Jump to content

User talk:Vanamonde93

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from User talk:Karellen93)

WikiCup 2023 September newsletter

[edit]

The fourth round of the competition has finished, with anyone scoring less than 673 points being eliminated. It was a high scoring round with all but one of the contestants who progressed to the final having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were

  • New York (state) Epicgenius, with 2173 points topping the scores, gained mainly from a featured article, 38 good articles and 9 DYKs. He was followed by
  • Sammi Brie, with 1575 points, gained mainly from a featured article, 28 good articles and 50 good article reviews. Close behind was
  • Thebiguglyalien, with 1535 points mainly gained from a featured article, 15 good articles, 26 good article reviews and lots of bonus points.

Between them during round 4, contestants achieved 12 featured articles, 3 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 126 good articles, 46 DYK entries, 14 ITN entries, 67 featured article candidate reviews and 147 good article reviews. Congratulations to our eight finalists and all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them and within 24 hours of the end of the final. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.

I will be standing down as a judge after the end of the contest. I think the Cup encourages productive editors to improve their contributions to Wikipedia and I hope that someone else will step up to take over the running of the Cup. Sturmvogel 66 (talk), and Cwmhiraeth (talk)

Guild of Copy Editors 2023 Annual Report

[edit]
Guild of Copy Editors 2023 Annual Report
Our 2023 Annual Report is now ready for review.

Highlights:

  • Introduction
  • Membership news, obituary and election results
  • Summary of Drives, Blitzes and the Requests page
  • Closing words
– Your Guild coordinators: Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Wracking.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

WikiProject Human Rights Revival

[edit]

Hi! I recently posted at WikiProject Human rights about the lack of activity on the project and its being labeled as "semi-active". I noticed that you are a member of the project, and would like to get your input if possible. See my post on the Talk page, and if you have insight into possibly reviving the project or have any thoughts about it, feel free to comment. Thanks! Spookyaki (talk) 22:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness, I had entirely forgotten I had signed up as a member. I don't have very much to say here, I'm afraid: it's still something of a mystery to me what keeps some projects active and makes others go quiet, though of course it comes down to editor time at the end of the day. My content work is has been tangentially related at best. Vanamonde93 (talk) 00:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine-Israel articles 5 arbitration case opened

[edit]

You offered a statement in an arbitration enforcement referral. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Evidence. Please add your evidence by 23:59, 14 December 2024 (UTC), which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction. For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 06:14, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2024).

Administrator changes

added
readded
removed

Interface administrator changes

added
readded Pppery

CheckUser changes

readded

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mentoring for FAC

[edit]

Hi, I'm contacting you because I noticed your username is listed at WP:FAM and I am interested in nominating a FAC but have never done so in the past. I'm contacting several people listed as FA mentors so if you are busy that is okay. The article is Neurocysticercosis, a parasitic brain disease. I have started a peer review for the article which can be found at Wikipedia:Peer review/Neurocysticercosis/archive1. Thanks in advance for your time and consideration! IntentionallyDense (Contribs) 22:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will do my best to stop by, as it's an interesting topic, and close enough to literature I've read that I hope to be able to offer intelligent feedback. We have some very capable editors who work on medical topics, though; have you tried asking one of them too? @Spicy, Ajpolino, and SandyGeorgia: come to mind. Vanamonde93 (talk) 01:09, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have not asked Spicy but have asked the others. Thank you in advance I appreciate all the feedback I can get. IntentionallyDense (Contribs) 01:17, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted page.

[edit]

Some time back you deleted the "Leadership Network" page, for fully sound reasons, I'm sure. For academic reasons, I'd like to see what appeared earlier for that, and have gone to the internet archive, but I am wondering it there is a way through Wikipedia to access that deleted page in its final form. Does it exist archived internally somewhere, at WP? We are doing research on the subject of the so-called "New Apostolic Reformation," and apparently the founding influence of that movement, C. Peter Wagner, regularly published through the Leadership Network. A specific, further reason to ask is that the internet archive entry for this page predates the deletion by two years, and so the only vestige of the article, otherwise, fails to reflect any changes to the article over the period of 2016-08-18 (it's last archive) and 2019-02-09 (it's approximate deletion date, see https://web.archive.org/web/20190209192914/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership_Network). Cheers, and thank you for any effort in reply. [a former logging editor and professor]. 73.110.70.75 (talk) 19:19, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid the page was deleted for copyright reasons, and so I cannot give you a copy of the deleted version. A large portion of it was copied from the organization's own website, however, and the content ought to be available there or at the archived version of that page. Vanamonde93 (talk) 19:42, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, received. I did/do not understand that providing evidentiary historic, archival material (as does the appended 2016 Internet Archive link, see following) was viewed according to any applicable legal doctrine, as violating copyright, per se. That is, we here are not of the understanding that maintaining and allowing access to earlier evidence of a copyright violation—in this case, access for research reasons—itself constituted a further violation of copyright. (If that were true, Archive.org would be in serial violation, see the earlier, accessible, but less accurate 2016 version of the page, here: https://web.archive.org/web/20160818063603/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership_Network . Cheers, and thank you for any effort in reply. 73.110.70.75 (talk) 19:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not a legal professional, and so I'm not going to discuss the Internet Archive's model. But the page in question was deleted for violating Wikipedia's copyright policy, and as such it does not meet the criteria under which I can provide a non-administrator with a copy. Best, Vanamonde93 (talk) 20:10, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors December 2024 Newsletter

[edit]
Guild of Copy Editors December 2024 Newsletter

Hello, and welcome to the December newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since September. If you no longer want this newsletter, you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. If you'd like to be notified of upcoming drives and blitzes, and other GOCE activities, the best method is to add our announcements box to your watchlist.

Election news: The Guild's coordinators play an important role in the WikiProject, making sure nearly everything runs smoothly and on time. Editors in good standing (unblocked and without sanctions) are invited to nominate themselves or another editor to be a Guild coordinator (with their permission, of course) until 23:59 on 15 December (UTC). The voting phase begins at 00:01 on 16 December and runs until 23:59 on 31 December. Questions may be asked of candidates at any stage in the process. Elected coordinators will serve a six-month term from 1 January through 30 June.

Drive: In our September Backlog Elimination Drive, 67 editors signed up, 39 completed at least one copy edit, and between them they edited 682,696 words comprising 507 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

Blitz: The October Copy Editing Blitz saw 16 editors sign-up, 15 of whom completed at least one copy edit. They edited 76,776 words comprising 35 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

Drive: In our November Backlog Elimination Drive, 432,320 words in 151 articles were copy edited. Of the 54 users who signed up, 33 copy edited at least one article. Barnstars awarded are posted here.

Blitz: The December Blitz will begin at 00:00 on 15 December (UTC) and will end on 21 December at 23:59. Sign up here. Barnstars awarded will be posted here.

Progress report: As of 22:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC), GOCE copy editors have completed 333 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,401 articles.

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, Mox Eden and Wracking.

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

Message sent by Baffle_gab1978 using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:50, 7 December 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Palestine-Israel articles 5 updates

[edit]

You are receiving this message because you are on the update list for Palestine-Israel articles 5. The drafters note that the scope of the case was somewhat unclear, and clarify that the scope is The interaction of named parties in the WP:PIA topic area and examination of the WP:AE process that led to two referrals to WP:ARCA. Because this was unclear, two changes are being made:

First, the Committee will accept submissions for new parties for the next three days, until 23:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC). Anyone who wishes to suggest a party to the case may do so by creating a new section on the evidence talk page, providing a reason with WP:DIFFS as to why the user should be added, and notifying the user. After the three-day period ends, no further submission of parties will be considered except in exceptional circumstances. Because the Committee only hears disputes that have failed to be resolved by the usual means, proposed parties should have been recently taken to AE/AN/ANI, and either not sanctioned, or incompletely sanctioned. If a proposed party has not been taken to AE/AN/ANI, evidence is needed as to why such an attempt would have been ineffective.

Second, the evidence phase has been extended by a week, and will now close at 23:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC). For the Arbitration Committee, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AE - word count request

[edit]

I'm aware that the AE between myself and Raladic is already overlong, and as with the previous one expanding in several directions at once, and Barkeep has already pointed at the word count. I have removed the replies from my complaint for length.

Can I please request 250 additional words to specifically deal with:

but the insertion of content that misrepresents a source, or is simply unsourced, is clear-cut sanctionable misconduct

As well as specific evidence of the number of times Raladic has engaged in BRR vs the number of times I have, as opposed to the bidirectional claim of edit warring currently being made against me on that basis. If there is to be a ruling of "fault on both sides" I would like the opportunity to demonstrate that this is heavily biased in one direction. Void if removed (talk) 09:27, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but in fairness I think Raladic would also need an extension. I will leave a note at AE. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:58, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Word count at AE

[edit]

Hey there, I would like to bring my word count back under where it should be but I don't think I can unless I cut those long quotes I posted for you. As it was a direct response to your question I wanted to know if you need those quotes on the record or can I cut them back to raw diffs at this point? Simonm223 (talk) 15:59, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind - I just saw Barkeep's reply. Simonm223 (talk) 16:04, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Simonm223: I think you could safely collapse those quotes, since the discussion has largely moved to other issues. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:23, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 December 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:59, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thamir Muhsin

[edit]

Three different users asked for this to be relisted, including one delete !voter - why did you clearly ignore us? SportingFlyer T·C 23:15, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't ignore you. I noted that I would give you a userspace/draftspace copy, allowing you to work on the article and recreate it at your leisure. If you find sources, this gives you the same outcome, without spending more community time; if you don't find sources, likewise. What is the problem, exactly? Vanamonde93 (talk) 23:38, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think it is terribly fair ... to leave this open without a clear indication as to why – me, SportingFlyer and one of the delete voters (the others probably would have as well if they had been notified – e.g. GiantSnowman voted delete but said he was confident sources existed) agreed as to why it was fair: to allow us another week to search for sources (plus, we need the details that were in the article, as well as the link to the Arabic Wikipedia article, to be able to appropriately search for sources in the first place). What's so bad with relisting? BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:47, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Leaving an AfD open is a request for further community input, and therefore consumes community time. That should be reserved for discussions that need input; this one clearly cannot use input right now, because you haven't presented any additional sources. As such, leaving it open isn't a good use of time. Conversely, you are in no way prevented from searching for sources and recreating the article if they are found. Again, what is the problem here? What do you wish to do that you cannot do? Vanamonde93 (talk) 23:51, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There isn't a way I can appropriately search for sources without knowing both the details from the article and having the link to the Arabic Wikipedia article on him. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:57, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ...which you could have addressed by asking for a draftspace copy, which I had promised to provide. Here it is. And here is the page on ar.wiki. Have at it. Vanamonde93 (talk) 00:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm off to DRV. This close was astonishing. SportingFlyer T·C 00:22, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    DRV closure, for the archives. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 December 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:00, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Logged warning

[edit]

I see that you have closed the AE case on Raladic with a logged warning, but there is no note of the warning on her Talk page. I know that she has retired, but people sometimes come back after retiring. Shouldn’t the warning appear on her Talk page? Sweet6970 (talk) 13:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think she may be safely assumed to have seen it, and the AELOG entry is what is formally required. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Query regarding treatment of sources

[edit]

In your recent comment at AE, you say ‘A good many arguments here amount to discounting sources based on POV rather than reliability. There is precedent for doing so, but that requires a wider discussion, outside the scope of AE.’. Please direct me to the precedent. Sweet6970 (talk) 13:14, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:GMORFC is the obvious instance where the community decided as a whole that one POV is "correct" with respect to how we discuss GMOs, and this has subsequently shaped our evaluation of sources in this area. There are other instances: I recall a fairly wide discussion about race and intelligence, but I'm struggling to find it as the interaction timeline tool is down for me. Other examples where the community has taken a specific position include climate change and the (non)scientific nature of some alternative medicine systems. Please note that I'm not saying that we have gone beyond what our content policies say; just that in a very contentious area, we have had wider discussions on the wording of some topics such that we are able to avoid rehashing the debate on every single affected page. I'm not certain that this is the right time for such a discussion on transgender health, but systematically discarding sources based on perceived POV alone is untenable without such a discussion. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for this clarification. Sweet6970 (talk) 17:43, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Republican Party (United States) 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 18:30, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays!

[edit]
Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Wikipedia in 2024! Wishing you a Very happy and productive 2025!  ♦ Maliner (talk) 16:01, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rob Zerban

[edit]

Hello, Vanamonde93,

Could you review your closure for this AFD? You closed it with a Keep outcome but I don't see any participants arguing for this result. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 22:57, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Thanks for letting me know, I was certain I'd closed it "delete", which is of course the right outcome. Vanamonde93 (talk) 22:58, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seasonal greetings:)

[edit]
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello Vanamonde93, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025.
Happy editing,
— Benison (Beni · talk) 18:07, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

— Benison (Beni · talk) 18:07, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings

[edit]
Season's Greetings

When he took up his hat to go, he gave one long look round the library. Then he turned ... (and Saxon took advantage of this to wag his way in and join the party), and said, "It's a rare privilege, the free entry of a book chamber like this. I'm hoping ... that you are not insensible of it."

(Text on page 17 illustrated in the frontispiece in Juliana Horatia Ewing's Mary's Meadow and Other Tales of Fields and Flowers, illustrated by Mary Wheelhouse, London: G. Bell and Sons, 1915.)

Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:28, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Fowler&fowler, and the same to you and yours. A nice choice of image, a reminder of why we do what we do is always a good thing. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:10, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, in turn, for that discerning reply. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:03, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sambhaji Bhide

[edit]

Hello! Regarding your recent reversion of my edits, could you help in the following:

  • 2018 report: Which? The one cited? Then somebody may confirm and say 'A 2018 Mumbai Mirror report'.
  • He has a controversial history with political leaders: Saying somebody was/is controversial with political leaders is not only weasel and in particular, but quite stylish, isn't it? Although irrelevant, also see WP:CSEC.

I am writing this here and not the article's talk page because I think the tags I added are not that confusing, and specific to address your view. Thanks, ExclusiveEditor 🔔 Ping Me! 18:53, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If I am wrong about this, kindly let me know, so I may put this on the article's talk page rather. Regards, ExclusiveEditor 🔔 Ping Me! 19:00, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Exclusive editor. It was very unclear what your tags were referring to, which is why I removed them. In the first case, yes, clearly it is the Mumbai Mirror report; you could name it, if you like, but there is no ambiguity as to which report is being discussed. As to the second, I've reviewed the source and in my opinion it has no substantive information, so I've removed it entirely. If more details are available elsewhere (perhaps in the article cited in the source I removed?) they may be worth adding. Your tag didn't really address this either, however. It is generally good practice to review a source before tagging a sentence, and in cases such as this one something like {{template:clarify}} will let you explain your concern better. Vanamonde93 (talk) 19:04, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. I was about to ask you if I could add a clarification template for the second sentence, regarding which particular politicians he is 'controversial' and that 'being controversial with' is more like a weasel phrase. However it seems you have removed it after checking the source. Regards --ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 19:24, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SPI Case close and suspicious users casting aspersions

[edit]

Hi Vanamonde93. There have been many suspicious IP socks who have attacked me or have made suggestions about me that aren't true because they don't like my content position. They hop IPs and post them over and over on admin talk pages. I'm not Symphony Regalia and I don't have a relation to that user. I don't think it's fair for case to be left open like a fishing expedition when both forms of evidence don't match.

It should be clear by the checks that I'm a different person, and even with three super long posts from suspicious users the evidence is still weak because it isn't true so it feels like a bias to leave it open. Now other editors will interpret it as a call to canvass their friends and "throw stuff at the wall to see what sticks" which isn't fair to me or the other targets. EEpic (talk) 20:20, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ethiopian Epic: Leaving that SPI open doesn't directly affect you. If I closed it, another user could add a new report just as easily as they could post more evidence. If these editors choose to post off-topic evidence, they are not immune from investigation and sanction themselves. Vanamonde93 (talk) 20:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It makes me feel unwelcome it's like aiming a weapon at me for an undetermined amount of time even though an investigation was already conducted. Previous admins have also investigated this 2 or 3 times and they all found there was no merit. One of the people doing it is sock of one of the involved editors abusing proxies to spread lies and tie editors together who have a content view he doesn't like.
https://www.ipqualityscore.com/free-ip-lookup-proxy-vpn-test/lookup/14.192.214.186
Leaving it open even after the investigation will encourage opposing people to come nitpick every little thing they can possibly find which is easy to do among users who have the same content position. If they have to open a new case they will be more inclined to bring evidence with merit. I don't think it's fair treatment. I'm not Symphony and I shouldn't have to go through all of these aspersions from someone using IP socks. EEpic (talk) 00:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It has not been "left open after the investigation", I have asked for more information, which I routinely do at SPI (I did that twice today, as it happens). Please let this matter drop: if there is no evidence against you, no action will be taken, and if there is evidence, closing this report will not prevent it from being analyzed in the future. Empirically, "If they have to open a new case they will be more inclined to bring evidence with merit" is simply not true. Vanamonde93 (talk) 02:25, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see, thanks I appreciate the input. EEpic (talk) 04:11, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays!

[edit]

Ekdalian (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Ekdalian (talk) 07:48, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

[edit]


LukeEmily (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

LukeEmily (talk) 14:45, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 December 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Vanamonde93&oldid=1265076743"