Peaceray
home
Barnstars,
Badges, &
User Boxes
Talk to meNowhere, in
particular

Happy New Year[edit]

Happy New Year Peaceray. Hope this ping finds you well. Wishing the new year brings along all the joy and happiness you can wish for! Ktin (talk) 02:25, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year to you, too, Ktin Peaceray (talk) 01:32, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Social sciences and society Good Article nomination[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Shadow docket on a "Social sciences and society" Good Article nomination. 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 16:30, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts - William Turner[edit]

Sorry for being answerable after a long time, working in a different wiki project, English version is not my default. Thank you very much for the literature and other sources. Greetings--SkrzydlatyMuflon (talk) 21:08, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Coup of Gitarama on a "History" Good Article nomination. 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 23:30, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome[edit]

Hi Peaceray, thanks for the excellent welcome message! Best, Hazedon (talk) 05:51, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion of removal of "correct information"[edit]

You told me it was "correct information" that the claims of fraud in the 2020 election were false. You asked me to cite contrary information, although you did not cite any yourself, and rather stacked the deck by declaring a host of establishment and left-wing sources to be reliable while disallowing those that I might appeal to. Obviously you do all of this in good conscience, but it adds up to major bias. The last time Ohio and Florida voted for a "losing" candidate was in 1960. That election was very likely rigged in Illinois and Texas, and probably in the new state of Hawaii also. I'm a PhD in political science, but of course, appeal to one you prefer to align with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.71.28.174 (talk) 18:01, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@77.71.28.174: Please see MOS:CITELEAD, which states:

Because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material. Leads are usually written at a greater level of generality than the body, and information in the lead section of non-controversial subjects is less likely to be challenged and less likely to require a source; there is not, however, an exception to citation requirements specific to leads. The necessity for citations in a lead should be determined on a case-by-case basis by editorial consensus. Complex, current, or controversial subjects may require many citations; others, few or none. The presence of citations in the introduction is neither required in every article nor prohibited in any article.

I did not need to provide any citations attesting to those false claims because those were already provided in the Mike Braun#Effort to overturn 2020 presidential election result section.
As for the status of Ohio & Florida being bellweather states, I am unaware of any part of the constitution that indicates that those states alone get to forecast, let alone pick, the winning presidential candidate. The times, they are a changing, & 21st century patterns seem to be different from 20th century patterns.[1] As someone who has had a few statistics courses, including a couple on the graduate level, I find statistical variability unsurprising, particularly when it can be explained by demographic changes. As someone who claims a political science PhD, you should be aware of these trends. Peaceray (talk) 18:51, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Presidential voting trends by state". Ballotpedia. 2018-02-28. Retrieved 2022-01-12.

Help pls[edit]

Hi Peaceray. You said I could post questions to you. Thank you. I've been trying to tidy up the entries on aspirin because there is a widespread myth that it occurs in willow bark, when actually it was synthesised in a lab by scientists. But the story is so widespread that millions believe it and there are plenty of references to support it (all of which go in circles, just referencing each other). So, for example, you find a quote that Hippocrates used willow as a painkiller. In fact, Hippocrates never mentioned willow at all and I can link to complete texts of Hippocrates which show this. But when I say that, I get my posts deleted because there are lots of people who claim it. A negative reference isn't a reference, apparently. What's the correct thing to do? Visit the Salicylic acid page and look at the history section for an example. Is there any way of removing widespread misinformation from Wikipedia, or does it just keep coming back? E Wusk (talk) 17:36, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@E Wusk: Okay, this is a situation in which the best one can generally hope for is a partial resolution & compromise, & the process demands patience.
First I recommend some reading about a similar case in a different field, the Haymarket affair.
Second, here are some relevant English Wikipedia policies, guidelines, & essays:
I do recommend reading through all of this before attempting further edits at salicylic acid. To try to edit the page now might be considered edit warring.
If we were to think about this in military terms, you will need to approach this as a campaign, not a single battle. I am emphasizing the long-haul nature of resolving conflict here, as success in this matter can only be brought about by negotiation, compromise, & consensus.
Please do this groundwork of reading & learning more about Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. The more grounded you are in WP:PG, the more successfully you will be able to advance your viewpoint. AFter you do this groundwork & have citations that support your change, I would then open a discussion at Talk:Salicylic acid.
When I am able, I will solicit advice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine that WikiProject has its own reliable source standards, outlined at WP:MEDFAQ & WP:MEDRS. While Talk:Salicylic acid does not list WikiProject Medicine as one of the interested WikiProjects, WikiProject Molecular Biology/Molecular and Cell Biology & WikiProject Pharmacology are closely related. We may be able to find a medical historian who could buttress the information to be changed with appropriate historical & medical citations.
I have had similar situations that I have encountered. Some I have been able to resolve, some not, & sometimes it requires ongoing attention. The main thing is to assume & act in good faith. Peaceray (talk) 00:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Peaceray. I understand, and I shall make reference to those articles. Fortunately, this isn't an area where I have done any original research and I don't feel emotionally involved. But if it helps Wikipedia, I'm happy to try to improve the articles. Can I ask one more favour? Is my work on History of Aspirin - history of willow in medicine - section OK? I fear it may read like it is biased. It's frustrating if I add a perfectly good reference and it is deleted rather than incorporated because someone assumes I'm biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by E Wusk (talkcontribs) 08:16, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Moka Ma's edits[edit]

I see you are an experienced editor, and I noticed this edit. I'm wondering at what point this should go to ANI. The editor seems to be hopelessly struggling, and continues to edit very high-traffic articles. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:32, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Magnolia677: The next time this month that Moka Mo removes material without an edit summary, I would add another final warning to that user's talk page then immediately report it at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. I would read the Wikipedia:ANI advice essay. You can ignore step one if you are prepared with evidence (see Help:Diff),as Moka Mo has been warned.
If reverting this editor, I would advise adding some language into the edit summary, such as As WP:BRD suggests, please discuss this on the talk page before attempting this edit again.
This user is not a novice editor — far from it. Please see https://xtools.wmflabs.org/ec/en.wikipedia.org/Moka%20Mo. Some of this editor's actions are appropriate, but it is clear that Moka Mo is proceeding as a lone wolf who has only responded to complaints on the user talk page a handful of times. Thus, Moka Mo seems WP:UNRESPONSIVE & possibly in violation of WP:CIVIL, particularly when it comes where it says Explain yourself. Insufficient explanations for edits can be perceived as uncivil. Please also see WP:COMMUNICATE.
If Moka Mo next makes an edit that fails to leave an edit summary or appears to go against a communicated consensus, then I would go straight to WP:ANI with the necessary diffs.
Peaceray (talk) 16:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
With this edit they reverted User:RadioKAOS, an experienced editor who left a very detailed edit summary, and left no edit summary for reverting. This is disruptive. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:22, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Magnolia677: I just added a warning to User talk:Moka Ma for disruptive editing — this is over four warnings for the month. At this point, I would take it to WP:ANI with a couple of the applicable diffs. Peaceray (talk) 19:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red[edit]

Hi there, Peaceray. I see that you've recently been creating or improving at least three biographies of women and helping with others. As you may know, WikiProject Women in Red is trying to chip away at the Wikipedia gender gap. If you intend to continue writing about women, you might like to become a member of our project. You can do so by registering at the top of the project's main page. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 18:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Ipigott! I have been a member since 17 March 2021 & work with the project intermittently. Peaceray (talk) 19:20, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How remiss of me. I see I even welcomed you myself on that occasion. In any case, just let me know if ever I can be of any further help.--Ipigott (talk) 20:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arden, Delaware[edit]

Hey,

So I fixed the titling of that section from "Notable residents" to "Notable people" still, that is an edit that should remain. As for the other part, I was just trying to fix formatting so as to maintain consistency across thousands of other sections of this type, and proper grammar. If you know a way to do so without removing the annotated link, then please help. So all I am trying to do, is have the names, then a comma, then the text. That is how these are formatted literally tens of thousands of other places across the globe (this is my primary editing hobby is these "Notable people" lists...).

Please let me know how we could fix that. I tried without removing the "annotated link", but was not successful. I then removed it, but kept all the wikilinks intact as you saw next, and that was the edit that you reverted. Thanks for your help in advance. Th78blue (talk) 23:16, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Th78blue: Whose standard of consistency? I think that you may be working at cross-purposes with the creators of ((annotated link))} & ((Short description)). There has been quite an effort to implement the latter (approximately 4,360,000 pages, or roughly 8% of all pages & the former template makes good use of the information in the short description.
I think that the ((annotated link)) adds useful information to lists & that it is a disservice to remove them. I do not think the cause of making everything look the same justifies the removal; indeed, I think that it should argue for its inclusion, since it makes lists more useful to have a short description. As in the case of the Arden, Delaware, most readers would not know who these notable people were & are thus less likely to click on the Wikilink to find out, whereas having the short description might pique their interest.
I respective request that you stop removing annotated links to make articles look the same. If you were doing this in a See also section, you would be operating against the Manual of Style, which indicates here that Editors should provide a brief annotation when a link's relevance is not immediately apparent, when the meaning of the term may not be generally known, or when the term is ambiguous. I think that the same standard applies in principle to Notable people sections.
Please consider, rather than removing ((annotated link)) to make everything look same-same, actually adding them may be the superior course of action. Peaceray (talk) 00:05, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am just not that familiar with the "annotated link", as this was my first time running into it. I am not necessarily for or against anything, but rather just working on building out short descriptions with similar formatting for these lists. I think a short description is fine, I was mostly just speaking of the comma instead of the dash, in this instance... Sorry if I am not explaining myself clearly. Th78blue (talk) 00:08, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For clarity so that you know what I am referring to in terms of standards for these Notable people list formats. I am fine with the annotated link, but was just hoping it would look like the following per the MOS and consensus attained, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography#Birth date and place. Please let me know though if I am still not making sense and I will try and re-articulate what I am trying to say. Thank you for your patience. Example list style/format:
  • John Smith (1900–1990), doctor, lawyer and politician
  • Sally Wong (born 1984), ice skater
Th78blue (talk) 00:16, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Th78blue: Annotated links default to the dash, so it can be better to use that for other entries when annotated links are used. Alternately, one can add this
|dash=,  parameter/value to the annotated link template to get a comma & a space rather than the default space dash space.
I would make a request with Pbsouthwood at Template talk:Annotated link about including a template parameter for the MOS:BIRTHDATE. Peaceray (talk) 00:29, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Minor thing[edit]

[1] My indent was where I wanted it, I prefer to go by WP:INDENT. Also, since I use the beta "Discussion tools" these days, it's automatic. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:26, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: 👍 trout Self-trout Peaceray (talk) 18:59, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jump server misinformation[edit]

Hello I created a topic on the jump server article talk page about a bunch of misinformation you added back into the article, please come discuss. Thank you 2600:1700:12B0:3000:85A4:3E9A:69B1:D576 (talk) 05:06, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That would be Talk:Jump server. Peaceray (talk) 05:35, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

WikiDefender Barnstar Hires.png
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
thanks for being extremely reasonable and amazing in a discussion that involved team tagging and some editor's ignorance and stubborness. thanks so much AnyaDavid (talk) 07:28, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February with Women in Red[edit]

WIR Black History Month 2022.png
Women in Red Feb 2022, Vol 8, Issue 2, Nos 214, 217, 220, 221, 222


Online events:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook icon.jpg
Facebook |
Instagram.svg
Instagram |
Pinterest Shiny Icon.svg
Pinterest |
Twitter icon.png
Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:10, 31 January 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Feedback request: Social sciences and society Good Article nomination[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:William H. Davis (educator) on a "Social sciences and society" Good Article nomination. 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 02:30, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Friday (Arapaho chief) on a "History" Good Article nomination. 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 11:31, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Saturday Feb 5: ONLINE Met Afrofuturist edit-a-thon (and monthlong campaign)[edit]

February 5, 12-2pm: ONLINE Met Afrofuturist edit-a-thon
Jar MET DP207617.jpg
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for a virtual Metropolitan Museum of Art edit-a-thon Saturday afternoon (12-2pm) with partners AfroCROWD and Black Lunch Table. To join the livestream from your computer or smartphone, just watch at this link. More information about how to connect is available on the meetup page.

Our focus will be on the exhibition Before Yesterday We Could Fly inspired by Seneca Village, and featured art, artists, history and culture of the African diaspora.

We look forward to seeing local Wikimedians, but would also like to invite folks from the greater New York metropolitan area (and beyond!) who might not typically be able to join us in person!

We are also running a Met Afrofuturist chat channel on our Wikimedia NYC Discord server for the whole monthlong campaign.

12:00pm - 2:00 pm livestream via YouTube

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team 05:27, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

I think there is still canvassing of the indonesian article caused by some "well known" editors[edit]

hi peaceray, i thank you for adding the template to assume good faith in the article that has gone really bad and it's at the center the scrutiny of some WELL KNOWN editors that caused during the years lots of troubles, making Wikipedia seems it's a gameplay of those who wins and those who looses. I would report this incident to an admin notice board even though i can see one of these editors history of being an extremely revolting wikipedia editor as is well aware of the situation and caused me a ban for just posting sources on the article...and im sure it was a case of admin shopping.... for simply stating my opinions and sources i did state to improve the article. im sure he will get me banned, he is anyway...known for banning people just to win an argument...thanks for the attention Amoeba69th (talk) 02:37, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia NYC: Strategic Planning Survey for our community[edit]

Wikimedia NYC: Strategic Planning Survey for our community
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg
Welcome to Wikimedia New York City!

Hi Wiki-Yorkers,

We are reaching out as part of our community-building efforts at Wikimedia NYC. Our regional group is engaged in a strategic planning process to sharpen our strategy for the next three years, and we would like your input. Given your connection to us and your experience with Wikimedia NYC, I would be grateful if you would be willing to share some of your perspectives and insights as we think about our next chapter.

Attached is an anonymous survey, which will remain active until February 28. Responses will go directly to Barretto Consulting and the Wikimedia NYC board will receive responses in aggregate and to identify cross-cutting themes. Please take some time to answer it and share your thoughts with us.

Fill out our Wikimedia NYC survey!

Thank you so much. We appreciate all your ideas and community spirit.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team 18:38, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Sarah Azhari[edit]

Hi Peaceray. As requested, I have provided my opinion at the Sarah Azhari talk page. Hope that helps. Regards, Naval Scene (talk) 10:51, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Welcome section![edit]

I really appreciated your useful Welcome section on my Talk page! I wish you all the best sending my thanks. --Corrado72 (talk) 21:23, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feb 23: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon NYC[edit]

February 23, 7pm: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon NYC
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg
Welcome to Wikimedia New York City!

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-8pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop. To join the meeting from your computer or smartphone, just visit this link. More information about how to connect is available on the meetup page.

We look forward to seeing local Wikimedians, but would also like to invite folks from the greater New York metropolitan area (and beyond!) who might not typically be able to join us in person!

If there's a project you'd like to share or a question you'd like answered, just let us know by adding it to the agenda or the talk page.

7:00pm - 8:00 pm online via Zoom (optional breakout rooms from 8:00-8:30)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team 19:39, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Help: Apache Kafka entry[edit]

Hi, you did revert edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Apache_Kafka&diff=next&oldid=1072665876 and we are wondering why? The change seems ok to us? It would be great to understand what is wrong with the edit and how the proposed change can be accepted.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6c4e:1a7f:e00:f5a8:8f74:ff6d:1120 (talk) 21:07, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The edit that I reverted contained a blatant & unattributed copy & paste from https://kafka.apache.org/ (Archived 21 February 2022 at the Wayback Machine). This is a violation of one of English Wikipedia's Wikipedia policies with legal considerations, specifically the Wikipedia:Copyright violations policy. Please also see the Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources explanatory supplement.
At a minimum this quote should have been put into quote marks or into a quotation template & dutifully footnoted with a citation (Please see WP:QUOTE & MOS:QUOTE). This should have also been located elsewhere, as direct quotes are a lousy way to start a opening sentence for an article. Peaceray (talk) 21:33, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarification.

You're Invited! Writing Black History of the Pacific Northwest into Wikipedia[edit]

On, Friday, February 25, 2022, Oregon State University will be hosting an online editathon focused on Black history of the Pacific Northwest. You can learn more here and/or register here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:26, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March editathons[edit]

Women in Red logo.svg
Women in Red Mar 2022, Vol 8, Issue 3, Nos 214, 217, 222, 223, 224, 225


Online events:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook icon.jpg
Facebook |
Instagram.svg
Instagram |
Pinterest Shiny Icon.svg
Pinterest |
Twitter icon.png
Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Gerhard Schröder[edit]

RE the edit you reverted from

... is a member of the board of the Russian state owned company Gazprom, he is also a retired German politician, consultant and lobbyist, who served as the chancellor of Germany from 1998 to 2005..... TO

... is a German retired politician, consultant and lobbyist, who served as the chancellor of Germany from 1998 to 2005 ...

ok, I added added lower with the other one that is still in the top paragraphs. Though, since when was it a banable offense not to follow the style manual? That previous edit that you reverted was not disruptive - all I did was list his current role first. At this time, it is HIGHLY POV whether he is most known globally for briefly running Germany, or for his current role working for the russian state, during a war. Outside Europe, few would have heard about him until recently until his role in the creation of Nord Stream was globally publicized, as was his new role as of Feb 2022 working for the Russian State owned Gazprom. 79.155.94.28 (talk) 17:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I already responded to you at Talk:Gerhard Schröder#Current Role - Gazprom & User talk:79.155.94.28#February 2022 so I am unsure why you are pursuing this here.
One disruptive edit in itself is typically not blockable (different than banning, BTW); multiple disruptive edits, as in this case, are a different matter. Please see our edit warring policy & the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle essay.
I will note that this article has existed since 2001-05-17, so Schröder was obviously notable before his activity with Nord Stream that occurred shortly after he left the chancellorship in 2005.
Further discussion on Schröder & Gasprom should take place at Talk:Gerhard Schröder. Peaceray (talk) 18:30, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Social sciences and society Good Article nomination[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:John C. Young (college president) on a "Social sciences and society" Good Article nomination. 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 00:30, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2020–2021 Belarusian protests on a "History" Good Article nomination. 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 04:31, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted change[edit]

Hey Peaceray,

I'm a trainer who does a lot of work for Google teaching about Google Cloud. I happened to notice that some of the information on the GCP Wikipedia page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Cloud_Platform was out of date. I updated the page about a month ago and today I received a notice that user Drmies‬ reverted my changes. This is all new to me, and I'm not sure why my changes were reverted. I attempted to "Talk" to Drmies but I'm guessing his talk page is locked? Not sure. Since I know what I'm talking about when it comes to GCP, and since I include a reference to the GCP page containing the information I used to make the edit, I'm not sure why the revert. Though my impulse is just to revert his changes back to mine, I'd like to know if I did something wrong first :-)

Thanks for your time.

Cheers.

Hagg (talk) 21:10, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hagg: There is more than one matter here.
  1. To address a matter with an editor about a specific article, I recommend posting to that article's talk page, starting the post by using the ((ping)) template, such as ((ping|<username>)). This will notify that editor, as you probably noticed when I used it to ping you here.
    I am unsure how you tried to contact Drmies. Perhaps you tried to email that editor; not every editor has that feature enabled.
  2. If you are not doing basic copyediting, but rather adding, changing, or updating the information in an article, you need to verifiy that by citing a source, preferably a reliable source. In the case of your edit to Google Cloud Platform, you changed information but did not reference a new citation. If the new information that you changed was due to changes in an existing citation, then you should note what changed & which citation you used in the edit summary. Apparently you did not put anything in the edit summary. See Help:Edit summary for more information on that.
  3. Since you work for Google, you are what we call a connected contributer. Because of this, you may wish to review the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide explanatory supplement & the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest behavioral guideline. Note that this would not apply to edits like your edit to Saint Basil's Cathedral, because you are not connected to that subject.
I hope this is helpful. Peaceray (talk) 22:06, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Peaceray:,

I may have not been clear. I work for a technical training provider, and we teach classes about Google Cloud, but I don't actually work for Google. I'm guessing that clears me of the conflict of interest. I went to the talk page for Drmies, but I'm seeing a lock in the upper right corner of that page and don't see the ability to add a new section, like I did here on your talk page.

I'll put an entry on the talk page for where I'm doing my edit, as you suggested, and see what I can find out. I did include a technical reference for the information I edited, but as a link in my content rather than a bottom of the page sort of thing. I'm assuming my oversight was likely not putting any comments for my edit.

Thanks for the help.

Hagg (talk) 22:50, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hagg: I am unsure why you cannot do certain things, except perhaps that you are registered but not yet autoconfirmed, i.e., user accounts that are at least 4 days old, which you currently have, & have made at least 10 edits to the encyclopedia, which you do not have at present (currently your count is at five). Also, registered users may immediately e-mail other users if they activate an email address in their user preferences, so if you have not activated your own email address, you cannot email others. Peaceray (talk) 00:29, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Seattle Wiknic 2015[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Seattle Wiknic 2015 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 06:58, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Seattle Wiknic 2016[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Seattle Wiknic 2016 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 06:58, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Portland Art+Feminism Edit-a-thon: March 12, 2022[edit]

You are invited! An Art+Feminism Wikipedia edit-a-thon will be held in Portland, Oregon, on March 12, 2022. Learn more here!

Wikipedia is one of the most-visited sites on the internet—and it’s created by people who volunteer their time to write and edit pages. Learn how to edit Wikipedia and be a part of shaping our understanding of our world. In this workshop, volunteer Wikipedia editors will be on hand to train participants on how to get started editing pages and offer ideas for which pages you can pitch in to help improve. Show up at any point during the four hours to get started!

Also: Free burritos!! We will be providing vegan, vegetarian, and meat burritos from food cart Loncheria Las Mayos. Alder Commons has a large, fenced playground. Children are welcome! Some computers will be available to borrow, but if you have a laptop, please bring it to use. We will also be leading an online training for new editors at 11am-12pm PST. Please feel free to join that training if you are not able to show up IRL.

This event is part of the international month of events organized by Art+Feminism, which is building a community of activists committed to closing information gaps related to gender, feminism, and the arts, beginning with Wikipedia. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:37, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New into linguistics[edit]

Hey @Peaceray:! It is a great honor for me to write to you. I wanted to tell you that I am a linguistic major and I am going to be editing and creating articles specifically on ethnolinguistics and indigenous languages. I plan to live with native peoples whose languages ​​almost no material is available and add it to Wikipedia. I hope you are great! Yours, --Wondolor (talk) 01:46, 16 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Hi @Wondolor:! Two links that might interest you:
I do not know which indigenous languages interest you beyond Hawaiʻian, but you might like to see the slide that accompanied my presentation to last year's WikiConference North America on the coverage of North American indigenous languages in Wikipedia & Wikimedia:
You may already be aware of these WikiProjects:
Oh, & here's a template for the okina mark, ʻ
I hope that you can & will help to improve the coverage of ethnolinguistics and indigenous languages in Wikipedia!
Peaceray (talk) 17:00, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Francis Boyle[edit]

What's this nonsense about Francis Boyle alleged conspiracy theories? I came across this site by accident and removed an obviously biased slander. There are more than enough reliable sources to justify the removal of the content in question. The origin of COVID-19 is by no means settled. Even the President of the United States and various intelligence agencies called for further investigations. This is pretty much common knowledge by now. There are tons of reports and resources, also from respected scientists. I don't think I need to find you the sources for that.

"Editors may not add content solely because they believe it is true, nor delete content they believe to be untrue, unless they have verified beforehand with a reliable source"

This should also apply to you. But if you find yourself incapable of following these simple rules, maybe you should ask yourself if you are the right person for a Wikipedia editor. No wonder the website is losing its reputation for unbiased, unpolitical articles. It's a sad development. Even the co-founder of this website warned about editors like you following their agenda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:EC:3706:4200:91E7:7380:2734:C305 (talk) 23:10, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You removed cited material & citations by Reviews in Medical Virology, PubMed, & the World Health Organization. These sources are what the Wikipedia medial community generally refers to medical reliable sources (MEDRS). I do not know from where you are getting your news, but if your sources are not themselves considered MEDRS & conflict with the cited sources in the article, then I would suggest you reconsider your sources.
If you wish to remove reliable sources from an article, then discuss it first on the Talk:Francis Boyle page & get consensus. You are in fact required to find reliable sources to counter these citations. Yes, you do need to find the sources for that, present them, & obtain consensus.
I believe that I do follow English Wikipedia's policies & guidelines. I do not believe that you have offered any concrete example other than your personal opinion that I have done otherwise. It is a sad development when editors remove verification from reliable sources but cannot offer contravening evidence & cannot conceive that they may be biased in doing so. Peaceray (talk) 23:37, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mar 27: Wiki-Tent Brunch in Brooklyn[edit]

March 27, 11am-2pm: Wiki-Tent Brunch in Brooklyn
Wiki-Tent Brunch location, Sahadi’s – Courtyard 3/4 in Industry City.
Wiki-Tent Brunch location, Sahadi’s – Courtyard 3/4 in Industry City.
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join us for a planned outdoor gathering between the local Wikimedia NYC community and visitors from the global Wikimedia Foundation at Sahadi's tent in Brooklyn's Industry City.

All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct. In addition, to participate in person you should be vaccinated and also be sure to respect others' personal space, and we may limit overall attendance size if appropriate.

11:00am - 2:00 pm
(Industry City, Brooklyn)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team 04:13, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

April Editathons from Women in Red[edit]

WiR Translation Contest 2022 logo.png
Women in Red Apr 2022, Vol 8, Issue 4, Nos 214, 217, 226, 227, 228


Online events:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook icon.jpg
Facebook |
Instagram.svg
Instagram |
Pinterest Shiny Icon.svg
Pinterest |
Twitter icon.png
Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:45, 22 March 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

WikiWednesday tonight + Sunday Wiki-Tent Brunch[edit]

Online and in-person events
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join us for:

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team 13:23, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Pauli's pronouns[edit]

Hi, Peaceray: When you have a moment, could you go over to the Paul Murray Talk Page and consider my latest comment on the pronouns discussion (@19:47, 21 March 2022), as it pertains to the most recent changes to the article by a new editor who does not seem to understand the "discuss-seek consensus" process? Thanks. PDGPA (talk) 18:18, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Social sciences and society Good Article nomination[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Mariam Soulakiotis on a "Social sciences and society" Good Article nomination. 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 11:30, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:William of Villehardouin on a "History" Good Article nomination. 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 17:31, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE April 2022 newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors April 2022 Newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Hello and welcome to the April newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since December 2021.

Election results: Jonesey95 retired as lead coordinator. Reidgreg was approved to fill this role after an 18-month absence from the coordinator team, and Baffle gab1978 was chosen as an assistant coordinator following a one-year break. Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Tenryuu continued on as long-standing assistant coordinators.

January Drive: Of the 22 editors who signed up, 16 editors claimed 146 copy edits including 45 requests. (details)

February Blitz: This one-week effort focused on requests and a theme of Africa and African diaspora history. Of the 12 editors who signed up, 6 editors recorded 21 copy edits, including 4 requests. (details)

March Drive: Of the 28 editors who signed up, 18 claimed 116 copy edits including 25 requests. (details)

April Blitz: This one-week copy editing event has been scheduled for 17–23 April, sign up now!

Progress report: As of 11 April, copy editors have removed approximately 500 articles from the backlog and completed 127 copy-editing requests during 2022. The backlog has been hovering at about 1,100 tagged articles for the past six months.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Tenryuu

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:88.203.104.246[edit]

Hello, a couple of things about that IP. First, three "only warnings" rather defeats the point of an "only warning", especially when delivered after a "final warning". There's no need to go through all four warnings; once they've been informed that their editing is a problem and that they could be blocked, you can request a block at WP:AIV if they continue. Then you just need to wait for an admin to swing the banhammer. Second, it's not really helpful to pepper them with warnings in such quick succession (like four warnings in two minutes). If you come across an IP on a busy vandalism spree, or a very persistent vandal, you can go straight to AIV. If they've been blocked relatively recently (ie the block expired within the last month or so), it's safe to go straight to AIV and you can notify the previous blocking admin(s). That IP happens to be on my watchlist from when I blocked them last month so I've renewed the block. :) Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:56, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@HJ Mitchell: I had confused this with another IP block earlier in the day & thought that the previous block was still active. Therefore I thought I was cleaning up. Normally I have no hesitation about going to AIV after the 5th vandalism (1st vandalism after final warning). I was also coming back after a de facto lockup & reboot on my PC, & had to multi-task, so that exacerbated things. Ah well, I would have eventually figured it out. Peaceray (talk) 23:02, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apr 24: Wiki-Picnic and WikiSeder in Brooklyn[edit]

April 24, 2-5pm: Wiki-Picnic and WikiSeder in Brooklyn
Wiki-marzo
Wikimedia NYC

You are invited to join us for a planned outdoor gathering with the local Wikimedia NYC community at the barbecue area of Brooklyn's Fort Greene Park.

All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct. In addition, to participate in person you should be vaccinated and also be sure to respect others' personal space, and we may limit overall attendance size if appropriate.

2:00 - 5:00 pm
(Fort Greene Park, Brooklyn)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:49, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Styles Personal Life[edit]

Hello Peaceray!

There seems to be some confusion regarding Harry Styles personal life - you may see the talk page for more information about what is going on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Harry_Styles

Personally I think that your edit was correct in reverting the change from the Guardian article (as that article talks about his aesthetics) but was wrong in allowing the GQ article to stay up as he has clarified he does not label his sexual orientation in no less than five different interviews, yet Google is prioritizing his answer that he gave under pressure that he doesn’t think he’s bisexual in search results. Today’s interview made a nod to the pressure of that interview, so it feels a little unethical to keep it up, particularly when we have control over what information Google recommends to people when they search “Harry Styles sexuality.” Additionally, the Better Homes and Gardens article from just today offers a lot more perspective than the degraded link to a secondary source from the Sun that is currently linked in the article.

Obviously this can all be debated etc. but people have been saying for a long time that that part of his article is not written very well and now that he has a really good and respectful interview with more context, it seems to be time to overhaul the page. Because as it is, it’s a bit like pulling Britney Spears tabloids with degraded links from back when she was super demonized in the media to fill out her wikipedia page personal life section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by H-influenzae (talkcontribs) 00:56, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@H-influenzae: Whenever someone removes cited material, including citations, without a sufficient comment in the edit summary, I routinely revert it. Also, I am generally in accord with the WP:VNT essay, which states in a nutshell that Editors may not add content solely because they believe it is true, nor delete content they believe to be untrue, unless they have verified beforehand with a reliable source. Lily32241 made exactly this type of change, which was reverted by Discospinster. Lily32241's reversion of Discospinster's reversion with the edit summary Most recent quote on the subject was woefully insufficient to explain why citations were being removed. Certainly the Lamont citation should not have been removed.
As to the decision about the Better Homes and Gardens, Independent, & GQ articles, that is a discussion better done on the article talk page where other interested editors can see it. Certainly we do not want anything WP:UNDUE. Peaceray (talk) 04:46, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apr 27: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon NYC[edit]

April 27, 7pm: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon NYC
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg
Welcome to Wikimedia New York City!

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-8pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop. To join the meeting from your computer or smartphone, just visit this link. More information about how to connect is available on the meetup page.

We look forward to seeing local Wikimedians, but would also like to invite folks from the greater New York metropolitan area (and beyond!) who might not typically be able to join us in person!

If there's a project you'd like to share or a question you'd like answered, just let us know by adding it to the agenda or the talk page.

7:00pm - 8:00 pm online via Zoom (optional breakout rooms from 8:00-8:30)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team 02:33, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: History Good Article nomination[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2003 La Paz riots on a "History" Good Article nomination. 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 10:30, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022 at Women in Red[edit]

WiR Women in the Ancient World.png
Women in Red May 2022, Vol 8, Issue 5, Nos 214, 217, 227, 229, 230


Online events:


See also:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook icon.jpg
Facebook |
Instagram.svg
Instagram |
Pinterest Shiny Icon.svg
Pinterest |
Twitter icon.png
Twitter

--Innisfree987 (talk) 04:57, 2 May 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Help with Kaliflower Commune citation[edit]

Hi Peaceray, thanks for putting the citation to the Chicago Reader in correct format. You asked for Volume/issue number. I found that info but am not sure how to re-open the template & add it. The original print article was published in two parts. Part 1: Sept 27, 1995, Vol. 24, No. 52, p.1 ff; Part 2: Oct 6, 1995, Vol 21, No. 1, p.8 ff. (That is, the articles start on the pages indicated, & then jump around the way magazine articles do, "cont. on p. X". Not sure how to format this.)

Can you help me understand how to change the citation correctly?

I am an inexperienced Wikipedia editor and appreciate your knowhow! Nadnie (talk) 19:19, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Nadnie: I will put the Wikitext code for your additions below, but you can find detailed instructions on using the template at ((cite journal)). This assumes you are editing the source code. If you are using Visual Editor to add or change references, you can usually add fields by choosing to edit the reference then clicking on "Add more information" at the bottom then searching for the field(s) that you wish to add.
  • <ref name="Brennan 1995a">((cite journal |last=Brennan |first=Gerald E. |title=Naked Censorship: The True Story of the University of Chicago and William S. Burroughs, Part 1 |date=1995-09-27 |volume=24 |number=52 |journal=Chicago Reader |location=Chicago |publisher=Chicago Reader, Inc. |oclc=758113682 |page=1 ff.))</ref>
  • <ref name="Brennan 1995b">((cite journal |last=Brennan |first=Gerald E. |title=Naked Censorship: The True Story of the University of Chicago and William S. Burroughs, Part 2 |date=1995-10-06 |journal=Chicago Reader |location=Chicago |publisher=Chicago Reader, Inc. |volume=21 |number=1 |oclc=758113682 |pages=8 ff.))</ref>
Some notes:
  • Because the article has the ((Use mdy dates)) template (only displayed in edit mode) date formats such as "1995-09-27", "27 September 1995", & "September 27, 1995" will all render as September 27, 1995.
  • While all-numerical dates take hyphens, page ranges should have an en dash. If you have a numeric keypad, with the numeric lock on, you can enter this as Alt-0150. If you cannot do this, do not worry as some WikiGnome or a bot will probably eventually come along to change a hyphen in page ranges to an en dash.
  • Strictly speaking, ref names (name="Brennan 1995a") are not needed unless you are going to reuse the reference. Visual editor takes care of this transparently when you choose to reuse a reference.
I plan to email you separately with my own question & comment. Peaceray (talk) 20:20, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022 Seattle meetup[edit]

Space Needle 1 2016-08-15.jpg
In the Seattle area? We are resuming Seattle monthly meetups on Tuesday, May 17, 2022, 5:45pm to 7:45pm at the Distant Worlds Coffeehouse. For the address and to RSVP, please click here.
Cascadiawikimedians transparent Gill Sans 155px high.png
23:21, 3 May 2022 (UTC) To unsubscribe from future messages from Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle, please remove your name from this list.

Feedback request: Social sciences and society Good Article nomination[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:William C. Young on a "Social sciences and society" Good Article nomination. 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 09:30, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ANI[edit]

Appears to be much ado about nothing, but some IP user from Talk:Harry Styles neglected to notify you about a filing. Zaathras (talk) 01:02, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

a question...[edit]

Why are you consistently stalking my edit page? I'm not saying your changes are necessarily awful, and it feels like you are specifically screwing with me (I mean, I can see no other reason for specifically going out of your way to meticulously document MY edits; don't you have a profession and/or education and/or interest set of your own that you can pursue?). These are MY pages that I am working on and if you were interested in collaborating, you might have had the courtesy of asking me (and also not METICULOUSLY GOING THROUGH EVERY EDIT I DO WHEN I AM NOT AROUND, AND SPECIFICALLY MINE). Like I said, I appreciate that they are not "bad edits", HOWEVER, there is NO REASON TO EDIT STALK MY PAGE, it is incredibly disrespectful, and it serves no purpose other than to upset me. Thanks 40.133.234.46 (talk) May 11, 2022, 23:41.

I would prefer, & will use, the word "monitor". I am monitoring your edits because some of your actions appeared to be disruptions that went against English Wikipedia policies & guidelines. I do this because I am one of the editors that cleans up vandalism. You have gotten my attention. That does not mean that I will automatically revert you, but where I see actions that seem disruptive & that are against policies & guidelines, I will certainly revert those.
The solution to getting me to stop monitoring your edits is simple. Stop being disruptive, adhere to Wikipedia policies & guidelines, & perhaps try assuming good faith in your comment to & about your fellow editors. Peaceray (talk) 01:22, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was never being disruptive; someone came along being disruptive towards me, then instead of addressing their actions, you duplicated their actions and also did the same towards me. I cannot speak to why, but you are clearly still "monitoring" me and there are SO SO many people out there that need it far more. I have never, ever vandalized. Thanks for your reply. 40.133.234.46 (talk) 02:11, 12 May 2022 (UTC).[reply]
Well, I have a different opinion, especially since you violated MOS:SURNAME twice more after being advised about it. Others also seem to have a different opinion than you on whether or not you have been disruptive. I think fellow editors at the ANI discussion can draw their own conclusions about your edits.
Please do not assume that I only monitor you. I also check other folks whom have made what the ORES review tool identifies as problem edits. There are a lot of those that are false positives, but I am discerning enough about that. Most problem makers get blocked quickly, but there are those who figure out how to be truly collaborative & constructive.
If one does not want others to scrutinize one's own edits, it is best to keep one's nose clean. Peaceray (talk) 03:52, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If people followed what MOS:SURNAME says to the tee, almost no page would make any sense, since very few pages (and indeed a lot of sentences) mention more than one name, and surnames alone do not often make for readable sentences. If I recall correctly, a general rule of thumb for the English language in general is per paragraph. I'm also pretty sure that MOS:SURNAME more generally resets in subsections; using a full name in a 'Death' section appears to be de rigeur (I've used Wikipedia for a LONG time and this is rather common; in fact, it's on the majority of pages). Thanks for your reply. 40.133.234.46 (talk) 11:51, 12 May 2022 (UTC).[reply]
If you have a problem with MOS:SURNAME, open up a RFC at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography. I do not relitigate Wikipedia policy & guidelines on user or article talk pages. I am willing to discuss cases of WP:COMMONSENSE on article or WikiProject talk pages when exceptions may be appropriate. Peaceray (talk) 16:09, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your effort to repair the disambiguation page for 'TMI'[edit]

... however, for some reason someone reverted your edit; perhaps you could find a solution for this?

I am actually seriously concerned that words like 'lone' and (worse) 'only' do not have some sort of definition. Perhaps more peculiar, only has no link to any actual definition at all. That'd be like making Richard Cheese the top option under 'cheese' and quark (cheese) the top entry for quark (eg, the particle). I've been trying to start a conversation with an administrator on here but I have not yet received a reply, in that case in regards to rather incredibly dangerous redirects (sort of similar). Dunno if perhaps you'd be willing to look into this (and really, the disambiguation page for 'only' and the redirect page for 'begins' is kind of intensely nothing like the meaning of 'only' (or 'begins') that most people would think of). Thanks. 40.133.234.46 (talk) 21:00, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is better discussed at Talk:TMI. There, editors like Bkonrad can explain their reasoning & interested editors can work collaboratively. Peaceray (talk) 00:37, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see that instead of replying to my request you have started to edit stalk (pardon, "monitor") the pages I am currently working on again. Would you mind perhaps addressing what I was asking you for help with -- which was not going, one by one, through the pages I am currently working on, SOLELY because I am the one currently working on them? In fact, if you could stop doing that, and perhaps focus on someone else who is actually making insane edits and harassing people on this site, it would be totally appreciated (because, really, there's thousands of them). Thanks so much! 40.133.234.46 (talk) 22:21, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No. I will continue to monitor your edits due to your past behavior. I happen to make collateral improvements (i.e., WP:WIKIGNOME) when applicable. Please do not flatter yourself in thinking that you are the only editor I monitor, although I will probably monitor you longer due to your combative tone. When I see you have not been disruptive for a while, I will cease.
Also, if you make a comment on my talk page, it is common courtesy to wait for a timely response rather make any assumptions, although soon WP:DENY will apply. Less than 1½ hours between your request & your complaint shows a complete lack of WP:AGF. Peaceray (talk) 00:37, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]