User talk:Almaty

GA review of digital media use and mental health

@Farang Rak Tham: Thanks for your help! --E.3 (talk) 05:08, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Digital media use and mental health

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Digital media use and mental health you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Farang Rak Tham -- Farang Rak Tham (talk) 08:22, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Future self/GA1

E.3, you opened a review of this nomination over a month ago, but have yet to post anything to it.

I should probably mention that the nomination was made by a student in a college course that had an online component to it involving editing a Wikipedia article. That student's final Wikipedia edit, on December 5, 2018, was to nominate this article at GAN; it is highly unlikely that they will be around to address any issues you may discover in the course of your review.

If you wish to proceed with your review, by all means do so. If you would like to withdraw from the review, let me know here and I'll make sure the page is removed and the nomination placed back into the pool of those nominations awaiting a reviewer. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:49, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi thanks, sorry about that. Can you please remove the review? --E.3 (talk) 02:55, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Digital media use and mental health, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daniel Miller (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:10, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Digital media use and mental health

The article Digital media use and mental health you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Digital media use and mental health for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Farang Rak Tham -- Farang Rak Tham (talk) 08:02, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Digital media use and mental health

The article Digital media use and mental health you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Digital media use and mental health for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Farang Rak Tham -- Farang Rak Tham (talk) 19:22, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Digital media use and mental health

Thank you for the submission to WikiJHum. We've moved it over (and made minor formatting differences edits).

• v:WikiJournal_Preprints/Digital_media_use_and_mental_health  

Could you fill in the Article info template at the top of the page (If you don't yet have an orcid, applying for one takes ~2 minutes).

If you're ready to submit it for peer review to be organised, just fill in the authorship declaration form and a handling editor will start to contact external reviewers! T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 06:15, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

DYK nom Digital media use and mental health

Hello again, E.3. There are some issues with your DYK nomination. Please come by to fix them.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 22:21, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm awarding you a barnstar!

		The Original Barnstar
		I noticed your bold edits to Internet addiction disorder and I appreciate them. Clovermoss (talk) 13:22, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks so much! Glad this slow cleanup of the digital media use and mental health template is going well! --E.3 (talk) 13:06, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Social media addiction at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 04:09, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Paracoccidioides lutzii

Hello! Your submission of Paracoccidioides lutzii at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:36, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi there! I have reviewed the article further and believe it is now eligible for DYK. I have left an additional query (as well as an image suggestion) at the nomination page. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:27, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Social media addiction

Hello! Your submission of Social media addiction at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 22:12, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi! I reviewed your nomination, and unfortunately, it's a no. I think I have got it right, although I'm not sure I have done the rest correctly. As of now, I believe that you will agree with my review, once you see the rationale. In any case, I have noted that it's my first review and a second opinion would be welcome. Your opinions are welcome too. Cheers! Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 22:16, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

@E.3: I have changed my review to a comment. I was advised that you might not be comfortable with me as the reviewer going forward. Therefore, perhaps, it's best that I do not look into the article any further, to try and generate a review. Having said that, if my involvement has drastically compromised the chances of the nomination being looked at by someone else, and you'd rather I see it through, I will gladly accept. I must reiterate though, that I am a complete newb; and might again bring up more petty things that would require you to devote more time into educating me, before I can approve the nom Usedtobecool ^✉️ ✨ 13:25, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

E.3, I have just posted a new comment about the expansion. Unfortunately, DYK requires the expanded material to be newly created, so the material copied in from other articles is itself subject to the 5x expansion rule. At this point, probably your best hope of qualifying for DYK is to aim to make the article a Good article; GAs, once they are listed, are eligible for DYK if nominated within seven days, even if they didn't qualify previously. Best of luck, and sorry for the bad news. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:26, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Digital media use and mental health GOCE Copy Edit

Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Digital media use and mental health has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. You'll notice that I have made sure that Internet appears throughout the article rather than internet to fix consistency issues. Internet appears with a capital letter throughout its WP article. I suspect "internet" might be jarring to most readers, but if you disagree it is an easy fix.

Best of luck with the FA process.

Regards,

20:25, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Thankyou so much for the copyedit! :) --[E.3][chat2][me] 02:27, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

New message from Narutolovehinata5

Hello, Almaty. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Social media addiction.
Message added 01:40, 4 August 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 01:40, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Flaming sword (effect), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Milling (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Digital media use and mental health

@E.3 and Farang Rak Tham: I approved ALT4 for your DYK nom Template:Did you know nominations/Digital media use and mental health. However, there is one problem that I noted:

• While doing a light copy edit, I noticed there is an open-ended quotation in the third sentence of section Digital technology use in mental health care.

The source is offline so I can't verify the quote or where it should start. Could you please fix this ASAP, as the DYK has already been promoted to the prep area. Thanks! – Reidgreg (talk) 17:24, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

• Done @Reidgreg: thanks for the review and the pickup. --[E.3][chat2][me] 17:31, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • You're welcome! Hope that you get lots of page views! – Reidgreg (talk) 13:35, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Your help desk question

You did not get a response to this question. Did you find the answer elsewhere?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:15, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

@Vchimpanzee: No not yet, I asked here too Wikipedia_talk:Peer_review thanks --[E.3][chat2][me] 00:39, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Paracoccidioides lutzii

On 19 August 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Paracoccidioides lutzii, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that deforestation in Brazil could be linked to higher rates of the severe fungal infection caused by P. lutzii (pictured), a neglected tropical disease? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Paracoccidioides lutzii. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Paracoccidioides lutzii), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:01, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Digital media use and mental health at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 09:55, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Digital media use and mental health

Hello! Your submission of Digital media use and mental health at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:00, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 19:33, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 13:09, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Digital media use and mental health

On 5 September 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Digital media use and mental health, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that research into digital media use and mental health has found that females are more likely to be affected by problematic social media use while males are more likely to have gaming disorder? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Digital media use and mental health. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Digital media use and mental health), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Good work on this, it took a lot of patience and perseverance to see the DYK nom through! I hope you get lots of views! – Reidgreg (talk) 13:45, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks a lot @Reidgreg:, yeah it did, we got there in the end! Looks like the factoid is on the google snippet for social media addiction now which was another aim. If you have some time, I'd really appreciate you taking a look at the FA nomination as well. Thankyou! --[E.3][chat2][me] 12:30, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

FA review?

Hey. I noticed your current FAC nomination needed some prose reviews, and was wondering if you'd be interested in trading reviews? I'd love to get as much feedback as possible this time around for my nomination, and would be more than prepared to review yours in return. I understand if you don't have the time though. Kind regards, Homeostasis07 (talk/contributions) 00:01, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

@Homeostasis07: sure I'll take a look. It would be my first FA review but I've read the guidelines and I'll give it a shot --[E.3][chat2][me] 01:19, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

		The Premium Reviewer Barnstar
		Thank you for contributing to Jill Valentine's FAC. You probably had no idea of the sort of quagmire you were stepping into by reviewing Jill's article, but your uninvolved, unbiased critique was exactly what was needed: it genuinely helped clear the air surrounding the article of a lot of its toxicity. I can't explain in words in a barnstar of how appreciative I genuinely am. Just... thanks for all your help. And congratulations on your own nomination being promoted as well. ;) Homeostasis07 (talk/contributions) 02:22, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Digital media use and mental health

Hello:

I've run through Digital media use and mental health and made a few minor fixes. The article seems in good shape.

I have a bit of an issue with internet not being capitalised given that Wikipedia's article on the subject does use a capital suggesting some consensus may have been reached at some point. However, if the consensus now is that New Zealand usage tops WP's I'm fine with that.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 19:05, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks so much @Twofingered Typist:, was great. FYI I have opened the discussion re the internet here. --[E.3][chat2][me] 12:47, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Psychology Barnstar for you!

		The Psychology Barnstar
		For your excellent work on Digital media use and mental health, particularly your active solicitation of feedback, suggestions, and peer review. Bravo!   - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) (I am a man. The traditional male pronouns are fine.) 15:31, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks so much for that Mark! --[E.3][chat2][me] 15:44, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Digital media use and mental health

		The Featured Article Medal
		By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of the huge amount of work you have put into getting the important topic of digital media use and mental health to featured article status and the exemplary approach to Wikipedian cooperation you have demonstrated while doing so. Bravo! Gog the Mild (talk) 13:57, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Thankyou so much! Was a great process, thanks for the support, and all the amazing suggestions and edits. --[E.3][chat2][me] 14:05, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Digital media use and mental health. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:34, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Oh how cool, thanks Gog the Mild, I didn't even know this existed! --[E.3][chat2][me] 11:04, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Digital media use and mental health scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that Digital media use and mental health has been scheduled as WP:TFA for 6 November 2019. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 6, 2019. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 21:21, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Precious

digital media use and mental health

Thank you for quality articles about Digital media use and mental health, such as Problematic social media use, for Paracoccidioides lutzii, for sharing travel images, for your nutshell: "be unassuming", - physician in preventive healthcare in Australia, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2306 of Precious, a prize of QAI. Nice to meet you! I recognised Wadi Rum, been there earlier this year ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:34, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Video Game Addiction

Hello:

I am writing to let you know that the copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Video game addiction has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Best of luck with the GAN when you get to it.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 18:37, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Deletion to quality

		The Deletion to Quality Award
		For your contributions to bring Digital dependencies and global mental health (prior candidate for deletion at: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Digital dependencies and global mental health) to Featured Article status, I hereby present you The Deletion to Quality Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 04:53, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

I am utterly gobsmacked that no one has awarded this to you yet. Nice work! – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 04:53, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations and thank you for your efforts in bringing a contemporary and socially much relevant topic like Digital media use and mental health to FA level and featuring on Main Page today. Keep up the good work! §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 12:16, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

I/internet

My main concern was that the article was a mishmash of styles, with some paragraphs using "internet", and others "Internet". While I personally feel that changing the case changes the meaning, I'm aware that "internet" is becoming more and more common, while it's counterpart is gradually going the way of the dinosaur. I have no objection if you wish to use lowercase, but it should be uniform throughout the article. Thanks, Joefromrandb (talk) 06:18, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Joefromrandb, I changed all instances to lowercase (apart form in references, which as we realise, some use uppercase and some use lowercase. I think it is now uniform throughout the article :) --[E.3][chat2][me] 04:39, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:44, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Problematic social media use

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Problematic social media use you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 19:01, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Problematic social media use

The article Problematic social media use you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Problematic social media use for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 12:41, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Sorry @Gog the Mild:, have been very very busy IRL, will try to get to it later in the week! --[E.3][chat2][me] 18:51, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Fine, no rush. Wikipedia isn't going anywhere. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:13, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi E.3. How you doing re maybe getting round to this? Gog the Mild (talk) 19:26, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Almaty, congratulations on the new name. It's now 2020; any chance of you getting back to this soon? BlueMoonset (talk) 18:39, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Almaty. It's been seven weeks. If I don't see any action over the next couple of days, I'll close it as unresponsive. Gog the Mild (talk) 04:05, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Apologies @Gog the Mild:, my real life got super busy. I might put a signpost up. Thankyou for the review. Unfortunately I don't have the super energy I used to have for the topic, after the marathon of digital media use and mental health I may get back to it at some point but my academic interests are now elsewhere. Thanks very much again for your support. --Almaty (talk) 13:06, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

"May tonight's light keep us all gently soothed"

Thanks again for all of your help this year. It was very much appreciated. Wishing you and all your loved ones a happy and healthy holiday season. And remember to take the time to do what you want to do in 2020. Over the course of human history, only a relatively minuscule amount of people will ever be able to say they lived through the year, so make it a good one! ;) Homeostasis07 (talk/contributions) 21:17, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Problematic social media use

The article Problematic social media use you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Problematic social media use for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 23:21, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Outbreak lead

I suspect your revision will be undone unless it is refined. Traditionally, outbreaks refer to an increase in incidence of a disease. Obviously, the disease may be caused by a virus but it's still the disease that is the subject. So the sentence, "The COVID-19 outbreak is an ongoing outbreak of SARS-CoV-2..." is going to be contested. I think the original sentence was ok (perhaps minus "Wuhan") but that's an edit I wouldn't try to make with a ten foot pole. :) - Wikmoz (talk) 08:53, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Charts Maker

[[ Ancient civilizations of Mexico and Central America (1917) (18191750992) |100px]]	Cheers for Graphs
	Cheers 4 ur work on daily cases graphs on the 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak!!! Church of the Rain (talk) 16:32, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Redirect expand

Hello. I appear to have expanded your redirect from 2009. How interesting. :) --Almaty (talk) 08:19, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Oh, awesome, very salient topic! -- Beland (talk) 17:17, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Almaty! You created a thread called Hello! Can anyone help me with "wikifying" this table? at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Children

Sorry - i searched for various terms, didn't try paediatric Robertpedley (talk) 11:16, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks!

Thanks for the thanks with regards to the edit here: 1!

Unfortunately, the other editor has decided to reimpose the same entry again, 2, without providing an edit summary or responding the Talk thread here 3, you're welcome to refuse, but just to show multiple editors holding concerns on its appropriateness means they should at least come to Talk first (or even leave an explanatory edit summary), would you mind recovering the original passage? Best. Sleath56 (talk) 22:36, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Epidemic curve

Hello! Your submission of Epidemic curve at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Bryan Rutherford (talk) 16:24, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

The article will need to be expanded if you wish to pursue this nomination. We need to hear from you at the nomination soon as to whether you're will to undertake an expansion. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:56, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into your local language via meta

The 2019 Cure Award

In 2019 you were one of the top ~300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a thematic organization whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.

Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:35, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Go nuts putting my comments in the right section you have my support on that Almaty (talk) 12:16, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Comment in wrong section

You may want to place Special:Diff/945831088 to the right section. --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

IMPORTANT Consensus on an improved version of the lead for COVID-19

Hey Almaty,

please vote here to reach a quick consensus and remove the misleading sentence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2019–20_coronavirus_pandemic#Another_thought

It it much more precise now. We can improve further if you have comments but at least let's make a first step in the right direction!

--Gtoffoletto (talk) 22:24, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2019–20_coronavirus_pandemic#Compromise_of_all_positions for another attempt at broader compromise --Gtoffoletto (talk) 00:24, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Best compromise to COVID-19 lead

Hi there. I note your interest in the COVID-19 lead and the issues surrounding the current edit. Please let’s clear this thing up once and for all, and reach a quick consensus if possible. I’ve included below a link for you to vote on a best compromise. Current edit as it stands is quite misleading and more damaging the longer it is up given that people will read it and freely socialise thinking that as long as nobody coughs at them then they’re all good.

This is a compromise between leaving out the ‘primarily’ which therefore mentions coughing as though it’s the only way droplets are formed (per current misleading edit), and the other side which is actually mentioning exhaling and sneezing. This way, the primary method is stated, no secondary methods stated, and the reader knows that other forms of droplet production are possible.

Please vote using the link below, thanks in advance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2019%E2%80%9320_coronavirus_pandemic#Compromise_of_all_positions

Magna19 (talk) 00:44, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Let's get more votes for 3b. It's clearly achieving consensus and is probably among the most accurate.--Gtoffoletto (talk) 13:04, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

it’s too complex a dispute now, I’ve never been involved in a dispute like it. I’ve said my piece repetitively and vehemently, I think it was a major win having the disputed inline in. I don’t want to be involved in that dispute anymore, it’s too stressful. —Almaty (talk) 13:09, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Afraid just ban me. I’m out Almaty (talk) 15:05, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

I do not threat the edit war, the edit war already happened. Please investigate but I withdraw editing Wikipedia permanently anyway. Almaty (talk) 15:10, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

• Almaty I understand that this is a stressful time for everyone in healthcare as we see our patients, friends, and colleagues get sick with this disease and some of them die.
• With respect to someone removing the content, I assume you are referring to this.[1] Which is not me and is an edit I disagree with. I hope after taking a step back you will rejoin us. Wishing you all the best. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:54, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

The Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Digital media use and mental health. ——SN54129 16:39, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

——SN54129 16:39, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar

It was your tenacity that completed the information gathering for the potential transmission routes on the lead of the article. Your perseverance on the talk page imprinted on my mind. No one is perfect and we all live and learn. I hope you'd rejoin us and help everyone on the planet acknowledge the fact that no one is perfect. Hopefully, there will be one day the peer-review process from the high-quality journals will no longer require anonymity. Anyway, here is my best wishes to you! Wishing you all the best and good health! Reciprocater (Talk) 19:14, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Gonna miss you

We got into a similar position 5 years back with the Ebola outbreak. One editor got a bit overkeen and started warring (that's my version anyway). I dropped out for 5 years, so trying to limit my inputs to COVID. Robertpedley (talk) 19:34, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

thanks for telling me that. And for the other support messages. I think it’s not for me during the pandemic, because it has too much interest, may be having unintended consequences in India especially, and also the foundation advertising it to get more interest is probably the real subconscious reason as opposed to a content dispute. Good luck. —Almaty (talk) 04:46, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Welcome back. I think DJ is working very hard to maintain the pandemic page, with good intentions. He's reversed a few of my edits but maybe they weren't all that great. I'm now taking long view of any significant rearranging. Robertpedley (talk) 08:53, 31 March 2020‎

yeah I guess I’m retired from editing the main text. I’m scared That we,re not conveying the right information. Or if we do, we use technical words that can be very easily misunderstood by lay people. —Almaty (talk) 09:19, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
The specific details of these sanctions are described here.

Broadly, general sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Template:Z33 – bradv🍁 17:28, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

April 2020

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Why are you reverting well meaning editors without an explanation? specifically this diff? You are aware of the sanctions and restrictions on COVID-19 related articles, so I suggest you discuss things before blindly reverting further. Praxidicae (talk) 17:31, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Almaty reported by User:Praxidicae (Result: ). Thank you. Praxidicae (talk) 17:35, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

April 2020

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  – bradv🍁 17:35, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Wasn’t worth coming back. This is a doc james show. Goodbye and good luck. —Almaty (talk) 17:37, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Topic ban

The following sanction has been imposed on you:

Indefinite topic ban from Coronavirus and COVID-19, broadly construed.

You have been sanctioned for edit warring at 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic, and personalizing the content dispute on this talk page and others.

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator as authorised by the community's decision at Wikipedia:General sanctions/Coronavirus and COVID-19, and the procedure described by the general sanctions guidelines. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions for that decision. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction at the administrators' noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. – bradv🍁 17:44, 1 April 2020 (UTC)