User talk:GreenMeansGo

Warning: this page is watched over by ancient and powerful spirits. Be civil, or you will invoke their wrath.

Have your say!

Hi everyone, just a quick reminder that voting for the WikiProject Military history coordinator election closes soon. You only have a day or so left to have your say about who should make up the coordination team for the next year. If you have already voted, thanks for participating! If you haven't and would like to, vote here before 23:59 UTC on 28 September. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

the USSR was *not* founded in 1917

[1] Please read the first sentence of USSR for your own education. --109.186.147.144 (talk) 15:35, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Looks like I may be confusing the USSR and the SFSR. But it's still not clear that this was accomplished by the Russian Republic in the few number of days it existed, and not the SFSR. Of course that would be a great deal easier to decide if this statement actually came with a source. GMG^talk 15:40, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

The source, stating that the voting rights pre-dated the Russian Communist Revolution, was already there in Women's suffrage#Russia. I've now added a second ref. --109.186.147.144 (talk) 16:21, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Maybe I'm misreading it, but it's still not totally clear which government actually granted the right to vote and when. GMG^talk 16:49, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Citing Women's suffrage#Russia: on July 20, 1917 the Provisional Government enfranchised women with the right to vote. I don't think the exact date nor the name of the specific government belong in the top section, though. --109.186.147.144 (talk) 17:14, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, but it's not clear that is supported by the source, from page 116 "the socialist parties' programs called for universal suffrage" and on 117, "a realization that women would have the right to vote." But neither says when that was actually granted, and you have a six week window where timing changes what government actually did the granting. GMG^talk 17:21, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

All that said, it ain’t the USSR yet, and Russian republic, with a suitable level of vagueness, covers the governments intevening between. Also, this looks a bit like the drunk-under-the-lamppost, searching where it’s easiest (on Wiki itself). Qwirkle (talk) 17:36, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Please see page xv of the book: July 20: Provisional Government extends right to vote to women., and additionally page 294 (search for "right to vote"). --109.186.147.144 (talk) 17:39, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Ah ha! Now we're getting somewhere. But shouldn't the article then link to Russian Provisional Government instead? July 20 was almost a month and a half before the Russian Republic was created on September 1. GMG^talk 17:43, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Done --109.186.147.144 (talk) 17:51, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

And Y accepted, since the article is under pending changes protection. GMG^talk 17:53, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

And now, for my next trick

enEnglish will be this users's first language as soon as they learn how to speak it.

I didn't, per se. That's what happens when you learned yourself how to spell :) TomStar81 (Talk) 20:46, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

I couldn't resist a cheap joke. It's not in my nature. :P GMG^talk 21:12, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Also, from where I sit on my front porch, I believe it's spelt "learnt". See also relevant userbox. GMG^talk 21:17, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

*lernt. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 21:25, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For the cheap laughs and a lightened mood I hereby present you with this Barnstar of Good Humor...presented somewhat at my expense, but hey, any chance you get to congratulate someone for lightening mood is well worth it in my opinion :) TomStar81 (Talk) 23:14, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Hey thanks TomStar81. You can pay it forward by watchlisting the Teahouse. We can always use more folks, and can always use more admins for those sticky questions that us mere mortals can't answer without help. GMG^talk 23:42, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Gee fizz

Ladies and gentlemen, arguably one the most successful indigenous reservations in one of the richest countries in the world. And I've so far deleted three following sentences because they're not helpful. GMG^talk 00:52, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Kevin Rashid Johnson

On 28 September 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kevin Rashid Johnson, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Kevin Rashid Johnson was charged with inciting a riot for organizing a prison strike that may or may not have happened? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kevin Rashid Johnson. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Kevin Rashid Johnson), 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Definitely interested to see whether a Black Panther member on the main page causes any kind of stir. GMG^talk 00:25, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Your recent comment at Teahouse.

Do not presume to words in my mouth again, got it? You are never authorized to speak for me. Thereis no en.wiki policy that we should encourage users to use other language Wikis, and there is policy that requires communication in English. Pretty fucking arrogant to presume to speak for another editor and I suggest strongly you not do it again. John from Idegon (talk) 00:21, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

1. Chill out.
2. If you've never contributed to a multi-lingual project like Wikidata or Commons, I suggest you do.
3. Our purpose is to make more knowledge more free for more people. That doesn't just include English speaking people. GMG^talk 00:30, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Heart Berries 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) 12:40, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Yeah yeah. I know. I hadn't figured out 100% if that's what I want to go with or not. GMG^talk 12:54, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 October 2018

• From the editor: Is this the new normal?

• News and notes: European copyright law moves forward

• In the media: Knowledge under fire

• Discussion report: Interface Admin policy proposal, part 2

• Arbitration report: A quiet month for Arbcom

• Traffic report: John McCain's death generates over 7 million hits, followed by historical low

• Technology report: Paying attention to your mobile

• Gallery: A pat on the back

• Blog: After a catastrophic fire at the National Museum of Brazil, a drive to preserve what knowledge remains

• Recent research: How talk page use has changed since 2005; censorship shocks lead to centralization; is vandalism caused by workplace boredom?

• Humour: Signpost Crossword Puzzle

• Essay: Expressing thanks

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thank you very much for your generous help at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, kind stranger :) chaos1618 (talk) 14:24, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Hey, no problem at all chaos1618. If there's ever anything I can do to help feel free to drop back by either here or back at the Teahouse. Thanks for helping us to build a better encyclopedia! GMG^talk 14:29, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Alexis Herman/GA1

GreenMeansGo, do you mean to return to your GA review here soon? It appears to be waiting for you to check the edits that were made in response to your comments. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:20, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Ah. Thanks for the notification BlueMoonset. I hadn't notice that they had followed up with their 10 August ping on the talk page. Yes, I'll get to this before the week is out to be sure. GMG^talk 16:22, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Great! Thanks again. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:36, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

WT:INTADMIN#Non-admins

Just noting that you don't really have to strike your vote in deference to MA, as you raise very good points and don't say anything technically inaccurate. Enterprisey (talk!) 04:13, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, but after thinking about it, I'm not really tech savvy, and I just honestly have much more confidence in the expertise of others. If they think it's that dire of an issue, then I'm willing to grant them that they know what they're talking about. GMG^talk 10:29, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	For your nuanced, rational and thought-provoking comments over here:-) ∯WBGconverse 15:28, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Hey, much appreciated. I'm often told I'm special, but I'm pretty sure it's usually not intended to be a compliment :P GMG^talk 15:32, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

JzG

I am not going to try to close the discussion. It's too late for that. It doesn't matter whether you are trying to get only certain information deleted from JzG's userpage or whether all of it violates guidelines (or in this case, according to you, policy). You asked him to remove it. He refused. You go to MfD. Instead, you went to the worst venue imaginable for this sort of thing. We are now going to have a extended dramafest about userpage guidelines, BLP, and worst of all Trump. I'm not criticizing you; I just wish you hadn't done it.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:09, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

I would much rather the content was simply and quietly removed when they were asked politely to do so. The issue can yet be easily resolved by the click of a button. GMG^talk 13:22, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

FYI, these look like politically motivated blocks:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mouse001#Blocked https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive187#Scjessey
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:99.170.117.163/Archive_1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Psts1st https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:207.87.20.74

and this is illustrative of a long term behavioral problem:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive913#Admin_edits_my_post_to_deliberately_change_the_meaning

107.209.19.163 (talk) 18:34, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm too busy writing about books atm to worry about an arbcom case. But if you think animus toward Trump supporters motivated a block against Scjessy, I question your investigative prowess. GMG^talk 18:39, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

The first one was also a sockpuppet who filed an AE request against Scjessey after joining and engaging in 2 months of POV pushing. I haven't looked into any more, but the first two are actually decent evidence of how even-handed JzG is. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:26, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

For my own part, I haven't actually made any accusations that JzG has taken any improper administrative actions. My main concern was:

1. Unsourced statements about living people (which I would have been well within my rights according to policy to simply remove without discussion),
2. Disparaging statements that are not conducive to collaboration with good faith and especially new editors (which is why we do not allow broad POLEMICs in user space, and especially not those disparaging 40-50% of a major country), and
3. A gift wrapped argument for every far right media outlet who wants to argue that Wikipedia is a librul cabal intent on political advocacy, rather than a neutral encyclopedia that simply calls their far right rhetoric for what it is.

These are detrimental to the mission, and that's the beginning and end of any argument that matters. GMG^talk 17:13, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Well, I still disagree with you over both the first and second points, and would point out that every far right media outlet already thinks WP is a librul cabal intent on political accuracy, and will continue to harp on about it for as long as WP:V remains one of the pillars. But I mostly showed up here to agree with you that the IP seems to be just venting their spleen at Guy without having anything real to base it on. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:19, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Donna Strickland edit

Hey Roger Hui. You seem to have forgotten to leave a comment. But in regard to what this is almost certainly in reference to, the content is not suggesting that her being the only living recipient is a necessary logical consequence of her winning, but that in fact, her winning did make her the only living recipient, because both the others are long deceased. GMG^talk 17:54, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

I did not forget. I wanted to add the section heading first before adding the actual comments. Here they are:

Hi. You reverted my edit of the Donna Strickland page. The sentence in question is:

Strickland is the first female Nobel Physics laureate in 55 years and the third woman in history to win the Nobel Prize in Physics, after Marie Curie in 1903 and Maria Goeppert-Mayer in 1963, making her the only living female recipient.[5][20]

The change (which you reverted) was:

Strickland is the first female Nobel Physics laureate in 55 years and the third woman in history to win the Nobel Prize in Physics, after Marie Curie in 1903 and Maria Goeppert-Mayer in 1963. She is the only living female recipient.[5][20]

You say: "They're not alive, that that's almost word-for-word from the source.". We know (or can easily find out from Wikipedia itself) that Curie and Goeppert-Mayer are not alive, but that is not the point. The point is that Strickland winning the Nobel, that alone, does not make her the only living female recipient. One does not logically imply the other; her winning does imply that she is a living female recipient but not the only living female recipient. If the source also says that, then the source is also (logically) wrong. -- Roger Hui (talk) 17:59, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

As I said above, it doesn't not need to be a necessary logical consequence in order to be factually true, which in this case it is. More to the point, the sources refer to the fact that she is the only living female recipient as an important aspect regarding the nature of the award. GMG^talk 18:02, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Well, if it's factually true then the simpler declarative sentence is both logically and stylistically better. We agree that the facts are not in question. -- Roger Hui (talk) 18:09, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Sorry I'm not more responsive Roger Hui. I'm in the middle of a project on my house. If it's just a stylistic disagreement, we should probably just ask the talk page. GMG^talk 19:41, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

For goodness sake

{{unblock|reason=I'm on a freaking hard blocked IP range. Help. GMG^talk

• I've already been through this on IRC. I don't need a steward. The global lock is anon only. The big nasty lock is just on en.wiki. I can edit Commons just fine. GMG^talk 01:38, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • So rather than spin out, head a section with a phase that is offensive to roughly one third of the world's population and in general throw a hissy fit, go look at the noticeboards, find an administrator that is active, email him or her and request IP block exemption. Or reboot your router and see if the new IP works. John from Idegon (talk) 01:43, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

I didn't realize that was terribly offensive. I assume "goodness" is less so?

Apparently I need a CU. And I'm tethered to my phone for the next few days. So restarting my router isn't an option, and restarting my phone doesn't do anything. There doesn't seem to be any CUs on IRC. So I figured I'd leave this here for the night and hopefully someone would get to it. GMG^talk 01:52, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

I just missed you on IRC. DeltaQuad and I are both on if you want to talk there sometimes these involve private issues, so that may be easier. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:01, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the change, GMG. For reference, see Ten Commandments, #3. I don't drive so my son and I use public transportation. I'll tolerate all kinds of profane language from passengers around us, but on that, I will speak up. The world's a better place when we respect others closely held beliefs. John from Idegon (talk) 02:15, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

No worries. Sorry for the trouble. GMG^talk 02:21, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

John from Idegon, there is nothing profane or offensive about anything he said. Lighten up. Nihlus 02:37, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Agreeing with Nihlus; we left the 19th century behind some time ago. ——SerialNumber54129 15:13, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

What I would really like someone to tell me is how I jumped from a mobile IP in Louisville to a proxy without the knowledge or expertise to use proxys, or even really know what they are beyond knowing the word for them. GMG^talk 02:39, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

• Well that was all very strange. GMG^talk 02:37, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I edit on mobile most of the time. My IP hope back and forth between Indianapolis and Phoneix. I live on the Oregon-Idaho border. Go figure.John from Idegon (talk) 03:15, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
    • Well, if you ever need an alternate account, there’s ‘’John from Phoenopolis’’ right there...Qwirkle (talk) 15:03, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

COI

Thank you for sticking up for me :"Thank you for uploading so many high quality images" I am not a professional photographer and have never taken a photojournalism course. I do, however, know some print journalists and know how they think and what they do. I do not do PR--what I do is called Public Service. I never understood why (some) people have had a violent reaction to my photos. In the past, people have stolen them, miscredited them (with their own name), flopped them, photoshopped people out that they didn't like who were in my photos and photoshopped people they disliked into them as well. When I met Joe Rosenthal, I didn't really know who he was; I thought he was just a nice old man who had been a past president of the San Francisco Press Club (this was in 1981). If I had been a WWII buff, I would have known, but I truly did not. As for Reverend Jim Jones, this November 18, 2018 is the 40th anniversary of the Jonestown Tragedy. NBCUniversal was trying to get my photos, but didn't know how to find me. Amazingly, they found one guy in Seattle who know who I was! A researcher from Topaz Museum wanted my 43 year old photo of writer Toshio Mori. She found a Nancy Wong who was a photographer, but it wasn't me. I don't know how 30 year old person could have taken a 43 year old photo, but.... Thank you again for your kind words. Edmunddantes October 16, 2018 204.102.74.23 (talk) 00:09, 17 October 2018 (UTC)