User talk:Yoenit/Archive 4
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 10:43, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Uncategorized articles
To be perfectly honest, I have a really difficult time understanding why anybody on Wikipedia wouldn't understand why the categorization project is important: put simply, at least in principle our articles have to be categorized so that readers and editors can find them because they're placed in their proper context alongside other related articles; without that, the only way that either a reader or an editor can know that an article exists is to happen across a text link in a related article.
I acknowledge that this particular page was a bit of a edge case, since there was no pressing need for anybody but an editor who happened to be working on deletions to actually see it — however, it does sometimes take several days for an article that's been tagged for speedy deletion to actually get deleted, not to mention that there are any number of other reasons why a page might be technically uncategorizable for days or even weeks at a time, or why people might think that "their" article is somehow different from others and shouldn't have to follow the same rules as all of the others. The thing is that if you look at the big picture, the categorization project can't do its job properly if there are pages on the list that we have to ignore and not deal with for days upon days at a time. If the tool isn't clean, then it's not the project's job to just accept or work around the dirty parts — we have to clean it, because it has to be clean. It's really that simple.
And just for the record, when I first started working with the uncategorized articles list, there were almost 50,000 uncategorized articles — and because approximately 200 new uncategorized articles get created every day, clearing the list took almost six months of setting aside two or three hours every single day to do nothing but sit in front of my computer tagging one article after another (which, I'm sure you can imagine, is about the single most boring thing I've ever done with my time — but it had to get done and nobody else was doing it.) And it's not just new articles, either, as many existing articles become uncategorized through user error (e.g. somebody adding HTML coding to an article and then failing to close the tags properly), vandalism (e.g. somebody replacing Category:Museums in Ohio with Category:My math teacher is a fat cow!!!!1!), poorly formatted edits (e.g. somebody adding a new item to a disambiguation page, but doing so in a way that erases the {{dab}} tag) and other assorted things that should have, but didn't, get caught by new edit patrol or a vandalism bot. And if you do the math, 200 articles per day means that it takes less than a week for the list to get back over 1,000 articles again, and less than a month to get over 5,000.
All of which is why the list has to be monitored and cleared to zero, with no exceptions for any reason whatsoever, at least twice a week. Ideally, it would happen every single day, but there aren't enough people working on it and even I'm not willing to make that my daily priority. Bearcat (talk) 17:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Comment on ANI
While I appreciate your comment there, I wonder why you stressed "both" in it. I responded just once, when my opponents attacks there continued to go on, and became even more unreasonable. But I apologize, I didn't know that would be frowned upon. W\|/haledad (Talk to me) 21:30, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- You are right, using "both" might not have been fair in this case. Yoenit (talk) 21:42, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Your messages and signature
You don't like fragmented discussions, huh? Well neither do I. That is why User talk:Walex03#Your userpage and personal information had messages posted by me there. However, you have not responded in a few weeks so I got nervous. After a little while I decided to talk to you on your talk page about it and I hoped you could see me here and please respond to this and the previous message on my talk page.
What is much more important is that I noticed in your signature there is no link to your userpage, but your username is bold. However that was on my talk page, not your user page, so it should've been formatted as a link. Changing your signature would be helpful because WP:SIG says it should link to at least your user and talk page, and many include their contributions page.
That will be all.
Walex03 (talk) 20:04, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, you seem a bit upset. My apologies if I have given offensive. I missed the response you were talking about, so I will respond to it now. With regards to the signature, you are wrong. wp:SIG (or to be more precise, WP:SIGLINK) specifies a signature must contain at least one link to your user page, user talk page or contributions page, not two or three links. Also, my userpage (user:Yoenit) is nothing more than a redirect back to my user talkpage, so there is no advantage to linking it. Yoenit (talk) 22:12, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
My apologies if I have given offensive, too. I apologize for the whole sig issue. And I can see your point. I do not mainly like your user page being a redirect to your talk page, I'm just saying, that's why I don't, but your user page is yours to screw around with, so I have no objections.
Walex03 (phone?) (talk) 02:15, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXII, March 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:52, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Help us develop better software!
Thanks to all of you for commenting on the NOINDEX RfC :). It's always great to be able to field questions like these to the community; it's genuinely the highlight of my work! The NOINDEX idea sprung from our New Page Triage discussion; we're developing a new patrolling interface for new articles, and we want your input like never before :). So if you haven't already seen it, please go there, take a look at the screenshots and mockups and ideas, and add any comments or suggestions you might have to the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:47, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Civility
Your edit summary for this change, Which moron put such a large graph at the top of the page? is not appropriate. Please comment on content, not contributors; also, edit summaries should explain what you are doing and why. Also see WP:CIVIL, WP:COLLAB, and WP:WIKIQUETTE. —EncMstr (talk) 21:34, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
- Really? Well, if it makes you happy. Next time try including a link to wp:NPA as well, you are after quoting part of the policy. Yoenit (talk) 22:33, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXIII, April 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:58, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXIV, May 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:43, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Brilliant Idea Barnstar |
| Using the westeros.org Concordance for the sourcing of the World of A Song of Ice and Fire article was an excellent suggestion.[1] Thank you. – sgeureka t•c 09:46, 12 June 2012 (UTC) |
GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:39, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)
Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:
- Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM
It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.
At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).
Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.
If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi t | c 17:38, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
criteria for speedy deletion revert
The point of adding the information that wikipedia uses the dictionary definitions of importance and significance is important information for readers of that article. Putting that information in the talk page is pointless.TeeTylerToe (talk) 18:48, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
- What I meant that you should discuss your proposed change on the talkpage and get consensus there before implementing it. This is standard editing practice for all policy pages. Make a proposal there why you believe this line is necessary and see if other people agree with you. I personally think the comment is pointless, as no objective definition for important exists. Yoenit (talk) 19:32, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
- That's the point. The important or significant speedy deletion criteria exists, and the only definition for those terms that can be used is the dictionary definition. Without the sentence, it's ambiguous as to whether the speedy deletion criteria uses the dictionary definition. Without the sentence, the criteria is both subjective, and ambiguous. Adding the sentence removes that ambiguity. It's like the difference between a speed limit sign that says "you can't go 'fast'", and a speed limit sign that says "you can't go 'fast', and in this usage, we're using the dictionary definition of fast, which is subjective'", it confirms the non-existence of any solid definition.TeeTylerToe (talk) 20:07, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXVI, July 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:59, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXVII, August 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:21, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Military history coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 10:10, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXVIII, September 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project and/or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:08, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXIX, October 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ian Rose (talk) 03:12, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXX, November 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 01:25, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Category Freemasons Proposed Deletion
Hi, as you were a contributor to a previous DRV on the Freemasons category there is another deletion discussion on this. JASpencer (talk) 16:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXI, December 2012
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:05, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 20:17, 5 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
The Bugle: Issue LXXXII, January 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:01, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXIII, February 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:16, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
USS Indiana
Nice work with this article! It is currently on the main page in "On this day". :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:09, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXIV, March 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:46, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXXXV, April 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:12, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 16:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Titan's Cross nomination
As you are listed as a member of Operation Majestic Titan, you are receiving this message to notify you that a new Titan's Cross nomination has been opened. You are therefore cordially invited to iVote or offer your opinion on the nomination. Sincerely, TomStar81 (Talk) 05:44, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Nomination of Timeline of the 2001 anthrax attacks for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Timeline of the 2001 anthrax attacks 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/Timeline of the 2001 anthrax attacks until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Guy (Help!) 22:24, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
MfD nomination of Talk:Action of 8 June 1945/Temp
Talk:Action of 8 June 1945/Temp, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Action of 8 June 1945/Temp and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Talk:Action of 8 June 1945/Temp during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 20:36, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:16, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Other former secondary schools in the Metropolitan Borough of Dudley listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Other former secondary schools in the Metropolitan Borough of Dudley. Since you had some involvement with the Other former secondary schools in the Metropolitan Borough of Dudley redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 03:15, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Other primary schools in Dudley and Sedgley listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Other primary schools in Dudley and Sedgley. Since you had some involvement with the Other primary schools in Dudley and Sedgley redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 22:52, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Other secondary schools in the Metropolitan Borough of Dudley listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Other secondary schools in the Metropolitan Borough of Dudley. Since you had some involvement with the Other secondary schools in the Metropolitan Borough of Dudley redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 17:54, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:22, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Possible removal of AWB access due to inactivity
Hello! There is currently a request for approval of a bot to manage the AutoWikiBrowser CheckPage by removing inactive users, among other tasks. You are being contacted because you may qualify as an inactive user of AWB. First, if you have any input on the proposed bot task, please feel free to comment at the BRFA. Should the bot task be approved, your access to AWB may be uncontroversially removed if you do not resume editing within a week's time. This is purely for routine maintenance of the CheckPage, and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You will be able regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
User group for Military Historians
Greetings,
"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive
Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive#Participants and create a worklist at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
TFA for USS Indiana (BB-1)
I have nominated USS Indiana (BB-1) to be today's featured article on Feb. 28. As the article's FAC nominator, you are invited to this discussion and can participate by clicking here. Z1720 (talk) 16:33, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
USS Indiana (BB-1) scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 28 February 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 28, 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/February 2023. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:15, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
TFA
Thank you today for USS Indiana (BB-1), introduced (in 2010): "An interesting little article on the United States first "real" battleship"! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:25, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
TFA
Thank you today for USS Massachusetts (BB-2), introduced (in 2010): "I am nominating this for featured article because I am attempting to create a featured topic about the US first battleship class. Massachusetts was the US's second "real" battleship and received neither the attention of USS Indiana (BB-1), nor the glory of USS Oregon (BB-3), making her probably most notable for her bad luck."! - We miss you. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:31, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
Nomination of Kill Bill for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kill Bill, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kill Bill until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 18 July 2023 (UTC)