User:Thinker78/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Arbitration case[edit]

Abuse of power. Undue censorship. Status quo stonewalling. Disregard of the consensus policy. Disregard of the dispute resolution process. Unnecessary threats. Abusive use of administrator tools. Not assuming good faith. Disregard of policies backing edits. Editorial lynching. Complete lack of collegiality. Rudeness. Disregard of experience of editor and treating them like an anonymous troll.

Block 03:11, 10 February 2024 Block reasons: forum shopping, failing to listen,

I was provided two diffs [7] [8] as justification for my blocking, with the statement, "You were yet again forum shopping in places where user conduct is not discussed." These are edits I made after reading beforehand the Dispute Resolution policy and following its guidance. I was trying to get uninvolved input and have community consensus in the discussion (even if it was against me), which is why I objectively publicized it elsewhere. I was involved in a dispute regarding the comment of an ip. I reverted twice[1][2] and was not planning on doing it again due to self-made personal guideline of not reverting more in a dispute. There was discussion in my talk page about dispute (Chemtrails). Regardless, admin Johnuniq warned me of block if I "reinstate obvious nonsense again".[3] There was no attempt to discuss beforehand my concerns, violating the principle of consensus and imposing a point of view by way of admin threat. I had noticed in several times that ip comments that seemed out of place were legitimate and were unduly removed.[4][5] It can take me an hour or more of research to investigate a removed ip comment and I only remove some, after finding other removals legitimate. I do this because I don't like undue censorship and try to be as objective as possible in my editorial work. I grew up in Guatemala, where the government used to kill people for reading the wrong book, so probably that has a lot to do with how I think. I followed the Wikipedia:Five pillars, my edits were not disruptive but rather contribute to a better encyclopedia, written from a neutral point of view, that anyone can use, edit, and distribute, in an environment where editors should treat each other with respect and civility and understanding that Wikipedia has no firm rules, where the principles and spirit matter more than literal wording..

Neighboring places infobox map project==[edit]

Add a map which includes the immediate neighbors (and their names on top of its location) of the place in topic in the infobox. Add wikilinks of each place in the caption, or in a footnote in the caption. Provide directions for accessibility reasons. Example: Quiché Department.

Guatemala[edit]

Border departments:

  1. Petén checkY,
  2. Alta Verapaz ,
  3. Quiché checkY,
  4. Huehuetenango checkY,
  5. San Marcos ,checkY
  6. Jutiapa ,checkY
  7. Zacapa ,checkY
  8. Chiquimula ,checkY
  9. IzabalcheckY.

Guatemala Department[edit]

Baja Verapaz , El Progreso , Jalapa , Santa Rosa , Escuintla , Sacatepéquez , Chimaltenango , Quiché .

Category:Deposed national presidents[edit]

{{seealsocat|Coups d'état‎|Leaders ousted by a coup‎}}

[[People expelled from public office‎]]

[[Category:National presidents‎]]

Category:National presidents ousted by a coup[edit]

[[Category:National presidents‎]]

[[Category:Leaders ousted by a coup]]

Category:First women government ministers[edit]

[[Category:Women's firsts]]

[[Category:Government ministers‎]]

Category:Assassinated politicians by political orientation‎[edit]

See Politicians by political orientation‎.

Category:Assassinated politicians +

  • Democratic Party (United States) politicians = Assassinated Democratic Party (United States) politicians‎
  • Republican Party (United States) politicians‎ = Assassinated Republican Party (United States) politicians
  • Liberal politicians‎ = Assassinated liberal politicians
  • Anti-communists‎ = Assassinated anti-communist politicians
  • Anti-capitalists‎ = Assassinated anti-capitalist politicians

Citation[edit]

[1]

CRRN[edit]

item\proportion views[a] watchers recent watch v/w[b] w/rw[c] edits[d] v/e[e] w/e[f] daily edits rw/de[g]
AN[h] 41,000 5,265 489 8 11 1,174 35 4 39 12
DRN[i] 5,077 1,249 76 4 16 433 12 3 14 5
NORN[j] 2,968 916 82 3 11 93 32 10 3 27
AFD[k] 10,109 1,900 107 5 18 3,482 3 1 116 1
DR[l] 3,849 1,291 140 3 9 513 8 3 17 8
CR[m] 2,425 580 71 4 8 222 11 3 7 10
CRRN[n] 923[o] 323[p] 32[q] 3 10 33[r] 28 10 1 29

Previous transponse[edit]

Item or proportion AN DRN NORN AFD DR CR CRRN
views (a) 41,000 5,077 2,968 10,109 3,849 2,425 923[s]
watchers 5,265 1,249 916 1,900 1,291 580 323
recent watch 489 76 82 107 140 71 32
v/w 7.8 4.1 3.2 5.3 3.0 4.2 2.9
w/rw 10.8 16.4 11.2 17.8 9.2 8.2 10.1
2023 edits 1,174 433 93 222 513 222 73
e/v 0.03 0.09 0.03 0.02 0.13 0.09 0.08
e/w 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.2
e/rw 2.4 5.7 1.1 2.1 3.7 3.1 2.3
1,174 433 93 222 513 222 73
0.03 0.09 0.03 0.02 0.13 0.09 0.08
0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.2
2.4 5.7 1.1 2.1 3.7 3.1 2.3
AN=Adminitrators noticeboard
DRN=Dispute resolution noticeboard
NORN=No original research noticeboard
AFD=Articles for deletion
DR=Deletion review
CR=Closure requests
CRRN=Closure requests review noticeboard

Conspiracy theory[edit]

  1. Conspiracy theory term misuse to discredit opponents.[2]
  2. "a clear purpose for fostering the very concept of “conspiracy theory” has, in practice, been to disparage it so that people who desire to have a reputation as intellectually serious, or even just sensible, are discouraged from engaging in it."[3]

Timeline of abolition of monarchies[edit]

Test[edit]

test[4] 2test[4][5][6] It's 19 Apr 23:11.

Wikimusic[edit]

Hello Jimbo Wales. I saw what seems to be an abusive situation involving Taylor Swift and other musicians whose work is owned many times by abusive managers or corporations. Maybe Wikimedia could start a Wikimusic project to help launch careers of musicians according to the Foundation's principles. In the process, Wikimedia could garner popular support and increased funding, specially by grateful musicians who make it big later on.

Revert[edit]

On 02:41, 27 May 2023 User:J947 reverted my edit stating, "that's just wrong. You can indeed simply change the redirect". First, in the guidance it mentions, "If you want to edit a redirect page you must use a special technique in order to get to the redirect page itself." But it doesn't explain what the technique is. At least not in the same subsection, which defeats the purpose of it. Second, in the case of making redirects into articles, my case involved a draft that I wanted to make into an article but there was an existing redirect. To make it an article I had to follow the procedure according to WP:Moving a page#Moving over a redirect and I had to make a move request. I modified the guidance accordingly but I overlooked that in other cases, maybe the redirect page could have been just been blanked and edited over to make it into an article.

ww2[edit]

World War II (WWII, WW2, or the Second World War; 1939–1945) was a global conflict and the deadliest in human history, with tens of millions people killed. It involved the vast majority of the world's countries—including all of the great powers—forming two opposing military alliances: the Allies and the Axis powers. World War II was a total war that directly involved more than 100 million personnel from more than 30 countries. The major participants in the war threw their entire economic, industrial, and scientific capabilities behind the war effort, blurring the distinction between civilian and military resources. Aircraft played a major role in the conflict, enabling the strategic bombing of population centres and deploying the only two nuclear weapons ever used in war. It resulted in 70 to 85 million fatalities, mostly among civilians. Millions died due to genocides (including the Holocaust), starvation, massacres, and disease. In the wake of the Axis defeat, Germany and Japan were occupied, and war crimes tribunals were conducted against German and Japanese leaders.

edit summary: moved alternate names to parenthesis for conciseness per MOS:FIRST, "global war" >> "global conflict" per MOS:REDUNDANCY, added a top notability-the deadliest in human history, copyedited relevant part in first paragraph to avoid redundancy with first sentence

Potential reply in rfc[edit]

Seeing the feedback, what about, "World War II or the Second World War, often abbreviated as WWII or WW2 (1939–1945) was the most destructive conflict in history."

FDR fringe[edit]

Who wrote that nonsense about his failing health? Roosevelt was poisoned by British intelligence due to Churchill's anger at him for US plans to recolonize SE Asia. Roosevelt's son Elliot interviewed Stalin in 1946[7] and was informed of this fact.[8] The US and Britain were trying to poison Stalin too and he was finally poisoned in 1953. Further, the allies did indeed seek peace with the Hitlerite forces to go after the SU. Everyone knows it now, except for Wikipedia "authors". By ip 17:57, 9 November 2022

AfC source evaluation[edit]

Here is my in depth analysis of the sources currently cited in the article

Source analysis
Source Significant[t] Sgn. Independent[u] Ind. Reliable[v] Rel. Secondary source[w] Counts to GNG?
CBS Austin Sure, I guess yes No, this is an interview with Bosstick promoting her event and her products no Probably, I don't see anything specific about CBS Austin at RSN or RSP, but I would guess that CBS would be considered generally reliable by the Wikipedia community. Yes No
Business Insider Maybe, there isn't a ton of non-interview content maybe Maybe, there is a lot of interview content here, but there is plenty of content from the author of the article that I think we could count it as independent maybe Yes, at RSP there is no consensus for Business Insider generally (see WP:BI), but for culture specifically the website is considered generally reliable. I also don't see anything suggesting that Amanda Perelli is a contributor, in fact, her profile says she is a "Creator Economy Reporter." I'm not sure what that means, but I'll assume the best and say she is probably on staff. Yes Maybe
E! Maybe, there's some non-interview content interspersed maybe Maybe, again this is largely an interview where Bosstick is giving advice. I don't see anything promoting products, which is a good sign. maybe Maybe, E! is mentioned a few times at RSN with mixed responses. The site appears to be largely gossip and tabloid news. I also can't tell if the authors of the article are staff or just submitted the article to E! as contributors. My instinct would be to say the site is unreliable, but I'm not sure. maybe Maybe
Entertainment Tonight Maybe maybe Maybe, again this is mostly an interview / quotes from Bosstick maybe Maybe, I don't see much about Entertainment Tonight at RSN or RSP, but what I do see isn't great. It appears to be owned by CBS, however, I don't see anything about an editorial staff or whether Carly Sloane is a contributor or staff member. maybe Maybe
Marie Claire No, there isn't much non-interview content no No, this is almost entirely an interview and contains promotional bits about products Bosstick is selling no Maybe, there is little to no content about Marie Claire at RSN and RSP. The website appears to have editorial oversight and a staff, but the website appears to be largely devoted to gossip and tabloid news. maybe No
USA Today No, there is no content that isn't an interview no No, this is entirely an interview no Yes, USA Today is listed at RSP as generally reliable Yes No
NY Post No, this is mostly an interview no No, this is an interview with tons of promotional content about her products no No, the NY Post is listed at RSP as unreliable no No
Yahoo! Entertainment No, this is mostly an interview copied from E! no No, this is interview content copied from E! no No, RSP specifically warns that Yahoo! syndicates news from other sources no No
TheWrap No, doesn't even mention Lauryn as far as I can tell no Maybe, looks kind of like a press release and would be considered routine news about her business maybe Yes, TheWrap is listed at RSP as generally reliable Yes No
Fast Company Doesn't even dedicate 100 words to the blog that Bosstick writes no Yes yes Probably, Fast Company was mentioned favorably at least once at RSN and appears to have an editorial staff. Yes No
People No, this is a trivial mention of Bosstick no No, basically just a quote from Bosstick no Yes, People is listed at RSP as generally reliable Yes No
Us Weekly No, doesn't even mention Bosstick no Yes yes No, Us Weekly is listed at RSP as generally unreliable no No
Amazon No, there is no prose. Awards and stuff like this are good, but I don't see how this contributes to Bosstick's notably specifically no Yes yes Maybe, Amazon is listed at RSP as generally unreliable but I suppose this is more of a primary source verifying that Bosstick's book is on their bestseller list maybe No


[9][10]

MOS:LEADLENGTH table[edit]

Lead guidance 400 words
# Article length in words[x] Lead length, in paragraphs Lead length, in words[y] Article length in characters or bytes[z]
1 Fewer than 2,500 One or two From 5 ~ 200 Fewer than 15,000
2 2,500–5,000 Two or three 120 ~ 300 15,000–30,000
3 More than 5,000 [5k-7.5k] Three or four 180 ~ 400 More than 30,000 [30k-45k]
4 [7.5k-10k] Four or five 240 ~ 500 [45k-60k]
5 [10k–12.5k] Five or six 300 ~ 600 [60k-75k]
6 [12.5k–15k] Six or seven 360 ~ 700 [75k–90k]
7 [15k or more] Seven or eight 420 ~ 800[11] [90k or more]

Paragraph length in words and sentences[edit]

According to Masterclass, a paragraph can consist of a single word or as long as the writer wants. The average paragraph is 200 words and is recommended to be from 3 to 8 sentences, although in academic writing it ranges from 6 to 8.[12]

Very short Short Average Long Very long
Regular words 1~80 80~160 160~240 240~320 320 or more
Regular sentences 1~3 3~4 4~6 6~7 7~8 or more
Academic words 200~240 240~280 280~320 320~366 360~400
Academic sentences 5 6 7 8 9

Newly recommended lead length[edit]

For younger audiences it is recommended shorter paragraphs.[12] Wikipedia's audience is mostly young and guidance states that "Editors should avoid lengthy paragraphs". Therefore, shorter paragraphs should be used. A goal of the lead being 10% or less of the overall article length is followed in these tables.

Lead guidance short regular writing
# Article length in words[x] Lead length, in paragraphs Lead length, in words
1 Fewer than 2,500 1 ~ 3 From 3 ~ 240
2 2,500–5,000 2 ~ 4 240 ~ 360
3 [5k-7.5k] 3 ~ 5 360 ~ 480
4 [7.5k-10k] 4 ~ 6 480 ~ 600
5 [10k–12.5k] 5 ~ 7 600 ~ 720
6 [12.5k–15k] 6 ~ 8 720 ~ 840
7 [15k to 17k] 7 ~ 9 840 ~ 960
8 17k or more 8 ~ 10 ~7% of article length[11]
Lead guidance short academic writing
# Article length in words[x] Lead length, in paragraphs Lead length, in words
1 Fewer than 5k 1 ~ 3 From 3 ~ 500
2 5k to 7.5k 2 ~ 4 500 ~ 750
3 7.5k to 10k 3 ~ 5 750 ~ 1000
4 10k to 12.5k 4 ~ 6 1000 ~ 1250
5 12.5k to 15k 5 ~ 7 1250 ~ 1500
6 15k to 17k 6 ~ 8 1500 ~ 1700
7 17k or more 7 ~ 9 10% of article length[11]

Relevant guideline[edit]

WP:SIZERULE

WP:SIZESPLIT

Seeking consensus for table modification thread[edit]

  1. Hawkeye7 doesn't want kb column.
  2. NewsAndEventsGuy wants kb column (although agrees with the rationale of WhatamIdoing) and supports keeping or adding the character and words columns if consensus is gained first in WP:SIZERULE.
  3. WhatamIdoing doesn't want kb column. Wants lead length limit suggestion in words.
  4. SandyGeorgia doesn't want kb nor characters and wants lead length limit suggestion in words.
  5. Ovinus likes the four-paragraph rule and more than the word and character count.

Analysis of lead examples in thread[edit]

Version Initial Words LG400 LGSRW LGSAW Initial Lede Paragraphs Initial Lede Words Lede Compliance Words Lede Compliance Paragraphs
L. D. Reynolds 1 2323 1 1 1 4 299 LGSAW 0
L. D. Reynolds 2 2323 1 1 1 3 198 LG400, LGSRW, LGSAW LGSRW, LGSAW

April 2022 Blitz[edit]

5350 words initial size

Hours worked[edit]

Sunday 041722[edit]

3.5h

Monday 041822[edit]

930-1020, 1905-1954, 2038-2113
2h14

Tuesday 041922[edit]

0820-922, 1940-2045

2h7

Wednesday 042022[edit]

1441-1512

41m

Thursday 042122[edit]

0916-1025

1840-1915

2109-2130

2h05

Friday 042222[edit]

928-1015

1050-1116

1h 13

Total hours worked[edit]

11h 50m

Next edit[edit]

Notes[edit]

Needs cleanup besides copyedit.

Amalgamated Food Employees Union Local 590 v. Logan Valley Plaza, Inc.[edit]

The 1968 case of Amalgamated Food Employees Union Local 590 v. Logan Valley Plaza, Inc. resulted in a landmark judicial opinion regarding freedom of speech in shopping centers in the United States.


Top newspaper in each state, by circulation[edit]

Rank Newspaper Primary locality State
 Daily

circulation

(in thousands)

Year Daily

readership

Year Owner
3 The New York Times New York City New York 483 The New York Times Company
5 Los Angeles Times Los Angeles California 417 Nant Capital
6 The Washington Post Washington D.C. District of Columbia 254 Nash Holdings
9 Chicago Tribune Chicago Illinois 238 Tribune Publishing Company
Houston Chronicle Houston Texas 169 2015 825,000 Hearst Corporation
The Arizona Republic Phoenix Arizona 130 Gannett
The Philadelphia Inquirer Philadelphia Pennsylvannia 158 The Philadelphia Foundation
Tampa Bay Times St. Petersburg Florida 240 2011 The Poynter Institute for Media Studies
The Plain Dealer Cleveland Ohio 116 250 Advance Publications
The Charlotte Observer Charlotte North Carolina 137 2013 The McClatchy Company
The Boston Globe Boston Massachussetts 136 2016 John W. Henry
Star Tribune Minneapolis Minnesota 184 2015 Glen Taylor
The Seattle Times Seattle Washington 229 2014 The Seattle Times Company
The Baltimore Sun Baltimore Maryland 133 2015 Tribune Publishing

Twin cities Guatemala[edit]

City Jurisdiction
1 Caracas Capital District
San Salvador San Salvador
Madrid Madrid
Lima Lima
Santiago de Chile Metropolitan Santiago
Saltillo Coahuila
La Habana La Habana
Bogotá Distrito Capital
San Pedro Sula Cortés
Santa Cruz de Tenerife Santa Cruz de Tenerife
San José San José
Ciudad de Panamá Panamá
Taipei Northern Taiwan
Managua Managua
Beijing Beijing
Providence Rhode Island

Twin cities per muni[13][edit]

City Jurisdiction Country Year
Brusels
Cabildo Insular de Tenerife Santa Cruz de Tenerife  Spain
1 Doral Florida  United States
Nueva Orleans Louisiana  United States
Puente Alto Cordillera Province  Chile
Taipei Northern Taiwan  Republic of China 2007[14]
Saltillo Coahuila  Mexico
Monterrey Nuevo León  Mexico
San José San José  Costa Rica 2005
Belmopan Cayo District Belize
 Cuba
 Panama
 Republic of China
 Nicaragua
 Colombia
 Honduras 2016[15]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Monthly average
  2. ^ views/watchers
  3. ^ watchers/recent watchers
  4. ^ Average of first ten months of 2023
  5. ^ edits/views
  6. ^ edits/watchers
  7. ^ daily edits / recent watchers
  8. ^ AN=Adminitrators noticeboard
  9. ^ DRN=Dispute resolution noticeboard
  10. ^ NORN=No original research noticeboard
  11. ^ AFD=Articles for deletion
  12. ^ DR=Deletion review
  13. ^ CR=Closure requests
  14. ^ CRRN=Closure requests review noticeboard
  15. ^ Estimated using proportion AFD to DR v and applying it to CR v
  16. ^ Estimated using proport DR v/w
  17. ^ Estimated using proportion DR w/rw
  18. ^ Estimate considering the proportion of e/v of the most related items of DR and CR
  19. ^ Educated guess considering the proportion of e/v of the most related items of DR and CR
  20. ^ GNG: More than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material.
  21. ^ GNG: Excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. COI: Involves contributions about themselves, family, friends, clients, employers, financial and other relationships.
  22. ^ RS: May be published materials with a good publication process and/or authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject.
  23. ^ NOR: Provides an author's own thinking based on primary sources, generally at least one step removed from an event.
  24. ^ a b c Estimate based on June 2022 table and Prosesize numbers
  25. ^ Based on an editor comment they would like something like a 400 word limit
  26. ^ Per WP:SIZERULE

References[edit]

  1. ^ Soave, Robby (January 10, 2024). "Lab Leak Is Not a Conspiracy Theory, Anthony Fauci Concedes". Reason (magazine). via Yahoo News. Retrieved January 18, 2024.
  2. ^ Starcevic, Vladan; Brakoulias, Vlasios (April 14, 2021). "'Things are not what they seem to be': A proposal for the spectrum approach to conspiracy beliefs". Australasian Psychiatry. 29 (5): 535–539 – via Sage Journals.
  3. ^ Hayward, Tim (16 Jul 2021). ""Conspiracy theory": The case for being critically receptive". Journal of Social Philosophy. 53 (2): 148–167 – via Wiley Online Library.
  4. ^ a b "Guatemala City, Guatemala Population". PopulationStat. 15 July 2022. Retrieved 24 Oct 2022.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  5. ^ Stein, Stanley; Stein, Barbara (2003). Apogee of Empire: Spain and New Spain in the Age of Charles III, 1759–1789. Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 338–340. ISBN 9780801873393.
  6. ^ Smith 2003, p. 230Tezcatlipoca stories
  7. ^ "Interview Transcript of Stalin's Interview With Elliot Roosevelt" (PDF). Wilson Center. 21 December 1946. Retrieved 27 November 2022.
  8. ^ "Stalin Admitted Knowledge Of English, Roosevelt's Son Says". AP. February 6, 1986. Retrieved 27 November 2022.
  9. ^ Wilson, John (1979). "Eris in Euripides". Greece & Rome. 26 (1): 7–20 – via JSTOR.
  10. ^ Nagler, Michael (1988). "Toward a Semantics of Ancient Conflict: Eris in the "Iliad"". The Classical World. 82 (2): 81–90 – via JSTOR.
  11. ^ a b c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BVQri3aLfg
  12. ^ a b "How Long Is a Paragraph? Tips for Varying Paragraph Length". Master Class. Feb 25, 2022. Retrieved July 11, 2022.
  13. ^ "Memoria de Labores 2020 Municipalidad de Guatemala, Dirección de Cooperación" (PDF). Muniguate. 2020. Archived (PDF) from the original on 6 Sep 2021. Retrieved 6 Sep 2021.
  14. ^ "Taipei - International Sister Cities". Taipei City Council. Archived from the original on 2 November 2012. Retrieved 23 August 2013.
  15. ^ "Guatemala City now sister city with Rhode Island's capital". AP NEWS. 12 October 2016. Retrieved 18 August 2019.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Thinker78/sandbox&oldid=1215730957"