User talk:IntoThinAir

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Everymorning)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Hello, welcome to my talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!

RfD WP:MINIMUMDEATHS[edit]

GxE edits[edit]

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Heritability#Prominence_given_to_GxE_interaction_assumption_and_violation_results

International Public Conference on Vaccination listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect International Public Conference on Vaccination. Since you had some involvement with the International Public Conference on Vaccination redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Tornado chaser (talk) 20:44, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018[edit]

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. (Purge)

Hello IntoThinAir, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

June backlog drive

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers.
Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.

New technology, new rules
  • New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
  • Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
  • Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.
Editathons
  • Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.
The Signpost
  • The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Adopt a user[edit]

Hi I am looking to be adopted by a user. I've run into some trouble on AN/I where i made a bad judgement call in regards to COI advice I gave out. Maybe you can adopt me as a user out so that I don't repeat similar mistakes. Thank you. JC7V-constructive zone 08:02, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

OK, I'll adopt you. IntoThinAir (formerly Everymorning) talk 18:25, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Questions[edit]

Hi thanks for adopting me. Just some specific questions:

  • 1) If an IP has been blocked in the past month and they vandalize again for the first time after the block is up, do I give them a Level 1 or Level 2 warning???
  • 2) If I see an account with a promotional username creating a draft about a company that matches their username (but have no non mainspace edits), do I leave a warning message?? or do I report them to UAA?? I've heard conflicting things about this. I even heard one admin tell a user to take it straight to COI. It seems to me that there is a very thin line between the 3 actions.
  • 3) When is the most ideal time to give a user a welcome-vandal message??
  • 4) What's the best way to decide between tagging an article as 'topic of article may not meet Wikipedia's Notability guidelines' and PRODing it?? It seems to me that in some situations it's a thin line.

thank you JC7V-constructive zone 15:55, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Your revert of my edit/reply[edit]

You're absolutely correct! There was no reason for me to. Thanks for the heads up. Stalking issue. Extremely sorry for inconvenience. Changing password (yet again!). AnonNep (talk) 13:19, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

  • To add some detail, I've posted at Helpdesk for more based on an ongoing offline situation [1]. As I said in the Helpdesk post this removing posts/comments wholesale doesn't reflect my (years long) edit history. Again, very sorry. Passwords changed & pursuing the issue. AnonNep (talk) 14:06, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the Bugzy Malone edit would you help me to cite sources KING 81 (talk) 22:20, 4 August 2018 (UTC) KING 81

Nomination of Steven Goddard for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Steven Goddard is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steven Goddard until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. jps (talk) 00:17, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Wiknic 2018[edit]

Please join us for a Wiknic at Tribble Mill Park in Lawrenceville, GA on Sunday, August 26, 2018 between 11:00 am - 2:00 pm. Sign up here. —Ganeshk (talk) 03:14, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Heritability[edit]

Actually, it would be undefined, because it would be a ratio of 0 divided by 0... (genetic variance=phenotypic variance=0) Of course you have to write what the source says :-) --Randykitty (talk) 07:33, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, the "two eyes" example is in a couple other sources besides the Maccoby article (e.g. The Gene Illusion by Jay Joseph). Honestly I was largely thinking the Maccoby paper was a good source for critical perspectives and wanted to work it in the article somehow. The source does in fact say "A human characteristic such as being born with two eyes is entirely genetic, yet its heritability would be computed as zero in a twin or adoption study since it is a characteristic that does not vary within the population studied". IntoThinAir (formerly Everymorning) talk 14:06, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Well, if I would want to be completely pedantic, I would point out that the heritability of having two eyes actually is 1, because there is variation (albeit very little, see Cyclopia) and it is purely genetic... ;-) The way heritability is calculated in twin studies, heritability would indeed come out as zero because both the MZ and the DZ correlations would be 1, so the difference is 0. (Assuming that cyclopa doesn't occur in twins or only so rarely that you never would have it in any ordinary sample). I should look up that Maccoby paper when I have a moment. --Randykitty (talk) 14:30, 20 August 2018 (UTC)