Jump to content

User talk:Wugapodes: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Ruby2021 (talk | contribs)
Line 108: Line 108:
Please let me know what I should do. Thank you.[[User:Ruby2021|Ruby2021]] ([[User talk:Ruby2021|talk]]) 01:02, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Please let me know what I should do. Thank you.[[User:Ruby2021|Ruby2021]] ([[User talk:Ruby2021|talk]]) 01:02, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
:Hi [[User:Ruby2021|Ruby]], and welcome to Wikipedia! We're excited that you'd like to help write and edit. As Steven said below, you should first read [[WP:OR|our policy on original research]]. As an encyclopedia, we only write about information that has been covered by reliable, independent, secondary sources. Because incorrect information can be dangerous to readers' health, we have [[WP:MEDRS|a stricter policy on sources for medical information]].{{pb}}If you'd like to write articles related to COVID-19, I would recommend looking at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/COVID-19|requested articles on women COVID researchers]]. This lists women who other editors think we should have an article on and includes a couple sources to get you started. You can use [[WP:AFC|our articles for creation process]] to get started. Let me know if you have any other questions, and I look forward to your editing! <span style="white-space: nowrap;">— [[User:Wugapodes|Wug·]][[User talk:Wugapodes|a·po·des]]​</span> 19:33, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
:Hi [[User:Ruby2021|Ruby]], and welcome to Wikipedia! We're excited that you'd like to help write and edit. As Steven said below, you should first read [[WP:OR|our policy on original research]]. As an encyclopedia, we only write about information that has been covered by reliable, independent, secondary sources. Because incorrect information can be dangerous to readers' health, we have [[WP:MEDRS|a stricter policy on sources for medical information]].{{pb}}If you'd like to write articles related to COVID-19, I would recommend looking at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/COVID-19|requested articles on women COVID researchers]]. This lists women who other editors think we should have an article on and includes a couple sources to get you started. You can use [[WP:AFC|our articles for creation process]] to get started. Let me know if you have any other questions, and I look forward to your editing! <span style="white-space: nowrap;">— [[User:Wugapodes|Wug·]][[User talk:Wugapodes|a·po·des]]​</span> 19:33, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
::Hi, Wugapodes, Thank you very much for letting me know.[[User:Ruby2021|Ruby2021]] ([[User talk:Ruby2021|talk]]) 00:05, 2 September 2021 (UTC)


== Questions about writing my ideas ==
== Questions about writing my ideas ==

Revision as of 00:06, 2 September 2021

Backlog

Transcluded from User talk:Wugapodes/Tasks

GAN report: mystery solved?

Wugapodes, you may recall that in the GAN report's Malformed nominations sections, an "Unknown nomination" link to the Film section of the page, but with no other information beyond that, showed up for this first time on June 1, 2019. It finally disappeared last night, and I have a tentative diagnosis.

I believe the nomination in question was for Rushmore (film), which was originally made on May 31, 2019, during the day and with a subtopic of "Film". It was clearly a handmade GA nominee template (people are supposed to substitute the GAN template): what I thought was the problem here was that there were no links for the nominator or their talk page, which I fixed. What I missed when I finally started investigating in mid-June—and what I think caused your bot to pick up on the error—was that the date/time field was malformed: all times are supposed to have two digits for the hour and two for the minutes, and this was formatted "8:20, 31 May 2019 (UTC)" rather than "08:20, 31 May 2019 (UTC)", something I didn't notice until today, when I was trying to figure out what went wrong.

I think it was the problematic date that caused the problem, though there may have been something else about this nomination that caused it—this is a tentative diagnosis, after all, and it may be accurate, partially accurate, or not the actual issue at all. Still, this info might help you track down where in the code the error might have been generated, and why the link was to the section rather than the actual (problematic) nomination.

Hope all is well, and best of luck tracking this down. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:15, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, yeah, that's probably it. The regular expression which parses the noms assumes that the timestamp has two digits for the hour, so that's an easy fix. Wug·a·po·des18:46, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GANs to do

New Years Greetings

I've noticed that some of these GANs directly above are either done or on hold. In case you might be interested, I've recently listed the biography for the film director Martin Scorsese as a nomination. He is nominated for an Oscar this year and I thought it might be nice if his article could be brought to peer review quality before the Oscars next month, if you might be inclined to look at it. CodexJustin (talk) 17:12, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome template

More readable article

Thanks for listening to me and making the changes. May I also suggest you consider changing the rather long sentence: "It used to be only the study of the systems of phonemes in spoken languages, but it now may also cover any linguistic analysis either at a level beneath the word (including syllable, onset and rime, articulatory gestures, articulatory features, mora, etc.) or at all levels of language where sound or signs are structured to convey linguistic meaning." I count about 66 words which requires a grade 31 to read (how many PHDs is that :). Here is a suggested revision: At one time it only related to the study of the systems of phonemes in spoken languages. Now it may cover either a) any linguistic analysis either at a level beneath the word (including syllable, onset and rime, articulatory gestures, articulatory features, mora, etc.), or b) all levels of language where sound or signs are structured to convey linguistic meaning. I will leave it too you. Cheers. John (talk)

21:57, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Avoiding issues regarding my T-ban

Hi Wugapodes, just a quick note to avoid issues regarding my T-ban, I self reverted [1], on the page for List of oldest universities in continuous operation just in case some of the text I adjusted might run into the T-ban area. Initially, I was just correcting some of the facts regarding the university, but there is a reference to the fact that some of the classes originally were held at the Cathedral School and in churches. So, I just want to avoid a similar situation where I stumbled across text that might have infringed on the T-ban. --E-960 (talk) 10:50, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@E-960: The self-revert was a good idea, and I'm glad to hear you're being more careful. The sentence you added is, in my opinion, covered by your topic ban as the content related to Christianity. I also have some concern about it's relationship to secularism given the faculty of theology was patronized by the queen, but even if that is fine, the religious ties in the university's early history place this topic within "Christianity...broadly construed". On an unrelated note, the cited source lists the merged university as "Lviv" not "Lwów" as your original edit had changed it to. I'm guessing this is just a difference in transliteration? Wug·a·po·des 23:53, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, I starts out with a small correction to the date, and next thing you know I'm reviewing the entire text. Good thing I stopped and reverted. In regards to the Lwów/Lviv University, it's a bit of a complicated issue, the source retroactively calls it Lviv University, as the university is in Ukraine today and the primary language of study is Ukrainian. However, at the start of the 19th century the university was just recently taken over by the Austrians from Poland, with most of the facility still being Polish as was the city itself, and Polish and German as the auxiliary languages. The current name of the university "Ivan Franko National University of Lviv" was given to the school after the Soviet Union annexed Eastern Poland in 1939. There was a discussion a long time ago about central Europe on what to call place names in historical context that changed populations and/or countries, and a soft recommendation was put forth to use the name most appropriate for the time-period. Such issues constantly come up on Central European topics, as so many regions in that part of Europe changed hands over the centuries. --E-960 (talk) 06:13, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Read-only reminder

A maintenance operation will be performed on Wednesday August 25 06:00 UTC. It should only last for a few minutes.

Also during this time, operations on the CentralAuth will not be possible (GlobalRenames, changing/confirming e-mail addresses, logging into new wikis, password changes).

For more details about the operation and on all impacted services, please check on Phabricator.

A banner will be displayed 30 minutes before the operation.

Please help your community to be aware of this maintenance operation. Thank you!

20:33, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello

Hello there I’m a newbie --Geeksquad102 (talk) 03:44, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How can I agree to the stipulations and talk to someone about the 4400? Geeksquad102 (talk) 03:46, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What can I find out about the continuation of 4400? Geeksquad102 (talk) 03:48, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, did you read my last question? --Geeksquad102 (talk) 03:49, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Geeksquad102: I'd assume Wugapodes might be sleeping or otherwise busy - is there anything you need help with particularly? Elli (talk | contribs) 03:52, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well I happen to love 4400 and I was hoping for another episode or season would be great --Geeksquad102 (talk) 04:17, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Geeksquad102 and welcome to Wikipedia! As Elli notes I was busy and only just saw your message. I assume you're talking about The 4400? I actually remember liking that show myself, but I didn't know it was picked up for a reboot (see [2]). If you would like to improve the article by adding information on the reboot, we would appreciate your help! Let me know if you need me or have questions about editing. Wug·a·po·des 04:38, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have so many questions! I have no idea I’m 61 years old. But I do love that show and I would like to talk to the producers the writers the people that have an opportunity to talk to the doctors to let him know just how important that is especially for us old people it gives us hope! --Geeksquad102 (talk) 04:41, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes and I still work every day I’m at collections specialist for is steel importer. I drive 64 miles one way back and forth.
I could be a Defender lol --Geeksquad102 (talk) 04:44, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Geeksquad102: I can help you with editing Wikipedia, but I don't believe we have any connections to the show production staff. It looks like the TV show has an official twitter which might be a good way for fans to get in touch. The reboot seems to be produced by Ariana Jackson and Anna Fricke who both have twitter accounts but neither has posted in many years so it's probably not a good way to get in touch with them.
As for editing Wikipedia, you should check out our brief editing tutorial. This will introduce you to how you can open the editing interface, the editing toolbar, and how to publish your changes to Wikipedia (among other topics). If you're interested in the reboot, we have a section on that which you might be able to improve. If you have the time and interest, you could write a new article on the reboot specifically, using the original article as a guide on what to include. Hopefully you enjoy Wikipedia, and let me know if you have any problems with editing. Wug·a·po·des 19:55, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Andrew Cuomo on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 August 2021

How might the gender diversity of movement organizers compared to elite editors explain tensions between the community and WMF?
The graphs article is interesting. I included one here that made me think about this previous report which among other questions asked Why should decisions that affect how information is disseminated around the entire world be made by a handful of participants who are almost certainly English-speaking white males privileged by their access to computer literacy, free time, and awareness of a particular discussion? Our readership and the free culture movement in general are diverse, and the organizational leaders are representative of that. Among the most active editors, and even editors at large, decisions are made predominantly by men, but global decisions are made by a group with greater representation of women's voices. In considering the frequent backlash to global decisions, is this disparity informative? Consider Gamergate, a harassment campaign ostensibly about "ethics in journalism" where predominantly male gamers undertook organized harassment campaigns against women journalists. Taken on their own terms, the goal was to maintain the integrity of the "gamer" identity and culture of which masculinity was an integral, if tacit, part (c.f. Bucholtz 2001). As the culture diversified, represented in part by the growth of female voices and criticism in gaming journalism, cultural conservatives waged a culture war in order to maintain their exclusive conception of "gamer" resulting in the coordinated harassment of women journalists. This graph and the others in the article suggest that our demographics may be feeding a similar dynamic. Interesting to think about. Wug·a·po·des 21:40, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You for Becoming My Mentor (Issue of COVID-19)

Hello, Wugapodes,

You are my mentor for my edits of Wikipedia. I created my Wikipedia account yesterday. I wanted to write for the Wikipedia article, “COVID-19”, and found that I could not and would like to ask you what I should do or can do with Wikipedia regarding COVID-19.

I have thought that because global warming affects the world and because the COVID-19 pandemic has the cases in many parts of it, they are probably related. I have written that for some posts of US President Joe Biden and the UN on Facebook in the past. However, I did not know if some people got interested in my idea as I received no replies from them.

I wanted to write my idea of covering the faces for the article of “COVID-19”. It is to create a helmet-like equipment with a small air purifier inside it. In this way, I think that the infections in many cases could be avoided. Indoors, we can have the air purifiers. Outdoors, we could use the helmet-like equipment. I wrote about this equipment to the US Embassy in Tokyo many months ago, but no one seems interested in it. It might not be useful, but I have thought that it would save people.

I also wanted to write for the article what I heard for the patients who are and will be infected with COVID-19. I heard that a person’s power of resistance is dramatically increased with a shot of Vitamin C, and so it might be possible to save the lives of the people who are and will be infected with COVID-19 with such shots.

Please let me know what I should do. Thank you.Ruby2021 (talk) 01:02, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ruby, and welcome to Wikipedia! We're excited that you'd like to help write and edit. As Steven said below, you should first read our policy on original research. As an encyclopedia, we only write about information that has been covered by reliable, independent, secondary sources. Because incorrect information can be dangerous to readers' health, we have a stricter policy on sources for medical information.
If you'd like to write articles related to COVID-19, I would recommend looking at requested articles on women COVID researchers. This lists women who other editors think we should have an article on and includes a couple sources to get you started. You can use our articles for creation process to get started. Let me know if you have any other questions, and I look forward to your editing! Wug·a·po·des 19:33, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Wugapodes, Thank you very much for letting me know.Ruby2021 (talk) 00:05, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Questions about writing my ideas

I wrote my ideas for the Talk pages of "Chosen people", "Darwinism" and "Catholic Church and homosexuality". Please let me know if it is good to write one's own ideas. Thank you. Ruby2021 (talk) 12:33, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NO, please read wp:talk wp:or wp:forum and wp:rs.Slatersteven (talk) 12:54, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16:00, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

MfD closing

Howdy. I don't envy your task. GoodDay (talk) 21:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@GoodDay: It's why they pay me the big bucks ;). At least it wasn't the worst discussion I've closed. I've found it helps to skip the threaded comments on the first read through and only dig deeper when they seem to be going somewhere. If a lot of people are saying "per X" and there's a thread underneath X, it's important to read, but if it's just a huge thread on a couple sentence rationale that wasn't referenced I find it's usually more heat than light. Wug·a·po·des 21:48, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, whatever your methodology, I think it was very sound close which accurately and conscientiously summarizes the consensus itself and the contours of the debate, in the case of a challenging discussion. Thank you for taking the time to work it up, Wugapodes.
On a more personal note, I entered that discussion knowing that the consensus was already all but certain at that point, but feeling that I had an obligation to speak up if I felt there were some additional aspects to the issue that should be raised before said consensus was formalized. I knew that a best-case scenario for me in that situation was to just to have those concerns perceived in the light in which I intended them--i.e. coming from a place of similar priorities to many of the delete advocates, but just perceiving the strategy and nuances differently--and I feel your close was very fair-handed in that respect, so please know that did not go unnoticed or unappreciated. :) SnowRise let's rap 08:03, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad you appreciate it; I try to avoid naming particular editors in closes as it can put unnecessary attention on them or wrongly present a particular view. Your contribution seemed worth pointing out so that if editors want to dig further they know where to look. I appreciate the time you took to consider your position and write it out despite the direction of the debate. Language isn't a pre-existing object, but something we constantly (re-)produce through interaction. Setting aside the keep-delete dynamic of an MfD, the discussion was really "how do we as a community understand the meaning of these words and what do we do about it?" From that perspective I found your comment incredibly interesting: the interpretation is obvious, but we can choose to develop and enforce an alternate interpretation to subvert that interpretation. It's quite clever, and has a long history which you rightly point out in reference to re-appropriation of slurs. I believe another commenter proposed modifying the template to use "singular they" with the intent to annoy those using it for political ends with the goal of dissuading its use. These are interesting tactics that, in the right circumstances, could be very effective social responses. When we understand discussions beyond a keep-delete paradigm, we can come up with interesting solutions to problems, and while I personally agree that deletion is preferable in this case, remembering that we have options beyond c2:DisagreeByDeleting and can be quite creative when we need to be. Wug·a·po·des 21:07, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was annoyed near the end of the MfD, that 2 or 3 editors were on the border of (if not) breaching WP:CIVIL, WP:ASPERSIONS, WP:AGF, with their comments towards me. Merely because I supported userboxes for white pride & straight pride. But anyways, it's closed now. GoodDay (talk) 16:19, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable. It's part of the insidious nature of dog whistles. They recruit others to the defense of the cause through misdirection, and they create division within coalitions that share the same underlying beliefs. It's a divide and conquer strategy: couch intolerance in facially benign terms, get good people to defend the benign meaning, other good people point out and respond to the hidden meaning and ostracize those defending the benign meaning, bigots claim those defending against the intolerant meaning are themselves intolerant, those who defend the benign meaning ally themselves with those seeking to spread the intolerant meaning in opposing those defending against the intolerant meaning. It's a hazard that comes with defending surface-level meanings or abstract notions of tolerance without regard for the cultural, political, and historical contexts which led to the coining and spread of particular terms. Wug·a·po·des 21:07, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2021 July

Hi! Could you please elaborate a bit on your reasoning behind the closure, just for the record? Thx. -- RZuo (talk) 17:09, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@RZuo: No one at the move review (besides the nominator) said that the close should be overturned. The only editor who did not outright endorse the close explicitly rejected overturning the close, saying "there is no basis here to overturn". There is no other way I could have closed that discussion other than consensus to endorse the close. Wug·a·po·des 20:17, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Legit Bronco (13:18, 1 September 2021)

How much time does it require to be a official editor? --Legit Bronco (talk) 13:18, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Legit Bronco: You already are an official editor! There are some buttons that we restrict for safety reasons such as the ability to move pages (4 days and 10 edits) or edit certain controversial political articles (1 month and 500 edits), but most of the encyclopedia is yours to edit whenever you like. There's no maximum or minimum time you must contribute, and even small edits as you read are helpful. Feel free to ask more questions if that didn't help, and if there are specific edits you want to make but can't I can help you figure out how to make them happen. Let me know, and welcome to Wikipedia! Wug·a·po·des 20:12, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]