Jump to content

User talk:Sadads: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Email this user
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Please fix your bad edits: revised prior comment
Would you mind assessing this
Line 850: Line 850:


But that still leaves open the issue: when nothing is wrong to start with, what is the number of errors that it's okay to introduce? [[User:Fabrickator|Fabrickator]] ([[User talk:Fabrickator|talk]]) 15:29, 20 April 2021 (UTC) (revised comment)
But that still leaves open the issue: when nothing is wrong to start with, what is the number of errors that it's okay to introduce? [[User:Fabrickator|Fabrickator]] ([[User talk:Fabrickator|talk]]) 15:29, 20 April 2021 (UTC) (revised comment)

==Would you mind assessing this==
I am having trouble with a user who is keen to [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jerm&oldid=1016224232 [inappropriately close down] active projects, and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jerm&oldid=1019224153 now is refusing to let me restore a project] in an area I am actively working on. Would you mind assessing this situation. Thanks. — [[User:Epipelagic|Epipelagic]] ([[User talk:Epipelagic|talk]]) 05:14, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:15, 22 April 2021

Check out my Archive of Past Actions!

Which specific article(s) do you have concerns with?

You can always ask for WP:REFUND for a prod, or such. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:55, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


The WikiLoop Battlefield weekly barnstar

The WikiLoop Battlefield Barnstar
Congratulations, Sadads

You have been recognized as the weekly champion of counter-vandalism of WikiLoop Battlefieldseeking new name,
a crowdsource counter-vandalism patrol and label tool (http://battlefield.wikiloop.org)
for the week ending at 2020-03-01.


On behalf of the team and community of WikiLoop Battlefield and as Wikipedians, we like to appreciate your contributions, and look forward for more in the future. Also don't forget to bring your Wikipedian friends who you think are also passionate of keeping Wikipedia protected.
Cheers, xinbenlv Talk, Remember to "ping" me 04:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]



Your draft article, Draft:María Teresa Mirabal

Hello, Sadads. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "María Teresa Mirabal".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Veľketaka (talk) 05:15, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists of works

Hey, perhaps you could point to the section of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists of works which recommends you use the {{cite news}} template, complete with the bodged author field commented out and the completely inappropriate access date field, to generate a list of notable works for an author page. And when you can't, because it's not on that page, go and fix Michael Pollan. Thanks. Nick (talk) 22:25, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Questionnaire invitation (a new tool to be developed, to verify media data)

Hi there, I'm developing a tool to assist users in verifying (structured) data of media on commons.

To understand the community's needs, I would like to invite you to participate in this questionnaire: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScbNdJdQYN1yBvEeKne48eWDU6SBsdlUfNBAmZyvUEBkCR1Gg/viewform?usp=sf_link. It should take ~2 minutes.

Thanks a lot. :D

(You received this message as you seems to have experience with structured data on Wikimedia projects.)

-- Gabrielchl (talk) 23:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Structured data

Hi Alex, I'm just not an expert in strutured data. For [this edit] I'm not sure, if the previous state were better - I could see / seek, if it is a tree, or not. But because of I'm not an expert, I won't revert this. Can you explain this for me ? Greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 12:59, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR: The leaf is not the focus of the image, but the whole grown plant -- so if we are using something generic like leaf or branch, they should be qualifiers -- unfortunately we haven't quite figured out the right data modeling for this as a community -- so for right now, I am removing things that are not the focus of the image -- that particular one I probably should have done something like I did with this edit: [1]. However, the obnoxiously bad volume of depicts statements being created because of the CAT tool, I am assuming a lot of these are created by folks not being thoughtful -- sorry. Thanks for asking, Sadads (talk) 20:10, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Alex, thank you for answer. Think I understand it better now. Greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 06:45, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for having me

Dear Admin,

Thank you for having me. I am indeed happy to be here. I accept the cup of tea. I am yet to know how to do this Talk thing. I am sorry if I am violating. It's just that I needed to show my appreciation. I do not know where else to type or click. I am open to learning so please teach me. Please I do not know how to sign with the four tildes. I just copied and paste (the last one).

Thank you all. Ngostary2k (talk) 22:11, 24 May 2020 (UTC) Ngostary2k (Ngostary2k (talk) 22:11, 24 May 2020 (UTC))[reply]

A little request

Could you remove https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Akademiefoto.jpg?

It will be used for private purposes.

Thanks!--2003:CB:2F1D:9732:251B:7714:2E7F:9A4 (talk) 16:56, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean remove? It would have to be done through commons:Commons:Deletion_requestsSadads (talk) 17:46, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

Hello Sadads. I don't know whether I am at right place. I found your name at Peer review volunteer list for literature. I have nominated my article Manilal Dwivedi (19th-century Indian writer) for Peer Review. I want to promote it to FA. It would be great help for me if you review it and suggest some points. Thanks. --Gazal world (talk) 08:48, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Master Skylark

Hi Alex! I hope you are faring will. I have started a draft on a subject more in your wheelhouse than mine. Please pitch in if you are so inclined. Cheers! BD2412 T 16:32, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@BD2412: That looks quite good from what I can tell -- haven't been editing in novels lately, mostly focused on climate change -- putting it live might find some more attention :D Sadads (talk) 15:39, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'll work it up just a bit more and do that today. Thanks! BD2412 T 15:49, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Military units and formations of the United States Navy by war

A tag has been placed on Category:Military units and formations of the United States Navy by war requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:35, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Peaceful transition of power

Hey, I get that you're trying to link people to the new article you created, but you need to actually review what you're linking with FindLink before adding the link. You've added it to a number of articles where it makes zero sense in context, such as Dali (goddess), where the phrase "peaceful transition" in context referred to the transition from one year to the next. I've reverted quite a few of these. Please take more care with automated editing tools in the future. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:43, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jessica Krug

Hi there. If you think the section about Jessica Krug puts unnecessary weight on one small scandal, mightn't we simply shorten the entry instead of deleting it entirely? The same with the Sokal affair. Being a scholarly gatekeeper is the core mission of a university press, so it's reasonable to mention notable failures. Happy to compromise with some brisker version if you thought my prose was too colorful. Nlfkng2eg (talk) 14:31, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Nlfkng2eg: that is the kind of content that should be covered in her page, with like 1 sentence in the main article -- but that much coverage, is violating WP:BLP. Also, almost all those sources are scandal papers -- so I am not convinced that they are particularly reliable sources othrwise. As for the Sokal affair: that has nothing to do with the press, but rather was a problem in one journal -- academic publishing allows the peer review process to largely happen independent of the publisher... so I don't understand the connection you were drawing there (also again, these sources are not very reliable). The other two problems are more systematic in the way they were described, and are more connected with the Press itself. Sadads (talk) 18:22, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Sadads:Thanks for your quick response. You don't say how the prose violates WP:BLP and it's not clear at a glance how, but I would gather that if the passage were framed around the press rather than the author, you'd withdraw your object. When you say "scandal papers," however, the citations were to 1) the NY Post, 2) Quillette, and 3) the monograph itself. I'll give you that the NYP is a tabloid, but there is a meaningful difference between a tabloid (which may be sensational but is still on a spectrum of reportage) and a scandal paper. Nevertheless, the NY Times wrote up the article as well and I'd by happy to cite them instead. Quillette can be provocative, but it doesn't fit anyone's definition of yellow journalism. I'll take away a suggestion to re-work this piece to center the press and citing the Times rather than the Post and to make it brisker in the spirit of not letting it expand to fill up an inappropriate space. . . . In the spirit of compromise, I'll forgo pressing for the Sokal affair, but academic publishing does *not* allow the peer review process to happen independent of the publisher. It is perhaps the scholar readers who comment on the content of a monograph, but the editors have considerable power in that they select the reader and the press assesses an author and project on numerous additional decision variables--the reputation and identity of the author being just two things. Nlfkng2eg (talk) 18:52, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Nlfkng2eg: NYPost is generally unreliable for the Wikimedia community in terms of coverage of political topics and Quillette is treated as a questionable source and described as an opinions paper for the most part. And you should never be citing a book itself. As for the broader question: yes please, make sure it focuses on public critic of the organization itself, not on you synthesizing various pieces of evidence to "prove" that the organization was responsible for some scandal -- these topics both feel like they should be treated on the specific organization or person pages, not on the press page, and certainly not for multiple paragraphs -- its undue weight.Sadads (talk) 19:13, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Sadads: You've made some insinuations or inferences about my intentions that I don't agree with, and I do not see how Quillette is more an opinion periodical than say, Jacobin or The Nation on the left or National Review or National Affairs on the right. But there's enough common ground here that I'll try this again. Thanks. Nlfkng2eg
Oh I am not arguing that those sources are more appropriate either: NYPost is actually much more widely cited than Jacobin for example. But Quillete in particular, has been removed way more often as evidenced by its use in talk pages rather than articles, than in actual content pages -- so its worth paying attention. Yeah please do try again! Sadads (talk) 19:50, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Sadads: Thanks for your feedback. The Chronicle of Higher Ed ran a high-spirited article early last year [2] titled "The Academy's Favorite Hate Read," and I have a hunch (typing to you from the campus of a large university) that it isn't so much that Quillette is all or more opinion, but that their opinions are deliberately and provocatively contrarian. In fact, sometimes what infuriates people is how bloody-mindedly literal or empirical they are. But it's reasonable to say that a reference in an article should persuade people and not turn them off, even if their revulsion is irrational. I'll need to set this aside for a while, but assuming you're watching the Duke press page, you'll see something fresh there in due course. Thanks again.Nlfkng2eg (talk) 22:05, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hi@Sadads:. I am a fawiki user but I rarely cooperate Enwiki. My account in wikimedia has been blocked since March 17, 2020 by a wikimedia admin named (Sealle) and I can not upload any photo. I could not find his Email address. I wonder if you could help me. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by پخش مطلب (talk • contribs) 19:21, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! @پخش مطلب: Offwiki communication is not the best tool for contacting that user: please contact them directly on the wiki where you have been blocked. There is likely a process like the one described at Wikipedia:Appealing a block on that wiki. Each wiki is self governed and run by different editors. Sadads (talk) 23:41, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to review Eat Just page

I work for Eat Just, Inc., a sustainable food company. In compliance with WP:COI, I proposed a draft re-write of the page here that trims promotion, updates the page, etc.

I saw that you participated in the Sustainable food system page and thought I'd see if you were interested in chipping in on Eat Just page. Since I work for the company itself, I am required to rely on more impartial editors to approve any large changes.

Thank you in advance if you do take the time to participate. Anoyes202 (talk) 20:33, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
[reply]

Hi @Anoyes202: I am rather busy at the moment, so won't be able to dig into this until later in the week -- if I don't respond by next Weds or so, please feel free to ping me then. Sadads (talk) 00:32, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • Community sanctions now authorize administrators to place under indefinite semiprotection any article on a beauty pageant, or biography of a person known as a beauty pageant contestant, which has been edited by a sockpuppet account or logged-out sockpuppet, to be logged at WP:GS/PAGEANT.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:52, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"2012 Hurricane season" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect 2012 Hurricane season. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 4#2012 Hurricane season until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 16:50, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CLXXV, November 2020

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:51, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Excerpt insertion

Hello, there appears to be a problem with this edit.

The insertion of text by the template {{Excerpt}} causes corruption of reference 14 (the first one it inserts). Looks like there is a problem with that template. Keith D (talk) 23:13, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Keith D: Thanks, @Sophivorus: is the maintainer -- he may be able to have insight on that, Sadads (talk) 00:36, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 41

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 41, September – October 2020

  • New partnership: Taxmann
  • WikiCite
  • 1Lib1Ref 2021

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:48, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the online edit-a-thon on climate change topics in November 2020

Guide: How to contribute climate change information to Wikipedia

Hi,

I am EMsmile, and I am a part of a group of people wishing to improve climate change-related articles on Wikipedia. We are organising the "Wiki4Climate" online edit-a-thon from 24 November to 1 December 2020. Please take part by registering here. This event is organised by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) and Future Climate for Africa (FCFA). If you have any questions about this event, please feel free to ask your question on the event's talk page here. Please also join us in the event's Slack channel for easier communication and to make this into a collaborative effort. To join the Slack channel, please click here.

We also recommend this new guide to you: Guide: How to contribute climate change information to Wikipedia (Baker, E., McNamara, L., Mackay, B., and Vincent, K. (2020). How to contribute climate change information to Wikipedia: A guide for researchers, practitioners and communicators. Cape Town: Climate and Development Knowledge Network and Future Climate for Africa). EMsmile (talk) 12:55, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New, simpler RfC to define trust levels for WikiLoop DoubleCheck

HI Sadads,
I'm writing to let you know we have simplified the RfC on trust levels for the tool WikiLoop DoubleCheck. Please join and share your thoughts about this feature! We made this change after hearing users' comments on the first RfC being too complicated. I hope that you can participate this time around, giving your feedback on this new feature for WikiLoop DoubleCheck users.
Thanks and see you around online,
María Cruz
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:05, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you would like to update your settings to change the wiki where you receive these messages, please do so here.

New page - Polymateria

Hi Sadads,

My name is Sophie and I am very new to being a Wikipedia user - editing and writing articles. I am contacting you because I saw that you had made changes to the plastic pollution Wikipedia page. I was hoping I could get your help to create a new page for the company I work for, we are developing technology for biodegradable plastic solutions (not oxo-degradation) to help combat plastic pollution and fugitive palstics. As I am currently working at Polymateria, I am unable to create the company Wikipedia page and was hoping you could help me.

If you are happy to help me I can send you the text that I would like to have on the page, external sources included.

Again, as said I am very new to this side of Wikipedia so please do let me know if there is another way I should be trying to make these changes.

Thank you and hope to speak soon, Sophie SophieStromback (talk) 17:28, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @SophieStromback:, so the transparent process would be for you to share a draft on your user sandbox: User:SophieStromback/sandbox, and we can give feedback on it in the Wikimedia space -- for context, make sure you have read the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide, and disclosed on your user page fully -- Sadads (talk) 18:04, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Sadads, Thank you for your response! I have now added a request to my sandbox and also added it to my talk page. Any chance you have a moment to look at it, would love your feedback? Hopefully speak soon and have a great weekend! SophieStromback (talk) 15:55, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:20, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You Note

Thank you so much for your timely intervention. Ptinphusmia (talk) 21:57, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Enhanced weathering

Hi, Sadads. Thank you to offer to collaborate on the improvement of the page Enhanced weathering. I am creating a new version of the page in User:Daniele Pugliesi/Enhanced weathering. I think at the moment the explanations are still confused, but I am trying to make it more clear, first of all distinguishing between chemical, mechanical and biological weathering of rocks. I think it is important for the reader to easily follow all the explanation step by step, so I am trying to make clearer the connection between natural chemical weathering, ocean acidification and enhanced weathering. Probably it could be worth to explain other related processes (natural or artificial) associated with natural and enhanced weathering, in order to have a wider perspective of this technology related to other natural and artificial processes occurring in the Earth.
Please let me know in case you have some suggestion. I will send another messages from time to time to update you on my edits and doubts for this page. Speak you soon. --Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 12:40, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

p.s.: I am not English mother tongue, so probably some sentence I write looks weird or has some mistake. Please let me know in this case, so I can improve my English. :) --Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 12:43, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Daniele Pugliesi: -- that looks great! you should definitely move the revisions to the main article! Great job!Sadads (talk) 10:27, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2020).

Administrator changes

removed Andrwsc • Anetode • GoldenRing • JzG • LinguistAtLarge • Nehrams2020

Interface administrator changes

added Izno

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When God Writes Your Love Story Featured article review

I have nominated When God Writes Your Love Story for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:39, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Plastic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Garbage patch.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:09, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject Newcomer and Historian of the Year awards now open

G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVI, December 2020

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:49, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Kandy Tuskers in 2020

Please see note on your DYK review. Yoninah (talk) 19:59, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Yoninah: Ah, thanks, I hadn't really thought about it in that way -- don't interact much with DYK these days, so some of the critical evaluation skills not there -- that was a QPQ review, Sadads (talk) 11:55, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit reverted as "not helpful"

Hi Sadads,

Like yourself, my goal on Wikipedia is to make it a better place. I saw a sentence that was (rather jarringly) interrupted by a parenthetical statement that created odd phrasing, and I tidied it up. With all due respect and for my own edification, could you please take a second to explain how such an edit could be considered unhelpful? I could understand such a reversion if I had massively expanded the sentence – but I did not.

Thank you for your time, and have a great day.

Sincerely, 1980fast (talk) 22:52, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@1980fast: -- um, I reverted the addition because I misinterpreted your the diff -- sorry about that -- but at the same time, the new phrasing was still not clear. I just tweaked: check out the diff, Sadads (talk) 11:53, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Looks great! I did one further small tweak, removing the period (in compliance with WP:CAPFRAG) since it is no longer a complete sentence. 1980fast (talk) 02:34, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Kendra Pierre-Louis

Hello! Your submission of Kendra Pierre-Louis at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Mujinga (talk) 15:17, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cite Unseen update

Hello! Thank you for using Cite Unseen. The script recently received a significant update, detailed below.

  • You can now toggle which icons you do or don't want to see. See the configuration section for details. All icons are enabled by default except for the new Green checkmark generally reliable icon (described below).
  • New categorizations/icons:
    • Megaphone Advocacy: Organizations that are engaged in advocacy (anything from political to civil rights to lobbying). Note that an advocacy group can be reliable; this indicator simply serves to note when a source's primary purpose is to advocate for certain positions or policies, which is important to keep in mind when consuming a source.
    • Hand writing Editable: Sites that are editable by the public, such as wikis (Wikipedia, Fandom) or some databases (IMDb, Discogs).
    • Red journal with an X Predatory journals: These sites charge publication fees to authors without checking articles for quality and legitimacy.
    • Perennial source categories: Cite Unseen will mark sources as Green checkmark generally reliable, Exlamation mark in orange triangle marginally reliable, No symbol generally unreliable, Stop hand deprecated, and Black X blacklisted. This is based on Wikipedia's perennial sources list, which reflects community consensus on frequently discussed sources. Sources that have multiple categorizations are marked as Blue question mark varied reliability. Note that Green checkmark generally reliable icons are disabled by default to reduce clutter, but you can enable them through your custom config. A special thanks to Newslinger, whose new Sourceror API provides the perennial sources list in a clean, structured format.
  • With the addition of the new categorizations, the biased source icon has been removed. This category was very broad, and repetitive to the new advocacy and perennial sources categorizations that are more informative.

If you have any feedback, requested features, or domains to add/remove, don't hesitate to bring it up on the script's talk page. Thank you! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 23:09, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message as a user of Cite Unseen. If you no longer wish to receive very occasional updates, you may remove yourself from the mailing list.

Kendra Pierre-Louis

Hi, we're unable to promote an article to the main page that has an image licensing problem. Would you like me to return it to the nominations page until the matter is settled? Yoninah (talk) 18:10, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Yoninah: There is nothing wrong with the image, the nominator made a spurious claim without evidence -- it should not interfere with the process on EnWiki, Sadads (talk) 12:26, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I did notice that the author approved the upload. OK, hope this deletion request is resolved quickly. Yoninah (talk) 12:36, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" closing

G'day all, voting for the WikiProject Military history "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" is about to close, so if you haven't already, click on the links and have your say before 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC) for the coord team[reply]

DYK for Kendra Pierre-Louis

On 2 January 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kendra Pierre-Louis, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that climate journalist Kendra Pierre-Louis is a critic of mayonnaise? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kendra Pierre-Louis. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Kendra Pierre-Louis), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 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.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

Stop icon
Your recent editing history at Plant-based diet shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Make your case on the talk page and get WP:CON. You should know better. Project Drawdown is a promotional project, not a WP:SCIRS source; WP:PROMO. Zefr (talk) 22:03, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Del Mar, California, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bluff.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead

Go ahead and continue tagging the sections that concern you. I will correct or even replace them where necessary. I tried to re-add your edit in the history and cause of concern but missed the line. Go ahead and re-add it and continue tagging the relevant sections. I will attend to them soon after. In the meantime readers can see there is an accuracy issue there--Buzles (talk) 22:33, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

About the land, just add your edit, that with technology it's no longer an issue. You didn't need to replace that part. Just add to it that it is less of an issue now with more sophisticated technology.--Buzles (talk) 22:38, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message!

Hi! I saw your message regarding the upcoming work on Climate and Human Rights and I am very interested in this topic and how we can spread information about it. Additionally, I would be happy to take a look at the To Do List on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Climate_change/Justice and see how I can help. MadisonWI1999 (talk) 18:34, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE

Hi, I'm moving here to follow up on the brief exchange that we had at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Annaïse Heglar, in the interest of not clogging up the AfD. I think your suggestion makes a lot of sense. Varying interpretations of this policy seem, to me, to be causing weekly (if not almost daily) problems in AfD discussions — I just saw it come up again at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruce Lerman. And as you noted it's not just esoteric stuff, but will probably come up more and more often, and is causing severe arguments not just on Wikipedia but also on social media, with lots of nasty implications for peoples' well-being and Wikipedia's reputation. So I think an RfC or a Village Pump thread is a sensible next step. The problem is that I don't want to poison the well by proposing a clumsy change that has no hope of making anything better, and I'm honestly not totally sure what I think it should be changed to. Do you have any thoughts about what a good way to proceed would be? No worries if not, I just thought that your suggestion of trying to make sure that the policy is aligned with consensus was a good one, and I want to be sensible about the next step. - Astrophobe (talk) 19:21, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Astrophobe: I agree with you on doing an RFP post deletion discussion -- its always delicate on these things, because sometimes attention has the opposite effect of those starting the conversation. I actually have a hard time imagining, her AFD for example, not concluding that she is a public person -- she is all over the U.S. environmental movement, and is actively promoting storytelling about environmental justice... the whole goal of the book All We Can Save is to promote women leaders in the space... they were included in the book because the editors thought they were notable.
But I could see a version of the policy that says something like "living persons not newsworthy or of regular public comment yet documented because of their livelihood that request removal", but the problem is that for every exception we make through these requests, the closer we get down the slippery slope of Right to be forgotten. I empathize with the reaction she has on Twitter, but have a hard time imagining a version of these rules that is appropriate for effective (yet inclusive) encyclopedic coverage... But then again, its been a long time since I have spent time in the trenches of AFDs on BLPs. Sadads (talk) 21:43, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVII, January 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:06, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes - Issue 42

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 42, November – December 2020

  • New EBSCO collections now available
  • 1Lib1Ref 2021 underway
  • Library Card input requested
  • Libraries love Wikimedia, too!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Climate change in Kenya

On 28 January 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Climate change in Kenya, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that malaria is expected to become more prevalent due to the impacts of climate change in Kenya? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Climate change in Kenya. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Climate change in Kenya), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help on Wikiproject Climate change project

Hi,

any chance you want to help out on increasing coverage and info on this ? Carbon sink upscaling additional info on carbon sink upscaling (missing info) --Genetics4good (talk) 16:36, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Genetics4good: My expertise/skill is more on describing impacts, and adaptations in different contexts so that we help readers see the connections to topics they care about-- I am not sure how to solve that problem in particular. Maybe through: Intended Nationally Determined Contributions -- which is very underdeveloped and doesn't really address this set of issues i.e. it looks like there was a lot of criticism of this from India in their NDC. The other option could be to build something into the Carbon sequestration article. Do you have a specific set of documents/research you want to draw information from? Sadads (talk) 15:49, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sadads, I'm discussing this at the Wikiproject talk page. Refer to that for more info which I am posting along the way.

--Genetics4good (talk) 09:46, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2021

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

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Infographics

Want to post this here as there is no need for conflict. Dispite what was said at Wikiproject COVID Infographics are used alot on medical articles. They are a great way to convey information especially for those with comprehension problems and non-native readers . Do you have a commons cat where this are like C:Category:Medical diagrams in English?--Moxy 🍁 03:09, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Moxy: Thats in my professional capacity -- but yeah the infographics are all at Category:Graphics_produced_by_World_Health_Organization -- I will reach out to you about using them more in my professional capacity, Sadads (talk) 11:59, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Loksmythe. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Injaz Lebanon, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Loksmythe (talk) 14:36, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion for 100% renewable energy

An article that you have been involved in editing—100% renewable energy—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:28, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]


An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Land defender, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Environmental defender.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago

Awesome
Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:01, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: Thank you so much! Sadads (talk) 11:10, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

=

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, February 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:03, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2021

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

Administrator changes

added TJMSmith
removed Boing! said Zebedee • Hiberniantears • Lear's Fool • Only • WGFinley

Interface administrator changes

added AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
  • When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
  • There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

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

Excerpt tree

Hi! I notice that many or even most of the articles where you add excerpts are related to environmental issues. Thus I'm wondering if maybe an excerpt tree is emerging already. In the Spanish Wikipedia, I've developed several trees, including one rooted in climate change. Are you aware of the concept/technique? Cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 13:11, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sophivorus: Added a few, but several are doing something funky where there is no transclusion happening (see the Algae tree). Maybe something is wrong with the method for identifying them? Sadads (talk) 13:42, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Sadads: Amazing!! I hope you find them as useful as I do, and not just a curiosity. :-) As to the bug, I'll look into it! Sophivorus (talk) 14:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agricultural Productivity

What's up? 86.83.56.115 (talk) 13:48, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I want to leave, there's a storm coming and I must secure stuff, but here's a try guessing what your problem is with my edits. I'm guessing from your edit history that you are primarily concerned with climate change, and you specifically didn't like the one edit where I deleted your contribution to the article regarding that subject. Annoying, you could of just re-added that part with an edit summary explaining why you think it's necessary to have it in there, instead of reverting all the improvements I made to grammar. My motivation is thus: the article in question is a simple economical concept. I generally edit agriculture articles. There are very many editors who want to promote climate change stuff, and very few interested in agribusiness -this is true throughout the western world, where almost no one is employed in farming, but everyone has an opinion about it. Whilst there is nothing wrong with that, agricultural articles often get crammed full of this topic. I fail to see how that sentence I removed helps a reader who wants to understand, or read about, agricultural productivity. I mentioned it comes across as propaganda. Inherent bias is another term. Imagine how some farming student looking this term would sigh ... blablabla climate change again. Too much promotionalism can harm what you are trying to achieve - informing people about climate change. Can you feel me? 86.83.56.115 (talk) 14:59, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What you are saying makes no sense -- we don't write content for how people feel....land use, and how its connected to climate change is absolutely central topic. Any economic concept is connected to the environmental and social systems that it influences -- by your same logic we should say nothing about food security in the article. You are removing an appropriately weighted concept again and again, Sadads (talk) 05:18, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Can you feel me" is a colloquialism from hip-hop music, it means do you understand what I'm trying to say? -perhaps you are unfamiliar with the term. Please, I removed your text, then re-added it as a compromise to you, then edited it to fit the subject matter better -I did not remove stuff again and again. Try and be a bit more collaborative. You've been around for a long time I see: you know how things work around here. I personally think food security is important and didn't touch that part, the third editor to join the fray must have. I agree that any economic concept has environmental and social implications, but I disagree that it is a central topic, and that's actually the reason I think it's superfluous and repetitive: a reader simply looking for info on the subject of economy or agriculture will not require this info. People have different viewpoints, this you must accept (as I must). Either way, I do believe the article is improving with the three of us fighting about it. 86.83.56.115 (talk) 14:56, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the expression -- your example of the ideal reader for the page appears to be quite radical than mine. I am imagining the average reader to be a random person or government administrator who sees a term "agricultural productivity" and needs to understand how that effects society and make a decision about how they respond to the topic -- anything economic has a human behavior and related impacts on society and the environment (thinking a bit like groups like Freakonomics would). Also, the climate adaptation literature spends a huge amount of energy and time on productivity v land degradation and climate change weather changes, etc, so we need to expand that coverage quite significantly in the article. As for the other editor -- they are prone to fringe theories about human overpopulation -- so I would be very skeptical of anything they are adding -- you and I have already had to correct several rather blatant moments of bias/racism. If you are interested I could really use some more eyes on human overpopulation -- that article is a trainwreck, Sadads (talk) 18:37, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, the reader I was thinking of was myself as a student of agronomy a few decades ago... I'd sort of hope a "government administrator" has better sources than Wikipedia, hahaha! Regarding "human overpopulation", this concept actually really disturbs me -I consider it a fascist fringe theory unsupported by science, and I have deleted much promotion of it on unrelated pages over the years. If we say there is overpopulation, this implies there is a percentage of the population which must be culled. I always wonder who has to die according to these people. Blacks? Republicans? Indians? Jews? It is evil nihilism and crying about spilled milk -we have the world population we have: we must deal it, not complain that it would be better if all these people didn't exist. The moral thing to do is to address the problems of the world by helping people, not whining that they should be killed like Hitler's theories of Lebensraum. It's unfortunate, I'm familiar with the works of David Pimentel, he also wrote much else about agroecology and agroforestry, but on Wikipedia it is that one stupid essay that keeps on being quoted. I wrote most of the articles on normal overpopulation, carrying capacity and other ecological concepts being abused by that article, and had to constantly fight with a guy, didn't want to touch the human overpopulation one with a 5-ft pole at the time ... I'm so against the idea it will be hard for me to stay neutral. You are right, it is absolutely terrible - too long and too much OR. If it were up to me I'd delete huge parts. Ah, I see you've argued with the editor in question on the talk page of that article... unconstructive... sigh!
Regarding your suggestion about expanding the article, I added an online source with this edit that touches on all the subjects you mention from a more economic perspective. Perhaps you will find something useful there? Perhaps we should add something more about the importance of women regarding agricultural productivity. My interests are agriculture, ecology and botany -not so much environmentalism. However, real life calls -the storm is over and the damage has been extensive, I've never had this many glass panes smashed before, and 'tis the season for getting some growing done! I'm raring to go now this horrible corona is nearing some sort of resolution- so I will unfortunately be less available in the coming time. I'm actually taking a break from taking a break from Wikipedia. Regards, Leo 86.83.56.115 (talk) 21:00, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the input -- yeah I am getting up the willpower to start a conversation on the Fringe Theory Noticeboard about the article -- its a mess, and that editor consistently re-adds content that is fringe at best, and malicious in a lot of situations. I hope that as you come back we can continue to collaborate -- I think there is room for both of our approaches to the topic -- and other agricultural topics -- so I hope we get a chance to work on it, Sadads (talk) 22:16, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! So we are not alone on watching over the very problematic Overpopulation. PS: thanks for reporting the user. Nsae Comp (talk) 08:26, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Freaked Out" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Freaked Out. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 11#Freaked out until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 12:07, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

For your work on the Human overpopulation article. I keep seeing it pop up on my watchlist and you have been extending effort there for some time now. Seems like monumental task! :) S0091 (talk) 22:22, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It really bothers me -- because some of the research is legitimate, but some of the way in which its is currently compiled on the article is as if the "statistics" result in an "obvious" conclusion -- which is not the case when you read up on this stuff :P Also, now that Buzle is blocked I am feeling a bit more liberty in removing the marginal stuff -- hopefully whoever comes along in the future can actually summarize the scholarship that does specific attribution arguments -- and describe it as an argument :P Its going to require some really careful, careful reading of the content we have though -- its sloppy at best, Sadads (talk) 22:29, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@S0091: Realized I forgot to ping :P Sadads (talk) 22:30, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Overconsumption, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Human development.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 42

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 42, January – February 2021

  • New partnerships: PNAS, De Gruyter, Nomos
  • 1Lib1Ref
  • Library Card

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CLXXIX, March 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:56, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fertilizer

If you wish to discuss fertilizer article, I am very happy to so. It is a very large area of culture and technology, and like all large topics, it includes many controversies. It seems inappropriate to introduce the topic from the perspective of Mother Jones, which is not exactly NPOV journal. In any case I will be around. --Smokefoot (talk) 14:02, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WikiLoop 2020 Year in Review

Wikipedia mini globe handheld
Wikipedia mini globe handheld

Dear editors, developers and friends:

Thank you for supporting Project WikiLoop! The year 2020 was an unprecedented one. It was unusual for almost everyone. In spite of this, Project WikiLoop continued the hard work and made some progress that we are proud to share with you. We also wanted to extend a big thank you for your support, advice, contributions and love that make all this possible.

Head over to our project page on Meta Wikimedia to read a brief 2020 Year in Review for WikiLoop.

Thank you for taking the time to review Wikipedia using WikiLoop DoubleCheck. Your work is important and it matters to everyone. We look forward to continuing our collaboration through 2021!

María Cruz
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BR-319

Do not do experiments, as you did in the article BR-319. The article is a translation of the Portuguese version (native language of the object in question). You removed the road map, reliable sources from the main Brazilian newspapers and all kinds of unacceptable vandalism. Restrain yourself or it will be a reason to ask for your block. Rauzaruku (talk) 15:39, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced text brought from the Wiki in Portuguese, written mostly by the user Naldo Arruda, who lives in the Amazon region (therefore, has much more reliability to write about this BR than any user who lives outside Brazil and only reads biased information and partial by the world press), was supervised by Wiki administrators in Portuguese and the version there is considered neutral and informative enough not to be disputed by anyone. You want to start a purposeful R3R fight, right? Your will is visible. Rauzaruku (talk) 16:44, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Rauzaruku: I am an admin on English Wikipedia -- I don't respond well to threats. Consensus on Portuguese Wikipedia does not stand for consensus on English. We leave ecological content on English Wikipedia because it is part of the economic impact of a topic (including very controversial highways). Sadads (talk) 16:46, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The whole ecological issue is addressed in the text you deleted. To repeat: this text that you deleted, in addition to being written by a RESIDENT OF THE REGION, has communist sources such as O Globo and Folha de São Paulo, who are totally interested in destroying Jair Bolsonaro. You better stop thinking that the article should be yours just because you are an administrator or not. It is not your job. Rauzaruku (talk) 16:51, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

LTNS, hope you're well! Just leaving this here as a courtesy, since the person who created the discussion failed to do so: Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Multiple accounts. Thank you. GorillaWarfare (talk) 16:56, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

Precious
Six years!
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:27, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerda Arendt: Awww thanks! Glad to see you again, Sadads (talk) 12:18, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
my pleasure also, to see a recipient still active, and even responding --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:59, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gross domestic product, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Human development.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Flight test flights of the United States Air Force

A tag has been placed on Category:Flight test flights of the United States Air Force requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 13:59, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive

Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive#Participants and create a worklist at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:26, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2021

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

Administrator changes

removed Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
  • Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.

Technical news

  • When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
  • Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Overpopulation

Sadads, I think you are a bit overzealous with your edits, especially deletions. The link to the Global Footprint Network is directly relevant to human overpopulation, so please explain why you deleted the link. You are right that there are other organizations, and they should and will be added later too. So, instead of just deleting stuff, just add others, if think they should be treated equally. Thanks, Peteruetz (talk) 17:41, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Peteruetz: See also sections are not for a list of everything that could be possibly related to a topic (that is what categories are for) -- you should have a direct discussion of the topic in the article if it rises to the point of analysis. See MOS:SEEALSO -- but the general guidance is not to include everything that could possibly be include. For organizations like Global Footprint -- there should be direct discussion of the entity in the article or a new section on organizations supporting arguments about overpopulation. See also sections aren't just arbitrary dumping grounds of "kindof related" stuff, Sadads (talk) 17:50, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Besides, you have already worked on a list that is focused on these issues: List of population concern organizations, Sadads (talk) 19:13, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CLXXX, April 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 02:09, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please fix your bad edits

Following are changes you made which appear to me to be "bad" in some respect or other. This is after reviewing a small handful of the changes you made.

Fabrickator (talk) 05:35, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fabrickator Only two of the four were inappropriate among the ones you point at, and the error rate among others is quite low, I usually don't have that high of an error rate -- so not sure what you are talking about, Sadads (talk) 11:48, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Guess I'm a little more particular. For instance, this seems confusing:
n carbon sequestration
which probably should have been (ignoring wikilinking)
n-carbon sequestration
to begin with.

FWIW, I have seen other cases where only the word "sequester" or "sequestration" (adjacent to "carbon") was hyperlinked to "carbon sequestration". That makes good sense to me, e.g.

the advantages of carbon sequestration include...

But that still leaves open the issue: when nothing is wrong to start with, what is the number of errors that it's okay to introduce? Fabrickator (talk) 15:29, 20 April 2021 (UTC) (revised comment)[reply]

Would you mind assessing this

I am having trouble with a user who is keen to [inappropriately close down active projects, and now is refusing to let me restore a project in an area I am actively working on. Would you mind assessing this situation. Thanks. — Epipelagic (talk) 05:14, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sadads&oldid=1019226800"