Jump to content

User talk:Vanamonde93/Archive 51

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 45←Archive 49Archive 50Archive 51Archive 52Archive 53Archive 54

Nicknames in invered commas?

Hi Vanamonde93. I see that you put in a lot of work on the Miriam Makeba article – and are possibly (co)-responsible for its featured article status – so I have a feeling that you will be able to settle this query. At Louis Armstrong, the nicknames are in inverted commas. whereas here Mama Africa is not. Any idea which one is correct? Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 09:27, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

I default to doing what the sources do, unless that creates POV issues from outdated sources. I don't want to make general pronouncements; I'm not a MOS-expert. Perhaps you could ask at WT:MOS? Vanamonde (Talk) 15:59, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Balanescu 4tet

Thank you so much for sorting that out! I was worried that I was going to explode with outrage, which could have been messy. Cheers 82.34.153.236 (talk) 19:10, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

No problem, happy to help. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:19, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

A bit of help needed

Hi, Vanamonde93, we have a bit of a situation at Talk:Time in J. R. R. Tolkien's fiction. Rather than try to explain it here, which would seem like trying to get you on my side, I'd be glad if you could take a look at the article and talk page, and see if we can find a resolution? Obviously I'll answer any questions you may have. Many thanks, Chiswick Chap (talk) 05:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Women in Green GA Editathon October 2023 - Around the World in 31 Days

Hello Vanamonde93:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2023!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2023, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Around the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 countries (or broader international articles) by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Alanna the Brave (talk) 00:53, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

You are receiving this message as a member of the WikiProject Women in Green. You can remove yourself from receiving notifications here.

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diplomacy
[While I don't necessarily fully endorse all of your views,] I appreciate your effort in trying to resolve the edit war at Talk:2016 Indian Line of Control strike. Thank you, Wrythemann (talk) 20:37, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, appreciated. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:57, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Otto Reich

Hello Vanamonde93 I try to add new data to Otto Reich's entry, but I see how constant they are reverted, if I even finish the edition. Not even verified information such as his date of birth is accepted. Can you help or advise me on how I should publish this data? Sincerely Jmh58 (talk) 05:22, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Jmh58, welcome to Wikipedia. Any content included in an article needs to be cited to reliable sources, including dates of birth. If you are modifying content that is already supported by good sources, you need to demonstrate why the sources you are using are better, or why your text represents them better. In the case of Otto Reich, it's quite possible you will be able to find a source for the date of birth, but rather unlikely that any high-quality source will contradict the existing text about his role in the OPD or his lobbying activity. Vanamonde (Talk) 05:34, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Deletion review for Princess Anna of Saxony (1903–1976)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Princess Anna of Saxony (1903–1976). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 62.181.221.7 (talk) 08:48, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Note to self, as the notification is badly formatted; DRV closed procedurally, as OP blocked for socking; all opinions were to endorse. Vanamonde (Talk) 05:41, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Recognition of same-sex unions in India on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:31, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

FA Review?

Hi. I've submitted Fleetwood Park Racetrack as my first FAC, and the nomination seems to be stalled. Could I interest you in doing a review? RoySmith (talk) 16:43, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Looks interesting! But it's far outside my wheelhouse and I've made a few other on-wiki commitments that I should get to first, so I can't promise anything...if I find time I'll look in. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:06, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 October 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:32, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open regarding amending the paid-contribution disclosure policy to add the following text: Any administrator soliciting clients for paid Wikipedia-related consulting or advising services not covered by other paid-contribution rules must disclose all clients on their userpage.

Technical news

  • Administrators can now choose to add the user's user page to their watchlist when changing the usergroups for a user. This works both via Special:UserRights and via the API. (T272294)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:41, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Ygm

Hello, Vanamonde93. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 00:56, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Speaker of the United States House of Representatives on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:31, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kfar Aza massacre on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 October 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:02, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Deletion review for SSSniperWolf

An editor has asked for a deletion review of SSSniperWolf. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 11:05, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Day Before the Revolution

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Day Before the Revolution you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Grnrchst -- Grnrchst (talk) 14:21, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Re this edit; the problem is that the bulk of the site is generated once a quarter from an underlying database, and the generated URLS are constructed with sequential page numbers. That means that when material is added to the database, the next regeneration will slide all the contents down from a URL with an embedded sequence of, say, 970, to 971 or higher. Because of this I always add an archive link when citing Galactic Central and put a status of "dead" in for the main URL, even though it's live at the time I cite it, because otherwise someone may come along and put in "live" since it appears to be live.

Phil Stephensen-Payne, who runs the site, has set up a way to do persistent links; see here. The only time I tried this it didn't work, but it would be a better option. If you try it and it works for you, let me know. And yes, access to old reviews is going to be very helpful; I'm looking forward to seeing what other articles can make use of them. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:26, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know! I'm certainly not immune to errors, but it would be strange of me to cite an entirely irrelevant database page...your solution seems to be a good one, but I think this means I have to go through all the pages I've used it on and fix broken links. Oh well. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:58, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Day Before the Revolution

The article The Day Before the Revolution you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Day Before the Revolution for comments about the article, and Talk:The Day Before the Revolution/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Grnrchst -- Grnrchst (talk) 18:22, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

ANI

I think your close was rather poor considering I wasn’t asking for sanctions or claiming complete innocence, but requesting an interaction ban. I know I haven’t been particularly nice interacting with Schrocat but they just called me stupid three times in a row. What am I supposed to do? I can’t just avoid them since we edit in and strongly disagree on the same topic area. Dronebogus (talk) 20:22, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Dronebogus: If you want uninvolved users to implement an IBAN, you need to let them weigh in, not prolong the interaction you say you find distasteful. If it's just going to be you and SchroCat going at each other, the thread isn't serving any purpose. Will you commit to not engaging in back-and-forth there? Regardless of provocation, real or otherwise? Vanamonde (Talk) 21:01, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
I can commit to it. I’m busy finding things somewhere else so I don’t really care. Dronebogus (talk) 21:02, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
I can’t just avoid them since we edit in and strongly disagree on the same topic area. How would the requested interaction ban work? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:26, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
They simply don’t discuss me or respond to my comments and vice versa. Dronebogus (talk) 21:33, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
The easy path is just to ignore their comments and don't respond to them, then. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:48, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
What SFR said; also, note that an IBAN would require you not to undo in whole or in part the edits made by the other, meaning that if you're in the same area you would need to check the history of a lot of the content you edit. Do you really want that? Vanamonde (Talk) 21:49, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
I’m currently attempting to engage in a civil discussion with them about something. We’ll just call it resolved for now. Dronebogus (talk) 22:57, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

October 2023 NPP backlog drive – Points award

The Reviewer Barnstar
This award is given to Vanamonde93 for collecting more than 50 points during the October 2023 NPP backlog drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to the drive! Hey man im josh (talk) 01:57, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Luminist

Were you aware of this resource? A friend just told me about it. It doesn't have everything, but it has a lot -- a complete run of Galaxy for example. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:21, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Mike Christie: Sorry, I missed this thanks to the back-and-forth below...I wasn't aware of it, but it looks very useful, thank you! Vanamonde (Talk) 15:33, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Al-Shifa Hospital on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

WikiCup 2023 November newsletter

The WikiCup is a marathon rather than a sprint and all those reaching the final round have been involved in the competition for the last ten months, improving Wikipedia vastly during the process. After all this hard work, Delaware BeanieFan11 has emerged as the 2023 winner and the WikiCup Champion. The finalists this year were:-

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the competition, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.

  • Unlimitedlead wins the featured article prize, for 7 FAs in total including 3 in round 2.
  • MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured list prize, for 5 FLs in total.
  • England Lee Vilenski wins the featured topic prize, for a 6-article featured topic in round 4.
  • MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured picture prize, for 6 FPs in total.
  • Delaware BeanieFan11 wins the good article prize, for 75 GAs in total, including 61 in the final round.
  • New York (state) Epicgenius wins the good topic prize, for a 41-article good topic in the final round.
  • Berkelland LunaEatsTuna wins the GA reviewer prize, for 70 GA reviews in round 1.
  • MyCatIsAChonk wins the FA reviewer prize, for 66 FA reviews in the final round.
  • New York (state) Epicgenius wins the DYK prize, for 49 did you know articles in total.
  • Ukraine Muboshgu wins the ITN prize, for 46 in the news articles in total.

The WikiCup has run every year since 2007. With the 2023 contest now concluded, I will be standing down as a judge due to real life commitments, so I hope that another editor will take over running the competition. Please get in touch if you are interested. Next year's competition will hopefully begin on 1 January 2024. You are invited to sign up to participate in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors. It only remains to congratulate our worthy winners once again and thank all participants for their involvement! (If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.) Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 November 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:45, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

A question

Hello, colleague. I don’t know who I can ask, so I’ll ask you. Perhaps you can tell me who I can contact.

I have a question. I've been told that Wikipedia can give editors access to protected academic journal articles. How can I access, for example, this article - https://brill.com/view/journals/ic/26/4/article-p407_7.xml?

I will be very grateful for your answer. With respect. Smpad (talk) 14:15, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi Smpad. Broadly speaking there's two ways; the first is to request access through The Wikipedia Library. They grant access to a wide variety of databases, including ones containing journal articles. Their minimum criteria for access are six months editing, 500 edits, and no active blocks; you don't quite meet those, but you're not too far. The second is to ask for access to a specific source through WP:RX. Happy editing, Vanamonde (Talk) 15:39, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Thank you very much, colleague. With respect. Smpad (talk) 15:55, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2023).

Administrator changes

added 0xDeadbeef
readded Tamzin
removed Dennis Brown

Interface administrator changes

added Pppery
removed

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves from 12 November 2023 until 21 November 2023 to stand in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections.
  • Xaosflux, RoySmith and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2023 Arbitration Committee Elections. BusterD is the reserve commissioner.
  • Following a motion, the contentious topic designation of Prem Rawat has been struck. Actions previously taken using this contentious topic designation are still in force.
  • Following several motions, multiple topic areas are no longer designated as a contentious topic. These contentious topic designations were from the Editor conduct in e-cigs articles, Liancourt Rocks, Longevity, Medicine, September 11 conspiracy theories, and Shakespeare authorship question cases.
  • Following a motion, remedies 3.1 (All related articles under 1RR whenever the dispute over naming is concerned), 6 (Stalemate resolution) and 30 (Administrative supervision) of the Macedonia 2 case have been rescinded.
  • Following a motion, remedy 6 (One-revert rule) of the The Troubles case has been amended.
  • An arbitration case named Industrial agriculture has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case close 8 November.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

ACE 2023

There are too few strong content contributors on ArbCom; give it a thought? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:00, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) What a good idea! Bishonen | tålk 21:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC).
You, too, 'zilla! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:08, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Very kind of you both to suggest it, but I simply don't have the time to be a good ARB...though I second the motion for Bish to run :) Vanamonde (Talk) 23:09, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Any other ideas ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:43, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
There's a few ex-ARBs who are also FAC regulars that I'd love to see run again: but besides that, I struggle to think of an editor who is active, content-oriented, writes FAs, has dispute resolution expertise, is an admin, and also hasn't been suggested already. Vanamonde (Talk) 00:17, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
":( Darn. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:32, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
There's actually a handful of content-oriented folks that'd be quite solid candidates in my estimation, but those that I communicate with either became admins recently or have yet to take that plunge, and in some cases have to be persuaded even to do that. And of course the fact that they'd be good at it doesn't mean they're willing. So perhaps the long-term picture isn't too bleak, but I don't have too much to offer right now. I would fully support a few names that have been tossed around at WT:FAC. Vanamonde (Talk) 03:54, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

I sure hope you don't think here that I was referring to you as nom on the SFR RFA, because they are mentioned in the same paras; I wasn't. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:18, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I did, in fact, assume that, because I can't think of another RfA you opposed as strenuously or in which you made reference to the noms in your oppose; but of course there's a lot of RFAs, and I appreciate you clarifying. That said, I stand by my comment. I think there's a world of difference between someone who has Wikipedia's best interests at heart but who is temperamentally unsuited for adminship (quite a lot of experienced editors fall into this category, only some of whom ever run at RFA, and fewer of whom succeed), and someone who made their very first edit with the intention of gaming the system. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:37, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
I'm sorry you thought that, as that must have been very uncomfortable ... and it's just dumb luck that caused me to read the comment and realize I had better double check that with you! I don't disagree with you re gaming the system; my agreement with Feyd was more along the lines that "the good guys" can still do more damage than those intentionally gaming the system. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:42, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Maybe I'll expand on that :) First, it doesn't happen as much anymore, particularly since the arbcom processing of bad apples goes faster these days, and there's more awarenes of admin boundaries, but it's hard to shake the decade-old scars of seeing how bad admins damaged good editors. Second, on a personal level, there's the admin cabal that outright went after me in 2007, because I disagreed with one of them on a WP:V policy matter, so they threatened me and concocted an arbcase to drag me through. Years later, one desysopped admin, and two community banned abusers-- but I went through hell. Third, there's the whole backstory to my block log. So, yea ... I jump when someone says bad admins can't do real damage. Going through an arbcase with two unstable individuals is not something that I've been able to forget. The block log -- meh -- did him more harm than me, but the 2008 arbcase left a scar. Fourth, I once had a medication mixup (actual pharmacy error), where I ended up accidentally with four times my synthroid dosage for three days, and was buzzing like crazy 'til I figured out why. During that time, I deleted something from an article, on BLP grounds, and later found the individual was dead (not a BLP). An admin revdel'd my deletion for no valid reason, claiming vandalism. And refused to apologize or acknowledge that the revdel accused me of vandalism, rather than an innocent mistake. I suppose I could come up with even more examples if I thought long enough, but I'd rather not think too hard on any more :). Feyd brought up a good point about expunging block logs, because I know an editor whose block log should be removed-- the admin literally hit the wrong button (misclick on the wrong editor), and labeled the subject a "raving nutter" in the block, and there that stands today, on a good editor, 17 years later. New editors come along and see that, and don't know it was a 100% admin mistake, for which the admin profusely apologized ... 'cuz you can't find that from the block log. So, yea, RFA stuff puts me in 'nother place. That's my story, and I'm sorry it could have seem aimed at you because of the proximity of commentary ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:54, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
I'm sorry you went through difficulties at the hands of now-banned admins; I don't know the circumstances, and can't comment on what may have prevented it. If the sort of temperament that would lead to such a situation is obvious at RFA, I don't object to it being flagged. But the rest of your experiences, problematic as they may be, really shouldn't impinge on how we scrutinize candidates at RFA. Bad blocks are common; many are made by very capable admins who had a lapse in judgement; many (most?) others are accidental; most are not reversed, like yours was, because they're short term. My own block log has two entries, one barely within discretion, one from a compromised account. It hasn't ever affected how people treat me. Editable block logs might be nice, but they're a technical matter that's far outside en.wiki's control. Unfair blocks are only occasionally the product of unsuitable admins; even Lourdes, a confirmed bad-faith actor, has yet to have a bread-and-butter block reversed, as far as I can tell, though a couple may yet be. Revdel is even less of an issue; it's entirely reversible, and I promise you nobody is going through all 6000 of your deleted edits looking for evidence of anything. TL;DR; I appreciate that you've had difficulties with various admins over the years, but the issues you describe are largely not ones that would be avoided even if we considerably raised the standards at RFA. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:57, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Well, I think I could summarize my "raising standards at RFA" to ... do what I do ... stop supporting candidates whose character you don't know inside and out. That, to me, is an awareness issue. I'll keep banging that drum :) Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:03, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

FAC Mentoring request

Hey, Sohom here, I'm planning to take Cross-site leaks (it's a niche security exploit) to FAC in the near future (early next year, RL willing 😃). I saw your name on the FA mentoring list and was wondering if you would be willing to provide some feedback on the article wrt to it's current state, and what I can/could improve on to get it to a FA status. (I'm pretty sure one of your suggestions will be to improve the prose quality and wrt to that, I have already requested a copyedit at WP:GOCE/R)Sohom (talk) 15:45, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 November 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:45, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Iranian Democracy Movement

Hello! You were the closing admin at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iranian Democracy Movement. I'm wondering if you would be able to provide a copy of it as a draft article? I think it's an interesting topic that deserves an article (perhaps as "Democracy movements in Iran" or some other variation rather than referring to it as one movement. Either way, I'd love to review what was deleted. Thmymerc (talk) 18:22, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

@Thmymerc: There is already a draftspace version at User:Jaredscribe/Iranian democracy movements, which you are free to make your own copy of so long as you provide the necessary attribution in your edit summaries, per WP:CWW. Please also not that the deletion was the result of original research and synthesis issues, and recreation that doesn't address that will run into the same problems. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:18, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. Yes, seems like an article that would need to be re-done from scratch essentially Thmymerc (talk) 08:57, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Narendra Modi

What is the basis for declaring that this edit contains original research? Every phrase is fully cited by credible news sources both domestic and international. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Narendra_Modi&oldid=prev&diff=1186851071 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mittgaurav (talk • contribs) 22:43, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

I have read all those sources multiple times; have you? You added the claim, in the lead, that "Modi administration's strong response to Pakistan-based Jihadist terrorist groups has gained widespread nationalist support", which is not supported by any of the cited sources. The source you added [1] certainly doesn't support it. Moreover, you need consensus to make such drastic changes to the lead of a major article, and the responsibility to obtain such a consensus via discussion is on you. Vanamonde (Talk) 23:54, 25 November 2023 (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) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

DYK for The Day Before the Revolution

On 30 November 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Day Before the Revolution, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ursula K. Le Guin's short story "The Day Before the Revolution", which won Nebula and Locus Awards in 1975, was praised for its depiction of a "revolutionary icon as a curmudgeonly old woman"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Day Before the Revolution. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Day Before the Revolution), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:02, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Vanamonde93. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 19:43, 1 December 2023 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Just wanted to make sure you'd seen! KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 19:43, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Kevin, I did see it but I've been kept off-wiki; I hope to fill it out later today. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:56, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Functionary candidates: December 2023 community consultation open

The Arbitration Committee has received applications for functionary permissions from several editors, consistent with its previous announcement that applications for CheckUser and/or Oversight permissions will be accepted at any point in the year. The following editors have applied for the CheckUser permission and have subsequently been reviewed and vetted by the functionary team, and the community is invited to comment on the associated consultation pages:

The community consultations will remain open through 11 December 2023.

For the Arbitration Committee, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 04:15, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Functionary candidates: December 2023 community consultation open

COVID-19 pandemic in India

COVID-19 pandemic in India What is the basis for saying that the citations are mis-represented? The sources claim "nearly 3 million" to "4.7 million" deaths and that's what written and that's cited as well? Would have loved for you to read the sources. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=COVID-19_pandemic_in_India&oldid=prev&diff=1186851562 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mittgaurav (talk • contribs) 22:51, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

As above, I've read the sources; have you? Yes, there's different estimates of Covid mortality, because those studies refer to different time periods, and use different methods; you added wording implying the estimates were unreliable because they're varied, which is not appropriate. I was also concerned that you hadn't actually read the sources, given that you attributed the publication of a Science paper to NPR. Also, as I said above, when your edits are challenged you need to reach consensus on the text via talk page discussion. Vanamonde (Talk) 23:54, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Ok so I typed the name of the site as attribution so the whole content is wrong? And different times that you are going on about are all post event and are estimating deaths that happened across the same period. Different researches did come up with different numbers. Did they not? I don't think you actually read the sources in the wake of misunderstanding of how different research methodologies gave different results. Mittgaurav (talk) 20:36, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
No, your edit was reverted because you did not accurately summarize the sources you used. Vanamonde (Talk) 02:54, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation

Hi Vanamonde93 :) I'm looking to interview people here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 21:36, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Looks interesting, Clovermoss, when I find a spare moment I'll try to fill it out. Feel free to nudge me if I don't. Vanamonde (Talk) 02:55, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 December 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:11, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • Following a motion, the Extended Confirmed Restriction has been amended, removing the allowance for non-extended-confirmed editors to post constructive comments on the "Talk:" namespace. Now, non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace solely to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided that their actions are not disruptive.
  • The Arbitration Committee has announced a call for Checkusers and Oversighters, stating that it will currently be accepting applications for CheckUser and/or Oversight permissions at any point in the year.
  • Eligible users are invited to vote on candidates for the Arbitration Committee until 23:59 December 11, 2023 (UTC). Candidate statements can be seen here.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:55, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation - Pirjhando

Hi Vanamonde93. Hope you are doing fine. I know there is a lot of backlog in SPI cases but I'd like to kindly request your attention to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pirjhando. The user SaneFlint has denied having a COI with an article currently under AfD. There are numerous sources in their first language that seem to rely solely on their input/word, without any additional confirmation. Outcome of this SPI may change the credibility of their input if a COI is found. Jeraxmoira (talk) 15:30, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

@Jeraxmoira: As far I can see the only account that is actively editing is also the only one whose connection to the others is not obvious, meaning that as a non-CU there isn't too much I can do to stop any immediate disruption. If you are concerned that SaneFlint is a sock, please provide evidence of that specifically, so a checkuser can be justified. Vanamonde (Talk) 06:21, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for taking a look at it. I thought the behavioral evidence and the timeline were quite clear on this one. Here are some specific diffs that might provide further clarity.
  • Interaction Timeline - [2] vs [3]
  • The Registration date of AntiMishandlingBot, ProfSulaimanKhi and SaneFlint. Not really a coincidence when it's 30 minutes apart.
  • User talk:ProfSulaimanKhi [4] vs Draft of SaneFlint [5] (8 Minutes apart).
  • Similar IP (noting the first 6 digits are the same) of SaneFlint [6] removing the signature of User talk:ProfSulaimanKhi [7]
  • 182.190.217.166 - Adding "Sayyid Ihsanullah Rashdi" at Ubaidullah Sindhi [8] vs Same line rephrased by SaneFlint [9] Interaction Timeline (Note that IP edit and account is 8 months apart)
  • SaneFlint & User:Pirjhando communicate in a similar way on their talk page.
Please let me know if further diffs are required. Jeraxmoira (talk) 07:10, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
This evidence is helpful, but perhaps you misunderstood me; a CU is probably necessary to determine if a block is appropriate here, but I'm not a CU. If any of this evidence is not yet at the SPI, you should add it there, and a clerk or CU will decide whether a check is justified. Vanamonde (Talk) 14:27, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Sure, I'll add it to the SPI. The reason I reached out to you was to get this fast-tracked as you were active at that time. I'll also ping an active CU in the SPI. Thank you <3 Jeraxmoira (talk) 15:33, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors December 2023 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors December 2023 Newsletter

Hello, and welcome to the December 2023 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since September. Don't forget that you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.

Election news: The Guild needs coordinators! If you'd like to help out, you may nominate yourself or any suitable editor—with their permission—for the Election of Coordinators for the first half of 2024. Nominations will close at 23:59 on 15 December (UTC). Voting begins immediately after the close of nominations and closes at 23:59 on 31 December. All editors in good standing (not under current sanctions) are eligible, and self-nominations are welcome. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term that ends at 23:59 on 30 June.

Drive: Of the 69 editors who signed up for the September Backlog Elimination Drive, 40 copy-edited at least one article. Between them, they copy-edited 661,214 words in 290 articles. Barnstars awarded are listed here.

Blitz: Of the 22 editors who signed up for the October Copy Editing Blitz, 13 copy-edited at least one article. Between them, they copy-edited 109,327 words in 52 articles. Barnstars awarded are listed here.

Drive: During the November Backlog Elimination Drive, 38 of the 58 editors who signed up copy-edited at least one article. Between them, they copy-edited 458,620 words in 234 articles. Barnstars awarded are listed here.

Blitz: Our December Copy Editing Blitz will run from 10 to 16 December. Barnstars awarded will be posted here.

Progress report: As of 20:33, 10 December 2023 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 344 requests since 1 January, and the backlog stands at 2,191 articles.

Other news: Our Annual Report for 2023 is planned for release in the new year.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Message sent by Baffle gab1978 using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:54, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

WiG Editathon Barnstar – October 2023

Women in Green Editathon October '23
At last – here is your barnstar! Thank you for your excellent contributions to GA nomination The Day Before the Revolution during the WiG "Around the World in 31 Days" Good Article editathon. Best, Alanna the Brave (talk) 22:42, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Vanamonde93/Archive_51&oldid=1194976063"