User talk:Lightburst/Archive 12-31-22

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Welcome back :) GoodDay (talk) 00:12, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GoodDay: I do not know if you mean it or you are just f'ing with me. That is the level of my savvy.

I never figuratively 'bleep' with anybody. GoodDay (talk) 00:15, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back! BOZ (talk) 12:17, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

If you repost your personal attack, I will block your account. Tiderolls 14:13, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tide: rollsNot attacking anyone, just documenting. I will repost the part that does not include 18%. Lightburst (talk) 14:22, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

COI

Hi Lightburst, I'm here in my capacity as a functionary. The CheckUser queue (and ArbCom) received off-wiki evidence regarding whether or not you are making conflict-of-interest edits, and what was presented pretty clearly established that you are on good personal terms with the folks in Koch Marshall Trio (enough so to raise concerns about neutrality) and also have a COI regarding Bengal cats. I can't force you to do anything, but it might be best if you just followed COI best practices in those areas - discuss changes if challenged rather than reverting, make edit requests, that sort of thing. This really is just a suggestion - take it or leave it as you see fit. (and sorry about posting this to your userpage by accident earlier...not sure how I screwed that up. Need more coffee, I guess.) GeneralNotability (talk) 21:56, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GeneralNotability: I of course disagree, but I thank you for the very kind, and very public message. If I have a Bengal cat I have a COI with Bengal cats, that is a best one. With these kinds of discussions, and Levivich crawling around the personal lives of editors, I do not know how the encyclopedia ever got built. Lightburst (talk) 00:27, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An apology

Hi Lightburst. This is a follow-up to what I posted yesterday. Following our conversation over email, it looks like I was too hasty in accusing you of conflict-of-interest editing, and I'm sorry that I left that mark on your record. I get things wrong sometimes, and this was one of them. GeneralNotability (talk) 14:08, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the message.

Autopatrolled granted

Hi Lightburst, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled user right to your account. This means that pages you create will automatically be marked as 'reviewed' and no longer appear in the new pages feed. Autopatrolled is assigned prolific creators of articles where those articles do not require further review, and may have been requested on your behalf by someone else. It doesn't affect how you edit; it is used only to manage the workload of new page patrollers.

Since the articles you create will no longer be systematically reviewed by other editors, it is important that you maintain the high standard you have achieved so far in all your future creations. Please also try to remember to add relevant WikiProject templates, stub tags, categories, and incoming links to them, if you aren't already in the habit; user scripts such as Rater and StubSorter can help with this. As you have already shown that you have a strong grasp of Wikipedia's core content policies, you might also consider volunteering to become a new page patroller yourself, helping to uphold the project's standards and encourage other good faith article writers.

Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Cabayi (talk) 14:49, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Thank you. Your efforts are most appreciated. MONGO (talk) 17:44, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dudley Lake

Hi there, you pinged me in with this: [1] but I won't reply in the deletion thread as it is meta discussion and not relevant to whether the article should be kept. However, I would turn the question around on yourself. Are you misunderstanding the GEO guideline, because a lot of the arguments on these seem to be "it is in a national park so it is notable". That is not the guideline, nor its intent. The whole purpose of any of the guidelines is to establish whether something is sufficiently notable to write an encyclopaedia article. Now some lakes ARE notable. Some of most obvious, of course, being Oregon's Crater Lake, or Loch Ness. But less well known, but still significant would be lakes like Bala Lake, where there is significant coverage of the lake from various sources (history, settings in books, the site of famous events etc.) for an article. Yet another mountain lake, Llyn Barfog, rightly only gets a passing mention in the article on Afanc despite being in a Welsh national park, because other than the Afanc legend, it lacks any notability. It is not completely unnotable. It gets mention in Susan Cooper's "Dark is Rising" sequence, but the point - and the reason why no one should make an article of such a lake - is that there is just not enough to say about it to be an encyclopaedic article. And that is a lake that actually gets mention in books other than guide books.

AfD is an exhausting exercise. People can create 30 stubs in a day. Some people create thousands and thousands of stubs. Deleting one of them requires hours of editor time in AfD. Most of them will never be touched because it is just too much effort, but that does not mean it is okay to have stubs that cannot be expanded. Most wikipedia pages are stubs. Most pages provide no good information to anyone, and will never grow beyond that. This is not the intention of those who want to build an encylopaedia.

I didn't nominate these pages, and I wouldn't have because AfD is broken. It needs deletion at scale and I look forward to the RfC on that. Nevertheless, having seen these I can say with certainty - having done the due diligence of researching them - that these pages are about subjects that are not notable in their own right. They are best placed into some collection style page that could then present interesting and useful content to the reader. I have made that point, and tbh I made it not so much in the hope that these ones get deleted, as in the hope that the creator of these would see that and realise that yes, that is a better idea. We are here to build an encylopaedia for the purpose of making good and curated content available to everyone for free. There is a better way to do it than this. There really is!

Those are my thoughts. You don't need to reply, or take them on board. I would hope that you would consider them at least.

Pob bendith. Have a good day. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:53, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sirfurboy: Thanks for the message and I agree with most of your statements. I do not like stubs either. As a content creator I try to never make stubs because they are like useless placeholders and they rarely get expanded. Perhaps they are a way for an editor to say that they created x number of articles. In the case of named natural features - I believe they should have articles. I believe that our guidelines say that they are notable. In the case of these lakes, over time, there may be visitors who take photos and share them on Flickr or commons. Or a hiker may come to a body of water and look it up, perhaps a local writer writes about the lake and a Wikipedian will add to the stub. In any event there is not harm to the project by keeping a lake in the encyclopedia. I agree that a stub is not ideal, but we have room. I just argued for deletion of a man made pond called Cones Lake which I believe was confused with an actual lake called Cone Lake. The article was kept, I questioned the admin who assessed consensus. But I will not take it further and waste more energy and time... I guess we have room for the pond article and the lake article. Lightburst (talk) 13:19, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I agree that any of these places could become notable for a variety of reasons (although shared photos on Flickr would not be a WP:RS :) ). Yet page creation is easy, and a deletion does not preclude re-creation of the article in the future. As and when there is an article to be written on a notable subject, an article should be written and no previous deletion matters. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:39, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the messages. I appreciate you and your thoughtful position. I will disagree with you regarding the named feature, but I appreciate you. Lightburst (talk) 21:12, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September music

Thank you for the Danclas, - very constructive reviewing! Today's recommended reading: Opera in Ukraine! - 1 September: I remembered the Vespro della Beata Vergine, 2 September: the last of the Rheingau Musik Festival concerts, and yesterday we read The Story of Mr Sommer, and followed Ruth Lapide. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:22, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Gerda Arendt:! I love music and most things associated with it. Lightburst (talk) 21:49, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: I see that Linus Roth was promoted at DYK! Exciting - I only wish we had a photo of him and his amazing violin. Lightburst (talk) 23:20, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reminding me of DYK being exciting. I took a pic, but as I never do it during concert, and for a Bach encore not even during playing, I only caught him doing a deep bow, so you see nothing of his face. Yes, the "face" of the violin, but very small. Sorry, only for personal memory, 6 June. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:27, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The rose pic was taken on 11 Sep 2021, and this year was full of music that day, Tag des offenen Denkmals, not only singing in church and rehearsals for Verdi's Requiem, but two concerts at special places pictured, one a synagogue (pictured on its wall). Today three DYK: a piece we'll perform on Sunday, a violinist we heard in June playing the Berg Concerto (thank you for his violin!), and a Youth Orchestra shaped by a conductor who recently died. Almost too much of a good thing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:22, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Today, we sang old music for two choirs at church, pictured, scroll to the image of the organ of the month of the Diocese of Limburg (my perspective), and if you have time, watch the video about it --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:10, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

... and today I wrote an article about music premiered today, Like as the hart. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:51, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Any port in a storm

On 11 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Any port in a storm, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the first known publication of the phrase "any port in a storm" was in a 1749 erotic novel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Any port in a storm. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Any port in a storm), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

— Maile (talk) 12:02, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

7,601 views while at DYK 633.4 views per hour!

DYK for Bass Lake (Watauga County, North Carolina)

On 24 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bass Lake (Watauga County, North Carolina), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the slopes near Bass Lake at Flat Top Manor in North Carolina were covered with hundreds of apple trees? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bass Lake (Watauga County, North Carolina). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Bass Lake (Watauga County, North Carolina)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Jimmy Henley.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Jimmy Henley.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:07, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Jennifer Mee Mug Shot 2010.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Jennifer Mee Mug Shot 2010.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:18, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

For your kind, reasonable words. Buffs (talk) 19:08, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For sure! You seem like a person who can learn without being smashed on the head. Lightburst (talk) 21:39, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your question at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ComplexRational

Given that ComplexRational has noted they do not wish to disclose their prior account for privacy concerns, asking exactly when they began editing on that prior account should not be a question the candidate should answer. Doing so would erode their privacy. They have acknowledged the prior account, and ArbCom would have intervened had the prior account been under a cloud of some kind. That is sufficient to explain their prior experience and thus abilities with their current account. I respectfully request you remove the question. @ComplexRational: given your legitimate privacy concerns, I would not answer this question. If you feel compelled to answer, I would not note when you began editing except in the most general of terms. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am doing Due diligence - Hammersoft your statement about eroding privacy is simply not true. They have demonstrated proficiency early in the new account and disclosure of "when" does nothing to compromise their identity. The ComplexRational account was started in 2018 and I am requesting how much earlier the other account was started. We cannot keep rubber stamping admins into lifetime appointments and try to silence anyone who has questions and concerns. Also this conversation should not be taking place on my talk page. Lightburst (talk) 19:43, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/ComplexRational

Squelching

I'll just respond here, so as not to belabor that thread. You can move it if you wish. Opinions on What's Wrong With RfA are a dime-a-dozen, but I'm of two minds when it comes to responses to opposition at RfA. In some cases, it seems like doing so just adds heat and doesn't lead anywhere productive. But I also think it's sensible for anyone who thinks our declining admin corps is a major cause for concern to speak up when they don't agree. I this case, I think it's really more about a concern for someone's privacy than support/opposition at RfA, though. I do think it's reasonable to wonder about a candidate's past accounts, to be clear, but it seems like that's satisfied by disclosing to arbcom (or at least that's sufficient for me, since they'll be able to actually check the old account rather than infer about the account from vague answers about start dates and experience). I see no problem with asking the question; I just don't know what sort of answer would actually be useful and would likewise hope he doesn't answer if he feels it would be a privacy problem. That's all. YMMV. Feel free to remove this if you've had enough of this business. :)

BTW I didn't realize until just recently that squelch is a term that comes from telecommunications/radios. It's interesting that its use doesn't seem to carry the connotations of the term, regarding the "signal" squelched as "noise". — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 22:19, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All this said, I also agree with what Floquenbeam just wrote at the bottom of the RfA. Sorry to belabor it after all. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 22:21, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your text

BTW I didn't realize until just recently that squelch is a term that comes from telecommunications/radios. It's interesting that its use doesn't seem to carry the connotations of the term, regarding the "signal" squelched as "noise". — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 22:19, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rhododendrites There are four administrators belaboring the point. I would like to reword the question to simply how much experience did the other account have. I hate that these are lifetime appointments - if a crap one gets in were stuck. and not long aago an Icewiz sock was almost installed as an admin. Because of these rubber stamps. Lightburst (talk) 22:23, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ack. Just came to follow up to say I didn't read Floq's comment to the end, so my +1 implied more than I intended. I was just dittoing the "let's not freak out; he can just ignore the comment if we wants" part. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 22:33, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rhododendrites Understood. Creating content is fun, and I have created quite a bit as of late. The backrooms of the project are no fun at all. I just think it is important to have good admins that protect editors and content. I thought Floqs comments were unfortunate and I said so on his talk page. He has previously been a help to me, but they all have their hackles up over what they think was an attempt at outing. Lightburst (talk) 22:52, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thanks for your help on Stewart Donaldson. I guess I went too too fast, I'll read this later. Sarrail (talk) 16:11, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Sarrail! I am not an editor in that area, but I am going to hope that other editors assist. David Epstein knows much more in this field. Lightburst (talk) 16:13, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats

	Article rescue lifejacket of success
	I hereby award you the (completely made up) Article Rescue Squad lifejacket of success for kick-starting the improvement of so many articles. CT55555(talk) 21:01, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays!

Happy Holidays and Happy New Year, Lightburst!

The other day, I was having a conversation with someone about holiday cards and social media. It occurred to me that, in the years since I left Facebook, the site I use most to communicate with people I like isn't actually a social media site at all. If you're receiving this, it's pretty likely I've talked with you more recently than I have my distant relatives and college friends on FB, at very least, and we may have even collaborated on something useful. So here's a holiday "card", Wikipedia friend. :) Hope the next couple weeks bring some fun and/or rest. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:39, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. Feel free to take a "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" if you prefer. :) BOZ (talk) 23:14, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lightburst: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:05, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:05, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Lightburst,
Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and a Happy New Year to you and yours! CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:14, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

</gallery>

– Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:14, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.