User talk:SMcCandlish/Archive 190
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:SMcCandlish. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 185 | ← | Archive 188 | Archive 189 | Archive 190 | Archive 191 | Archive 192 | → | Archive 195 |
September 2022
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Talk:2022 United States Senate election in Pennsylvania 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 15:31, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Talk:2023 Nigerian general election 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 17:31, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Board of Trustees election
DoneThank you for supporting the NPP initiative to improve WMF support of the Page Curation tools. Another way you can help is by voting in the Board of Trustees election. The next Board composition might be giving attention to software development. The election closes on 6 September at 23:59 UTC. View candidate statement videos and Vote Here. MB 04:04, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Christian Kälin
DoneHi SMcCandlish. Would you mind settling a content issue at Talk:Christian Kälin#Unexplained removals of sourced content, WP:COATRACK additions? I see you're listed at Category:Wikipedians willing to provide third opinions, and you appear to be sensitive to BLP questions in general, so I thought you might be an appropriate and impartial editor to step in. For context, related disputes with the same editor have occurred at Talk:Henley & Partners#Major changes made without consensus a few months ago and, much more recently, at Talk:Christian Kälin#St Kitts edit reversed. (If you have reason to believe you would be biased in this discussion, please feel free to abstain - I want to be extra careful to avoid canvassing here, due to my COI.) Thanks! Sarah Nicklin (talk) 08:16, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Sarah Nicklin: I've added some semi-detailed comments over there. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 21:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for weighing in. As it's been a week since you made your comments and no objections have been voiced, would you mind implementing your own proposed resolution? Sarah Nicklin (talk) 19:09, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Christian Kälin follow-up
DoneHi SMcCandlish. In case you missed my follow-up comment up at User talk:SMcCandlish#Christian Kälin, I'll post here in a new section as well.
I appreciate that you took the time to comment at Talk:Christian Kälin following my initial inquiry here. As it's been over two weeks since you made your comments there, and no objections have been voiced, would you mind implementing your own proposed resolution? Thanks a lot! Sarah Nicklin (talk) 08:34, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Sarah Nicklin: I'll have to think on this. I'm not sure of the propriety of providing a WP:3O and then just implementing it. Will need to look into that. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 23:05, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you. I'm not sure what other options exist, as my own ability to implement is limited by my COI, and no other editor is likely to get involved organically. It would be a shame for your well-articulated third opinion to have been given for nothing. Sarah Nicklin (talk) 12:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
- Hi again - I hope you don't mind if I nudge you on this issue once more. I would be willing to implement your suggestions myself directly if you were to give me the green light, but it seems more appropriate for an uninvolved editor like you to do so. Does that make sense to you? Sarah Nicklin (talk) 14:14, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, but I'm now an involved editor. I'll probably do it anyway, but on a non-busy day. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 22:48, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you, much appreciated! Would it make sense to ask at the Teahouse or elsewhere if there is a less involved editor out there who would assist? I'm just not sure what other recourse there is in this kind of situation. Sarah Nicklin (talk) 07:14, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
- @Sarah Nicklin: Given the lack of objection both at the article talk page and at Teahouse, I'm now comfortable implementing changes there, if you propose them in specifics I can just edit in. I'm too pressed for time to go digging in article history to re-assemble the material myself. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 19:15, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you, much appreciated! Would it make sense to ask at the Teahouse or elsewhere if there is a less involved editor out there who would assist? I'm just not sure what other recourse there is in this kind of situation. Sarah Nicklin (talk) 07:14, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, but I'm now an involved editor. I'll probably do it anyway, but on a non-busy day. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 22:48, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- Hi again - I hope you don't mind if I nudge you on this issue once more. I would be willing to implement your suggestions myself directly if you were to give me the green light, but it seems more appropriate for an uninvolved editor like you to do so. Does that make sense to you? Sarah Nicklin (talk) 14:14, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you. I'm not sure what other options exist, as my own ability to implement is limited by my COI, and no other editor is likely to get involved organically. It would be a shame for your well-articulated third opinion to have been given for nothing. Sarah Nicklin (talk) 12:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
- Finally got around to it all the other day. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 19:57, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" 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, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Helstrom (TV series) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" 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 05:30, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Talk:La République En Marche! 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 22:30, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
DoneYou are invited to join the discussion at Talk:2023 Nigerian general election § Requested move 13 September 2022. Watercheetah99 (talk) 19:10, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
ACE
I've been thinking for a long time that non-admins should be encouraged to run for Arb. Why is that micro community of Arbcom regulars assuming that the broader community is not intelligent enough to vote on a well fleshed out RFC? Why do they want to nip the idea in the bud? Certainly some things need to be drastically changed at Arbcom, if not even deprecating it altogether and replacing it with something else. A major RFC can be launched any time. It won't be in time for this year's election but it does not need to wait until next year's ACE RFC. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:00, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- What is the RFC question you have in mind? — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 07:49, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- One about creating a couple of extra seats on Arbcom to filled with by non-admins who reach the pass mark. You commented there already. I think that crafted well, an RfC on such a major change would generate a lot of participation. Not sure which way it would go though. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:31, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Hi both. I've been watching the discussions on ACE with interest, as you may or may not know, I've long been a proponent of non-admins on Arbcom. Sounds great to me, any community member who passes the ACE should be eligible for the committee - it was the reason I ran as a non-admin in 2017, with the hope that it would remove the non-admin stigma. The idea of some sort of affirmative action to add non-admins to the committee, however, makes me extremely uncomfortable. It will encourage two separate communities, admin and non-admin and drive a wedge between them. It could easily discourage non-admins from applying to be admins.
- Philosophically, I believe we are one community - non-admins, admins, arbs, we're all Wikipedians and anyone who volunteers and has sufficient trust amongst the community of Wikipedians should be part of the arbitration committee. I do not agree with the idea of someone who is empirically more trusted missing out on a seat on the committee to someone who is empirically less trusted. That is what the election is for.
- Honestly, if I were to support some sort of affirmative action regarding the committee, it would be to push for representation that we don't have. That might be pushing for gender diversity, or geographical diversity, but pushing for diversity on Wikipedian admin status? I simply do not agree, and I do not believe the wider community will either. WormTT(talk) 09:59, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Under other circumstances I would probably agree with all of that. But we have the problem that ArbCom is also the (only) arbiter of desysop cases. This makes it a conflict of interest / separation of powers problem for ArbCom to be entirely composed of admins, who have a long and overwhelming history of backing up other admins almost at all costs. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? ArbCom itself – 1. existing as an admins-only body responsible for policing admins, and 2. making up discretionary sanctions [now contentious topics] out of their collective ass thereby giving admins unforeseen power – is the proximal cause of "adminship is no big deal" no longer being true (for over a decade now). — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 23:52, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Talk:William, Prince of Wales on a "Wikipedia style and naming" 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, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
O'Rahilly's historical model
DoneHi, SMcCandlish. I've nominated O'Rahilly's historical model for deletion at Wikipedia:articles for deletion/O'Rahilly's historical model. As per your TP comments from earlier this year, you may be interested in weighing in. Eddie891 Talk Work 16:05, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: History and geography request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of popes on a "History and geography" 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 01:31, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Princess Maria Carolina of Bourbon 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 21:31, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Disregard
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Death of Mahsa Amini on a "Biographies" 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 11:30, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive
| New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive |  |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
(t · c) buidhe 21:17, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of dignitaries at the state funeral of Elizabeth II 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 16:30, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: Society, sports, and culture request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Crisis pregnancy center on a "Society, sports, and culture" 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 19:30, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Discussion at Talk:Cyber Anakin § A mountain out of molehill?
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Cyber Anakin § A mountain out of molehill?. 45.136.197.235 (talk) 00:32, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- I don't know enough about the subject to get meaningfully involved, so I'll defer to the people already participating. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 01:04, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, but we are essentially just spinning wheels there at this point. It'll be great if you can take some time to review the issues there before giving feedback and advice, which we'll be grateful with. 45.136.197.235 (talk) 01:16, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- It's become too steep a mountain to climb. I suggest starting a WP:RFC about the underlying question(s). — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 02:50, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, but we are essentially just spinning wheels there at this point. It'll be great if you can take some time to review the issues there before giving feedback and advice, which we'll be grateful with. 45.136.197.235 (talk) 01:16, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 52
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 52, July – August 2022
- New instant-access collections:
- SpringerLink and Springer Nature
- Project MUSE
- Taylor & Francis
- ASHA
- Loeb
- Feedback requested on this newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:21, 30 September 2022 (UTC)