User talk:Avalik

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Renaming of Medieval Warm Period[edit]

I contest the changes — either it should actually go according to the MoS: medieval warm period (or Medieval warm period for the title), or (better) it should stay Medieval Warm Period as it is used almost consistently throughout literature. Lars T. (talk) 23:25, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I have started a RFC about it, I hope you don't mind. Regarding your pointer to the list, I first of all see the inconsistency that most (but not all) "Era"s and "Age"s are capitalized. Furthermore, the other "... periods" could also be described as "the period of (the) ...", while the "Medieval Warm Period" doesn't fit that pattern; it would also be hard to actually fit it into the list. IMO it is a fixed scientific term with just that capitalisation. Lars T. (talk) 22:58, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
A WP:RfC is a Request for Comments. I had it set up on the Talkpages Talk:Medieval_Warm_Period#RFC:_renaming_of_article_according_to_WP:STYLE.3F, but it has already been closed with a rename to the old capitalisation. Lars T. (talk) 23:42, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop[edit]

As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:01, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Help Me -- How should I go forward with this user?[edit]

{{helpme}}

Hey there... I'm not too keen on policies however I've encountered in my editing a Wikipedian who while I believe intends good (mostly, except for one little thing) isn't making what I believe to be the most constructive edits, bordering on vandalism if it was bad faith.


User that I'm concerned about is User:BlueFireIceEyes (check contribution history to see) ... I placed some warnings on her talk page but I'm unsure how I should actually be handling this. Could someone help me here with who I should be taking this to / how I should handle this (if I should be reacting at all?) ...


I suppose you'll need to know what my exact concerns are to help... which are as follows:

  1. Removing mainantence templates (i.e. 'weasel', 'fact', 'who', etc) without actually fixing it. Particularly persistent with doing this, article examples: Bisexuality, Bisexual chic, Bisexual erasure and articles on people.
  2. Re-adding content immediantly after it's removal despite being unreliable or unsourced.
  3. Marking edits that aren't minor as minor, even marking what could be considered "controversial edits" as minor. Not using edit summary enough.
  4. Using edit summary to make accusations or attacks on editors such as "(adding in about her speeches and LGBT activist work-should be in the summary. homophobes need to STOP deleting this!!!!!)" , "‎ (adding some sources and cleaning it up, because the biphobes seem to be using any excuse they can to ruin this page)", "(well your opinion isn't a neutral point of view. it's called the lgbT community for a reason. stop with the transphobia)", "(adding some sources and cleaning it up, because the biphobes seem to be using any excuse they can to ruin this page)", etc.
  5. Making attacks/accusations on article talk pages, i.e. Talk:Bisexual erasure "No, it was labeled that way by several GLBT and straight organizations as well as scientific ones, and the main author of it has a biased and dishonest past. Why don't you do some research?" among others.
  6. Claiming/insinuating ownership over several "bisexual" related articles (even saying they are "our community pages") and asking people who are "not bisexual / bisexual allies to stop editing the articles", i.e. Talk:Bisexual_erasure#Made_some_changes and edit summary, "(everyone wanted references, I've given you many references, and I have done my best to make it as neutral as possible-it's not exactly a non controversial topic.Please leave our community page alone!)"


Again, except for the removal of maintanence tags I think they are good faith edits but that doesn't change the fact that (at least, I think - I may be wrong) that they aren't helpful edits and the way she/he is treating other editors isn't being very helpful.

I don't know policy so I need some assistance on what to do here (if anything) other than hand out some warnings. Thanks for the assistance.

You're right in saying that removing tags without actually addressing issues can be a bit disruptive, especially when edits are marked minor in that way (for example, here). A great thing to have in a dispute like this are revision diffs; basically, it lets a third party like me look at only the unbiased facts, as opposed to hearing the story from someone who can be biased.
So yeah, if you could get a few of those diffs together of what you see as problem behaviour, that would be great. I'll approach BlueFireIceEyes, though. Cheers, m.o.p 01:06, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

User talk:BlueFireIceEyes[edit]

Hey. Great thing to see new users that are against vandalism. I would just friendly point out, that as I see, you have posted several warnings to User talk:BlueFireIceEyes at once. If you want to give a so called final warning, please see WP:WARN. It has a list of warning templates in Wikipedia. Usually you must start with level one, then go for level 2 and so on, but if you see that user has several edits in short time that are only vandalism, please use only warning. For example {{subst:uw-create4im}}~~~~ if they create pages that don't belong to Wikipedia. There is no need for multiple warnings added at once. Please see WP:VAN for info about vandalism and how to deal with it. Feel free to contact me if you need help with vandalism dealing.  Ilyushka88  talk  22:41, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

To be honest I'm not completely new, just not very keen on the policies and always seem to have a hard time finding them haha. Anyways, thanks for the tip I'll contact you in future if I have any questions regarding vandalism/troublesome users. Avalik (talk) 09:55, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Every tag I removed I did fix and I put in several sources, and I can prove it. Why are you saying the tags were "not fixed"? It is quite plain I have made several changes that I did fix, unless you want the tags there for some other reason. If it says "unsourced" and I put in a lot of sources, there is no need for the tag, and I wasn't aware that the only one allowed to make that determination was you. I really do hope that this is a neutral subject for you, but given your history and what you have removed from some of our pages, I am starting to wonder. I never "claimed" ownership, I just said it was best if people who understood the subject matter did most of the editing. I wouldn't go to your community pages and start editing things because it is not something I know a lot about, and that is what I meant. I am starting to wonder if you are trying to get me banned, because you want to revert the pages back. I do not know why you would want the pages to be poorly sourced. I am starting to think that this is not a neutral subject for you. I hope that is not the case as it would be an abuse of authority. The reason I say this is because you removed several instances that talked about bisexual erasure in the gay community, and then you said there were poor sources. There was nothing wrong with the sources, they were verifiable-yet you removed them. Now you are lying and saying they are unverifiable which is not true. Please stop.

As for the tags, I did not remove anything that I did not back up. I would appreciate if you would stop accusing me of things I did not do. If this really is a neutral subject for you, then please stop removing sources and reverting any positive changes that someone makes to the bisexuality pages. I will go to wikipedia and tell my side of the story. BlueFireIceEyes (talk) 22:46, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm just going to refer you to what I said to m.o.p mostly as my "proof", User_talk:Master_of_Puppets#RE:_How_should_I_go_forward_with_this_user.3F in reference to my "accusations". As for everything else,
"from some of our pages, I am starting to wonder. I never "claimed" ownership" -- I just thought I'd point out you said they were "our pages" right before you said you didn't claim ownership. And you've constantly referred to the bisexual pages as "your" or "our" (referring to bisexuals, I assume) pages and asking others (referring to non-bisexuals) to "leave OUR page alone". 'Our' is a possessive word, isn't it? In fact you even said to me on the article talk page " The only people who should be editing this are members of OUR community. Stick to the lesbian stuff and leave us alone!"... That is claiming ownership and also trying to scare off other editors. You don't own the page, there is no "community" that owns it, anyone can edit it and shouldn't be deterred.
" I wouldn't go to your community pages" -- my community pages? Sorry? There is no such thing on Wikipedia. Anyone can edit and they don't belong to anyone. They aren't owned. I shouldn't have to repeat this anymore.
"The reason I say this is because you removed several instances that talked about bisexual erasure in the gay community, and then you said there were poor sources. There was nothing wrong with the sources, they were verifiable-yet you removed them. Now you are lying and saying they are unverifiable which is not true." -- Are you referring to where I removed the single (not several) sentence that was referring to something like... victims of hate crimes being called gay by the media when they were really bisexual? That was because the cite didn't back up the text. I read every single cite and they were either referring to the victims as gay, or bisexual. The thing is that the article didn't mention that he was wrongly identified -- the articles that said he was bisexual could have just as been easily wrong as the ones that said he was gay so unless there is a citation for the citiation that says the newspapers that referred to the victims as gay were indefinitely wrong your citations did not support the text. Or are you referring to where I removed wikilinks (kept text)? That's due to the Manual of Style. One shouldn't wikilink the same word over and over and over again in the same article. In an article as short as bisexual erasure, once is enough, two is pushing it. Otherwise I'm unsure what you can possibly be referring to. Avalik (talk) 13:01, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
BlueFireIceEyes: I think Avalik is referring to things like this. As I said above, though, the best thing for you to do to help me assist you guys in the dispute is gathering diffs of the behaviour you're concerned with and putting them here so that I can get a view of the whole picture without having to dig through too much (and therefore possibly skew my view one way or another). Cheers, m.o.p 01:06, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Apologies for the reply delay! Very good job gathering all those diffs; very extensive, very helpful. The user in question hasn't been active since everything that transpired; however, I'll be leaving them a note asking for them to stop editing LGBT-related articles until we've agreed on some things. You did everything correctly, though; great job! I can respect your desire to keep copy-editing, though. Keep it all up, and know that I'm always a talk page away if you need help! :) Cheers, m.o.p 03:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Mammals Notice Board[edit]

Articles for deletion nomination of Be with You (2009 film)[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

I have nominated Be with You (2009 film), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Be with You (2009 film). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. DGG ( talk ) 18:28, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Sociology Newsletter: II (April 2010)[edit]

Sociology ProjectNews • April 2010
Spreading the meme since August 2006

The Sociology WikiProject is conducting a roll call (or min-census, if you prefer). More then five years down the road, we have over 50 members, but we don't know how many of them are still active in the sociology area. If you are or want to become once again an active contributor to the sociology content on Wikipedia, please move your name from the inactive to the active list on our roll call (or add yourself to the list if you haven't joined yet!).

In other news, we have reactivated the newsletter :) At least, for this announcement. We also have a new, automated to do listing, an active tag and assess project (which has identified about 1,800 sociology articles on Wikipedia, and assessed about 1,3000 of them), and three new userboxes for your self-identification pleasure :) On a final note, I highly recommend watchlisting the Wikipedia:WikiProject Sociology page, so you can be aware of the ongoing discussions.

You have received this newsletter because you are listed as a recipient of WikiProject Sociology Newsletter (Opt-out). • signed

Rest In Peace Avalik[edit]

It is with great sorrow that I say goodbye to beautiful, intelligent, creative Avalik. September 19, 1990 to October 1, 2010

You are free my beautiful one.

Love Mom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.183.59.23 (talk) 05:40, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Announcement[edit]

Hello! I'm The Arbiter, one of the coordinators for WikiProject Zoo. I am proud to announce the launch of a new portal: Portal:Zoos and Aquariums! ZooPro, ZooFari, and I worked hard to create a new portal for information on zoos, aquariums, and the associated projects and articles on Wikipedia. If you could head on over, take a look at our work, and maybe learn some more about zoos and Wikiproject Zoo, it would be great! Cheers and Happy Editing!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of The Arbiter (talk) at 03:27, 14 December 2010 (UTC).

WikiProject Sociology membership[edit]

You are listed in the Category:Wikipedians interested in sociology, probably due to the use of "This user is interested in sociology" userbox, but you have not added yourself to our official member list for WikiProject Sociology. This prevent you from, among other things, receiving our sociology newsletter, as that member list acts as our newsletter mailing list (you can find the latest issue of our sociology newsletter here). If you'd like to receive the newsletter and help us figure out how many members we really have, please consider joining our WikiProject and adding yourself to our official member list. Thank you, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 12:58, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

You've got mail![edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Avalik. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

Orphaned non-free image File:Figaro.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Figaro.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 01:41, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Science lovers wanted![edit]

Science lovers wanted!
Smithsonian logo color.svg
Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Wikipedia about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in the sciences! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! Sarah (talk) 19:49, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

WikiWomen's Collaborative[edit]

WikiWomen Unite!
WWC-02.png
Hi Avalik! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Wikipedia are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the WikiWomen's Collaborative.

As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by:

We can't wait to have you involved, and feel free to drop by our meta page (under construction) to see how else you can get involved!

Can't wait to have you involved! SarahStierch (talk) 00:59, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

New medical organization[edit]

Hi

I'm contacting you because, as a participant at Wikiproject Medicine, you may be interested in a new multinational non-profit organization we're forming at m:Wikimedia Medicine. Even if you don't want to be actively involved, any ideas you may have about our structure and aims would be very welcome on the project's talk page.

Our purpose is to help improve the range and quality of free online medical content, and we'll be working with like-minded organizations, such as the World Health Organization, professional and scholarly societies, medical schools, governments and NGOs - including Translators Without Borders.

Hope to see you there! --Anthonyhcole (talk) 21:15, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

WikiWomen's Collaborative: Come join us (and check out our new website)![edit]

WikiWomen - We need you!
WWC logo purple and blue.png
Hi Avalik! The WikiWomen's Collaborative is a group of women from around the world who edit Wikipedia, contribute to its sister projects, and support the mission of free knowledge. We recently updated our website, created new volunteer positions, and more!

Get involved by:

  • Visiting our website for resources, events, and more
  • Meet other women and share your story in our profile space
  • Participate at and "like" our Facebook group
  • Join the conversation on our Twitter feed
  • Reading and writing for our blog channel
  • Volunteer to write for our blog, recruit blog writers, translate content, and co-run our Facebook and receive perks for volunteering
  • Already participating? Take our survey and share your experience!

Thanks for editing Wikipedia, and we look forward to you being a part of the Collaborative! -- EdwardsBot (talk) 00:51, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi could you help me[edit]

Hi could you give a quick check to this and give me a feedback please

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Thelmadatter/Sandboxes_Group_2/Embryogenic_germ_disc — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rorras (talkcontribs) 20:14, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library now offering accounts from Cochrane Collaboration (sign up!)[edit]

The Wikipedia Library gets Wikipedia editors free access to reliable sources that are behind paywalls. Because you are signed on as a medical editor, I thought you'd want to know about our most recent donation from Cochrane Collaboration.

  • Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization that conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.
  • Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account.
  • If you are still active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 20:22, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

Hello Avalik, I'm here onbehalf of WP:ORPHAN in which you are also a participant. So, we want your opinion to a WP:ORPHAN related matter. It is a proposal by Technical 13. Please have a look here. Your opinion (i.e support, oppose etc) are very much appreciated there. Thank you. By Jim Cartar through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Backlog drive[edit]

Wiki letter w.svg

Hello Avalik,

WikiProject Orphanage is holding a month long Backlog Elimination Drive to de-orphan articles which have orphan tags!
The goal is to eliminate the backlog of orphan articles. There are currently 120295 articles which have orphan tags. The drive is running from April 12, 2014 to May 12, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all editors participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive. To add your name in the participants list click here.
So start de-orphaning articles! Click here to see the list of articles need de-orphaning. Visit Suggestions for how to de-orphan an article to know more!

Thanks. Opt-out Instructions by Jim Cartar on behalf of WikiProject Orphanage through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:21, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation[edit]

Your upload of File:Chifalle pet ferret.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:29, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride 2014[edit]

Hi Avalik. In case you are not aware, there is an upcoming campaign to improve coverage of LGBT-related topics on Wikipedia, culminating with an international edit-a-thon on June 21. See Wiki Loves Pride 2014 for more information. If you are interested, you might consider creating a page for a major city (or cities!) near you, with a list of LGBT-related articles that need to be created or improved. This would be a tremendous help to Wikipedia and coverage of LGBT culture and history. Thanks for your consideration, and please let me know if you have any questions! --Another Believer (Talk) 16:42, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

The Pulse (WP:MED newsletter) June 2014[edit]

The first edition of The Pulse has been released. The Pulse will be a regular newsletter documenting the goings-on at WPMED, including ongoing collaborations, discussions, articles, and each edition will have a special focus. That newsletter is here.

The newsletter has been sent to the talk pages of WP:MED members bearing the {{User WPMed}} template. To opt-out, please leave a message here or simply remove your name from the mailing list. Because this is the first issue, we are still finding out feet. Things like the layout and content may change in subsequent editions. Please let us know what you think, and if you have any ideas for the future, by leaving a message here.

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:23, 5 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Medicine.

BMJ offering 25 free accounts to Wikipedia medical editors[edit]

Neat news: BMJ is offering 25 free, full-access accounts to their prestigious medical journal through The Wikipedia Library and Wiki Project Med Foundation (like we did with Cochrane). Please sign up this week: Wikipedia:BMJ --Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 10 June 2014 (UTC)