- 1 Break
- 2 Donald Gary Young
- 3 Climate change in... drafts
- 4 ArbCom 2019 special circular
- 5 Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)
- 6 A barnstar for you!
- 7 URGENT!
- 8 Your draft article, Draft:Arrogance
- 9 External academic review and publication of Wikipedia pages
- 10 Thanks for the disambiguation
Donald Gary Young
I see you are on a Wikibreak, but reaching out with this since you may find it of note. I pinged you in the discussion but looks like an editor reached out to everyone I pinged except for you so thought I would make sure everyone was notified. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:46, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
Climate change in... drafts
I noticed that 50 "Climate change in..." drafts of yours from mid-2017 seem G13 eligible. You've historically made some minor edits to skip the auto-tag but haven't this time around. Is that because you're away or do you mean to let them go by the wayside? If the former, no worries, but maybe it'd be easier to move them all to userspace so you don't have to do the song and dance? Just a thought. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 13:00, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Just to give you a heads up, there are a fair number of drafts at Wikipedia:Database reports/Stale drafts that appear to be stuff that you are working on if you are interested in keeping them around. -- Dolotta (talk) 02:55, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 special circular
- Thanks. My Wikimedia password is unique to this website, and is long and random. bd2412 T 23:55, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|The Prespa Barnstar|
|Thank you for your hard work on with the 2019 Macedonia Name RFC. We finally rewrote Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia), and we could not have done it without your service on the closing panel for the RFC. Thank you, BD2412. I am glad to have had the great pleasure to work with you! –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 04:47, 8 May 2019 (UTC)|
Your draft article, Draft:Arrogance
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
External academic review and publication of Wikipedia pages
I'm contacting to ask whether you'd be interested in updating the Concurrent use registration article (or any page you've worked on) and submitting it for external, academic peer review.
The WikiJournal of Humanities (www.wikijhum.org) couples the rigour of academic peer review with the extreme reach of the encyclopedia. For existing Wikipedia articles, they are a great way to get additional feedback from external experts. Peer-reviewed articles are dual-published both as standard academic PDFs, as well as having changes integrated back into Wikipedia. This improves the scientific accuracy of the encyclopedia, and rewards authors with citable, indexed publications. It also provides much greater reach than is normally achieved through traditional scholarly publishing.
The WP:WikiJournal article nominations page should allow simple submission of existing Wikipedia pages for external review.
- I think that the article most useful for this process would be Demographics of the Supreme Court of the United States. bd2412 T 11:54, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
- Wow, that is a thorough article. I agree that it looks very appropriate. If you decide to go ahead and submit it for ext peer review, feel free to let me know if anything in the WP:WAN page is unclear, we tried to build it analogously to WP:FAC. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)talk 23:38, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the disambiguation
I'll be more careful with citations using that source in the future.
Some IP editor undid both my edits on Sensenbrenner, which you had disambiguated, rather quickly. I undid their edits a moment ago. They had never edited any article before. I expect it might be a banned editor paid to scrub the subject's article. Should the page be protected? Activist (talk) 00:47, 14 May 2019 (UTC)