User talk:Yngvadottir

	; Archives (Index) ;
	1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12;

Archive of my Did You Knows

Arbitration case request declined

Hi Yngvadottir. The Wikipediocracy-related conduct case request has been declined. While the arbitrators were closely divided, there was not an absolute majority to accept the case. For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 06:41, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orville Peck's bibliography

Dear Yngvadottir : we keep running into the same problem. I want to explain some wikipedia policies: 1) you should discuss the proposed changes on the Article Talk page, pinging the editors who have been involved. 2) you MUST cite a specific wiki-policy, that the article violates, such as WP:COPYVIO. I noticed, that you have not been citing specific policies in your other deletions. 3) as I explained to your earlier, there is NO PREFERRED REFERENCE FORMAT in wikipedia today:Please read this carefully: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources . 4) if you do not like the list of references in the article about Orville Peck, you can suggest splitting the list into a separate bibliographic article. Please take a look at a bibliographic article, that I participated in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Mearsheimer_bibliography . This article is linked to the main article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Mearsheimer . If you want to split a separate bibliographic article about Orville Peck, you should open a request for discussion. 5) I am sorry, that I have to explain you all these policies, that you violated, despite your numerous contributions to Wiki, but I hope, that you will be a more productive editor after your learn the proper procedures. Thank you for understanding and please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions. Respectfully, Walter Tau.

@Walter Tau: The discussion belongs on the article talk page, where I gave a fuller explanation than in my edit summary. (I note you have reverted at the article, but haven't yet edited the talk page section). However, check WP:BRD and WP:ONUS: you have been bold, and been reverted. The onus is on you to discuss, not on me or anyone else who disagrees with your addition to the article. (By the way, you're not signing, so the ping template won't work. Your ping syntax was wrong anyway, but pinging also requires a signature at the time the comment is left.) Yngvadottir (talk) 03:24, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yngvadottir: Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately, you did not address all 4 of the issued, that I raised.

6) you misunderstand, what BOLD mean on wikipedia. It refers to specific facts. Our disagreement on Orvill Peck article is about formatting not facts. Formatting should be discussed on the talk page first. Also, unless you found vandalism or copyright violation, you should discuss your proposed deletion on the article talk page first. 6) Wikipedia:ONUS =Verifiability. What is not verifiable about Bibliography List for Orville Peck. Please answer this question, do NOT skip it. 7) I keep forgetting how the signature works here. Sorry about that. Walter Tau (talk) 03:35, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page. We have a disagreement about how to edit this article, Orville Peck. (BTW you know you can do a numbered list by typing # in front of each item, and the software makes the numbers?) Yngvadottir (talk) 03:42, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please review edits

Please check these edits on Ashab Uddin (general)

- Cerium4B • Talk? • 05:04, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cerium4B: Both you and the IP are at 3 reverts, which means the IP is wrong that you are violating 3RR, but you are both edit warring and in danger of being blocked and/or the article being locked (protected) by an admin. I have no idea who's right or whether you are both partially right. I suggest you ask about PSC and the use of the honorific parameter at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Bangladesh and then walk away and let other members of the WikiProject sort it out. It's not worth getting blocked over. For what it's worth, that's my advice. Yngvadottir (talk) 07:37, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yngvadottir

Okay

thank you so much - Cerium4B • Talk? • 08:14, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

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) 00:21, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recall

You have voted in the admin recall petitions which have been presented. Both appear to have been effective - in the re-RfA running now opposes outnumber supports and the other admin has retired. No admin de-sysopped for cause has ever succeeded at RfA. One such is this character Special:Permalink/1243623079#Catastrophic. You are invited to open a recall petition. 89.243.12.172 (talk) 12:45, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One editor messaged alleged canvassing, but aren't we all in this to see that administrators don't overstep their authority? The administrator in question removed this report to AN with no explanation:

Some administrators delete their user pages (fair enough) but others delete their talk pages as well (e.g. to hide a comment they made that Wikipedia is "cruft"). If the talk page is deleted, the Community cannot audit what was there, so just blank it (but in this case there doesn't seem to be any need for that). 86.6.5.96 (talk) 12:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hiding from the Community reports about administrators who hide their misconduct from the Community is a red line which must never be crossed. There is also the question of why Samwalton9, with zero editing activity between 7-12 and 14-19 November, used rollback to remove 24 comments on user talk pages, the management of which is entirely up to the talkpage owner. 89.243.12.172 (talk) 12:42, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ACE2024

An excellent and accurate voter guide. Superb preamble too. Makes me wish I had written one this year after all but I'm trying to make a soft return to WP. Shame your guide was a little late because the vast majority of voters have already made up their minds and are poised over their keyboards just waiting for the polling station to open its door. Generally over 50% of the votes are cast within the first couple of hours. (1)[(2) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

I wasn't aware of that; I tend to leave voting to the last minute myself. And I had no idea you'd created those graphs. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Archives (Index)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12