This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Archives (Index)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

story · music · places

My calendar story today is about Michael Herrmann celebrating his birthday. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:17, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

same kind of birthday for Josef Protschka --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

today I am happy about a singer on the Main page (at least for the first hours), after TFA the same day last year. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks to Seiji Ozawa. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:39, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Quite the globe trotter. Barkeep49 (talk) 03:29, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Very selectively, - images just updated. - The image, taken on a cemetery last year after the funeral of a distant but dear family member, commemorates today, with thanks for their achievements, four subjects mentioned on the Main page and Vami_IV, a friend here. Listen to music by Tchaikovsky (an article where one of the four is pictured), sung by today's subject (whose performance on stage I enjoyed two days ago). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:43, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Listen to music from Ukraine if you like, - I heard it in 2022, and the November concert (at a different church) raised a truckload of winter clothes. My story today is also from my life: I heard the singer in 3 of the 4 mentioned musical items. I sang in yesterday's. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:35, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rinaldo (opera) was premiered on 24 February, which OTD on the Main page recognized, pictured. I gave it an infobox. What do you think about what happened then Today)? For context: Carmen, The Bartered Bride, L'Orfeo, Nixon in China ... all by the same user who sadly died years ago. The last time an infobox opera was disputed was Robert le diable. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The 2024 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with 135 participants. This is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2017.

Our current leader is newcomer Generalissima (submissions), who has one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher) and 10 GAs and 12 DYKs mostly on New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:

• AirshipJungleman29 (submissions), with one FA on Hö'elün, two GAs on Mongolia-related articles, and two DYKs;
• Vami_IV (submissions), with one FA on Doom (2016 video game), one GA on Boundary Fire (2017), and 11 reviews;
• MaranoFan (submissions), with one FA on Holidays (Meghan Trainor song), a nine-article FT on 30 (album), and two DYKs;
• Skyshifter (submissions), with one FA on OneShot and one DYK;
• Sammi Brie (submissions), with five GAs and five DYKs on television and radio stations;
• voorts (submissions) and Elli (submissions), both with one FA and one DYK each.

As a reminder, competitors may submit work for the first round until 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February, and the second round starts 1 March. Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round; currently, competitors need at least 15 points to progress. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:57, 11 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regarding this comment: although I do think there would be more opposes coming from voters with personal agendas, I think there is another category of voters who currently go unheard from. Being critical of another editor is an unpleasant thing to do, so I think there are potential opposing editors who demur from participating in the current RfA process. I also think most editors aren't collecting diffs on everyone they encounter just in case they might have to weigh in on them someday, and they aren't so motivated to participate in an RfA to spend extensive amounts of time hunting down past diffs, so they don't contribute. I appreciate of course that relying on people's unreliable memories makes the system more vulnerable to gatekeeping and unconscious bias. Historically, I haven't been a fan of moving to a voting system, but the community is no closer to agreeing on something like my proposal for a pros-and-cons evaluation, so it might be time to consider voting, the other approach commmonly used by organizations everywhere. isaacl (talk) 00:09, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think the current system discourages opposers and so yes that is a substantial part of the reason why I think opposes would go up if we moved to secret ballot. Barkeep49 (talk) 00:19, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations on a "WikiProjects and collaborations" request for comment, and at Talk:Black Irish (folklore) on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:44, 21 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's always quite disconcerting to find out that one has been discussed somewhere without a courtesy ping to be allowed to speak for themselves, as I did today. That said, I wanted to specifically thank you for what you said, and for initiating a (gentle) rebuke on your own cognizance.[1][2] I was taken aback by that accusation, then puzzled, and then incensed. It took quite a bit of restraint to respond the way I did at the time, when a fairly significant part of me was screaming stuff about hypocrisy and (especially) tone policing hypocrisy and the weaponization of AGF and so on. I greatly appreciate that you made an effort to correct that and to push back against the characterization of my observation, even as you acknowledged not agreeing with it yourself.

Not coincidentally, given your comment at the proposal and above here about secret ballots at RFA, the furor we have in reaction to Oppose votes can contribute just as much to toxicity at RFA as actual bad Opposes. Certainly the accusation leveled against me is the sort of thing that can be used to silence editors, and someone less experienced might come away from that RFA afraid to lodge an Oppose in the future, worried they might be bullied by an admin suggesting they violated AGF. Grandpallama (talk) 23:58, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]