Jump to content

User talk:Doug Weller: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Wishing you well: stupid phone auto correct...
Line 77: Line 77:
::::Thanks all. This community is important to me and knowing how many good people have my back is marvelous and gives me strength. [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 16:40, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
::::Thanks all. This community is important to me and knowing how many good people have my back is marvelous and gives me strength. [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 16:40, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
:::::Good thoughts and wishes winging their way from snowy Sweden. Hoping for good news. --''[[User:Bonadea|bonadea]]'' <small>[[Special:Contributions/Bonadea|contributions]] [[User talk:Bonadea|talk]]</small> 16:28, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
:::::Good thoughts and wishes winging their way from snowy Sweden. Hoping for good news. --''[[User:Bonadea|bonadea]]'' <small>[[Special:Contributions/Bonadea|contributions]] [[User talk:Bonadea|talk]]</small> 16:28, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
I'm also dropping a breast wishes here! [[User:Springee|Springee]] ([[User talk:Springee|talk]]) 12:24, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
I'm also dropping a best wishes here! [[User:Springee|Springee]] ([[User talk:Springee|talk]]) 12:24, 16 February 2022 (UTC)


== Cirrus cloud ==
== Cirrus cloud ==

Revision as of 17:14, 16 February 2022

The current date and time is 21 July 2024 T 14:47 UTC.

Discretionary sanctions alerts

You can email me from this link but in the interests of Wiki-transparency, please message me on this page unless there are pressing reasons to do otherwise.

Comments which I find to be uncivil, full of vulgarities, flame baiting, or that are excessively rude may be deleted without response. If I choose not to answer, that's my right; don't keep putting it back. I'll just delete and get annoyed at you.

User:Doug Weller
User:Doug Weller
User talk:Doug Weller
User talk:Doug Weller
User:Doug Weller/Workshop
User:Doug Weller/Workshop
Special:Prefixindex/User:Doug Weller
Special:Prefixindex/User:Doug Weller
User:Doug Weller/Userboxes
User:Doug Weller/Userboxes
Special:Contributions/Doug Weller
Special:Contributions/Doug Weller
Special:Emailuser/Doug Weller
Special:Emailuser/Doug Weller







Notice Coming here to ask why I reverted your edit? Read this page first...
Welcome to my talk page! I am an administrator here on Wikipedia. That means I am here to help. It does not mean that I have any special status or something, it just means that I get to push a few extra buttons to help maintain this encyclopedia.

If you need help with something, feel free to ask. Click here to start a new topic.
If I have not made any edits in a while, (check) you may get a faster response by posting your request in a more centralized place.


I don't use irc often, but my account name on Libera is DougWeller.

First I'd like to say I appreciated your detailed information at the top of you talk page and your seeming interest in being civil. I'm simply curious why you imposed sanctions on me. To my remembrance I have not made any edits related to either of those topics. The topics I've made edits on and am interested in are biology, modern American politics, modern Canadian politics, American History, Climate Change, media, and economics. So really I'm just confused. Thanks, Viktory02 (talk) 09:29, 29 November 2021

Thanks, I haven't been doing this a long time Viktory02 (talk) 15:50, 29 November 2021

Why did you undo my edit in Biblical Cosomology-Teertrevo

Hi Mr. Weller! I noticed you removed my edit on Biblical cosmology, where I removed the incorrect interpretation of Revelation. Is there any reason for you doing so?
Thanks!
-Teertrevo (talk) 15:50, 29 November 2021

Pre-Categories for Discussion thoughts...

Hi Doug - Coming by for some guidance. I've been working on categorization under Category:Far-right politics in the United States as it's a bit of a mess. In the current tree, Category:White supremacy in the United States is under Category:White nationalism in the United States as a subcat. Logical. But dealing with the articles, there seems to be a lot that are categorized to both. The main article for the nationalism category is White nationalism, which of course indicates the crossover relationship. So here's my question - from a pure categorization point of view, it doesn't make sense to have separate categories if people just meta tag them indiscriminately into both categories - then there is no category tree. But going up the tree Category:White nationalism and Category:White supremacy seem to have the same issue. Some people see a distinct difference, others say they're equivalent. But what's the point in having separate categories when everything is just going to be dumped into both anyway? I don't see a way forward to take it to CfD. Do you have any thoughts? Should I just let it go? ButlerBlog (talk) 14:48, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Butlerblog: Sadly I have very little understanding of how categories work, it's a great mystery to me. And of course many people and organisations who identify as white nationalists are white supremacists (even if they deny it). I don't think you'll get very far taking it to CfD, I'd guess there would be no consensus because of the issue. Wish I could help more. Doug Weller talk 15:08, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You're probably right, the CfD wouldn't likely get anywhere as I'm sure there are others that see it the same way - a logic mess, but no clear way forward. It's probably a can of worms anyway, so probably best for me to not spend too much time on it at this point. I appreciate your input! ButlerBlog (talk) 15:22, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Doug Weller. 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.ARoseWolf 15:15, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Information Posted on a page.

I was patrolling some recent edits and stumbled upon seeing that a user posted a phone number and said me "číslo zaslat kód děkuji" which translates roughly to "me number send code thank you" I believe this violates a policy of some sort but i'm not sure because I'm relatively new. Can you help me out. -Toast (talk) 22:46, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No Problem, already e-mailed Oversight and they suppressed the information. -Toast (talk) 19:07, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What's your objection to discussing Nazi symbol of Hakenkreuz?

Saw a comment in my talk page. Do you have any objection to discussion on Nazisymbology of Hakenkreuz? Airpowerobserver (talk) 11:54, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Did figure out your objection is to the statment that I made which is

"The English equivalent is Hooked Cross and don't try to divert it onto people of Asia to escape scrutiny. That's inhumane.". Just because u don't agree with it, you can't complain that i'm not civil. Once again you cannot expect Asian's to carry the burden of Europeans's on their back. Doing it and on being pointed out calling it uncivil is inhumane and arrogance.Airpowerobserver (talk) 12:12, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Airpowerobserver: it clearly shows a lack of good faith. Doug Weller talk 12:25, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Really? Criticism should be welcomed rather than shoo them away with alibi of lack of good faith.Airpowerobserver (talk) 12:29, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Airpowerobserver: you are digging yourself in still deeper by this personal attack. You can criticise without insults or showing a lack of good faith. Doug Weller talk 12:31, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What's the personal attack here? Are you a White European? Is that the reason u objected in the first place taking my comments as a personal attack? Is there any restriction in pointing out European dirtiness in Wikipedia or Wikipedia taken over by the Whites or both is true? Airpowerobserver (talk) 12:42, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No surpise, this editor has been blocked. Doug Weller talk 14:37, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wishing you well

Hi, hope you don't mind me posting like this but I saw your comment on FTN and just wanted to wish you well with your trying times ahead and my sincerest hope your cancer can be treated successfully. Nil Einne (talk) 17:47, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. Wishing you the best of luck that you beat cancer. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:23, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hoping for the best for you. - Donald Albury 01:51, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And me. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks all. This community is important to me and knowing how many good people have my back is marvelous and gives me strength. Doug Weller talk 16:40, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good thoughts and wishes winging their way from snowy Sweden. Hoping for good news. --bonadea contributions talk 16:28, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also dropping a best wishes here! Springee (talk) 12:24, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cirrus cloud

I have nominated Cirrus cloud 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.

Sorry, I was referring to the introductory bit

I usually see citations even in the introductory bit, but the introduction to the page: [Slavery in ancient Rome]==, does not. Do introductions need citations? Because I honestly don't know or if my edit was just unclear. Sam Buzhduga (talk) 19:40, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page. Doug Weller talk 19:54, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would note Mr Weller: 1. I have a devotion to Wikipedia's success in it's project to bring information to people (including donations). 2. I have dutifully gone through what may be a "normal process of involvement" including first edits that were rejected as not meeting standards. 3. I have accomplished a few (10 or so) edits since. It is important work imho. I state this dull history because as much as I see improvements could be written and would like to contribute, it seems impossible, because of the process. I won't ask why the process is so labyrinthine. Instead I'll ask for encouragement; Please consider calculating how much time is projected to be necessary for various Wikipedia edits, and publishing an essay to that effect. I have started edits and given up because I cannot devote what I worry will be hours to changing the meaning of an article. Alternately I suggest that rather than simply rejecting edits, there be staff that takes an edit that has merit, and rewrites it to solve deficiencies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthhurts34 (talkcontribs) 22:13, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]