User talk:Wildfire35
Congrespeople task force
[edit]I guess I'm game? I'm not too active an editor though. Would like to help however I can. I'd be interested in first figuring out guidelines for notability on political positions - which bills and which votes are important to highlight, which stated positions are relevant versus outdated, and so on. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 13:58, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- Ditto here. I'm game, and think it would be a good idea to come up with some standards on what makes particular votes noteworthy. I'm of the mind that a link to a roll call vote is not a sufficient source for inclusion, as members of Congress take hundreds (if not thousands) of such votes, so we need to find additional sourcing regarding particular votes taken by members to show noteworthiness. Marquardtika (talk) 14:19, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- Maybe a good starting point for a criteria could be "a vote is relevant if the bill has a wikipedia page, or is attached to / affiliated with such a bill" or something along those lines. But now that I spend more than 10 seconds thinking, this might not be totally optimal because opinions on things like social issues (for example) may be expressed in ways besides votes on bills (eg. speeches on the floor, at public events, tweets, etc.), but are still relevant to voters and to wikipedia readers. So, I guess this idea I had doesn't exactly work. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 18:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- I'm glad to hear that you're both interested! I really like your idea and think it could be a great starting point. Maybe we begin by adding major votes on bills that have their own Wikipedia Pages (like the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act) to every Congressperson's pages. Then, we can see which important political opinions we need to fill in with statements and other sources. My guess is that some issues like electoral college certification during the 2020 election appear on most pages already and so have their own form of notability (i.e. enough other Wikipedia users found it improtant already, hence why it's on so many pages). I figure we can work backwards as well, starting by prioritizing votes and statements during the current congressional section.
- Maybe a good starting point for a criteria could be "a vote is relevant if the bill has a wikipedia page, or is attached to / affiliated with such a bill" or something along those lines. But now that I spend more than 10 seconds thinking, this might not be totally optimal because opinions on things like social issues (for example) may be expressed in ways besides votes on bills (eg. speeches on the floor, at public events, tweets, etc.), but are still relevant to voters and to wikipedia readers. So, I guess this idea I had doesn't exactly work. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 18:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- I'm also going to build a task force page somewhere on the Politics wikiproject page for us to coordinate all of our material as well, and will link it here as soon as it's ready, which will hopefully be a little later this week.Wildfire35 (talk) 04:21, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- Does that mean that our discussion should move to that page once its created (for ease of finding, haivng a central location, being accessible to others who want to contribute)? Please advise. Thank you! QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 15:32, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yes! I'm planning on moving our discussion once the page is made so it's easy to find and contribute to for other users, but we can continue working here in the meantime. Wildfire35 (talk) 17:37, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- PLease send link whenever its ready :) QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 14:11, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Wildfire35 I see you made a page - is that ready? Please advise on what we're to do and how to help in an organized way :) QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 14:57, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yes! I'm adding finishing touches today, but feel free to head over to the page if you'd like! 2022 Elections task force I'm linking a few more resources today and then we should be good to go! Wildfire35 (talk) 16:01, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Wildfire35 I see you made a page - is that ready? Please advise on what we're to do and how to help in an organized way :) QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 14:57, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- PLease send link whenever its ready :) QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 14:11, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yes! I'm planning on moving our discussion once the page is made so it's easy to find and contribute to for other users, but we can continue working here in the meantime. Wildfire35 (talk) 17:37, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- Does that mean that our discussion should move to that page once its created (for ease of finding, haivng a central location, being accessible to others who want to contribute)? Please advise. Thank you! QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 15:32, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- I'm also going to build a task force page somewhere on the Politics wikiproject page for us to coordinate all of our material as well, and will link it here as soon as it's ready, which will hopefully be a little later this week.Wildfire35 (talk) 04:21, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for your patience! I've finished building the task force page here: 2022 Elections task force. Feel free to head over and get familiar, I'm finishing linking resources today and then we should be good to go! Wildfire35 (talk) 16:02, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- You reached out to me I'm open to helping out. EJSpaich (talk) 18:16, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
- Awesome, thanks for joining! Feel free to head to the task force page here: 2022 Elections task force. I'm finishing linking resources today so we should be good to go! Wildfire35 (talk) 16:02, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
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) 01:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
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) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)