed
- Traffic report: Are you afraid of spiders? Arnold? The Idol? ChatGPT?
The Signpost: 17 July 2023
[edit]- In the media: Tentacles of Emirates plot attempt to ensnare Wikipedia
- Tips and tricks: What automation can do for you (and your WikiProject)
- Featured content: Scrollin', scrollin', scrollin', keep those readers scrollin', got to keep on scrollin', Rawhide!
- Traffic report: The Idol becomes the Master
The Signpost: 1 August 2023
[edit]- News and notes: City officials attempt to doxx Wikipedians, Ruwiki founder banned, WMF launches Mastodon server
- In the media: Truth, AI, bull from politicians, and climate change
- Disinformation report: Hot climate, hot hit, hot money, hot news hot off the presses!
- Tips and tricks: Citation tools for dummies!
- In focus: Journals cited by Wikipedia
- Opinion: Are global bans the last step?
- Featured content: Featured Content, 1 to 15 July
- Traffic report: Come on Oppie, let's go party
The Signpost: 15 August 2023
[edit]- News and notes: Dude, Where's My Donations? Wikimedia Foundation announces another million in grants for non-Wikimedia-related projects
- Tips and tricks: How to find images for your articles, check their copyright, upload them, and restore them
- Cobwebs: Getting serious about writing
- Serendipity: Why I stopped taking photographs almost altogether
- Featured content: Barbenheimer confirmed
- Traffic report: 'Cause today it just goes with the fashion
The Signpost: 31 August 2023
[edit]- From the editor: Beta version of signpost.news now online
- News and notes: You like RecentChanges?
- In the media: Taking it sleazy
- Recent research: The five barriers that impede "stitching" collaboration between Commons and Wikipedia
- Draftspace: Bad Jokes and Other Draftspace Novelties
- Humour: The Dehumourification Plan
- Traffic report: Raise your drinking glass, here's to yesterday
The Signpost: 16 September 2023
[edit]- In the media: "Just flirting", going Dutch and Shapps for the defence?
- Obituary: Nosebagbear
- Featured content: Catching up
- Traffic report: Some of it's magic, some of it's tragic
The Signpost: 3 October 2023
[edit]- News and notes: Wikimedia Endowment financial statement published
- Recent research: Readers prefer ChatGPT over Wikipedia; concerns about limiting "anyone can edit" principle "may be overstated"
- Featured content: By your logic,
- Poetry: "The Sight"
The Signpost: 23 October 2023
[edit]- News and notes: Where have all the administrators gone?
- In the media: Thirst traps, the fastest loading sites on the web, and the original collaborative writing
- Gallery: Before and After: Why you don't need to know how to restore images to make massive improvements
- Featured content: Yo, ho! Blow the man down!
- Traffic report: The calm and the storm
- News from Diff: Sawtpedia: Giving a Voice to Wikipedia Using QR Codes
The Signpost: 6 November 2023
[edit]- Arbitration report: Admin bewilderingly unmasks self as sockpuppet of other admin who was extremely banned in 2015
- In the media: UK shadow chancellor accused of ripping off WP articles for book, Wikipedians accused of being dicks by a rich man
- Opinion: An open letter to Elon Musk
- WikiCup report: The WikiCup 2023
- News from Wiki Ed: Equity lists on Wikipedia
- Recent research: How English Wikipedia drove out fringe editors over two decades
- Featured content: Like putting a golf course in a historic site.
- Traffic report: Cricket jumpscare
The Signpost: 20 November 2023
[edit]- In the media: Propaganda and photos, lunatics and a lunar backup
- News and notes: Update on Wikimedia's financial health
- Traffic report: If it bleeds, it leads
- Recent research: Canceling disputes as the real function of ArbCom
- Wikimania: Wikimania 2024 scholarships
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) 00:52, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 4 December 2023
[edit]- In the media: Turmoil on Hebrew Wikipedia, grave dancing, Olga's impact and inspiring Bhutanese nuns
- Disinformation report: "Wikipedia and the assault on history"
- Comix: Bold comics for a new age
- Essay: I am going to die
- Featured content: Real gangsters move in silence
- Traffic report: And it's hard to watch some cricket, in the cold November Rain
- Humour: Mandy Rice-Davies Applies
The Signpost: 24 December 2023
[edit]- Special report: Did the Chinese Communist Party send astroturfers to sabotage a hacktivist's Wikipedia article?
- News and notes: The Italian Public Domain wars continue, Wikimedia RU set to dissolve, and a recap of WLM 2023
- In the media: Consider the humble fork
- Discussion report: Arabic Wikipedia blackout; Wikimedians discuss SpongeBob, copyrights, and AI
- In focus: Liquidation of Wikimedia RU
- Technology report: Dark mode is coming
- Recent research: "LLMs Know More, Hallucinate Less" with Wikidata
- Gallery: A feast of holidays and carols
- Comix: Lollus lmaois 200C tincture
- Crossword: when the crossword is sus
- Traffic report: What's the big deal? I'm an animal!
- From the editor: A piccy iz worth OVAR 9000!!!11oneone! wordz ^_^
- Humour: Guess the joke contest
The Signpost: 10 January 2024
[edit]- From the editor: NINETEEN MORE YEARS! NINETEEN MORE YEARS!
- Special report: Public Domain Day 2024
- Technology report: Wikipedia: A Multigenerational Pursuit
- News and notes: In other news ... see ya in court!
- WikiProject report: WikiProjects Israel and Palestine
- Obituary: Anthony Bradbury
- Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2023
- Comix: Conflict resolution
The Signpost: 31 January 2024
[edit]- News and notes: Wikipedian Osama Khalid celebrated his 30th birthday in jail
- Opinion: Until it happens to you
- Disinformation report: How paid editors squeeze you dry
- Recent research: Croatian takeover was enabled by "lack of bureaucratic openness and rules constraining [admins]"
- Traffic report: DJ, gonna burn this goddamn house right down
The Signpost: 13 February 2024
[edit]- News and notes: Wikimedia Russia director declared "foreign agent" by Russian gov; EU prepares to pile on the papers
- Disinformation report: How low can the scammers go?
- Serendipity: Is this guy the same as the one who was a Nazi?
- Traffic report: Griselda, Nikki, Carl, Jannik and two types of football
- Crossword: Our crossword to bear
- Comix: Strongly
The Signpost: 2 March 2024
[edit]- News and notes: Wikimedia enters US Supreme court hearings as "the dolphin inadvertently caught in the net"
- Recent research: Images on Wikipedia "amplify gender bias"
- In the media: The Scottish Parliament gets involved, a wikirace on live TV, and the Foundation's CTO goes on record
- Obituary: Vami_IV
- Traffic report: Supervalentinefilmbowlday
- WikiCup report: High-scoring WikiCup first round comes to a close
The Signpost: 29 March 2024
[edit]- Technology report: Millions of readers still seeing broken pages as "temporary" disabling of graph extension nears its second year
- Recent research: "Newcomer Homepage" feature mostly fails to boost new editors
- Traffic report: He rules over everything, on the land called planet Dune
- Humour: Letters from the editors
- Comix: Layout issue
The Signpost: 25 April 2024
[edit]- In the media: Censorship and wikiwashing looming over RuWiki, edit wars over San Francisco politics, and another wikirace on live TV
- News and notes: A sigh of relief for open access as Italy makes a slight U-turn on their cultural heritage reproduction law
- WikiConference report: WikiConference North America 2023 in Toronto recap
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Newspapers (Not WP:NOTNEWS)
- Recent research: New survey of over 100,000 Wikipedia users
- Traffic report: O.J., cricket and a three body problem
The Signpost: 16 May 2024
[edit]- News and notes: Democracy in action: multiple elections
- Special report: Will the new RfA reform come to the rescue of administrators?
- Arbitration report: Ruined temples for posterity to ponder over – arbitration from '22 to '24
- Comix: Generations
- Traffic report: Crawl out through the fallout, baby
Introduction to contentious topics
[edit]
You have recently edited a page related to genetically modified organisms, commercially produced agricultural chemicals and the companies that produce them, broadly construed, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Additionally you are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
--Tryptofish (talk) 22:21, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
The Signpost: 8 June 2024
[edit]- Technology report: New Page Patrol receives a much-needed software upgrade
- Deletion report: The lore of Kalloor
- In the media: National cable networks get in on the action arguing about what the first sentence of a Wikipedia article ought to say
- News from the WMF: Progress on the plan — how the Wikimedia Foundation advanced on its Annual Plan goals during the first half of fiscal year 2023-2024
- Recent research: ChatGPT did not kill Wikipedia, but might have reduced its growth
- Featured content: We didn't start the wiki
- Essay: No queerphobia
- Special report: RetractionBot is back to life!
- Traffic report: Chimps, Eurovision, and the return of the Baby Reindeer
- Comix: The Wikipediholic Family
- Concept: Palimpsestuous
The Signpost: 4 July 2024
[edit]- News and notes: WMF board elections and fundraising updates
- Special report: Wikimedia Movement Charter ratification vote underway, new Council may surpass power of Board
- In focus: How the Russian Wikipedia keeps it clean despite having just a couple dozen administrators
- Discussion report: Wikipedians are hung up on the meaning of Madonna
- In the media: War and information in war and politics
- Sister projects: On editing Wikisource
- Opinion: Etika: a Pop Culture Champion
- Gallery: Spokane Willy's photos
- Humour: A joke
- Recent research: Is Wikipedia Politically Biased? Perhaps
- Traffic report: Talking about you and me, and the games people play
The Signpost: 22 July 2024
[edit]- Discussion report: Internet users flock to Wikipedia to debate its image policy over Trump raised-fist photo
- News and notes: Wikimedia community votes to ratify Movement Charter; Wikimedia Foundation opposes ratification
- Obituary: JamesR
- Crossword: Vaguely bird-shaped crossword
The Signpost: 14 August 2024
[edit]- In the media: Portland pol profile paid for from public purse
- In focus: Twitter marks the spot
- News and notes: Another Wikimania has concluded.
- Special report: Nano or just nothing: Will nano go nuclear?
- Opinion: HouseBlaster's RfA debriefing
- Traffic report: Ball games, movies, elections, but nothing really weird
- Humour: I'm proud to be a template
The Signpost: 4 September 2024
[edit]- News and notes: WikiCup enters final round, MCDC wraps up activities, 17-year-old hoax article unmasked
- In the media: AI is not playing games anymore. Is Wikipedia ready?
- News from the WMF: Meet the 12 candidates running in the WMF Board of Trustees election
- Wikimania: A month after Wikimania 2024
- Serendipity: What it's like to be Wikimedian of the Year
- Traffic report: After the gold rush
The Signpost: 26 September 2024
[edit]- In the media: Courts order Wikipedia to give up names of editors, legal strain anticipated from "online safety laws"
- Community view: Indian courts order Wikipedia to take down name of crime victim, editors strive towards consensus
- Serendipity: A Wikipedian at the 2024 Paralympics
- Opinion: asilvering's RfA debriefing
- News and notes: Are you ready for admin elections?
- Recent research: Article-writing AI is less "prone to reasoning errors (or hallucinations)" than human Wikipedia editors
- Traffic report: Jump in the line, rock your body in time
The Signpost: 19 October 2024
[edit]- News and notes: One election's end, another election's beginning
- Recent research: "As many as 5%" of new English Wikipedia articles "contain significant AI-generated content", says paper
- In the media: Off to the races! Wikipedia wins!
- Contest: A WikiCup for the Global South
- Traffic report: A scream breaks the still of the night
- Book review: The Editors
- Humour: The Newspaper Editors
- Crossword: Spilled Coffee Mug
The Signpost: 6 November 2024
[edit]- From the editors: Editing Wikipedia should not be a crime
- In the media: An old scrimmage, politics and purported libel
- Special report: Wikipedia editors face litigation, censorship
- Traffic report: Twisted tricks or tempting treats?
The Signpost: 18 November 2024
[edit]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) 00:38, 19 November 2024 (UTC)