Jump to content

User talk:Girth Summit

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 01101010 (talk | contribs) at 03:18, 26 February 2020 (→Question). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Happy holidays


Interstellarity (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

CVUA question

Am I allowed to change previous answers to final exam questions? Can I answer questions out of order? The reason I'm asking the latter is because there's certain questions I'm more confident in answering. Clovermoss (talk) 05:05, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clovermoss, hi - if there's anything you want to change, go for it. And yes, answer in any order you like. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 06:47, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've answered some questions today and am closer to actually finishing. I've also done a lot-ish countervandalism work outside of CVUA. I did have one question about a question though: what do you mean by complex abuse? It's one of the questions in the last part. Clovermoss (talk) 00:38, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Clovermoss, it means something that isn't obvious - AIV is for obvious vandals, but where would you report something subtle that needed to be explained carefully with diffs? GirthSummit (blether) 06:43, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of St Rufus Church

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article St Rufus Church 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 J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 17:21, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My response

I forgot to ping you with my reply at Ergo's RFA, so here is a link to what I wrote. Hallward's Ghost (Kevin) (My talkpage) 00:55, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hallward's Ghost, thanks - I actually saw it before the RfA was still open, but didn't see any point getting into a lengthy off-topic discussion on a page that was about to be closed. Since you've come here, I'll reply. Briefly, I think that using terms like 'wankery', and make generalisations about groups of people with whom you disagree, isn't really productive. It's not about the language - I have no fear of rudey sweary words - it's just that I think if you're going to criticise behaviour, it's better to be clear and explicit about what you're criticising. I'm sure that people who agree with your analysis will know who/what you were talking about (or at least, I'm sure that they think they know), but I genuinely don't, and I expect the people you were actually referring to don't realise it - nobody would self-identify with the unpleasant description you gave, they probably imagine you were referring to some other denizen of ANI. Less dog-whistle snark, and more clearly expressed, reasoned and civil commentary, might actually change people's minds a bit. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 01:14, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And that's where we part ways, I guess. I have no interest in being falsely polite to a group of people who insult a fantastic content creator like Ergo. The "rudeness" of my language was the point: an expression of my disgust at the collective pile of opposes to a good-faith editor like Ergo. Are the majority of people who frequent ANI wankers? No, I don't believe so. But if an editor is spending a large majority of their time at ANI, attaboying admins in an attempt to get the bit for themselves, instead of actually building the encyclopedia, then those kind of editors have a much higher likelihood of being pettifogging wankers. Hallward's Ghost (Kevin) (My talkpage) 01:29, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hallward's Ghost, fair enough, but I still don't know who you mean. I'm not encouraging you to tell me - I don't want you to open yourself up to an accusation of making personal attacks - but approbrium will not be felt by someone who doesn't know that it's being directed at them. Better surely to make your case in a manner that would abide by our civility policy, and which might actually be heard by the people you're directing it at. It's not about being falsely polite - it's about the effectiveness of the message. If someone calls 'people like me' a bunch of arseholes , I'll likely ignore whatever else they have to say, no matter how valid it might be, either because I choose not to recognise the description, or because they called me an arsehole. If they had bitten their tongue and just talked about the issues, I might have listened. GirthSummit (blether) 01:51, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My anger is not directed at any one person, or any X number of specific people. It is directed at those people (as a general group) who spend X number of months at ANI in an attempt to attaboy enough admins to sail through RFA. Wikipedia's bureaucracy drives me nuts, and is one reason I left active editing for good about 10 years ago. It's also one reason I pop by RFA every so often to support candidates who are actually doing the work of building an encyclopedia, and to occasionally let fly when such a candidate is treated in a shitty manner, as Ergo was, by a bunch of people. And frankly, the people who overvalue bureaucracy on the project are never going to be convinced. It's not about that. It's about calling what they're doing by its name. That's what I was doing, and will periodically continue to do. I also have no use for our civility policy, as many years ago I saw it wielded as a cudgel against some of our best editors, such as Giano and others. Hallward's Ghost (Kevin) (My talkpage) 03:11, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Thanks so much for taking the time to close this AfD. I recognize that most editors voted to not delete the article, but, as you noted in the closing notes, none proved any evidence of significant coverage by reliable sources independent of the subject. Shouldn't Wikipedia's policy and guidelines be the standard that is applied, not the number of votes in a discussion? Clarification on this matter is appreciated. Thanks again. Qono (talk) 16:28, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Qono, hi. While I agree with you that !votes should be weighed against policy, it's also worth considering that every single vote was a keep (apart from your own nomination), and there were some very experienced editors in the discussion. I can't see how I could have closed it any other way to be honest - a delete close would have felt like a supervote, which I couldn't in good conscience do, and relisting seemed pointless when there was a clear consensus. You may of course ask for the close to be reviewed, if you think I have erred. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 18:19, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Girth Summit, I definitely appreciate that most everyone voted to keep and totally understand that you wouldn't want to cast a super-vote, but I am also mindful of the deletion guidelines (WP:ROUGHCONSENSUS) saying "Consensus is not determined by counting heads, but by looking at strength of argument, and underlying policy (if any). Arguments that contradict policy, are based on unsubstantiated personal opinion rather than fact, or are logically fallacious, are frequently discounted." Also: "policies are not negotiable, and cannot be superseded by any other guidelines or by editors' consensus. A closing admin must determine whether an article violates these content policies. Where it is very unlikely that an article on the topic can exist without breaching policy, policy must be respected above individual opinions." The exception seems to be "Per "ignore all rules", a local consensus can suspend a guideline in a particular case where suspension is in the encyclopedia's best interests." So, I was hoping that you could articulate in the closing note how not following the notability guideline is in Wikipedia's best interest here. Otherwise, I think it may be appropriate to have the close reviewed. A tricky case, for sure. Qono (talk) 18:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Qono, I don't intend to revisit the closure, but by all means take it to review if you want to - that's the right course of action if you disagree with what I did. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 20:20, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Wikipedia:Partial blocks.
  • The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.

Technical news

  • Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: {{uw-pblock}}.
  • When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title. [1]

Arbitration

  • Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:05, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Puddleglum2.0

Hello, Girth Summit. You have new messages at Puddleglum2.0's talk page.
Message added 20:26, 1 February 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

In trying to help a newer editor with their draft, and would appreciate your input. I don't want to intrude on your time, so please feel free to decline, just a request! Thanks. Puddleglum 2.0 20:26, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - February 2020

Delivered February 2020 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

21:40, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Revision to Tyler Clark Burke's page

Hi there, Girth Summit. Thanks for taking a look at my page (first one) for the artist Tyler Clark Burke. I have added several references now (my apologies for not doing this in the first place; I'm new to this and thought it would take months for review). Thank you for your time on this matter (and for all that you work on for Wikipedia). At your convenience, please feel free to let me know if you need anything else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.112.184.64 (talk) 17:32, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP editor, thanks for reaching out. I've had a look at the draft, and I'd advise you to find some better sourcing than what's on there at the moment before resubmitting. From a quick look:
  • The Toronto Star article would potentially be good, but I'm not sure what I'm looking at there - it appears to be a PDF document showing a screenshot of an article. Can you find a link to the original article? Note that, if the article is not online at the Toronto Star's website any longer, you may be able to find it using the Internet Archive - that would be permissible as a source, but I'm afraid a PDF on a webhosting site isn't (since it would be trivially easy to knock up fake sources that resemble that PDF).
  • The NYT article about A.P. Burke appears not to mention your subject by name - it doesn't support the assertion that she was his grand daughter.
  • The ADCC archives sources don't mention the subject.
  • The Spin Magazine source mentions the subject, but it's a single sentence - this is trivial coverage, and wouldn't count towards notability.
  • The Now magazine source is similar - just a couple of sentences about her studio.

I haven't look through the others, but if they are similar then this would not be accepted - I'd advise you to look for some solid sources with more in-depth coverage, and cut anything you can't support with reliable sources. Good luck! GirthSummit (blether) 18:23, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jallianwala Bagh massacre

Hi...hope you are well...seeking your opinion on IP edits here.... Whispyhistory (talk) 18:18, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Whispyhistory, looks like vandalism. I see it's coming from a few different IPs, so I've applied semi protection for three days. Let me know if it starts up again when the protection expires. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 18:27, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks...I think it will likely continue until someone reviews and rewrites most of that article. Whispyhistory (talk) 18:29, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Whispyhistory, possibly. We could maybe add pendibg changes protection to it if it keeps happening, Id probably ask abithrr admin's opinion before applying anything long term. GirthSummit (blether) 18:50, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK...I'll keep an eye on it anyway. Thank you again. Whispyhistory (talk) 18:54, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi..It started again. Whispyhistory (talk) 12:27, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Whispyhistory, OK - I've extended the semi-protection for a couple of weeks. If it continues after that, I'll ask someone more experienced than me whether they think it needs a long spell of semi-protection, or if something else like pending changes would be the better choice. Apologies, by the way, for the illiteracy in my last message. My phone was doing something weird with predictive text... Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 17:30, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you kindly...I didn't even notice the "illiteracy". :) Whispyhistory (talk) 18:55, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of St Rufus Church

The article St Rufus Church you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:St Rufus Church 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 J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 19:02, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anti Vandalism Training Request

Hello! I'm Minecrafter0271. I would be interested in training for the Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism Unit. I have 443 edits under my belt, and I would love to fight against vandalism on Wikipedia. So, I need a trainer, who can teach me what I need to know. Thanks! Minecrafter0271 (talk) 19:08, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Minecrafter0271, thanks for reaching out. I'd be happy to show you the ropes - I'll set up a training page, and ping you from there. In the mean time, your required reading is at WP:VANDALISM… GirthSummit (blether) 19:19, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. I did the mandatory reading of WP:VANDALISM and I understand it. Is there a page I have to go to? Please let me know. Thanks! Minecrafter0271 (talk) 22:02, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Minecrafter0271, hmm - you should have received a notification via the PING system, but perhaps that didn't make it through. Please see User:Girth Summit/CVUA/Minecrafter0271. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 22:18, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I'm just wondering, on average, how long will the gap me between me completing a task, and you updating the page? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minecrafter0271 (talk • contribs) 00:52, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Minecrafter0271, it will vary - might be a few hours, might be a few dayd. I'm not online all the time. GirthSummit (blether) 06:54, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quick Note

Hi, just wanted to let you now that I did end up moving the draft discussion to the draft talk page. I hope you didn't get all the pings I copied, I apologize if you did! :) Anyways, just wanted to let you know! Thanks, Puddleglum 2.0 19:40, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Puddleglum2.0, no - no pings received, you're good. As I understand it, you only get a ping if a new signature is added in the same post - if you're copying old pings and sigs, nothing should be triggered. I'll try to keep an eye on it, if you or DriverSafety could ping me in any further discussion there, it would help me keep track. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 19:52, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, will do! I'll notify DriverSafety about the ping system and help him/her with that. Thanks! Puddleglum 2.0 19:54, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I took a bit of a break from my primary Wikipedia occupation nowadays (the GOCE), and combined all the sources I had to create a potential draft for the Moray Cross! If you want to take a look at it, it's right here. I guess the one thing I mainly need help with is the lede -- is that necessary for a stub? Thanks! Puddleglum 2.0 20:37, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Puddleglum2.0, not necessary for a stub - but from a quick look, that ain't no stub! I'll take a proper look over the next couple of days, but i think thay is the start of a solid article. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 21:46, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, thanks. I was wondering, what do you think the title should be? Is 'Little Cross ' too vague? Maybe 'Elgin Little Cross' or 'Little Cross (Elgin)'? Sorry, I'm new to naming articles. Thanks! Puddleglum 2.0 05:04, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Puddleglum2.0, hi - I've started adding some stuff to the draft, moved a few things around a bit, hope that's OK? Feel free to revert or modify anything I've done so far. I've got to go out now, but there's some more I plan to do to the 'Description' section. As for the name, 'Little Cross' is probably fine - we don't need to disambiguate it since we don't have another article by that name. It can be moved to 'Little Cross (Elgin)' should anyone write another article about another Little Cross somewhere else. Cheers! GirthSummit (blether) 19:35, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much! As far as I'm concerned, you can mess around as much as you want with it, you'll probably do what's best. Thanks again! Puddleglum 2.0 19:52, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Puddleglum2.0 - I think I'm about done with the tinkering - take a look and see what you think. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit if you don't like what I've done. A couple of things that are probably worth pointing out:

  • See what I did with some of the refs - adding a 'ref name' allows you to cite the same ref multiple times within the article very easily. If you are using the 'Cite Sources' tool, it's easy to add a ref name when you first use a reference - then you can just select it from the drop-down menu each time you want to use it again.
  • I added a coordinate template, so that the coordinates will appear at the top of the page, and you can click on them to find the location in Google maps or other services.

That's about it, apart from adding stuff based on my offline sources, and obviously tinkering around. I think this is ready to move into article space - do you know how to do that yourself?

One other thing worth mentioning - this is long enough, and in my opinion good enough, to warrant a trip to Did you know?. Have you ever looked into that? It's a way to get your work recognised on the main page. The instructions are reasonably straightforward, and I'd love for you to be the one to get the credit for this since you started it all from scratch - I can help you through the process if you like? If you're not bothered, I'll nominate it myself, but I really think you deserve the little question mark on your user page! Note that the nomination has to be made within 7 days of the article being moved into main space, so don't wait around... I also think it should be added to WP:The 10,000 Challenge - again, you can do this yourself, otherwise I'll add it and credit you as well as myself. Let me know how you want to proceed. GirthSummit (blether) 18:45, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, I believe I know how to put it into the article namespace, if I have trouble I'll tell you for sure. Yes, I've prepared and read all the SKY stuff, I planned on doing that. I'm not familiar with the 10,000 challenge, it would be great if you could take care of that, please also feel free to credit yourself. :) It looks great, if I have any trouble doing stuff above. Thanks again! Puddleglum 2.0 19:11, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And... The Little Cross link is now blue! Thanks so much for your help. I think I'll take it through DYK, you do whatever you want with the 10,000 challenge. Thanks again! Puddleglum 2.0 02:06, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Puddleglum2.0, great! I've added some categories and talk page banners, and I linked to it from List of Category A listed buildings in Moray; I also added a note at the 10K challenge. Do give me a shout if you want any help with DYK, or ideas for hooks. Good job! GirthSummit (blether) 07:25, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just realised that you copied the text into a new article, rather than moving it. Not a big deal, but next time, you can simply use the 'move' tool - that retains all the editing history. It's under the 'More' menu at the top of the page. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 07:29, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Real quick -- due to the fact that I didn't use the move button (didn't know that existed, thanks!), I now have a useless user subpage lying around. Can you go ahead and use your admin powerz to delete the page User:Puddleglum2.0/Little Cross? Or is there an official process I have to go through? Thanks, Puddleglum 2.0 06:00, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Puddleglum2.0, I can indeed delete it - technically though, I think I ought to merge the histories of the two pages before doing that. I've never done that, but I'll figure it out then delete the userpage draft when I'm done. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 12:04, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

...and the article Little Cross has appeared on DyK! Yay! Thanks again for your help throughout the process! Puddleglum2.0 23:17, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Puddleglum2.0, sweeeet! It's a nice way to celebrate good content work, I'm always chuffed with a DYK. GirthSummit (blether) 01:02, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! :D Now I am trying to think of whether or not to write another article or find an article to bring to GA... :) I'm trying to get some good content work in, looking ahead 1 1/2 to 2 years. :) Anyways, thanks again for helping! Puddleglum2.0 05:13, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Puddleglum2.0, I wrote all of my GAs from scratch, rather than trying to find articles to improve. If you put in enough work to familiarise yourself with the sources while writing the article, you're in a very good place to take it to the next level. Tips... Choose a fairly constrained subject, one which has been written about in maybe six or seven sources, which you can access and familiarise yourself with them. You don't want a subject that is so big the the body of literature would be impossible to digest, or so obscure that there are only two or three sources you could use. It's also nice to have at least one freely available image you can use (not essential for GA, but definitely nice to have). Then, read all of the sources closely, then write the article. Nominate it to DYK - reviewers there may give you some initial feedback. Leave it for a while after that, and work on other stuff, then after a while (when your fresh) come back to it and assess it yourself against the GA criteria. Make any improvements you can, and drop me a note and I'll give you a preliminary assessment. GirthSummit (blether) 15:44, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting, thanks! Puddleglum2.0 15:46, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This

was archived without any follow up to your proposal. Is it worth trying again? ——SN54129 13:18, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Serial Number 54129, SC hasnt requested an unblock - I've never heard of unblocking without an unblock request being made, is that something that happens? For me, their apology went a long way to showing that they knew where they'd erred - if they make an unblock request accepting an Iban, I'd accept it and unblock immediately; if they want to be unblocked without an Iban, I'd be happy to post anything they want to say at AN and go with consensus. I feel that the first move needs to come fron SC though. GirthSummit (blether) 13:33, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly we do not unblock without an appeal. I meant vis a vis unarchiving the ANI thread for further input. But perhaps everyone who would have spoken already did. And time, as they say... ——SN54129 13:54, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Serial Number 54129, ok, understood. Is there anything particular you had in mind, maybe something you wanted to put on the record? I don't see any point in reopening it speculatively, but I'm guessing that you didn't swing by here without something having been on your mind - I'm happy to discuss any thoughts. GirthSummit (blether) 19:15, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

B. Wongar

You are welcome to join to the discussion. It's uncivil to write threats on my talk page related to my edits of the Wongar's biography since my edits are transparent and honest. As to B. Wongar's work, slanderous accusations and defamaton are by no means negative criticism and rejection of them is not a whitewash. What you call "negative criticism" is already addressed along with the academic rejections of the same. It's against BLP to categorise his work as a cultural appropriation and a literary forgeries and at the same time to delete a long list of Wongar's awards and recognitions - the best and powerful rejection of the "negative criticism". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.73.243.245 (talk) 21:05, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are mistaken - I have not threatened you. A warning that edit warring may lead to a block is not a threat, it's just telling you something that all editors need to be aware of, especially when they are engaging in edit warring. I am not going to get involved in the discussion, my note to you was made in my capacity as an administrator, and it concerned your conduct. I see no breach of BLP policy that would justify edit warring, and I explained to you why that was the case. How you move forward from here is up to you, now that you are aware or our policies. GirthSummit (blether) 23:41, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Idea for new community workspace

Hi. I would like to create some kind of collaborative workspace where coordinators or members of various WikiProjects would gather and provide updates and information on what is going on at each wikiproject, i.e. regarding their latest efforts, projects, and where interested editors can get involved.

You have been very helpful, so I wanted to get your brief input on whether you'd be interested in helping me to make this happen. I see a few possible options for making this happen, so I would like to get your input and feedback on this. which of the options below would you prefer? also, please reply to the brief questions below.

Please feel free to let me know what you think of this idea, and please let me know your preference, regarding the options above. if you do not see any need for this idea, that is totally fine. However, I think that the majority of editors lack awareness of where the truly active editing is taking place and at which WikiProjects, and I would like to do whatever I can to help make people more aware of where the activity is, what they can do to help, and also which areas of Wikipedia offer ideas and efforts that might help them in their own editing activities. Please feel free to let me know. --Sm8900 (talk) 05:15, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

hi! by the way, we are discussing this now as a proposal, at the following location. your input would be welcome there. thanks. link: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Idea_for_new_community_workspace. --Sm8900 (talk) 22:31, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your kind offer to Joshuaharrisoneast. I think you are right to put in the "at face value" qualification. The current referencing doesn't suggest academic rigour, and his comment on my talk It is important information that needs to be made available to everyone. doesn't quite fit either, cheers Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:18, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jimfbleak, I'm a sucker for AGF! In truth though, if my partner (a history prof) is to be believed, masters students' work doesn't always show as much academic rigour as one might hope for, and I can imagine an enthusiastic student who is studying, and is perhaps a fan of, a little-known composer saying something like that. If they can turn up decent sources, I'll be happy to keep an eye on their draft as it develops, but I'll be sure to let them know if the sourcing doesn't pass muster. GirthSummit (blether) 13:23, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for your comments, however, none of them are accurate. LOOK AT THIS WIKIPEDIA PAGE - IT IS ALMOST EXACTLY LIKE THE ONE I CREATED THAT WAS DELETED - AND LOOK CLOSELY AT THE SOURCES - THESE ARE ALL THE SAME THINGS YOU TOLD ME I COULD NOT USE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jake_Runestad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshuaharrisoneast (talk • contribs) 15:47, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DO EITHER OF YOU ACTUALLY WORK FOR WIKIPEDIA OR ARE YOU JUST BORED PEOPLE WITH NOTHING BETTER TO DO THAN TO GO THROUGH AND DELETE PEOPLE'S PAGES? IF YOU ARE EMPLOYED BY WIKIPEDIA I'D EXPECT YOU TO BE MORE PROFESSIONAL THAN THIS. UNACCEPTABLE AND OFFENSIVE BEHAVIOR FROM BOTH OF YOU. Joshuaharrisoneast (talk) 15:55, 11 February 2020 (UTC)Joshuaharrisoneast[reply]

Joshuaharrisoneast You're obviously upset, so I'm going to overlook the tone of your remark above, and the SHOUTING which is never appropriate. Here are a few points in response to your points:
  • The argument you are making is often characterised as other stuff exists. The short answer to that is that there are many, many articles on Wikipedia that do not meet our quality standards. Some of them were created many years ago before our quality standards were as rigorous as they are now; others simply slip through the net as a result of poor reviewing. We do our utmost to catch them all, but there are millions of articles and we're only human. I may find time to review the article that you've posted and, if it's as bad as you say it is, I may end up nominating it for deletion, or pruning it, as appropriate.
  • No, neither Jim nor I are employed by the Wikimedia foundation. We are volunteer editors, like yourself, but we have been entrusted by the community with administrative tools because we have demonstrated our knowledge of policy, and our ability and willingness to abide by it. See WP:ADMIN for more on this.
  • In saying that we are not employees, I obviously don't ascribe to the alternative that you have presented - it has nothing to do with wanting to go through and delete people's pages. We are entrusted by the community to uphold the expected standards of articles. Your article was deleted, in part, because it was an unambiguous copyright infringement - it would not only have been against our policies to host it, it would also have been illegal, and in creating it you breached the terms of use of this website. For you to complain that Jimfbleak was being unprofessional in deleting it is frankly ridiculous; to complain that I am being unprofessional by offering to help you write a better article simply beggars belief.
Somewhat against my better judgement, I am not going to withdraw my offer to assist you in writing a draft - I think you've come here to blow off steam after being rejected earlier, and so I'm going to give you one chance to change your attitude. My message on your talk page, therefore, still stands - in its entirety. We are not going to accept a lower standard of sourcing from you because you have been able to find a poorly sourced article; we are not going to wave someone through our notability guidelines because there are articles out there about subjects that might not be notable. If you can demonstrate that your subject is notable, then an article can be written, and I will help you to write it if you want me to. A warning though - you should read WP:CIVIL, and WP:NPA, and abide by them. Any further outbursts like the one above may see your account being blocked from editing. GirthSummit (blether) 16:19, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Girth, I'm going to put in a UAA request to have your account renamed to Patience Summit. Levivich 17:15, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Levivich, one does one's best - WP:RFCN is thataway... GirthSummit (blether) 17:39, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The page he keeps copying is probably written by him, but isn't marked as PD or similar, I've tried to spell that out on my talk page in the midst of a similar rant Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:49, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jimfbleak, I confess I didn't see the totality of that one-sidedly civil exchange when I offered to help them. I think Levivich should be looking to change your handle too... GirthSummit (blether) 17:52, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if you have been following this, but Joshuaharrisoneast and two socks have now been indeffed after a CU check {: Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:59, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jimfbleak, I saw the first one when you pinged me. He was vandalising my articles - I was the one trying to help him! People are strange... GirthSummit (blether) 08:26, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CVUA

This is a note that I have decided to remove myself from the CVUA trainers list. Not many editors have asked me for vandalism training. I'm thinking the reason might be because I have a little less experience compared to you and CASSIOPEIA. I appreciate all the advice you gave me about training others for vandalism. I might consider re-adding myself in the future, but I don't see it happening any time soon. Regards, Interstellarity (talk) 17:21, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interstellarity, it's your call of course, but I wouldn't give up just yet if I were you. In my experience, students come in fits and starts. I've had times when loads of several people approach me within a few weeks, and other times I've gone months with no new students. (I have a hunch that it might coincide with the starts/ends of academic term times, but I'm not sure about that). Anyway, totally up to you either way. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 17:27, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Interstellarity A further thought on this - with CASS's impending adminship, she might have less time available for CVUA stuff - I know my availability has reduced since the tools were waved in front of me. I haven't spoken to her about it, but I for one would be happy knowing that you were 'waiting in the wings' if one or other of us decided to step back. Please don't let this affect your decision if you've truly decided that you don't want to do it, but I really think you'd be good at it so just wanted to put it out there.​ GirthSummit (blether) 20:13, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am busy with school and may not review assignments in a timely manner and that is part of the reason why I dropped out. Did you see this conversation with CASSIOPEIA about this? Interstellarity (talk) 11:55, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Interstellarity, understood - seriously, no pressure from me to do it if it's not something you've got time for, you must focus on your real life obligations, that's what really matters. GirthSummit (blether) 13:06, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Interstellarity:, I'd be glad to work with you, I asked summit first because I didn't know if timezones/school would line up and I was trying to be considerate. I'm generally on weekdays on and off during the work day (8AM-5PM) EST, if this can work with you then I would be happy to work with you. Although looking at CASSIOPEIA's page are you no longer interested? I'm okay either way :) Flalf (talk) 02:50, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Flalf: As I said to CASSIOPEIA, I have somewhat a lack in interest in teaching new students counter vandalism. If I regain interest, I may sign up again in the future. My time zone is the same as yours, although I'm currently traveling and 5 hours behind. Also, I am a bit busy in real life especially college and can't always devote my time serving Wikipedia 24/7. I try to balance real life and Wikipedia although this may be so easy. You are welcome to sign up as a trainer if you feel you can instruct new students. Thank you for reading this message. Interstellarity (talk) 04:32, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Interstellarity:, No worries and no pressure as per our conversation, when you are ready and regain the interest, then sign up as we all understand the college workload can be a little be stressful. Best. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 05:53, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 20:38:37, 12 February 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Minedramamine


Hi there! I think I'm starting a new talk topic (when really I want to respond to the last one). I apologize if I'm doing this wrong.

I will respond to your comments inline below (in all caps):

Hi IP editor, thanks for reaching out. I've had a look at the draft, and I'd advise you to find some better sourcing than what's on there at the moment before resubmitting. From a quick look:

I WILL LOOK INTO PROVIDING MORE SOURCES (I'M DOING MORE RESEARCH NOW). I HAVE REACHED OUT TO TYLER FOR MORE INFORMATION. SHE MENTIONED THE THREE GUT RECORDS WIKIPEDIA IS PAGE IS FULL OF ERRORS.

The Toronto Star article would potentially be good, but I'm not sure what I'm looking at there - it appears to be a PDF document showing a screenshot of an article. Can you find a link to the original article? Note that, if the article is not online at the Toronto Star's website any longer, you may be able to find it using the Internet Archive - that would be permissible as a source, but I'm afraid a PDF on a webhosting site isn't (since it would be trivially easy to knock up fake sources that resemble that PDF).

THE ARTICLE DATE (JULY 11, 2004) IS ARCHIVED ON THE WAYBACK MACHINE, BUT THERE ARE UNFORTUNATELY NO RESULTS ONCE THE SNAPSHOT IS CLICKED UPON. I EMAILED TYLER AND SHE IS GOING TO CONTACT THE TORONTO STAR. I CAN ATTEMPT TO WRITE THE AUTHOR, MURRAY WHYTE. CAN HE PROVIDE A SWORN STATEMENT SOMEHOW? (I DID ALSO FIND THIS ARTICLE ON OFFLINE SOURCES FOR WIKIPEDIA PAGES): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Offline_sources

The NYT article about A.P. Burke appears not to mention your subject by name - it doesn't support the assertion that she was his grand daughter.

GOOD POINT. HERE'S FRANK BURKE'S BIO PAGE IF THIS IS USEFUL? HE IS CITED IN THE ARTICLE. HE MENTIONS HIS THREE CHILDREN ON HIS OFFICIAL BIOGRAPY PAGE. I WILL REQUEST TYLER WRITE THE NYTIMES AND ADD A CORRECTION. https://www.queensu.ca/filmandmedia/faculty-and-staff/faculty-and-staff-bios/frank-burke

The ADCC archives sources don't mention the subject.

I LOOKED AND IT APPEARS IT DOES IF YOU SCROLL DOWN?

The Spin Magazine source mentions the subject, but it's a single sentence - this is trivial coverage, and wouldn't count towards notability.

SHOULD THIS BE DELETED?

The Now magazine source is similar - just a couple of sentences about her studio.

SHOULD THIS BE DELETED?

I haven't look through the others, but if they are similar then this would not be accepted - I'd advise you to look for some solid sources with more in-depth coverage, and cut anything you can't support with reliable sources. Good luck! GirthSummit (blether) 18:23, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

THANK YOU!!!

Minedramamine (talk) 20:38, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Minedramamine, hi. So, if you're in contact with the subject of this article, I think you need to clarify the nature of your relationship with them. Please carefully read WP:COI, and WP:PAID, and take whichever steps are necessary according to your situation. This is very important - these policies are taken seriously, and failure to adhere to them closely will result in your being blocked from editing. Once you have confirmed that you have read and understood them, and have made the necessary disclosures, I will be prepared to offer further advice, but not before. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 21:21, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I am a fan of her old record label (Three Gut Records). I discovered there was no page for Tyler as I was researching a page for Katharine Mulherin (I am working on researching her page next and have written to her friends but haven't heard back yet). Katharine's page is very complicated and I do need to write the family for information to support her biographical details (but I didn't know her personally either). I also used to intern at Eye Weekly after Tyler worked there, and I also worked at The Toronto Star (The Star owned Eye Weekly). I wrote Tyler to ask for help for more sources after you flagged multiple changes and I couldn't find things on Google. She has responded with links to media.

I can delete the page if I'm doing this wrong.


Minedramamine (talk) 22:52, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Minedramamine, OK, fair enough - I thought perhaps that you were friends, colleagues or similar. Please confirm though that you've read those guidelines, and are confident that nothing in them is relevant to you, and I'll try to find time to look into the draft again soon. GirthSummit (blether) 23:18, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve read the guidelines and there isn’t a conflict of interest (or an exchange of $!), but I’m unsure I can fix all the things you’ve flagged. I may try to pass this on to someone savvier with Wikipedia. Minedramamine (talk) 00:01, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Minedramamine Hi again. I've reformatted your comments above somewhat to make them easier for me to read - I hope that's OK by you.
So, I've been pondering this a bit more and looking at your sources, and I think that it might be possible to demonstrate that the subject is notable, and that we should have an article about her. Before I get into that though, I do want to talk a bit more about the COI stuff. I am happy to believe that you are a fan of her label, and that there is no direct connection with her that would give you an obvious COI. On the other hand... you are in correspondence with her, and you indicated earlier on that she had told you that there were problems with our article about Three Gut Records. My slight concern is that you might be tempted to add/remove material because she had asked you to - perhaps because she said it was incorrect, or that there were missing details, etc. If you are acting on behalf of the subject of an article - even if you're not employed by her to do so, and you're just doing it as a favour, or because you're a fan - you do have a COI.
Please let me expand on this a bit. Our ultimate goal is obviously to have accurate content - but we aim to achieve that goal in a very specific way. Our content must be verifiable - meaning that the information must come from reliable, published sources. We cannot 'take someone's word for it', even if they are obviously an expert on the matter. If the sources are wrong, we have to be wrong too - the aim isn't to publish the truth, it's to reflect what the sources say. If they are wrong, so are we - that's intentional.
That's not to say that nothing can ever change - I haven't looked at Three Gut Records, and I know nothing about the subject, but if there is material in there that is unsourced, that can come out if you think it's wrong. But if the material that Tyler says is wrong is supported by decent sources, I'm afraid it has to stay there unless you can find better sources - more recent ones perhaps, or more reliable publications - saying otherwise. And if your reason for thinking that it's wrong is because Tyler says so, then you shouldn't remove it yourself - rather, you should make an edit request on the article talk page, indicate that you're in touch with Tyler and that she says the information is wrong, and present a reliable source supporting what you believe it ought to say. I know this sounds bureaucratic, but it's our defense against people/organisations coming along and basically writing whatever they like about themselves!
So, back to your draft. Can you give me a link to the Wayback Machine archive for the Toronto Star article? I might be able to find something if I have a starting point. Where did you unearth the PDF from? We don't need a sworn statement from the author or anything like that, and offline sources are indeed OK (a lot of my articles are supported in part by printed books); on the other hand, anyone who reviews your article is going to want to be able to confirm for themselves that the subject is notable. If the principal sources are offline, and the notability seems to be borderline, it's a much harder job for the reviewer to satisfy themselves that the notability is there.
I was also thinking that she might be able to pass our WP:NAUTHOR notability guideline, since she's written a number of books, which appear to have had some reviews in respectable publications, so I'm feeling that there may be a pass for her there. If you can find any more reviews of her books in serious publications, that would add weight to the notability claim there.
Regarding some of the other sources:
  • The NYT article mentions Frances Burke, and the Queens Uni site about Frank Burke mentions Tyler. I believe you that Frances and Frank are the same person, but this isn't verifiable, since the Queens Uni one doesn't mention his father. I know I'm being nitpicky, and this probably sounds ridiculous to someone who knows all this to be true - but on the other hand, there must be lots of people called Frances/Frank Burke, so an uninformed reader couldn't verify that the information is true from the sources provided. If the assertion is that Tyler Clarke Burke is the granddaughter of A P Burke, we need a source setting this out specifically, or setting out that Frank Burke of Queens Uni is the son of A P Burke, and that Tyler Clarke Burke is his daughter.
  • I looked again at the ADCC source and scrolled down, and I now see what you're talking about - she is mentioned, apologies, I missed it before. This is a primary source obviously, but it supports the assertion.
  • The Spin Magazine and Now Magazine sources aren't really adding anything - I'd cut them, if I were you. My general advice to people when trying to get a draft accepted is to go for quality over quantity of sources. If there are fifty sources, and forty seven of them are trivial coverage or primary sources, a reviewer might easily miss the three which demonstrate notability. A thousand low-quality sources are easily outweighed by three reliable, secondary sources giving significant coverage. My advice to you, therefore, would be to trim anything that seems trivial, and to present an article that might be slightly shorter, but which is solidly referenced, and which makes it easy for a reviewer to confirm notability either via WP:NAUTHOR, WP:NARTIST, or good old-fashioned WP:GNG. Good luck! GirthSummit (blether) 20:37, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw this! My apologies. I'm feeling out of my depth. I made edits today and didn't realize you had responded. Thank you—very helpful. Can I give this page to someone else to finish somehow (re: COI)? How might that work? I have definitely been emailing with Tyler about this now (asking for help to try to prove the info from The Star article). I did make some revisions today and now understand (re: above) that I am overreferencing. My intention was to try to prove things (but now see I should be footnoting, not just proving notability, and need to make sure the sources directly validate the claim). I am/was working on a page for Katharine Mulherin also, but am thinking I should give that to someone else also (a KM page is MUCH MORE important than a page for Tyler—and much more complex—and if I can somehow recommend this page to be written, I would love to know more about that process). I did ask (today) for clarity on how to properly include The Star article. The Wayback link to this date is there but nothing exists. I wrote The Star today and they have nothing online beyond 15 years or so (they also fully pulled the Eye Weekly archive offline). Murray Whyte is still a writer if helpful (but no longer with The Star). Link to Wayback Machine: http://web.archive.org/web/20040711000848/thestar.com And if I can give this to another editor, I am happy to walk away from this! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minedramamine (talk • contribs) 20:50, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Minedramamine, I'm afraid that I can't think of an easy way to hand a draft over to another editor, unless you're able to find someone with an interest in the subject who would be willing to take it on. My advice to you would be to do as Barkeep49 suggests - cut this back substantially. Only include information that you can verify with reliable sources - don't try to include everything you know, only include what you can verify. Definitely remove the Toronto Star PDF, and if the PDF is the only version of that article that you've read, then don't use it. On the other hand, if a library near you has an archive of back copies, and you have yourself actually read it the article in print form, then you can could cite it as an offline source. GirthSummit (blether) 12:27, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I'll remove the PDF link. I definitely saw the article. It's hard to tell online, but it was the cover of one of the big sections so it was noticeable (and a friend worked at the bar where the photo was taken). I was also working at The Star around this time (and had a subscription). This was back when people actually read newspapers, lol...and it was cool that Sweaty Betty's was in the photo. I've made some of Barkeep's suggestions. I'll keep going. Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minedramamine (talk • contribs) 18:01, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Potential RfB

Hello! I notice that you're an administrator. You do a wonderful job at reverting vandalism, and you're a pleasure to work with. So, after going through your contribs, I think that you would do a lot of good as a bureaucrat. I haven't created the nomination page yet, as I need your consent, but I hope you'll agree with this. Cheers! Minecrafter0271 (talk) 21:04, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Minecrafter0271, thanks for the kind words, much appreciated! However, I've only been an admin for a few months, there's plenty for me still to learn in many areas. Furthermore, closing discussions/weighing consensus isn't an area I've had a great deal of experience in, and that's what's at the heart of the bureaucrat role, so I wouldn't feel comfortable putting myself forward for that role. Thanks for thinking of me though, it's always nice to hear that someone thinks well of you. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 21:15, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CVUA Trainee

Hey Summit!

Would you be okay with taking a new CVUA student? I have a little over 200 mainspace edits and I'm looking to help prevent vandalism accross wikipedia.

Thanks, Flalf (talk) 02:38, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Flalf, thanks for reaching out - and thanks also for offering to help keep Wikipedia clean! In principle, I'd be happy to take you through the CVUA course, but I've got a few students on the go at the moment - some of them are nearing the end of their courses, and so I should be in a position to take you on soon, if you don't mind a short wait. While we're talking about it though, I thought it might be worth exploring whether counter-vandalism work is definitely the road you want to go down.
There are lots of things to get involved with here - copy editing, improving sourcing, discussing possible changes on talk pages of articles you're interested in - or even creating your own original content. For me, the most enjoyable thing I do here (when I get time!) is writing new articles from scratch - I've learned a huge amount while researching the articles I've written, and the process of having them reviewed has brought me into contact with lots of helpful, encouraging people who are a pleasure to interact with. It's fun!
Don't get me wrong - counter vandalism is a vital part of the project, and without editors working on it, Wikipedia would be ruined very quickly. However, while it's a necessary task, it's not a very enjoyable one. Some of the vandalism I come across is deeply offensive, and some of the people you come across are vindictive and downright nasty. So, I guess I just wanted to check whether you're prepared for what can be a slog through some unpleasant stuff. I'll therefore give you a choice: (a) we do the CVUA course; (b) you tell me about a subject you're interested in, that doesn't have an article about it, and I'll help you write it, then I'll take you through the CVUA course afterwards. Your call. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 21:26, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would love to have help writing and to do CVUA, but generally I just stumble on subjects I want to write on so I dont have anything in mind rn. Flalf (talk) 01:12, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Flalf, would you like me to suggest a subject for you to get your teeth into? I generally write articles about historic buildings in Scotland. This is partly because I find it interesting, but it's also because they are an easy thing to write about for a few reasons. First, there are some reliable online sources which are enough to get the basic details right, and to demonstrate notability. Also, there are usually photographs of the buildings on Commons already, just waiting for an article to be written about them. Most importantly though, the subject is quite constrained and focussed - you write up the history, you write a physical description, bash out a lead section summarising what you've written, and you're done. If you'd like (and only if you're interested), I could suggest a building that is missing and article, point you at a few sources, suggest an article you could use as a template, and we could go from there? GirthSummit (blether) 12:38, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Girth Summit: Sorry for the delayed reply. Recently Irish politics and politicians (this includes the troubles) have caught my interest- but I haven't got a subject in particular. Flalf (talk) 22:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much with the buildings! I'm going to write an article an article on the headquarters of the Danske Bank in Belfast. (formerly northern bank). It was the location of the largest bank robbery in the UK's history. You can see it here. Flalf (talk) 22:18, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Flalf, hi again - sorry I've been a bit quiet for the last couple of days, I've been doing some kitchen renovations which I thought would be a one day job, but it's taken me all week... Anyway, good work on the article - I see it's been reviewed and accepted. If you still want to go through CVUA, drop me a note - one of my other students has dropped, so I should be able to cope, provided you don't mind it if we go slow? Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 19:06, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Girth Summit: I ask a lot of questions and I probably wouldn't be able to go very fast myself so I'd be glad to! Flalf (talk) 22:49, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020

Hello Girth Summit,

Source Guide Discussion

The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.

Redirects

New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.

Discussions and Resources
Refresher

Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Milton Tower

On 14 February 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Milton Tower, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Milton Tower was the birthplace of John Ogilvie, Scotland's only post-Reformation Catholic saint? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Milton Tower. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Milton Tower), 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) 12:02, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Hi, please take a look at this inference of your comment and please respond if you agree with that inference, since I don't. --DBigXrayᗙ 13:52, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DBigXray, I just wrote an expansion on my thoughts in response to you. I've got to dash now, but briefly - I don't know if I'd go so far as to use the word 'inappropriate'; I think 'unhelpful and potentially counterproductive' would be a better description. GirthSummit (blether) 13:58, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"unhelpful and potentially counterproductive" are secondary to this. The applicability is the primary question here. Was I right in giving the particular template for the issue that had happened. This is a yes or no question and would appreciate if you could answer it clearly on the ANI where I had asked it to you. DBigXrayᗙ 14:13, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rishi Sunak

Hi ... ?Needs some protection, at least for few days. Please have a look. Thank you. Whispyhistory (talk) 17:49, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Whispyhistory, I'm on mobile at the moment, not great for reviewing diffs - consider reporting to RFPP if urgent, I'll try to take a look tomorrow GirthSummit (blether) 18:12, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's ok..someone has done it. Whispyhistory (talk) 05:27, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Counter vandalism

Can I be your students to counter e Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 05:36, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hypersonic man 11, hi, and sorry for the slow response, I've been very busy in real life for the last few days. I took a quick look at your contribution history, and I'm not sure that the CVUA course would be right for you just yet. I'm seeing a lot of edits to one particular article, a lot of edits to your userpage, and just a handful of edits elsewhere. My advice to you, if you want to get into editing Wikipedia, would be to spend a few weeks just getting to know how the place works - do some copy editing, improve some sourcing, engage in talk page discussions, read key policies and guidelines, etc. If you're still interested in CVUA after you've racked up a few hundred edits, come back to me. GirthSummit (blether) 19:15, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You realised that AfD is often a cesspool of incivility

On ANI you had stated "I realise that AfD is a often a cesspool of incivility". This is a general discussion on this statement of yours and I would appreciate if you not take the recent examples or anyone's name while responding. I would also appreciate that you dont get into philosophical discussion about Human nature. I have simple questions.

  • Q1. How did it become this cesspool?
  • Q2. Who is responsible for letting the situation to degrade to become a cesspool.
Hi DBigXray. I'll do my best and keep this on-point, and not to get side-tracked too much into philosophical musings. I'm also not going to give any examples or name any individuals, but I can think of several recent examples of what I'm speaking about below...
  • A1 - I haven't been here long enough to be speak knowledgably, but I suspect it was always like that. AfD is a place where people's emotions are naturally heightened - after all, we are talking about removing something from the project. There are obvious reasons why people on both sides of any debate might be worked up - perhaps they wrote the article, and put a lot of effort into it; perhaps they believe the article has been written to promote something, and that it's an abuse of Wikipedia; perhaps they care passionately about the subject, or indeed believe passionately that we shouldn't be covering the subject. Whatever, people are often very invested in the issue, and when that is the case people don't always behave ideally.
  • A2 - Everyone who participates. What I have frequently observed is that incivility is like a ratchet - heat builds up easily, starting small but getting progressively worse, and it can be difficult to get it to go back down. Someone says something a bit pointy; their target makes a reply that is at least equally, but often slightly more, snarky; the original person, or a third party, then makes an even worse comment, and before you know it people are making blatant personal attacks towards one another. Everyone involved feels aggrieved, everyone thinks that other people are at fault, but few people are ever willing to look at what they've said themselves and really reflect on whether they could have handled things better. When you come across a situation like that, it can be difficult to attribute 'blame' in any useful way - you can't usually identify a specific point at which you can say "OK, everything up to this point is just people being a bit snarky, but this diff is the one where someone crossed the line" - even if you can identify the first actual PA, people will always say "Ah, but that was provoked - look at this earlier comment" - and, in a sense, they will be right.
  • A3 - I'm not sure that 'restored' is the right word, since I'm not sure that it was ever anything else. But if you're asking how it can become a different sort of place, that requires everyone to behave better. I'm a big believer in this pledge - I put a lot of effort into trying to live up to it. I believe that if you exhibit an excess of civility towards others, even when their behaviour isn't ideal, situations tend not to degenerate as I've described above. Opprobrium is also underused - more people ought to be more willing just say to other people "Look, that's a bit rude, could you not say things like that please?" - not threaten people with blocks or visits to ANI, just tell them that they're out of line and ask them to up their game. GirthSummit (blether) 12:14, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for not taking names. Let me give you an analogy. Enjoy

Crime in FOO_land has skyrocketed. Police Commissioner GS is holding a press conference.
Journo: Commissioner, who is responsible for rise in incidents of battery and road rage ?

  • Commissioner GS: Every citizen who participates in it. What I have frequently observed is that violence is like a ratchet - heat builds up easily, starting small but getting progressively worse, and it can be difficult to get it to go back down. Someone says something a bit pointy; their target makes a reply that is at least equally, but often slightly more, snarky; the original person, or a third party, then makes an even worse comment, and before you know it people are at their throats with attacks towards one another. Everyone involved feels aggrieved, everyone thinks that other people are at fault, but few people are ever willing to look at what they've said and did themselves and really reflect on whether they could have handled things better. When you come across a situation like that, it can be difficult to attribute 'blame' in any useful way - you can't usually identify a specific point at which you can say "OK, everything up to this point is just people being a bit snarky, but this diff is the one where someone crossed the line" - even if you can identify the first actual attacker, people will always say "Ah, but that was provoked - look at this earlier comment" - and, in a sense, they will be right.

Journo : Commissioner, How can these crimes be brought under control and FOO_land be restored to a civil and sane place?

  • Commissioner GS. I'm not sure that 'restored' is the right word, since I'm not sure that it was ever anything else. But if you're asking how it can become a different sort of place, that requires everyone to behave better. I'm a big believer in Our constitutional values - I put a lot of effort into trying to live up to it. I believe that if you exhibit an excess of civility towards others, even when their behaviour isn't ideal, situations tend not to degenerate as I've described above. Opprobrium is also underused - more people ought to be more willing just say to other people "Look, that's a bit rude, could you not say things like that please?" - not threaten people or visits to the police station, just tell them that they're out of line and ask them to up their game.

The journo was was visibly shocked, nevertheless the interview was published and the next day Commissioner GS was sacked. DBigXrayᗙ 13:03, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher)Not having read the original Ani thread, I do just want to note that I don't think analogizing sysops to police is a good idea for anyone. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 13:13, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't policing unruly wikipedians a part of an Admin's job description ? DBigXrayᗙ 13:17, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Some editors might say yes, but I would give an emphatic no. First there is no "job description". Girth and I have a lot of similar interests but use the administrative toolkit in very different ways. Toolkit being the operative phrase in that sentence - I view being a sysop as merely having several extra buttons I can press. As for unruly Wikipedians, any Wikipedian can mediate a dispute. Our main mediator at WP:DRN is not a sysop after all. As I wrote in WP:MUSHROOM (which I think I stole from elsewhere but I put in because I believe it): It is true that you may be able to help mediate a dispute effectively, or resolve one, or guide the improvement of an article. But in virtually all of these cases your ability has nothing to do with your being an administrator, just with your experience, knowledge of the policies, and good sense—i.e. virtues you had long before you became an administrator. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 13:30, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well this is not about the admin doing DYK hooks or GAR or DRN but the admin helping on ANI/AIV etc (admin users of block button). We can agree to disagree. --DBigXrayᗙ 13:40, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DBigXray, I'm not really sure that your analogy works, certainly not with regard to battery. If someone hits someone else, you have a very clear point at which one can say 'right, that's actionable'. One can always claim provocation for any act, but the step from verbal abuse to physical violence is pretty clear-cut. Road rage is probably the better one - someone cuts me up in traffic, so I flip them the bird, so they roll down their window and call me a cunt, so I stop my car and get out to shout at them, so they get out and start shouting at me. And there we have it - two grown men standing in the street shouting at each other, holding up traffic for everyone. The policeman comes by to sort it out - what do they do? Who's in the wrong? We both are. Who started it? Was it them cutting me up? Maybe that was accidental - maybe I started it by flipping them off, or by escalating it by getting out of my car. Does it even matter who started it? We're both adults - we shouldn't be behaving like that, we're both to blame, both accountable for our actions. The only way to stop that sort of thing happening is for all of us to be more aware of our responsibility not to be a jerk, not to overreact when someone else is a jerk, to make a conscious effort to do whatever we can to maintain civility. GirthSummit (blether) 13:17, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say the analogy does work, because provocation is being used to defend the action. I was thinking of choosing between assault and battery and went with the latter to make the visualizations interesting. Now I will link this with the case at ANI, my point of this analogy was defending what I said in response to your cesspool comment, that might have irked you at ANI.
I hope you are aware that in the thread, I said several times, that the attacks on me (for which I gave templates) were unprovoked but no admin bothered to check and confirm it. The thread was started claiming my templates were for non existent personal attacks and when I provided diffs if the attacks, the entire thread was filibustered on the sole point of the templates. But apparently our competent admins can't be bothered to check the timestamps while checking the veracity of the claims and counterclaims. DBigXrayᗙ 13:37, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DBigXRay I didn't agree with your comment there, but I wouldn't say that I was irked by it - should I have been, were you referring to me?
The thread wasn't just about your use of PA templates - there were other things that were raised, and while I think the thread was completely unnecessary and should never have been raised against you, I do think that there are things you could have done better (I hope that it goes without saying that I also think there were things that other people could have done better, some of them much more serious things that anything you did). If you'd like me to, I'll explain what they are, but I'm not going to shove them down your neck if you're not interested. GirthSummit (blether) 13:51, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't say that I was irked by it Cool, - should I have been, No,  were you referring to me? No it was a general comment not to specific admin. thread was completely unnecessary Yes, which is why despite being the aggrieved party it was not me who started the ANI. I did not felt it was worth wasting my time over it, but someone else did with completely incorrect basis. Would i like you to explain ? No. Suffice to say I have been editing here for a long time, am reasonably competent and I had read what everyone was saying. There is no reason for anyone to waste anymore time than what was already wasted over this. I hope the ANI will have a positive impact, but as the closing admin said, folks can always return back. regards. DBigXrayᗙ 14:02, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for new resource

I would like to propose a possible new resource for WikiProjects, a community forum, or "town hall," for allowing communication between different WikiProjects. would anyone have any interest in this? Please feel free to let me know, or to comment. thanks!!

Please note, the page linked to below is merely an example, so that tab header for this page is for a different WikiProject. If implemented, the link would be placed on the specific tab header for this WikiProject, not the one shown below. thanks.

If you like this idea, or have any feedback, please feel free to comment at the discussion at Village Pump.

thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 13:14, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sm8900, hi - thanks for the reminder, I realise that I forgot to respond to your original post about this. To be honest though, I think at the moment I'll probably leave this proposal for others who are more invested in WikiProjects to discuss. I'm a member of a couple, but I don't really have too much to do with projects, and I'm not sure I have any particular insights into whether this proposal would be beneficial or not. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 13:31, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
thanks! by the way, I corrected the link, since there are some existing some comments at the first draft page for this. here is the correct link: User:Sm8900/Community forum and bulletin board re WikiProjects
as far as the usefulness of this, please feel free to just take a glance at the new draft. I tried to upgrade the format, content, and usability for this. please let me know what you think. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 13:34, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested to know

That the fun continues. I've indeffed per Wikipedia:No legal threats. Bizarre that having had East's battles to get a Naverud bio on here, we are now being told to take it off when it doesn't currently exist Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:08, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jimfbleak, weird. Do you think they imagine that we are hosting that PDF here, rather than just linking to it? GirthSummit (blether) 15:38, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The whole post shows a total lack of understanding of how we work, what's been going on, that East posted everything that was here, not us, and what is actually still here (nothing). I don't think I'll see him in court, somehow Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:41, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jimfbleak, they've been CU blocked as a sock of East - so no, probably little chance of a future court date... GirthSummit (blether) 16:44, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

note re items

Hi. can you please help me on WP:ANI? there is a section on some of my recent edits. I have already accepted and been open to all of the points there. your input might be helpful in resolving this positively, as an admin who can assist with providing some positive resolution, or context, etc. I appreciate any help. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 15:42, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sm8900, I'm afraid that I'm about to log off and go out for the evening. I'll try to take a look at it tomorrow, time permitting. GirthSummit (blether) 16:16, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
okay, please do!! I could really use your input, when you get a chance. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 16:18, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Surinamese guilders?

Okay so do you or Gog the Mild have a clue how to convert Surinamese guilders in 1764 to some sort of currency now? I know there was a ton of discussion on the conversion on Macpherson Grant and I've since used that British calculator on several articles, but I'm stumped about how to make that template convert guilders. It seems to me that ƒ155,000 was a huge number then and I'm curious as to what its equivalent would be now. The article in question is Elisabeth Samson, which was a total mess and I am just now working on a complete rewrite. Any help at all would be greatly appreciated. SusunW (talk) 00:14, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that we need to know how many Surinamese guilders there were to a pound sterling in 1764, even if very roughly. We can treat it as identical to the Dutch guilder. Which contained 9.655 grams of silver. In 1816, the pound, in silver, was set at 113 grams - prior to this it "floated". So, in a very rough and ready way, ƒ155,000 = £13,244 in 1764. Or £2,400,000 in today's money. Gog the Mild (talk) 00:36, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! But Gog the Mild. I have no clue how you did that, but really, really appreciate it. SusunW (talk) 05:21, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CVUA student

Hello Girth Summit,
One of your CVUA students, Minecrafter0271 got blocked from editing. You might want to consider removing this user from the list of instructors and deleting the training page. Thank you, Interstellarity (talk) 04:59, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interstellarity, thanks, I'd missed that. GirthSummit (blether) 07:54, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pepper spray

Hi GS, sorry for not reporting this earlier but there is another version to revel on that page. I also opened a report at WP:SPI for the three accounts involved in this story. Cheers and thanks, --DoebLoggs (talk) 13:18, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good spot, thanks - gone. I think the SPI is a good move, they're all adding the same promotional content. Not really my area though, I'll leave that to those who know what they're doing. GirthSummit (blether) 13:25, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mighty mistakes made to edit refless riting

Hi, and sry for the failed skaldic poetry title ... and edit ... but looking up Brage in the ref given, it says he was married to the daughter of a skald, hence he was not the first skald, nor any kind of originator of skaldity. To say that he was, using NBL, is simply misquoting the source. What the source does say, though, was that "Brage Boddason er den eldste skalden vi har skaldedikting etter", scil., Bragi is the oldest skald "that we have skaldic poetry after (i.e. from)", or, weless, "whose (skaldic) poetry been preserved for posterity", or something. If the "us" is fixed, is this change then uncontroversial? The others were just an afterthought, although Snorri might perhaps be credited with named works that can be linked to the relevant articles, instead of some empty adjectives. To say that eddaic verse is simple in meter and style is slightly misleading. It might be simpler than drottkvætt, but that is not saying much. I know that Wiki is not a Wiki source, but looking at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliterative_verse#Old_Norse_poetic_forms - which is quite well sourced - indicates that "simple" is not the best descriptor of a kvad, be it skaldic or eddaic. This is not to quibble, just to explain my thinking, if such it was, when committing the edit. Both Snorre and simplicity are minor matters which I am well content to let rest, but the Brage issue is, IMHO, simply misinformation, and Wiki is better for fixing it. What say you? T 85.166.161.28 (talk) 14:21, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - so, there main problem I had with your edit was the way it was phrased - "known to us" isn't a phrase we should be using, and better alternative would be "the oldest surviving examples" or something similar to that. If it had just been that, I would have made the change myself rather than reverting you, but you also changed "Bragi" to "Bragis verses". Re-reading it properly, I see that it was meant to be a possessive s, and so I could simply have changed it to "Bragi's verses". I would be perfectly happy for you to reinstate your change, perhaps wording it along the lines of "Brage is the earliest skald whose writing has survived", or similar. Sorry for the inconvenience. GirthSummit (blether) 14:33, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thx for elucidation and help. All inconvenience was in my error, the rest ist improvement, of the article, and me :) While we're at it: the preceding sentence claims Ragnarsdråpa to be the oldest norse poem. Now, the experts agree that the text of the Eggja stone, dated to 650 - 700, is written in a stylized meter, making it if not the oldest poem, at least one older than Rdr. But perhaps this is due to an ambiguity in the word "poem/poetry", as in "poem by a known author". While truth is a noble value, I don't want to rob Brage of all article content either, so how much of a stickler is it possible, or profitable to be? T 85.166.161.28 (talk) 14:49, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, oh well, couldn't wait, went bold, put in "among the oldest poems", but in a separate, easily reverted edit. T 85.166.161.28 (talk) 14:58, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me! GirthSummit (blether) 15:00, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, sorry to be the pebble in the boot here ... but IIRC not many skalds themselves left anything in writing; the poems were recorded much later. Now the article says "... whose writings ...". Con su permiso and with thx for being endlessly patient, I will change "writing" to "verse". Then my work her shall be done; I'll leave it to posterity to refine the concepts. T 85.166.161.28 (talk) 16:37, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Go for it - makes sense to me. GirthSummit (blether) 16:42, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely the last on Joshua East

Although Joshua East claimed to have no COI, I couldn't quite work out why JNarverud also triggered the CU sock puppet check, since you wouldn't expect East to pretend to be Naverud. Then I spotted the "spouse" line in the heading of this page. Yet another lie. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:02, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jimfbleak, gosh - yes, ok, if true that's a bit of a conflict. I spent a few minutes the other day Googling the two names, they appear to have coauthored some music too. GirthSummit (blether) 08:15, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I saw that too Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:56, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

note re your comments

your comments recently at ANI, and related talk pages, have been helpful, thoughtful. very insightful, and very principled. I really appreciate your help. I will take all of the points and concerns there to heart. having someone like you there, who advocated for full fairness and for our core principles, was really helpful. thanks!!! by the way, I may work on some alternate ways to approach those ideas. don't worry, I don't see any reason to set up entirely new resources from this point forward. would it be okay if I contact you in the future, to show you some other drafts? an admin like you has lots of insight into how things should really work around here. I greatly appreciate your help. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 16:43, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sm8900, you're welcome. Regarding your drafts and ideas, if it's about Wikiprojects, as I said before I'm probably not your best choice, since I'm not very involved with them. I may have time to take a look, but it's not really my bag to be honest. GirthSummit (blether) 17:57, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
that sounds fine. I do appreciate your reply. I will keep that in mind. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 18:00, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

sorry

I am sorry of what I did Dmay81 (talk) 08:32, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Information icon Hello, I'm Flalf. An edit that you recently made to User:Girth_Summit/CVUA/Flalf seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want to practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. did i do it right? Flalf (talk) 18:34, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Flalf, yep, good job - that worked fine. I'm logging off now to make dinner, but I'll put the next task on the training page soon. In the meantime, be sure to read WP:VANDALISM closely, and also familiarise yourself with the Recent Changes feed (accessed by the link on the left of your screen), and the filters you can apply to it. Cheers! GirthSummit (blether) 18:43, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Girth Summit: Alrighty! Flalf (talk) 18:46, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon Please stop your distributive editing. If you continue to edit distributively, you may be suffering of bilocation. —PaleoNeonate – 07:06, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PaleoNeonate, ha - two templates in 24 hours - what will my talk page watchers think, I'm usually such a goody-two-shoes! GirthSummit (blether) 07:34, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comon guys, this is admin harassment, more than that it is admin's talk page watcher harassment. GS dont we have some sandbox for CVUA trainees to test their sword ? ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 07:37, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DBigXray, Flalf is new to Twinkle. They reverted me at a training page which nobody else is watching, but I wanted to give them the chance to try putting a warning message on a user's talk page after a revert. Apologies for any inconvenience, it's not going to become a common occurrence. GirthSummit (blether) 07:40, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
yes, I understood that much. I just feel that using an Alt account acting like a vandal on some sandbox would be more helpful to test templating skills. Keep up the Good work. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 07:45, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I hope it was obvious that mine was completely fictitious, not an existing template. I also wouldn't have posted it if I wasn't in excellent terms with GS. In any case, thanks for patrolling and sorry for the inconvenience. —PaleoNeonate – 07:52, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It was obvious. I came here just to share the idea about alt account for templating. cheers--⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 08:03, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DBigXray, most trainees though have already used Twinkle to revert changes and issue warnings before starting the course, so this is a bit of a one-off - not worth the bother of setting up an alt account for, but I'll likely do that if it becomes a regular part of the course, thanks for the suggestion. GirthSummit (blether) 09:48, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Thanks for the PP on Jaboukie Young-White, I was on the fence about asking for it and you went ahead and just got the job done. Proves to show that the mop is in good hands. Ifnord (talk) 20:47, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Ifnord! Yeah, so much nonsense from so many IPs within the last couple of days - I was in the middle of trying to find the last decent version to revert to but you beat me to it, protection seemed like the obvious call. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 20:50, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Is this username a violation of the username policy? I'm not inclined to report it, but I just want to check with you. The username I'm talking about is: 01101010. Interstellarity (talk) 22:37, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interstellarity, I don't see an issue with it. If it looked like an ip I could see the problem, but that looks OK to me. GirthSummit (blether) 22:39, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I was just checking. Interstellarity (talk) 22:41, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Interstellarity, no worries. GirthSummit (blether) 22:42, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Interstellarity, its J in binary. 01101010 (talk) 2:46, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Girth_Summit&oldid=942673098"