User talk:Larry Hockett/Archive 19

Archive 15

←

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

TDINBB

Larry, I am confused why you would remove links that I have placed. They link to player pages that provide tremendous information for users looking to learn more about a player. Including chronology and much more.

regards, Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by TDINBB (talk • contribs) 22:15, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, TDINBB. I moved your question down to its own thread since it was unrelated to Beemteam’s question. I would prefer to keep the conversation in one place, and it looks like it’s going well on your user talk page. See my links to the WP guideline on external links. Note that the other editor who left you a message was not intending to say that it’s inherently wrong for the TDINBB website to have ads or paid memberships (lots of solid reliable sources have those). He is asking you as an editor not to engage in advertising of your website on Wikipedia. If it’s a notable reliable source, other editors will add those links for you. Please dont't respond here (in the interest of keeping discussions together). I’m just trying to help you understand what you’re being told. Larry Hockett (Talk) 23:50, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

question

Hello! Can I ask what is this command used for __NOTOC__? Also, where can I learn more of these commands? Thank you, I wish you the best! Some1 ^{talk} 10:27, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Good morning - see WP:TOC for information on Wiki markup related to tables of contents. That page explains things much better than I could. Larry Hockett (Talk) 11:10, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Dictatorship - experienced editor input?

Hi - I have shamelessly jumped on your talk page, because you made an edit to Dictatorship. There is currently an IP user (User:47.189.239.148) making uncited changes to this page. I have commented on the user's talk page, but they are continuing not to provide reliable sources, and in the past they have had warnings about this. I have reverted their changes, but they have reverted them back. I don't want to edit war, so when I saw that you had edited the page, I thought I might ask you to intercede and provide a third opinion! BobEret (he/him) (talk) 23:27, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I'll be happy to keep an eye on the article in case it starts back up again. I think a level 4 warning for unsourced changes is probably next. Larry Hockett (Talk) 23:45, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Your abuse is noted

Your edit history shows that you are abusing new and anonimous users by random reverts, without doing due diligence. While reverting and abusing other wikipedia users might give you some sort of ego boost, please note that this is not what wikipedia is for, and that your bullying tendencies go strictly against the wikipedia policies.

As for your ignorant and nonconstructive reversal of page about the last guest on the Lex Fridman podcast, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgTjSrrf6GQ, note that what views expressed on a public podcast with millions of views are public and it is legitimate to report about them on wikipedia pages, especially when they express views that are of public importance or about officials running for office. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.198.204.144 (talk) 18:01, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Hey, sorry. No abuse intended. Would you mind sharing with me the link to the article in question or just the name of the article? That way I can determine whether I have made a mistake or whether my actions simply require a better explanation. Thanks. Larry Hockett (Talk) 18:07, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject Women in Green June 2023 Good Article Editathon notification

Hello Larry Hockett:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Editathon event in June 2023!

Running from June 1 to 30, 2023, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) editathon event – another Wildcard Edition! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to any and all women and women's works during the event period. Want to improve an article about a Bollywood actress? Go for it. A pioneering female climate scientist? Absolutely. An award-winning book or film by a woman? Yes! GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to receive a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Alanna the Brave (talk)

You are receiving this message as a member of the WikiProject Women in Green. You can remove yourself from receiving notifications here.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Revert on Margaret Sanger

Hi! I noticed you reverted an IP recently about their characterization of Sanger in the lead. Can you explain why you did that? The characterization does seem to be factually accurate, so what's the problem?

And was your use of the rollback button intentional? I'm asking because I've hit the button unintentionally once or twice in the past.

Also, how would you feel about the milder language "supporter of negative eugenics"? RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 09:30, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Mostly MOS:FIRSTBIO, but also because these sorts of assertions have been discussed extensively on article talk pages and have never really gained consensus. Didn't mean to use rollback, but it looks like the IP editor had been blocked under a similar IP before making the edit. Re: attempts to soften the wording, presumably without talk page discussion, I think it might be circumventing that process of building consensus. Larry Hockett (Talk) 09:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Can you give some illustrative examples of "these sorts of assertions"?

Also, just now I randomly came across Charlotte Perkins Gilman, who is described as a eugenicist at the end of the list of activities/occupations in the lead. The characterization is cited to something.

I suppose I could raise the issue on the article's TP, but I'd prefer to deal with that kind of thing when I have more headspace and stomach for controversial discussions. After all (at least according to some editors), there's no deadline.

Cheers, RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 13:31, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

I could give examples, but I wonder if that would be seen as a little bit silly since we're talking about discussions on one article talk page. The discussions on race and eugenics are pretty easily located by looking through the seven pages of archives. Re: the Gilman article, I agree that it is cited to something; that something is a Britannica entry that doesn't contain the string eug anywhere on the page. It's certainly a bold move to use that citation where they did, but it is otherwise not a thing to be emulated. Larry Hockett (Talk) 14:28, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Bringing David Ogden Stiers Back to Life

Would anybody please have David Ogden Stiers being brought back to life so that he would turn 81 at the end of October 2023? 2601:640:4080:2780:FD6B:5774:2D37:155A (talk) 06:27, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Women in Green GA Editathon October 2023 - Around the World in 31 Days

Hello Larry Hockett:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2023!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2023, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Around the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 countries (or broader international articles) by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Alanna the Brave (talk) 00:53, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

You are receiving this message as a member of the WikiProject Women in Green. You can remove yourself from receiving notifications here.

Darryl Strawberry is a FOUR time WS Champion.

Hi, just trying to update a page where I know the information is correct - but it keeps reverting to incorrect information. It’s Darryl Strawberry’s information page. He is a four time World Series Champion. Not 3. While I understand he didn’t play in the ‘98 WS - he was on the active roster until a colon cancer diagnosis after the start of the 1998 playoffs, at which point he was moved to the disabled list and Ledee was call to the active roster. In MLB, the players who are awarded with a ring, and being considered a “World Series Champion” are anyone who stood in the batter’s box, or on the pitcher’s mound for the winning team during that season. Darryl Strawberry is a 4 time WS Champion. 1986 with the NY Mets and 1996, 1998, and 1999 with the NY Yankees. Please update. DennisR1283 (talk) 04:56, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Dennis - Article content issues are not usually best discussed on user talk pages, because this may leave interested parties out of the discussion. For this issue, you might discuss at Talk:Darryl Strawberry or WT:BASEBALL. See Archive 46 at WT:BASEBALL for one recent discussion. Our common approach on Wikipedia, which mirrors the approach used at reliable sources like Baseball Reference, is usually to omit the WS as an infobox highlight if the player was not on the postseason roster. Larry Hockett (Talk) 05:06, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Notebook reversion

Hi! I noticed your reversion of Bespi024's edit just now. Do you think that's AI-generated? They've made several similar rapid-fire edits to various articles and they all sound similar. Joyous! Noise! 03:04, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

I thought about that, but I don't think it changes our response. Larry Hockett (Talk) 03:08, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Totally agree. Joyous! Noise! 03:13, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Asking for help

Can you look at this link - I think the INVESTIGATIONS section is misnamed - I tried an edit -- it was reverted with alacrity - your thoughts would be helpful - if I change it - I get beaten on.

Anesthesiology#Investigations BeingObjective (talk) 17:45, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

I think it's more likely to be an error or misunderstanding than a beating, unless I'm really missing something big here. Is there any talk page discussion of this? I would maybe start there. Maybe work to clarify the meaning of investigations. To me, in the context of a medical specialty, it would refer to something like lab tests or X-rays. Larry Hockett (Talk) 18:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

I agree - yes, there is a talk section - it really should read 'Knowledge Requirements' or some such.

As to the beating - I'd like to think you are correct - but I have my doubts, I do have a stalker - they may seriously not see it as such - but there is a fairly clear pattern -

Small detail - but it does make the article read badly. BeingObjective (talk) 18:20, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Something to consider: You may find that other editors are more receptive to your points in that discussion if you remove the extra question marks and the all-caps text. I know it must be stressful to be reverted frequently, particularly if there's an unsatisfactory edit summary with the revert, but I think this message may not have the intended effect. If it's a simple mistake, there's usually an editor who won't mind discussing or fixing the issue, but if it comes across as a situation involving unnecessary drama, people may hesitate to get involved. Larry Hockett (Talk) 18:31, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

It is good feedback - I do have to work on the tendency to lean on professional experience - and developing digital consensus is a bit of an art form - a few articles I did manage to enhance IMHO - without any perceived conflict - I do find the minor edits - as in this section title - to be so obvious that I cannot understand why someone wants to be dramatic - thanks for the feedback. BeingObjective (talk) 18:37, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Hokie Gajan

I'm curious why you felt it necessary to undo my edit to the article on Hokie Gajan My addition to the article was pretty straightforward so I'm confused why you would choose to remove it without explanation. CarbonX (talk) 09:41, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

My apologies. My edit summary (“in the previous paragraph”) could have been a bit more detailed, but I tried to go with what I thought was straightforward too. With that edit summary, I meant that the information you added was already in the article one paragraph above where you added it. It's all still there, including the date of death, the name of his illness, and when he had been diagnosed with it. I hope this helps. Larry Hockett (Talk) 10:14, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Apologies for reverting your good edits on +Lohse's page

I misread / reverted too quickly on those -- thanks for your patience and good eye!

Maximilian775 (talk) 12:41, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

No worries! Hopefully my edit summary didn't come across as too cranky. Thanks for your note. Larry Hockett (Talk) 16:05, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Joseph Siegel

Have restored the page. Will change the Bachelor of History to Bachelor of Arts in history. Will also correct Meinrad, Indiana, to St. Meinrad Indiana. It is much easier if you simply inform me of problems in an article rather than revert a whole bunch of correct edits. Rogermx (talk) 00:06, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I would say that the easiest thing to do is to simply check the sources if you desire to add new information to an entry. If “a whole bunch” of edits were reverted, that would have to be because multiple editors noticed the problems.

The “Bachelor of” issue is a recurring one; usually I just fix it. Note that a Bachelor of History is a nonexistent degree; usually a bachelor's degree in history is a BA in the US. A Bachelor of Philosophy (BPhil) is a rare degree in the US; most bachelor’s degrees in philosophy are BAs, but close attention to the sources will help you make this determination for sure.

Could you address “1988ordination” and “when Bishop J. Peter Sartain named jo, vicar general”? These are edits that most editors would detect when checking their work. (You can click on Show Preview to see what your edits are going to look like - even before clicking on save.) Thank you. Larry Hockett (Talk) 00:26, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

March 2024 GAN backlog drive

Good article nominations | March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 02:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Bishop Byrne

Hi Larry, have restored my version of this article. I do not agree with the reversion of articles for any other reason than vandalism and will restore any articles that are reverted. Am sorry that you believe this is a "rush job". I think that I have made the article more readable and have had added content. As before, I am willing to listen to your suggestions and you of course are free to make any edits that you please. Rogermx (talk) 18:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. As part of that freedom, I made basic changes such as turning the word “bishopof” into two words. These are changes that should be caught by even the most cursory proofreading. If such issues come up once in a while, no worries. If they come up on nearly every edit, it comes across as an indication of carelessness.

Please don't be sorry about what I believe. It is only productive to be sorry about your own actions (especially actions that occur over and over again). Larry Hockett (Talk) 22:55, 2 March 2024 (UTC)