User talk:Buidhe
I take requests for image and source reviews on historical topics at A-Class and Featured level. Please post all requests on this page.
This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics:
|
I have finally nominated the article. Please take a look if you can: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of Christianity/archive1. Thank you! Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think I have addressed all that you mentioned. Would you mind taking another look? Your input is invaluable to me. Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:05, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Slovak Republic
[edit]Why not move Slovak Republic (1939-1945) to First Slovak Republic? 91838jeu72737 (talk) 11:32, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- 91838jeu72737 I'm not necessarily opposed, but you have to use the correct process by going through WP:RM and getting consensus for the move. (t · c) buidhe 13:52, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
Thank you!
[edit]The Original Barnstar | ||
To Buidhe on the occasion of the Minneapolis FA being kept. Your review of images made the difference. Thank you! -SusanLesch (talk) 17:49, 6 October 2024 (UTC) |
"Alison Chabloz" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]The redirect Alison Chabloz has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 8 § Alison Chabloz until a consensus is reached. Launchballer 09:39, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Dispute against EU Reporter reliability
[edit]@Buidhe I believe we should start a noticeboard discussion about EU Reporter. You seem to be strongly against it, but you are the only wiki editor that I am aware that has such a strong negative view against EU Reporter. There are quotes from this news website in Ukranian government websites: [1], [2]; Azerbaijani government websites [3]; Croatian goverment websites [4]; and others. Are you telling that all these goverments are trying to manipulate the news or they are naive enough to use unreliable sources for their official reporting? Do you have any other indication of Wikipedia consensus on the unreliability of this source other than your own research? Contributor892z (talk) 19:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- The source has been documented to publish native advertising, which means that you cannot trust that anything you read there is not a paid for ad. It is untrue that consensus is needed to deem a source unreliable—those adding a source have the burden of proving that it is a reliable source. (t · c) buidhe 20:05, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- The documentation you mentioned was made by a rival source in 2021 and since then EU Reporter has been subject to independent editorial control by NewsGuard, yet you still were uncomfortable of a reference to an article published there in 2022. Even based on your own argument, the independent editorial control by a rating system that is used globally is a proof that post-2021 this is a reliable source. Contributor892z (talk) 20:12, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's not proof of anything, given that "There is a rough consensus in this thread that NewsGuard is not a reliable source." A source has to spend time building a reputation for fact checking and accuracy, if it lacks this in 2021 it is unlikely to be RS a year later. (t · c) buidhe 20:17, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- The documentation you mentioned was made by a rival source in 2021 and since then EU Reporter has been subject to independent editorial control by NewsGuard, yet you still were uncomfortable of a reference to an article published there in 2022. Even based on your own argument, the independent editorial control by a rating system that is used globally is a proof that post-2021 this is a reliable source. Contributor892z (talk) 20:12, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Invitation to participate in a research
[edit]Hello,
The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.
You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .
Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
Kind Regards,
BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Important: Please update user script installation
[edit]Hi there, you currently have a user script installed from Anne drew Andrew and Drew
. Several weeks ago, I changed my username to Anne drew
, and unfortunately, due to an issue with script redirects, the scripts you have installed under my old username no longer function.
To fix this, please update your JavaScript pages (Special:MyPage/common.js or Special:MyPage/skin.js) by replacing all instances of Anne drew Andrew and Drew
with Anne drew
.
If any of this is unclear, please ping Anne drew for help. I apologize for the inconvenience and appreciate your understanding!
Thanks – Anne drew
You are receiving this message because you have installed one of Anne drew's user scripts. If you'd like to stop receiving notifications, you can unsubscribe here.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:11, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
Bulgaria, the Jews, and the Holocaust
[edit]Hope this finds you well Buidhe. Just noticed the above (University of Rochester Press, 2023: ed. Nadege Ragaru) is open access from Boydell & Brewer, here, if you're interested. All the best! SerialNumber54129 11:09, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
[edit]This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
Bogazicili (talk) 04:08, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Can you clarify if you want to move on with this DRN request or not? I find your answer here vague [5]. Do you want more information about what the dispute is or do you not want to proceed with DRN? I also suggested an alternative dispute resolution method in the talk page [6] Bogazicili (talk) 15:07, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
October 2024
[edit]Per Wikipedia:Civility, please refrain from comments such as If you aren't capable of finding it with a quick google search
[7]. There are no exact google matches with that quote, even when you only google the part after [Churchill], probably because the article is behind a paywall. Results of google searches may also differ based on geographic location. Wikipedia is a volunteer project, please be respectful of other people's time.
Overall, what I find most problematic is that you are giving details of the source you mentioned after being asked third time, and with an uncivil comment. Bogazicili (talk) 16:13, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- I didn't realize until then that I had forgotten to add the link. You could have asked for it.
- I did not mean to comment on anyone's googling skills, merely intending to say that nearly any quote can be matched to the source using this method, paywalled or otherwise.
- In the meantime I don't find it particularly civil that you keep accusing me of deliberately trying to skew article away from mentioning north America, although I have repeatedly told you this is not true. (t · c) buidhe 20:05, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- I did not say that you are
deliberately trying to skew article away from mentioning north America
. - I said
I am very concerned that anything mentioning Native Americans or Americas are being removed
. - I don't know if you are doing it deliberately or not, just to remove mention of Native Americans (or related issues). It is entirely possible you are only concerned about sourcing. But I am concerned about the lack of mention in the article. That's not a comment about your motivations.
- Please do not misrepresent what I say.
- And I asked for the source 3 times:
What is this 2020 paper?
[8]You didn't cite any source. Where's the link?
[9]You said "About this, a 2020 paper states". You never linked this 2020 paper. Before you had given a link to a 2009 paper
[10] Bogazicili (talk) 20:37, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- I did not say that you are