Jump to content

User talk:Zsinj/Archive 14

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

hi, Zsinj

[edit]

good day. we're going to insert your image of Cheomseongdae in Gyeongju into the National Weather Museum(korea) exhibition book. I want you to give me permission. I hope you answer as soon as possible. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.254.255.42 (talk) 06:27, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Could you share with me a link to the image? Once you do, you have my permission! Could you also share with me the book when it is published? Thanks! ZsinjTalk 15:24, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

[edit]
Hi Zsinj! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 01:58, Thursday, July 8, 2021 (UTC)

Mission 1 Mission 2 Mission 3 Mission 4 Mission 5 Mission 6 Mission 7
Say Hello to the World An Invitation to Earth Small Changes, Big Impact The Neutral Point of View The Veil of Verifiability The Civility Code Looking Good Together

Empty categories

[edit]

Hello, Zsinj,

According to Speedy Deletion policy, empty categories that are tagged CSD C1 must sit for 7 days in Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion before they are deleted ("This criterion applies to categories that have been unpopulated for at least seven days."). One reason for this delay is because categories are sometimes emptied out-of-process but they do not remain empty, they get refilled with pages that had been temporarily or improperly removed. So, please do not delete categories prematurely before 7 days have elapsed since they were tagged for deletion. You can see the time & date of the last edit to the page at the bottom of the deletion tag. Thank you very much. Liz Read! Talk! 22:42, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Liz:, great catch and I appreciate the reminder. I’ll be more diligent about the 7 day delay going forward. ZsinjTalk 22:46, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Is it best practice to undelete them so they can have their due process? ZsinjTalk 22:50, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve restored the ones deleted with an edit on July 2nd or more recently. Thanks again. ZsinjTalk 02:11, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Donald McEachin

[edit]

Dude i've explain why I've removed the edits made by those guys to the Donald McEachin page plenty of times, read the edit history man, Like, really? That meets Wikipedia standards? A bunch of charged attacks on a Congressman flies for good standards on Wikipedia? No other Congressperson or Legislator (Democrat or Republican) has that on their page for good reason!

The removal of cited relevant information and issuing “final warnings” while doing so is considered vandalism. Please seek consensus on the article’s talk babe before making such edits. ZsinjTalk 11:17, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever, just ruin this site for the few of us who use it for unbiased info I guess *shrug* because if y'all aren't going to do anything about it and actively keep it on the page, well what do you expect to happen

The point of the talk page is to discuss the changes. Waiting a handful of minutes is not sufficient. I recommend editing Wikipedia elsewhere while waiting for discussion to occur on the talk page. ZsinjTalk 11:23, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever, and you wonder why people think admins on here are the worst. If you see something wrong, FIX IT

You are already on the right path by seeking consensus on the article talk page. I only encourage patience while your suggestion is first seen and considered by others. In the mean time, please do not remove entire sections of articles without first having agreement from other editors. Thanks. ZsinjTalk 11:26, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well when one of the editors is the one violating the rules, you're in a pickle then sherlock, but i'm sure the condescending tones will help, sure. Thanks

Thank you for protecting my constructive edits!

[edit]

I also made some changes to PA Attorney General Josh Shapiro's page but got blocked for "coatracking". What can I do to restore access?

Please help remove block?

[edit]

They called it "coat racking" lol. What can I do besides appeal to Ohnoitsjamie?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:BlockList&wpTarget=%2310654816

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:History/Josh_Shapiro

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ohnoitsjamie# — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8805:1218:3400:30e3:83e8:791e:ae5a (talk • contribs)

You may make a edit request on the article’s talk page, but I will not reverse the block. ZsinjTalk 02:05, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

  • Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:19, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

COVID cases in Nauru

[edit]

Hello Zsinj, I am trying to have an opinion (from user who contribute to COVID articles) on this news: https://www.solomontimes.com/news/frontliners-test-negative-after-cargo-vessel-scare/10974. It seem that they have 13 positive cases on a ship in Nauru and I want to count them to this country. But, Nauru government still claim be covidfree (https://www.facebook.com/groups/219485726427273/) and reliefweb speak of "International conveyance" (https://reliefweb.int/map/world/epidemic-and-emerging-disease-alerts-pacific-27-july-2021). Have we to count these cases to Nauru? Regards, Sami270 (talk) 07:20, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If Nauru does not count them among their inhabitants, which makes sense because typically crew members have a home country and stay onboard during port calls (as seems to be the case here), then the cases could be accounted for to the ship itself, as seen in several examples on COVID-19 pandemic by country and territory. If the cases are later counted towards their home country or countries, per an additional source, the ship could be removed from the list on that article. Hope this helps. ZsinjTalk 10:37, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Zsinj, thank you for your respond. Other user have a similar opinion as you, these cases can not be included in Nauru total. Maybe we can mention them in COVID-19_pandemic_in_Oceania#Nauru by specifying they count as International conveyance and not for the country. Regards, Sami270 (talk) 07:25, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:IhatetheARCAseries

[edit]

Hi, thank you for blocking the user named above. Could you please let me know why you didn't block them indefinitely, per WP:DISRUPTONLY? They made no actual contribution to the project and even the username suggests they are not here to build an encyclopedia. Best, Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 01:44, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I chose not to in order to see if they’re committed to their vandalism cause or not. If so, yeah, an indef is appropriate. I can WP:AGF to a fault. ZsinjTalk 01:54, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

recent change

[edit]

Hello,

This is regarding the recent changes I made in the article Stratton Parker syndrome that you reverted. The source comes from Seralini, a scientist known for his involvement in the Seralini affair, and with a history of flawed research, as stated in the article Seralini affair. His researches have been declared flawed by multiple regulatory bodies such as the European Food Safety Authority, Food Standards Australia New Zealand, the French Agency for Food, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, etc. among others. Also his research seem to be politically motivated as stated in Seralini affair page. Hence I had removed that claim to avoid spreading misinformation on Wikipedia.

It would be better not to include that part. So please consider removing that claim as it is unreliable.

Thank you2409:4042:2E13:BF34:DE73:DE3D:FD60:6FA2 (talk) 19:23, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your message. While I recognize the flawed research as it relates to Roundup, I don’t think this article is related to that and is more of a case study related to this specific rare syndrome. Has his research on this particular topic been called into question too? ZsinjTalk 19:38, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
His researches are related to certain pesticides and GMOs. As for this particular topic, the research claims that the disease was caused due to pesticides exposure but multiple of his studies related to pesticide and GMOs have been flawed
Also he has exploited some of those involved in his research. To put it simply, he is the Andrew Wakefield of GMOs. So it would be better to not include that part on the safer side.2409:4042:2E13:BF34:65F9:81C6:BBEC:769B (talk) 19:45, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Reading the full text of the one-page article, I agree that there is merely conjecture as it relates to Stratton-Parker Syndrome and there there was no additional research conducted to prove the syndrome existed in the two cases except for similarity in symptoms that do not perfectly match the first two cases. There is enough doubt there, and considering his history of unreliable research into pesticides, for me to agree with you. I’ll undo my own edit. Thanks for reaching out because I’m really glad I got to research this and be proven differently than my original thought! ZsinjTalk 19:55, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Always happy to help. That "scientist" is an anti-GMO activist who promotes false claims that GMOs are harmful, despite the fact that there is a scientific consensus(around 90%) that they are as safe as their non-GMO counterparts, and have many benefits(they have reduced the use of pesticides, (which not only are a health hazard to human and animals, but also detrimental to the environment) by 37% and hence reduced pesticide poisoning, alongside other benefits). His work is akin to climate change deniers, anti vaxxers, and other science distorting cranks like anti-fluoridationists, tobacco deniers(those who downplay/deny the health risks of smoking/secondhand smoke), AIDS deniers, evolution deniers, etc.
That's why I had removed that claim because he is seems to have some kind of an agenda. 2409:4042:2E13:BF34:8534:B77:8E8A:DEA3 (talk) 16:49, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I also encourage you to create an account! Happy editing! ZsinjTalk 17:03, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you and I appreciate that, but I'm more of a reader. But I must say Wikipedia is a very good source for science and it provides accurate info(for almost all part, excluding few) in many science fields that are politically controversial like global warming, vaccines, etc., in an age where people deny climate change, and oppose vaccines. I will definitely continue make corrections(if required) in pages that I come across, when I get the time.2409:4042:2E13:BF34:8534:B77:8E8A:DEA3 (talk) 09:08, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).

Administrator changes

readded Jake Wartenberg
removed Emperor • Viridian Bovary
renamed Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
  • Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
  • The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.

Miscellaneous

  • Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
  • The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2021

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:05, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2021

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).

Administrator changes

removed A Train • Berean Hunter • Epbr123 • GermanJoe • Sanchom • Mysid

Technical news

  • Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
  • The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

[edit]

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Bots Newsletter, December 2021

[edit]
Bots Newsletter, December 2021
BRFA activity by month

Welcome to the eighth issue of the English Wikipedia's Bots Newsletter, your source for all things bot. Maintainers disappeared to parts unknown... bots awakening from the slumber of æons... hundreds of thousands of short descriptions... these stories, and more, are brought to you by Wikipedia's most distinguished newsletter about bots.

Our last issue was in August 2019, so there's quite a bit of catching up to do. Due to the vast quantity of things that have happened, the next few issues will only cover a few months at a time. This month, we'll go from September 2019 through the end of the year. I won't bore you with further introductions — instead, I'll bore you with a newsletter about bots.

Overall

  • Between September and December 2019, there were 33 BRFAs. Of these, Green checkmarkY 25 were approved, and 8 were unsuccessful (Dark red X symbolN2 3 denied, Blue question mark? 3 withdrawn, and Expired 2 expired).

September 2019

Look! It's moving. It's alive. It's alive... It's alive, it's moving, it's alive, it's alive, it's alive, it's alive, IT'S ALIVE!
  • Green checkmarkY Monkbot 16, DannyS712 bot 60, Ahechtbot 6, PearBOT 3, Qbugbot 3 · Dark red X symbolN2 DannyS712 bot 5, PkbwcgsBot 24 · Blue question mark? DannyS712 bot 61, TheSandBot 4
  • TParis goes away, UTRSBot goes kaput: Beeblebrox noted that the bot for maintaining on-wiki records of UTRS appeals stopped working a while ago. TParis, the semi-retired user who had previously run it, said they were "unlikely to return to actively editing Wikipedia", and the bot had been vanquished by trolls submitting bogus UTRS requests on behalf of real blocked users. While OAuth was a potential fix, neither maintainer had time to implement it. TParis offered to access to the UTRS WMFLabs account to any admin identified with the WMF: "I miss you guys a whole lot [...] but I've also moved on with my life. Good luck, let me know how I can help". Ultimately, SQL ended up in charge. Some progress was made, and the bot continued to work another couple months — but as of press time, UTRSBot has not edited since November 2019.
  • Article-measuring contest resumed: The list of Wikipedians by article count, which had lain dead for several years, was triumphantly resurrected by GreenC following a bot request.

October 2019

November 2019

Now you're thinking with portals.

December 2019

In the next issue of Bots Newsletter:
What's next for our intrepid band of coders, maintainers and approvers?

  • What happens when two bots want to clerk the same page?
  • What happens when an adminbot goes hog wild?
  • Will reFill ever get fixed?
  • What's up with ListeriaBot, anyway?
  • Python 3.4 deprecation? In my PyWikiBot? (It's more likely than you think!)

These questions will be answered — and new questions raised — by the January 2022 Bots Newsletter. Tune in, or miss out!

Signing off... jp×g 04:29, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Zsinj/Archive_14&oldid=1192259052"