Jump to content

User talk:3family6

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

Books & Bytes – Issue 63

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 63, May – June 2024

  • One new partner
  • 1Lib1Ref
  • Spotlight: References check

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for coordinators is now open!

[edit]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:40, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 September 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Egypt school user templates

[edit]

A tag has been placed on Category:Egypt school user templates indicating that it is currently empty, 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 it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 17:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 64

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 64, July – August 2024

  • The Hindu Group joins The Wikipedia Library
  • Wikimania presentation
  • New user script for easily searching The Wikipedia Library

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:33, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open!

[edit]

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open! A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. Register your vote here by 23:59 UTC on 29 September! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 September 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:07, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Kekal

[edit]

Kekal has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 15:28, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 October 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 November 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:03, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Always precious

[edit]

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:09, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 65

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 65, September – October 2024

  • Hindu Tamil Thisai joins The Wikipedia Library
  • Frankfurt Book Fair 2024 report
  • Tech tip: Mass downloads

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Christian metal

[edit]

One source is more than sufficient, if even needed at all. The idea is that if you were to put "tomato" into "list of fruits", you'd visit the article tomato and the connection is verified there, so it's unnecessary to re-confirm something that's already verifiable in the target article, let alone have multiple sources. I think using one bland book, and citing it repeatedly though would deter refspamming. I don't think Indie Vision Music meets WP:RS, but has there been a discussion somewhere? Please see huge COI between a major contributor and that publication at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#User:Metalworker14 Graywalls (talk) 14:39, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Graywalls I'm fine with it being reduced to one citation, and bands cited in the lead not needing one. The list is contentious, so there do need to be citations.
I was unaware of that COI, but I've used Indie Vision Music for years here. It meets the criteria for RS and it's listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Christian_music/Sources--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I say that if the only verification is entirely self-proclaimed... and work towards purging some of the bands through AfD or PROD as many are likely non-notable as well. Graywalls (talk) 14:53, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls Or you could, you know, use the sources that were on the list to rescue the articles. Come on, dude.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was talking verifiability wise. There are plenty that passes genre verification while not passing NALBUM. Graywalls (talk) 15:03, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls if they've made it onto the list, they're reliable. Respectfully, I've been working in this particular niche on this project since 2010. A lot of entries need rescuing, but there's plenty of sourcing for it (some of it now on Internet Archive, unfortunately, making it harder to access, but still).--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:06, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm cleaning up the refs, and I agree that some of the "newer" entries (added less than ≈8 years ago) might not be up to notability standards. I was a bit annoyed yesterday, because of long-term burnout from trying to hold up this subject area mostly alone now, I apologize for getting a bit snippy.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls Over the years, this or that band will get removed (or added) by an editor, plus these are BLP statements that involve deeply personal beliefs. Those issues are why there's been long-standing consensus that every entry needs a citation proving the band is metal and is considered Christian.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:03, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indie Vision Music isn't mentioned in that COI--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:54, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have not figured out a good way to add it there and link the two together without violating WP:OUTING. Although, the Metalworker14 and IVM COI should be fairly easy to figure out using Google and a bit of subject area knowledge. Also, I suspect WP:RS status, because I am not sure if authors' posts make it into public space similar to Forbes and HuffPo contributor articles or they go through editorial board with qualified editors comparable to say Vogue magazine. Can you explain their editorial process since you're vouching for them as reliable? Graywalls (talk) 15:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls will do, I believe it's been discussed somewhere, too 3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:04, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls I used IVM prior to Metalworker14, I believe, and I'm not affiliated with it, anyway, so it's not a COI for me.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:08, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll check on the WP:RS status on RS/N. I see the list in your question don't have many editor participation, as number of editors overseeing it. As a hypothetical example, f you ask Wiki Project Trains, they might say some rail fanning book on trains sold through Author House is reliable as fans consider that author an expert even if that said author's formal citation creds don't satisfy WP:EXPERTSPS Graywalls (talk) 15:37, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls there's long been a lack of active editors in this subject, which is also why I'm a bit annoyed that you would just delete articles rather than helping rescue them. Often it's just me now in this subject area and I don't have the time that I once did. I for one vet sources and there's been many I've rejected and removed.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My process, which has been a long-standing process and how it's done at the RS noticeboard, is to check for editorial staff, if there's a print version, and see if other, already established RS either refers to or uses content from that source (thus demonstrating a reputation of trustworthiness) or otherwise discuss the source (for instance, very recently I added Angelic Warlord because, in addition to the multiple staff for the site, an academic journal article said it's an accurate source). I do try to get consensus from other editors, it's been increasingly difficult as I'm often the lone person doing it (and the more recent contributor Metalworker14 is apparently a COI and likely paid editor).--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:57, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That user Metalworker14 was just blocked today after their undisclosed paid editing allegation was substantiated. Graywalls (talk) 01:14, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls thank you. I saw that. Also, while working on tidying the Christian metal list I saw an article (I can't remember which one, I'll find it again) which was created by them and had a COI notice from 2015! I think the now-blocked editor Walter Görlitz put it up. Why that didn't get escalated I have no idea. Metalworker14 might have very well been engaging in undisclosed paid editing for 10 years! Well, it's finally addressed, now. I guess the only thing for it is to clean up, salvage, and possibly, if need be, demolish what they've left after all
this.3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:55, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All record labels that do not meet WP:NCORP should be deleted. As for bands, WP:NBAND 5&6 are rubbish in my opinion and I am currently challenging to have that removed. Graywalls (talk) 02:06, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls I agree to both of those --3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 11:40, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls ah, I agree about the COI. I figured out which individual you were referring to. That certainly would make that individual unreliable for anything regarding the bands they are part of. I wouldn't say that disqualifies the publication, or author (unless paid editing) just as HM and Doug Van Pelt are reliable, just not for Lust Control. Incidentally, the founder of IVM (different from the suspected Symphony of Heaven COI individual) writes for "HM" as well, which is one reason (in addition to the fact that there's a staff and it's not just one lone person) that I and others have long-presumed IVM being reliable (HM is Vogue for Christian metal).--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:41, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's not quite how it works. If you and I were both auto enthusiasts who track race together and we buddy up with you being the writer and me being the editor, that's not sufficient to make our web zine as a WP:RS with editorial oversight and I feel that many of these music zines/magazines are of comparable setup and are only a notch above a one person blog and comparable to WP:FORBESCON. Graywalls (talk) 15:53, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls the connection I did above, with HM referencing IVM and sharing writers is how demonstrating the reputation of accuracy has been done. For at least a decade now. Volunteer staff are explicitly allowed, as well.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:59, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll leave IVM alone for the time being. I'll run it through RS/N when I have a moment, or you can if you'd like. Graywalls (talk) 16:04, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls I'll run it. It'll be later as right now I'm on mobile and that'll be easier to do on PC --3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:06, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done. See the discussion. Thanks for bringing this up, as I'm using IVM in an article draft and have used them countless times over the past 11+ years.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 22:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Graywalls I noticed that the individual in question no longer writes for IVM since they joined a particular band (which you have referenced elsewhere) 3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 13:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls your HM discussion is precisely an example of why editors who frequent a subject matter are often the best people to ask regarding the source. Because they're actually familiar with the literature. For example, I have two separate books that I have purchased years ago primarily for editing Wikipedia, and both of them discuss HM and consider it a good source. And I've already mentioned the Christianity Today coverage previously. I've also seen recently an article in a Texas newspaper interviewing Van Pelt and it mentions the importance of his magazine and how many readers it had. That one specific editor on here had never heard of the magazine does not mean it's not reliable or not notable.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:17, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations now open for the WikiProject Military history newcomer of the year and military historian of the year

[edit]

Nominations now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2024! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Nominations are open here and here respectively. The nomination period closes at 23:59 on 30 November 2024 when voting begins. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:20, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Christian metal artists, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alternative Press.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Symphony of Heaven

[edit]

The more I look at it, the shakier it's looking. The most recent edit, the author of the source I removed was former/current band member. This band is from Indiana. A lot of edits other than logged-in edits by Metalworker14 are anonymous IP edits from the US State of Indiana. It's possible the band is actually NOT notable all many of these non-independent sources are there to mask the lack of notability or to present things in a way the band wants to present it. Do you feel this article has a successful chance of deletion with AfD? Graywalls (talk) 21:46, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Graywalls in the current state, absolutely it would get deleted. I would say to check and see if other, more clearly established/agreed, reliable or independent sources provide coverage - HM, Cross Rhythms, Jesus Freak Hideout, etc. if you're still not seeing anything, then absolutely go for it.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 22:33, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As an aside, well done on catching that COI and paid editing. I think they'd been doing this in some capacity since at least 2014-15. Again, I have to go back and find the article, but I think Walter Görlitz (now blocked for sockpuppeting) I noticed something fishy and tagged the article with a COI notice. it's a shame that they ended up getting blocked for an unrelated disputed, because I think their input for both the Indie Vision Music discussion and this issue would have been very helpful. Ah, well, what's happened has happened. I appreciate that you've the galvanized me to get back into a bit of editing (I was actually working on a piece in my sandbox, which I paused on because I rely on Indie Vision Music for some of it). I'll try and help do some cleanup and tagging, I already got to a few articles from the Christian metal list.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 22:42, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've done a search, Graywalls, and I can only find two sources of good coverage - HM and The Metal Resource. Generally, at least three sources are needed to prove notability. I think it's safe to nominate for deletion, personally.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:07, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 November 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:40, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:23, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tooth & Nail product catalog

[edit]

I don't want to carry on an extensive one on one on the Afd but I am not understanding your ground for saying the list is notable. Something like the iPhone, the series of this product line is notable with a reliable source like this covering the line https://www.computerworld.com/article/1622162/evolution-of-apple-iphone.html however, what indication is there leading you to believe Tooth & Nails Discography is notable? Graywalls (talk) 16:38, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Graywalls there are multiple, non-trivial discussions in reliable sources about the album output (style, quantity, significance) of the label. One could create an article about that topic "Output of Tooth & Nail records".--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:41, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
basically, there is reliable source coverage about Tooth and Nail albums as a collective, similar to that Computer World article about iPhone generations.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:42, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't make sense to me. Are you saying that there's only sources for T&N as an organization? "there are reliable sources"... which are? Graywalls (talk) 19:03, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls no, I'm saying that not only are there sources for the organization, but some of those sources discuss the organization's output as a collective. 3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:15, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls by the way, regarding the Solid State deletion discussion, you are correct that NCORP applies to record labels. And it absolutely should.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 10:28, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

N BAND proposal

[edit]

Hello, so I am getting a vibe that you don't want anyone else touching the proposal after I struck out two of the lines at Wikipedia:Band notability proposal. Is that a fair presentation? I'm not familiar with PROPOSALs but it's in the Wikipedia space rather than your personal user space, s I was of impression that anyone can work on it without anyone overruling anyone. Graywalls (talk) 21:25, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Graywalls I'm not very familiar with proposals but I don't think anyone should alter it because it's actively being discussed. I asked at the discussion page if I can go ahead with altering it if no vote has been taken, but no one has responded yet. So I'm just trying to be cautious and leave it untouched until it consensus is reached. 3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 21:46, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then, why aren't you doing it in your user space? I STRONGLY object to the presence if item #5/#6 carried over from the existing text. Graywalls (talk) 21:48, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls because proposals are made in Wikipedia space. It's not a draft, it's a final proposal that I've submitted for discussion and vote. If you object to part of it, state that at the centralized discussion at Village pump (proposals) --3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 21:52, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's just something you went forward with, on your own terms with the discussion still going. Graywalls (talk) 21:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls no, the discussion is of the proposal I created. I suggest you read about how proposals are done, I followed that process. I did skip the drafting and feedback stage, which was perhaps not the best idea. If this one fails, you're welcome to propose another.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 22:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am looking at other proposals where multiple editors have worked on it. I'm just questioning whether you can keep others from editing it. Graywalls (talk) 22:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls I don't know. My concern is that if it's edited after people have voted, then there could be complaints that this is not actually what they supported.3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 22:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Schaliach

[edit]

So, it does not show in talk page log, but when you look in the page log, it shows that it was closed alongside another AfD, then a re-direct was created, and you converted the re-direct into a page. So, given the deletion history may I suggest you try to submit the page through Article for Creation process? See: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Schaliach Graywalls (talk) 13:37, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC is not required. I re-built the article from scratch. Since what was essentially a PROD was contested, challenge the article via the deletion process. Notability is demonstrated.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 13:38, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that that was a deletion discussion of Fleshkiller, not the Schaliach article as it stands.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 13:40, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's the page log for Schaliach. So why was it deleted? Graywalls (talk) 13:50, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. But, the article now is a complete re-build by myself. It was not created by Metalwork14.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:03, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the consensus was that Fleshiller at the time was not notable. It certainly was not salted or anything close to that.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:06, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
AfC says "Established users are encouraged to create articles on their own if they do not need support from reviewers." I've been an active editor on here for 14 years and have created hundreds of articles and have brought an article up to FA status. Respectfully, I think your prejudice against Metalworker14 (which is valid) is clouding your judgment here.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 13:42, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You do realize that I was the first person to comment on that AfD, and recommended deleting Fleshkiller at that time? Do your due diligence and properly read through those discussions and ALSO check for sources. That's basic AfD etiquette.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 13:50, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Before you make assumptions about my judgment being clouded by who created the article, look at the supposedly "created from scratch" article. Just as a starter, it contained sourcing to a freaking personal website. Also, there's telltale sign of notability bombing, like has been compared with big name, another big name, yet another big name... by borderline internet fanzine from the early 2000s/late 90s when simply being a printed publication was an indication of something. So those things were taken into account of doubtful notability. Graywalls (talk) 14:07, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The "a freaking personal website" is by a professional music journalist, and is mentioned multiple reliable sources including an academic book. And that's one source.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The names mentioned are the sonic comparisons, they aren't name-dropping.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:18, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls I created the article, you know you can just ask me about these things, right?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:20, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Phantom Tollbooth source

[edit]

Hey, just picking your brain on this - what are your thoughts on The Phantom Tollbooth as a source? I'm reworking an article that uses it as a source (Conspiracy No. 5), but frankly I'm not sure it passes muster from an editorial standpoint. Take a look at it here - three reviews, and it seems kinda amateurish. Today it just seems like a blog. Is there a cutoff point for reliability? Toa Nidhiki05 03:12, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Toa Nidhiki05 this one I've presumed was reliable because it was listed at the Christian music sources before I was active as an editor, over 14 years ago. Functionally I don't see how it's any different from other sites deemed reliable, as it had a site operator and joint editorial staff with other people underneath. I was thinking today about how I don't think I've ever actually looked into use by others of this source. But I don't see a reason to automatically reject it. I guess it's a question of do you think that these reviews are going to improve the article at all?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 03:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough! I don't think I'll be using it in the improved article - the reviews don't add much here, aside from emphasizing how much they think Mac Powell sounds like Eddie Vedder and Third Day sounds like Pearl Jam - but I looked in archive and they did have some decently impressive interviews. Just curious, since I've never actually used it for anything and rarely seen it ever used. Toa Nidhiki05 03:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Toa Nidhiki05 "and rarely seen it ever used" - you don't read my articles, then, lol (I don't mind) 3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 03:49, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, to be fair I've taken a few years break from CCM articles so maybe I just forgot. Toa Nidhiki05 04:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Toa Nidhiki05 I've also not been that active anymore --3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 13:09, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Toa Nidhiki05 ah, so I rediscovered that Powell references them in his 2002 encyclopedia, and calls them and True Tunes the best internet sites (at that time). I think this is one reason why I haven't seen issues with using them.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 20:21, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, that definitely helps then. Toa Nidhiki05 20:35, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards

[edit]

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2024! The top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Cast your votes here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2024. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:58, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Metalworker14

[edit]

I seem to vaguely recall conflict of interest concerns involving them came up sometime in the past, before the most recent concerns in the last few months. Right? Do you happen to remember where if so? Graywalls (talk) 03:54, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Graywalls There was one, but I'd have to dig through their article creations.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 10:02, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They've asked about where a COI concern about them has came up before. I'm not totally certain, but I vaguely recall there was a discussion (long before I became involved on this matter) that commented on their potential COI. Does that sound about right? Graywalls (talk) 17:58, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graywalls maybe. I've been trying to look into this myself.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:00, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Outing allegation

[edit]

3family6, I have checked with an admin and oversight concerning the allegation you have made at Special:Diff/1261885855 out of abundance of caution and no wrongdoing on my part was found and I feel you may need to very carefully read "exceptions" in WP:OUTING Graywalls (talk) 23:18, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Graywalls if you checked and no wrong doing was found, that's good enough for me.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 23:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
3family6, outing is a serious violation, so you need to be careful before you go around implicating others of doing such as you did to me. Graywalls (talk) 23:23, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. My concern was the discussion of the IP address of the user. I did read through the policy and thought carefully. I'm glad that nothing came of this, and I will remember this for if I encounter a similar future situation.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 23:27, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, need to add: to be clear, I don't believe you were intentionally trying to harass the account and I'm glad that it was not deemed a case of outing. I acted out of an abundance of caution myself.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 23:32, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:3family6&oldid=1261997728"