User talk:Marquardtika
Re: Nicholas A. Trutanich
Just curious, where did you come across where Nicholas A. Trutanich has been sworn in? I can't find anything. Snickers2686 (talk) 04:21, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- Snickers2686 Gosh, I know I found something yesterday about this, but now I can't find it again. Feel free to revert my changes in the mean time until I can find the sourcing! Marquardtika (talk) 18:30, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
February 2019 at Women in Red
 February events:
|
The Signpost: 31 January 2019
- Op-Ed: Random Rewards Rejected
- News and notes: WMF staff turntable continues to spin; Endowment gets more cash; RfA continues to be a pit of steely knives
- Discussion report: The future of the reference desk
- Featured content: Don't miss your great opportunity
- Arbitration report: An admin under the microscope
- Traffic report: Death, royals and superheroes: Avengers, Black Panther
- Technology report: When broken is easily fixed
- News from the WMF: News from WMF
- Recent research: Ad revenue from reused Wikipedia articles; are Wikipedia researchers asking the right questions?
- Essay: How
- Humour: Village pump
- From the archives: An editorial board that includes you
Disambiguation link notification for February 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Federalist Society, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Olin Foundation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
The Two
Italic textboth edits made are factually correct, further you have erases (and claim you're from Texas) I information wildly available on the Texas Historical Society website and the University of Texas archived business information — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.206.105.120 (talk) 01:44, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Please see WP:HOAX. If there were sources for the information you're adding, I'd tell you to add them--but there are no sources, because there is no "billionaire Sullivan ranching family from San Antonio." So please, just stop. Marquardtika (talk) 01:47, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
March 2019 at Women in Red
   Please join us for these virtual events:
| ||
|
|
The Signpost: 28 February 2019
- From the editors: Help wanted (still)
- News and notes: Front-page issues for the community
- Discussion report: Talking about talk pages
- Featured content: Conquest, War, Famine, Death, and more!
- Arbitration report: A quiet month for Arbitration Committee
- Traffic report: Binge-watching
- Technology report: Tool labs casters-up
- Gallery: Signed with pride
- From the archives: New group aims to promote Wiki-Love
- Humour: Pesky Pronouns
That is not how my team works
66.97.20.206 (talk) 20:52, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- ? Marquardtika (talk) 20:56, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for COI note
|
Thanks for COI note |
| Thanks for the note on how to best approach the COI I have at Common Cause, I'll make sure to use the talk page. Jlittlew (talk) 14:48, 11 March 2019 (UTC) |
April editathons at Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:00, 25 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
(Please excuse this post if it is a duplicate!)
The Signpost: 31 March 2019
- From the editors: Getting serious about humor
- News and notes: Blackouts fail to stop EU Copyright Directive
- In the media: Women's history month
- Discussion report: Portal debates continue, Prespa agreement aftermath, WMF seeks a rebranding
- Featured content: Out of this world
- Arbitration report: The Tides of March at ARBCOM
- Traffic report: Exultations and tribulations
- Technology report: New section suggestions and sitewide styles
- News from the WMF: The WMF's take on the new EU Copyright Directive
- Recent research: Barnstar-like awards increase new editor retention
- From the archives: Esperanza organization disbanded after deletion discussion
- Humour: The Epistolary of Arthur 37
- In focus: The Wikipedia SourceWatch
- Special report: Wiki Loves (50 Years of) Pride
- Community view: Wikipedia's response to the New Zealand mosque shootings
Cindy Hyde-Smith deletions
As an infrequent contributor to Wikipedia, I'm just now noting your significant deletions to the Cindy Hyde-Smith article of November, 2018. While I certainly understand neutral point of view and can see the point of YouTube video not being a reliable source (even though the video is unmistakably verifiable as that of Hyde-Smith), I do question why you made such sweeping deletions of citations which are clearly not of a questionable nature. Among the citations removed were excerpts from Hyde-Smith's own Web site; Mississippi's largest newspaper, The Clarion-Ledger; and established broadcast news organizations from local station WLBT to international networks like CNN and Fox News.
Frankly, this comes across not as an effort to adhere to Wikipedia standards, but more as a "sanitation effort" to remove unflattering (yet quite verifiable and well-sourced) information about Hyde-Smith. I find this hard to justify as a point-of-view fork, as both liberal and conservative media sources reported widely on the events mentioned.
Would you be so kind as to explain your reasoning for such heavy-handed removals under Wikipedia policies? 2601:3CA:204:F860:4DEB:52C8:7CB0:F598 (talk) 16:36, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
- @2601:3CA:204:F860:4DEB:52C8:7CB0:F598: I'm not sure what edits you're referring to. I'd suggest starting a discussion at Talk:Cindy Hyde-Smith and being specific about which content you're referring to and when the edits were made. Marquardtika (talk) 00:41, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
- Actually, you suggested on my talk page to address this here on your talk page, but I'll open a topic on the article talk page as you suggest.