User talk:Tamzin: Difference between revisions
Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Template editors 65,377 edits →Mi Shebeirach: thx |
|||
Line 779: | Line 779: | ||
*:::::::Welp, looks like we did it. Now the only question remaining is how to incorporate them both into a hook. ◇<span style="font-family: Blackadder ITC;">'''[[User:HelenDegenerate|<span style="color: black">Helen</span>]]'''</span><span style="font-family: Blackadder ITC;">'''[[User talk:HelenDegenerate|<span style="color: grey">Degenerate</span>]]'''</span>◆ 18:55, 10 December 2022 (UTC) |
*:::::::Welp, looks like we did it. Now the only question remaining is how to incorporate them both into a hook. ◇<span style="font-family: Blackadder ITC;">'''[[User:HelenDegenerate|<span style="color: black">Helen</span>]]'''</span><span style="font-family: Blackadder ITC;">'''[[User talk:HelenDegenerate|<span style="color: grey">Degenerate</span>]]'''</span>◆ 18:55, 10 December 2022 (UTC) |
||
*::::::::{{re|Drmies|Theleekycauldron|Your Power|HelenDegenerate}} Whoo! Alright, how about {{xt|Did you know ... that ''[[Fuccbois (film)|Fuccbois]]'' won awards and ''[[Fuccboi (novel)|Fuccboi]]''{{'s}} "bros" and "baes" received praise?}} (Also, not-it on the QPQs. <code>:P</code>) <span class="nowrap"> <span style="font-family:courier">-- [[User:Tamzin|<span style="color:#E6007A">Tamzin</span>]]</span><sup>[''[[User talk:Tamzin|<span style="color:#E6007A">cetacean needed</span>]]'']</sup> (she|they|xe)</span> 21:01, 10 December 2022 (UTC) |
*::::::::{{re|Drmies|Theleekycauldron|Your Power|HelenDegenerate}} Whoo! Alright, how about {{xt|Did you know ... that ''[[Fuccbois (film)|Fuccbois]]'' won awards and ''[[Fuccboi (novel)|Fuccboi]]''{{'s}} "bros" and "baes" received praise?}} (Also, not-it on the QPQs. <code>:P</code>) <span class="nowrap"> <span style="font-family:courier">-- [[User:Tamzin|<span style="color:#E6007A">Tamzin</span>]]</span><sup>[''[[User talk:Tamzin|<span style="color:#E6007A">cetacean needed</span>]]'']</sup> (she|they|xe)</span> 21:01, 10 December 2022 (UTC) |
||
*Whoa, that's crazy. I can't believe the size of those articles. Here, you can have this one, [[Template:Did you know nominations/Volodymyr Kozhukhar]]. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 21:41, 10 December 2022 (UTC) |
|||
== WP:STOPIT == |
== WP:STOPIT == |
Revision as of 21:42, 10 December 2022
You may want to increment {{Archive basics}} to |counter= 8
as User talk:Tamzin/Archive/7 is larger than the recommended 150Kb.
Talkpage expectations
|
{{
ds/aware }} |
---|
I don't like the idea of getting pings over someone putting a box on my page that says I did nothing wrong while vaguely insinuating that I did, so I'm just parking these here instead.
Update 18:24, 25 October 2021 (UTC): You know what, screw it. Keeping track of which to list is more trouble than it's worth, and I don't need any one-hit immunity. I'm aware of all of them. Even the weird ones like the Shakespeare authorship question or Waldorf education. If anything, I'm more likely to think something is a DS topic when it isn't, than vice versa. |
NOTE TO MOBILE EDITORS
Due to some annoying design decisions by the Wikimedia Foundation, you cannot see the notice at the top of this page, which also is supposed to show up when you edit this page. Its contents are:
|
---|
|
Selected WikiLove
Defender of the Wiki Barnstar from Joshua Jonathan
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
Absolutely deserved for uncovering the Swaminarayan-sockfarm. A lot of work is waiting, but you did great! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:14, 25 June 2021 (UTC) |
Reply
|
---|
|
Barnstar of Diligence from L235
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
Hi Tamzin, I'm Kevin. Thank you for your diligence on the Moksha88 SPI; had it been a less thorough report, it may have been overlooked or neglected, especially after the negative CU results. We're lucky to have had you looking into this. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 06:15, 27 June 2021 (UTC) |
Reply
|
---|
|
Civility Barnstar from Sdkb & Writ Keeper
The Civility Barnstar | |
Without getting into the messy question of whether or not the other editor's professed ignorance is plausible, I think it's clear your calm, non-judgmental efforts to explain why their comments were offensive have been helpful and appreciated by all. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:25, 29 June 2021 (UTC) |
- I definitely second this. Your essay is excellent, as well. You're doing the (proverbial) Lord's work, and with much more patience than I. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 23:07, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Further kind words
|
---|
|
mishloach manot for you!
Happy purim, Tamzin! I thought I'd try and throw together a mishloach manot basket to give out :) feel free to pass it around or make your own basket, if that's your thing—if not, cheers and chag Purim sameach! in jewish enby siblinghood, theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 03:27, 18 March 2022 (UTC) |
Reply
|
---|
תודה רבה, Claudia! A pleasantly synchronistic treat to find immediately after submitting my first foray into your neck of the woods. Despite my well-known affinity for Queen Esther (Esther 8:6 tattoo pic forthcoming on Commons once I've got the enby and agender colors touched up), I've never done much for Purim. Don't really know why that is, just how it's sorted out. But I'll never say no to something tasty! Chag sameach to you too, friend. i/j/nb/s -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 03:51, 18 March 2022 (UTC) |
Precious
may memories be for a blessing
Thank you for articles such as List of journalists killed during the Russo-Ukrainian War, for your bot and SPI work, for "find me removing things more often than adding them", for paying tribute on your user page in channeled anger, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
You are recipient no.
Discussion
|
---|
|
An assortment of barnstars from Floquenbeam, zzuuzz, Vami_IV, I dream of horses, and others
Defender of the Wiki Barnstar from Pharos, for defending the wiki from Pharos
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | ||
For reverting my accidental buffalo stampede. Thanks for ameliorating the utter state of confusion.Pharos (talk) 00:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC) |
Reply
|
---|
|
Admin's Barnstar from Bagumba
The Admin's Barnstar | |
Thanks for being able to make tough blocks, while maintaining the humility to not do so lightly. —Bagumba (talk) 02:24, 29 May 2022 (UTC) |
Reply
|
---|
|
Admin's Barnstar from Scorpions13256 and The Night Watch
The Admin's Barnstar | |
Stop it. You are literally everywhere. talk) 19:44, 20 July 2022 (UTC) ]
|
Seriously though. I am impressed by the time you dedicate to effectively warn editors violating policies (as opposed to templates), and your work in general.
- I second this. Thank you for your service! talk) 04:38, 21 July 2022 (UTC)]
Reply
|
---|
|
Technical Barnstar from Hawkeye7
The Technical Barnstar | |
For Help:-show classes. Really great work. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:05, 20 September 2022 (UTC) |
Reply
|
---|
|
Selected WikiHate
Vandalism warning from Nosebagbear and whoever whomever whoever most recently edited this page
Hello, I'm Drmies. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Nosebagbear (talk)
- Block me if you must, but you'll never catch my socks!
- (They're very cozy slipper-socks with like a stylized dog face on the top and then little fake ears on the side. Very cozy socks. AND YOU'LL NEVER CATCH THEM!) -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 13:28, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- Hello, people from the future. Confused why your name shows up here? See here. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 05:18, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
Meta-WikiHate against my mother of all people
Re above: by itself, from whomever is correct, if that's the end of the expression, placing 'whomever' in the
- I prefer "whomsoever." --Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:37, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- I appreciate that you dug into the page history to find that I did originally have it right. My lovely mother, who
mI will stress is a published author and editor and taught me everything I know about writing, concedes defeat on the matter, Mathglot. However, for questioning the woman whombrought me into the world, you've still earned a place in the WikiHate section, congratulations or not. (Also thank you.:)
) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 21:33, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Outrageous abuse of power by Tamzin
- I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Tamzin. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed,
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
-- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 02:08, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- Outrageous, Tamzin. I demand you resign your patrollership. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 02:10, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Pinned discussions
- Some of these discussions are collapsed because no one's commented in a while. They're still open discussions, though! If you want to reply to something, just remove the {{cob}} tags around the discussion.
Editing principles (Topic: Neurodivergence)
Initially ran 4 May 2021 to 7 May 2021. Featuring Vaticidalprophet and Elli. Collapsed but still open to new comments.
|
---|
Just noticed the new one. It's an interesting one, and a matter I've thought about how to phrase. I suspect myself a lot of neurotypes odd in the general population are the default baseline on Wikipedia, but there's only so many ways you can say it without sounding like you're insulting someone (and I freely admit I can be less careful and more flippant with my word choice than you often are, certainly when I'm in the ANI peanut gallery). I've noticed there's an unfortunate correlation between editors who freely disclose neurodivergence and editors with significant competence issues, and I've wondered what consequences it has for the project as a whole in terms of interacting with people who are more clearly not working on neurotypical principles than our already high average -- though, of course, many disclosed neurodivergent editors are substantial and obvious assets. Vaticidalprophet 04:01, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
|
Initially ran 26 October 2021 to 30 October 2021. Featuring Hijiri88, Ezlev, Aerin17, and BDD. Collapsed but still open to new comments.
|
---|
Arrgh... it's been a while since I thought about Japanese doesn't use pronouns anywhere nearly as much English, because content that is implied from context (as the referents of pronouns almost always are) is usually omitted: the Japanese for "I ate it" isn't "Watashi-wa sore-o tabeta" (literally "I it ate") but rather "Tabeta yo" ("Ate sentence-terminal-particle") and "I met her" isn't "Watashi-wa kanojo-ni atta" but rather "Atta yo"; "I ate it" or "She ate it" in Japanese would only specify the subject if it were in response to the question "Who ate it?", and even then "she" would necessitate a separate indication of who the girl/woman in question is, such as pointing, which is rude. (Needless to say, the Japanese version of Utada's website doesn't use any pronouns where the English version uses "she" and "her".) I actually recently found out that both the "Japanese words for he and she" that I learned in my beginner Japanese class were recent coinages based on English/French, the "word for he" being a redefined word classical Japanese pronoun that originally referred a person or thing that is far away from both the speaker and the listener, and the "word for she" being the same word, in the classical Japanese equivalent of the genitive case, with the noun "woman" attached after it. This kind of development would not be possible, needless to say, if personal pronouns were as entrenched in the actual Japanese language that people spoke every day as they are in English or French. I suspect this is why "pronouns" aren't really a thing on Japanese Twitter (etc.) like they are in America and Europe: it's my impression that a not-insignificant percentage of American pop-stars have their pronouns listed in their Twitter profile, and this percentage probably skyrockets when one only counts those pop-stars who have stated a gender identity other than cisgender male or female, but with Japanese pop-stars (even those who also hold American citizenship and live in Europe, and "occasionally tweet in English"), the former percentage is probably close to zero and the latter may be higher, but as far as I'm aware Utada is the most prominent case at the moment, and... So yeah, it looks like the Utada case is going to be solved by a consensus of editors based on the fact that sources affiliated with the subject use a particular pronoun pattern, but if more Japanese (etc.) pop stars, voice actors/actresses, live action actors/actresses, video game producers, etc. with anglophone fan-bases and extensive coverage in English-language blogs and "reliable sources" that are little more reliable than blogs, start coming out as non-binary, gender-fluid, etc., a discussion might need to be had about how the MOS passage you quoted applies to such cases. A huge hullabaloo was made about a decade back about whether personal websites (or websites maintained by publicists) should take precedence over academic publications with regard to MOS:JAPAN#Modern names (with reference to whether long vowels should be marked), which I think kinda missed the point there (if we take URLs or copyright information on Japanese-language websites into account, we get people named "Sakaguchi Jun'ichirō" being identified as "Sakaguti Junitiro" just because the webmaster created the URL based primarily on how Japanese text is input on a keyboard).
But I suspect that, when it comes to gender identity, personal/official websites should definitely take precedence over third-party sources that often pass for "reliable" in pop culture articles, no matter how many such sources there are or how recent they are compared to what we assume to be the latest update on the personal/official website. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:27, 26 October 2021 (UTC) BTW, I should thank you for your positive input on the Utada page! :D Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:27, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
|
toki! (Topic: Toki Pona)
mi lukin toki pona. epiku! QoopyQoopy (talk) 01:45, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
- @WP:ENGLISHPLEASE mi pana e sama toki Inli lon toki sina kepeken kipisi {{tooltip}}. sina ken ante a sama toki. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 02:00, 21 November 2021 (UTC)]
- I meant that I saw toki pona on your old signature and I thought it was cool :)
- I am, by the way! Nice to see another toki pona speaker on Wikipedia. QoopyQoopy (talk) 02:03, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
- @QoopyQoopy: Ah. You dropped an "e", then.
;)
Well cool, say hi on the server sometime. I'mwan Tansin—ken tonsi li ken jan
there. Also, if you aren't aware of https://wikipesija.org, check that out! I'm not too active there atm, but it's a fun project, with a long-term goal of getting WMF backing. Which is a long shot, but would be really cool. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 02:11, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
- @QoopyQoopy: Ah. You dropped an "e", then.
RE: Would there be interest in a bot that makes a "watchlist" just for recently-edited pages?
OMG YES! El_C 14:31, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
- -- TNT (talk • she/her) 21:12, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
- I agree. Watching my watchlist gets boring at some hours of the night. wizzito | say hello! 02:45, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
- @El C, TheresNoTime, and Wizzito: Well, currently item 1 on my big-project wiki to-do list is some content work (gasp! I know), and item 2 is the second round of 'zinbot automatic patrol circumstances, which I got consensus for months ago but still haven't run with, but this is item 3. If anyone else would like to take a stab at it (hint, TNT), what I'm thinking of is something like:Thus mine might look like
{{User:'zinbot/Secondary watchlist |source_page = <!-- Watch all pages linked from these pages, emulating Special:RecentChangesLinked for them. Separate by newline. ---> |source_user = <!-- Watch all pages edited by these users in provided timeframe. Separate by newline. --> |user_days_back = <!-- How many days back in a user's contribs to follow. Default: 7. --> |user_edits_back = <!-- How many edits back in a user's contribs to follow. Default: 200. --> <!-- Either of `user_days_back` and `user_edits_back` can be set to None, as long as the other has a value --> |namespace = <!-- Name or number of namespace(s) to watch. Use 0 for mainspace. Separate by commas. Default: All. Prefix with - to mean "everything but" --> <!-- Days back, edits back, and namespace can be overridden per source page or source user, by appending a # and then `days=`, `edits=`, or `namespace=` to the entry. You can also use a `prefix=` parameter. --> |always_watch = <!-- Will be watched even if not covered by the above parameters. E.g. Your own talk page, AN/I, etc. ... --> |never_watch = <!-- Will be ignored even if covered by the above parameters. E.g. your own talk page, AN/I, etc. ... --> |update_frequency = <!-- A number in minutes, or "auto". At "auto", the bot will update as frequently as possible, with the understanding that after each update you are moved to the back of the queue for updates, and the bot only edits once every 10 seconds. --> }}
That would render as {{Special:RecentChangesLinked/{{FULLPAGENAME}}/links}}, while a bot would update the /links subpage in accordance with the{{User:'zinbot/Secondary watchlist |source_page = User:Tamzin/spihelper log User:Tamzin/XfD log User:AnomieBOT/TPERTable <!-- Open TPERs --> Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion # namespace=4 prefix=Redirects_for_discussion/ <!-- Only watch active RfD subpages. --> User:Mz7/SPI case list <!-- Active SPIs --> |source_user = Tamzin 'zin is short for Tamzin |user_days_back = 2 |user_edits_back = None |namespace = -Category, File <!-- I don't really edit these namespaces --> |always_watch = User:Tamzin |never_watch = Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents |update_frequency = auto }}
{{{update_frequency}}}
value.Should be pretty straightforward to set up, when I get around to it. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 03:34, 1 February 2022 (UTC)- "
hint, TNT
"—thank you but no -- TNT (talk • she/her) 03:36, 1 February 2022 (UTC)- Wait, what do I do? You're not my mom/s! El_C 04:56, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
- "
- @El C, TheresNoTime, and Wizzito: Well, currently item 1 on my big-project wiki to-do list is some content work (gasp! I know), and item 2 is the second round of 'zinbot automatic patrol circumstances, which I got consensus for months ago but still haven't run with, but this is item 3. If anyone else would like to take a stab at it (hint, TNT), what I'm thinking of is something like:
- I agree. Watching my watchlist gets boring at some hours of the night. wizzito | say hello! 02:45, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
A mini-project to improve rcat templates
If you're ever looking for a new project, I think it would be very helpful for categorizing redirects if more redirect category templates could take a parameter to define the term the redirect is a modifcation from, for use with redirects that are modifications of other redirects (i.e. are avoided double redirects) and can be used along with the {{
- @Mdewman6: That does seem like a good project. I've got a full plate of technical projects right now, but maybe 1234qwer1234qwer4 wants to take a stab? -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 21:43, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Quick question
Hi, Tamzin! I was rummaging through the NPP archives and stumbled onto this discussion. First, my belated THANK YOU!! Second, please see this redirect which showed up in the NPP queue as a result of: 07:39 · Turtle-bienhoa · ←Blanked the page and then reverted 07:39 · Turtle-bienhoa · Undid revision 1097374915 by Turtle-bienhoa (talk). Is there any way we can get the Bot to recognize that type of activity so that it doesn't remove reviewed status? Best ~ Atsme 💬 📧 14:02, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
RFA
I opposed you at RFA, but after seeing you in action over the last few months, I see my fears were misplaced and I was mistaken. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 21:32, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you, Dennis. You were one of the admins who had the biggest influence on me when I first started editing, so that means a lot to hear. I've enjoyed working with you so far, and in fact can't think of an opposer who I haven't enjoyed working with, which I think says something good about the project. (Although I've been following Liz' advice of doing my best to lose track of who !voted which way... easy enough with 468 participants. There's some people where it's like "Hmm... I remember you were very strong in one direction or the other, but I can't remember which.")By the way, while I have you, I'd been meaning to ask: What makes this one instance of "admin" as plural incorrect? Or was your account compromised for a minute there? You were back to your trademark plural "admin" 2 hours later. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 00:33, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- Even at Wikipediocracy they make fun of me for using "admin" as a singular and a plural. (all in fun) I have no idea why I do that, it is properly "admins" but I have used admin as a plural, incorrectly, and have for years. So I try to catch myself, although I don't take it very serious.
- What I DO take serious is stepping up and saying "I was wrong" when I'm wrong. I think it's important to keep humble, which takes a little effort, being I'm a business owner/alpha type. As an admin, it is important to be able to admit a mistake whether it is pointed out or not, as we are expected to be examples. So yes, I think you've been doing a great job, and my fears, which were sincere at the time, were simply off base and wrong. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 00:44, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
I concur with Dennis Brown. Believe it or not, I actually trust you more than most administrators in the AP2 area. Now that these recordings related to January 6 have come to light, I understand where you are coming from even though I don't agree with you.
- Well, I'd just like to say that I supported you at RfA – but seeing you quietly and discreetly do your job well has been totally off-putting! where are the permabans for the trump supporters? get your act together, tamzin, c'mon...
/ij /nsb :)
theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 07:27, 17 August 2022 (UTC) - @Scorpions13256: The thing I most wish people would get is... Caring about the neutrality of the encyclopedia is a value unto itself. I have my political views, and they're important to me, but I also have my non-political views, and one of those is that furthering Wikipedia's mission is important. I've given a significant portion of my life to this site, and for even longer than that have treated its content with a sort of reverence—the largest reference work humanity has ever created, most of it generally decent, some of it very good, all of it a labor of love. From that perspective, setting aside politics is not just easy, but reflexive. The day Wikipedia articles start reflecting my political views is probably the day that I give up. My political views are about how the world should be. Wikipedia is about how the world is. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 16:58, 6 October 2022 (UTC)]
Janae Kroc
Janae Kroc (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) The pre-transition photo and "other names" seem to be the subject of slow, contentious edits by different people. Some want the names and photo, others don't. I'm not sure what should be displayed here. Would you please take a look at it? Thanks Adakiko (talk) 11:25, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Adakiko: Working my way through old talkpage posts. Hmm. Kinda feels like an "Everyone might be wrong" case. I think SugarBowlSkier2006 was wrong to remove her birth name, given that she refers to herself by that name sometimes. But I think HearthHOTS was wrong to restore the image without discussion, and 216.154.0.102 was right to remove it (although I don't condone their edit summary). But at the same time, the question of including the image is more nuanced than it might be in most cases. Kroc regularly posts pictures of herself pre-transition and is genderfluid, so one shouldn't assume that she'd be uncomfortable with a pre-transition photo in her infobox. (Speaking as another binary-presenting nonbinary person, I often get frustrated with people assuming I have a problem with my birth name or such.) A talkpage discussion about the nuances of that question would seem wise. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 16:46, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Janae has no problem whatsoever with people seeing the Clinton photo, it is featured prominently at https://www.janaekroc.com/about and it was the IP who removed it without discussion - I added it for the first time in June and its was up months before they blanked it with the false accusation of transphobia.
The reason I chose the photograph is because it's US government property, whereas we would need permission from Janae to use any of her more recent photographs. If someone is able to secure that, then we could discuss whether it would be a substitute for the very notable photo of shaking hands with the 90s POTUS. HearthHOTS (talk) 09:22, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Example male and Example female
Hi Tamzin—hope you are doing well. I was wondering if you would be able to update User:Example male and User:Example female to use Special:GlobalPreferences to set their genders, instead of setting them locally? As an irrelevant aside, as I was writing this note, I realized I would ping both accounts. This made me curious: how many pings are they currently sitting at? Anyways, happy editing! HouseBlastertalk 22:51, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Lee Pace
There seems to be a slow edit war on Lee Pace (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Whether Pace identifies as queer or gay. The sources seem to mostly use "gay", but some seem to think he identifies as "queer" talk:Lee Pace#Why was this article tagged under "Gay actors"?. Not sure what to do here, if anything. Source missing? Suggestions? Thanks Adakiko (talk) 20:49, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
Addressing Editor as "Boy"
I agree with your instruction to an editor not to refer to any editor as a boy, and that it is often offensive, and that in the United States it is racially offensive. I had a stray thought. You didn't instruct the editor not to refer to any editor as a girl, because that wasn't the mistake that they had made, but much of what you said would also be true. The details of the offense would be different, which is not much help. We do have editors whom I consider to be overgrown boys (who may have been stuck at 14 or 15 for twenty years), but that is another matter, and
So you don't want images of dancing pixies? Robert McClenon (talk) 07:19, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
- Just being sardonic. Robert McClenon (talk)
- @neurodivergent slant among Wikipedians, which correlates with such sensitivities. phab:T116501 has only been open 7 years, so maybe in another decade... -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 12:13, 11 November 2022 (UTC)]
- @
Pile on
I would like to join the other experienced editors and thank you for the Pipe trick link, as used just now for the first time by me. Thank you, - FlightTime (open channel) 22:43, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
- @FlightTime: I should start a list of all the people it's helped. I'm aware of at least one time that it contributed to me getting a hat somewhere. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 12:22, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
- Again, thank you! Now, the hard part, remembering to use it. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:47, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
Dianna Agron
Is this content on Dianna Agron#Relationships last para in section starting with "Agron's sexuality..." acceptable? It's been there a few months, at least. Thanks! Adakiko (talk) 13:06, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
- @in-text attribution; but I dunno, that might be more a question for the talkpage. Also, "queer" and "personality" shouldn't be wikilinked, but that's maybe less important. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 13:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)]
Nice work...
...at Hurricane Shark! Randy Kryn (talk) 15:43, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
- @SYNTH to, the reliable sources actually do draw! -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 12:27, 11 November 2022 (UTC)]
...and here! —
Great SPI
I've been following a few of these. See https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Mass%C3%A9nat_Emmanuel. Should Global locks be requested in view of cross wiki abuse? 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:48, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- Good call. Global lock(s) requested. In addition, @Do not follow: You might want to take a look at fr:Spécial:Contributions/TOP_MAG_WORLD, fr:Spécial:Contributions/MJ.edit, and fr:Spécial:Contributions/RichardGPierre (cf. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TOP MAG WORLD and block of fr:Spécial:Contributions/Massénat_Emmanuel). -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 00:41, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 11:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
- According to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Mass%C3%A9nat_Emmanuel there is a link with Greatnessdev, which has not so far edited here. Knowing that blocks are intended to be preventative I am wondering what, if any, action here ought to be taken, or whether you might again use your knowledge of the global lock process to consider whether they are appropriate for thsi editor too. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 12:23, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 11:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | |
For going above and beyond in a thankless role behind the scenes. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 11:46, 3 October 2022 (UTC) |
- Thank you, Timtrent.
:)
-- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 12:28, 11 November 2022 (UTC)- I am in awe of SPI folk. While I'm capable of making a report, you all have the determination to get the drains up and deciding if all of our reports have merit. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:42, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Original Barnstar | |
Thank you! talk) 19:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC) ]
|
- @Kioumarsi: Thank you! -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 12:33, 11 November 2022 (UTC)]
Emperor Tomato Ketchup (film)
Hi Tamzin, perhaps the page is still on your watch list after your intervention. Could you take a look at my edit? Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 17:05, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
- @WP:BANREVERT.) Your edit doesn't violate any core policy or guideline, but you probably knew that; if you'd like peer review beyond that, you should talk to others who've edited the article from a content-oriented perspective. Sorry for the slow resonse. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 13:14, 11 November 2022 (UTC)]
diaëresis
Tamzin, i just wanted to say that i like your use of the diaëresis in the word "reüpload", and was wondering why i hadn't seen that spelling before. hilariously, your comment on wp:errors was at one point the 21st result in a google search for that spelling of the word. i'm sorry i didn't mention this earlier; after i archived the aforementioned google query, my browser crashed and then i promptly forgot i had been writing you a message. dying (talk) 05:05, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
- I am curious about the reasoning behind this diaëresis, and if I may adapt its power to my own ends. jp×g 15:12, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
- @Dying: Thanks for archiving the Google search. That's fascinating.
:D
To the both of you: Join us! Join us! Join us! -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 18:59, 16 October 2022 (UTC)- Ωg, that is a great essay! personally, i tend to use the diaëresis whenever i can't decide between using a hyphen or not. it's like choosing the secret third option (the "nonb̈inary option", if you will). i also like using the diaëresis in "diaëresis" because i like accents that use themselves in their names, like the çengel, the ʻokina, and the
caronháček. (i think the accent aigu should have been spelt "accent égu".) your essay has given me some new ideas, and although i believe i have (regrettably) never used the word "tacoÿ" before now (as i don't really know anything tacoÿ besides tacos), i can see the diaëresis being used for similar words, like "gooëy". i am now wondering if someone opposed to a nietzschean goal for humanity could be properly described as antiü̈bermensch. anyway, signed. thanks for writing the essay! dying (talk) 00:25, 1 November 2022 (UTC)- @Dying: My greatest abuse of the diaeresis is for words that are valid compounds. For a time I had a daily routine written out that included both "wakeüp" and "makeüp". -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 13:18, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
- Ωg, that is a great essay! personally, i tend to use the diaëresis whenever i can't decide between using a hyphen or not. it's like choosing the secret third option (the "nonb̈inary option", if you will). i also like using the diaëresis in "diaëresis" because i like accents that use themselves in their names, like the çengel, the ʻokina, and the
- @Dying: Thanks for archiving the Google search. That's fascinating.
TY for the ping. Good close! IMO there's far too much emphasis in the MOS on trying to force a
- @Narky Blert: Yes, erroneous bluelinks remain vexing. I was rather proud of this catch in the wild a few months ago. Makes you think about how many there are lurking like that. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 22:15, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
- Gud catch indeed! I can't remember the details, but I once came across a politician who had played sport professionally over two decades after his death... Narky Blert (talk) 23:30, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Admin's Barnstar from Huldra
The Admin's Barnstar | |
Thanks for being able to make tough blocks, ecpecially for a block you did on 30 October 2022, thanks! — Huldra (talk) 23:43, 3 November 2022 (UTC) |
- @Huldra: I'm going to try to break my streak of not replying to barnstars for three months... Thank you. I genuinely never enjoy indeffing someone who's here to build an encyclopedia, which I do believe that user was. But we've still found no better way at handling long-term conduct issues than escalating blocks, and escalating blocks do, sadly, escalate. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 00:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
A random act of appreciation from a queer person to another.
LilianaUwU (talk / contribs) 09:18, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
I wasn't sure if this was worth noting
Hi, firstly sorry for being a little vague about the original LTA account! This is probably a coincidence but I've notice a new account MMWorldCreators which reminded me of the LTA Worldcreatorfighter (I can't remember the full user name, sorry). I realise this could be a coincidence and you won't be able to tell if it's them unless they edit. Please feel free to delete if this information is useless. Knitsey (talk) 18:10, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach (2018)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
- Comments at the review page. Take care Tamzin. MaxnaCarta (talk) 09:54, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach (2018)
The article Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach (2018) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach (2018) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MaxnaCarta -- MaxnaCarta (talk) 04:02, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
- Ayyyyy, nice job! High five :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 04:06, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
- Tamzin did a great job @Theleekycauldron! MaxnaCarta (talk) 04:14, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
- We can only hope we see more, MaxnaCarta :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 04:15, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
- Indeed! Tamzin, once you have a moment to self congratulate and enjoy your success, please do consider the page rename. Cheers MaxnaCarta (talk) 04:22, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
- We can only hope we see more, MaxnaCarta :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 04:15, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
- Tamzin did a great job @Theleekycauldron! MaxnaCarta (talk) 04:14, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
- Congrats on the GA! — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:42, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
- Wow, I'm finally ready to RfA now!
;)
Seriously though, thank y'all for your kind words. Six months to the day after the article was on DYK; and ten years, a week, and a day after I registered this account. Very nice symmetry. Thank you, MaxnaCarta, for being a great GA reviewer and amicus encyclopediae. I'd enumerate the ways, but res ipsa loquitor. Regarding your comment obiter dictum, ex rel. whether the article should remain sub this nomine, I'll ping you from talk, as any other option would be either in camera or ex parte. Your further thoughts are welcome in re this in rem matter, even as functus officio. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:23, 11 November 2022 (UTC)- In the matter of using Latin terms ad nauseum, respectfully, I dissent. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 06:28, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
- That...required Google translating. Catch you about! MaxnaCarta (talk) 06:43, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
- TIL of {{bcc}}. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 14:06, 11 November 2022 (UTC)]
- In the matter of using Latin terms ad nauseum, respectfully, I dissent. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 06:28, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
Well, I just finished your GA review. Because you have worked so hard, it was not a difficult task. Well done on a great piece of work. I came here to congratulate you and saw the above drama. It also made me recall - we have "interacted" in the sense I opposed your RFA.
I've decided to leave some love for a few reasons.
First, I was inexperienced at voting there and I do not think my vote was quite fair in hindsight. While I remain opposed to what you had said about being open to desysoping Trump supporters (or whatever it was you said, and keep in mind I do not like him either), there was no evidence I had to support a presumption you may be biased in future.
Second, if I were to vote again, I'd support this time.
Third, I liked working with you, even if only briefly. You are nice!
Fourth, you write amazing content, and if that is not a reason to let someone know they are valued on Wikipedia, I do not know what is.
Happy tenth anniversary Tamzin. You are kind, you are doing your best, and that is all anyone can ask.
“When in the evening we are alone with our most existential thoughts, it is then that we come face to face with the most precious truths that we discover in our brief existence in this world. Just before fatigue envelopes us, taking us into sleep. We think of what our lives actually mean. And then we know how lucky we are if we still enjoy consciousness, rationality and love. But the greatest of these is love.” ― Michael Kirby
MaxnaCarta (talk) 04:10, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
- @MOS:CURLY]
:D
-- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 12:10, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
I reverted your change to the RFC prompt
Friendly greetings, I'm posting here to let you know that I reverted your changes to the RFC prompt; arguing that the RFC was malformed is perfectly kosher, but doing so in the prompt itself is not. I hope you understand. Best, DFlhb (talk) 19:53, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
- @DFlhb: adding dedicated options to the RfC, that have explicitly received support from several editors, is allowed even after an RfC has begun. This includes options that call for a procedural and non-prejudicial close of the RfC for cause. Please self-revert this where it hasn't already been reverted by another editor(s). Thanks. Sideswipe9th (talk) 21:03, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
- I asked Silverseren (who also participated in the discussion) for clarification, and he said much the same as you. I now agree with both of you; I didn't know options for procedural closes were allowed in RFC prompts (though I did know that users could simply propose alternative options during the course of discussion). I've now reverted. My most humble apologies to @Tamzin. DFlhb (talk) 21:11, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
- Forgot to tag @Sideswipe9th; tagging just in case. DFlhb (talk) 21:12, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. Don't worry about trying to fix the ping. I've got this page on my watchlist :) Sideswipe9th (talk) 21:13, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
- I asked Silverseren (who also participated in the discussion) for clarification, and he said much the same as you. I now agree with both of you; I didn't know options for procedural closes were allowed in RFC prompts (though I did know that users could simply propose alternative options during the course of discussion). I've now reverted. My most humble apologies to @Tamzin. DFlhb (talk) 21:11, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
A Barnstar for you
EducatedRedneck (talk) 23:19, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Rangeblock question
Hello, just wondering how you figured out that a /16 rangeblock was needed here. Wouldn't a block on 98.46.104.0/21 have been enough? I'm not too familiar with CLCStudent, so I figure I'm missing something here. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 00:48, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Mako001: Well, Bullseye gave the smallest allocated range as the /16. When going with ranges smaller than what's known to be allocated, there's always the question of how meaningful a pattern it is for someone to be in a particular subnet. It does look like this has all been in that /21, but, is there a reason you think that the /21 is meaningful here, or is it just the narrowest range you could find that they were all in? (I may well narrow the block either way, but would like to know if there's something I missed pointing to that /21.) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 00:58, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
- So my logic was this (partly thinking out loud with stuff you likely already know): Based on a look at their contribs, all the CLCStudent RC patrolling was between (not including) 98.46.107.0 and 98.46.112.0, dating back to 2 October. I have noticed that some ISPs seem to let their customers roam about on significantly smaller ranges than the allocations can suggest, sometimes pretty rigidly so. This isn't limited to IPv4, and an RC derper who was supposedly able to move about on a /32 according to allocations, was found to only have access to a /39. My logic was that it was vanishingly unlikely that they were moving about on perhaps 20 or so different addresses on a /16, and yet remaining within a (relatively) tight window of IPs, by random chance, and that there was probably something technically limiting them from going past that, (even if it wasn't immediately apparent what that was).
- I guess an analogy would be to drop balls into a tube and record where they land, but there's a catch. Supposedly the tube is a cylinder, and you aren't able to directly see what shape it is. But, if they are all recorded as landing in a smaller area than you would expect for a cylinder, no matter where they are dropped from, or how many you drop, then you know that the "cylinder" is really a funnel of some kind.
- I rather wish that ISPs would enlighten us a little as to how small the outlets of their funnels are. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 01:28, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Mako001: Good points all around. Switched to the /21 for now; we'll see if it spreads to the rest of the /16. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 01:34, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
Page under constant attack
@Tamzin and Zzuuzz: The John Foster (printer) article which I recently created and is presently being featured in the DYK section is being constantly vandalized. The Rcrunchy account was just created today and went straight to the Foster article and started in with vandalism. Minutes later an IP user hit the page and made more tasteless edits. Another user, or likely the same user, did this to the article. Can either of you look into this, and while you're at it, give the article semi-protection at least. Sorry to keep having to notify you guys, but what else can one do? Best, -- Gwillhickers (talk) 18:33, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
- I see that's been done. If it was an LTA or wider problem then I'd probably mention it, but it looks like a result of just being prominent in the DYK pile. Take comfort that it's being widely read. -- zzuuzz (talk) 18:54, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @Gwillhickers: DatGuy has semi'd; probably all there is to do now. Weird quirk: Sussus Red Sus used an Amongus meme that's in Toki Pona... Never seen my favorite conlang come up in vandalism before. jaki a ('Nasty!'). -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 18:59, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Tamzin and Zzuuzz:, — Thanks to both of you for your prompt reply. Yes, DatGuy was looking out and semi-protected the page, which, however, will expire in only two days. I highly suspect that Rcrunchy is really Awolf58 at it again, as he created an account and went straight to the Foster page, with his usual signature of tasteless vandalism. In any case, Thanks for chiming in and looking out. All the best, -- Gwillhickers (talk) 19:08, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Userboxes
registered rights on the English Wikipedia. (verify ) |
0+ |
This user is one of the 47,331,085 most active English Wikipedians of all time. |
This user has been on Wikipedia for at least 0 days. |
This user has been editing Wikipedia for more than zero years. |
BLOCK | This user has been blocked for cause before, and would like to be again someday. (fulfill) |
This user is a Wikipedia administrator but would like to not be one someday. (fulfill 'crats stewards ) |
Is your userboxes not updating? Shocked at first when I read: "This user has 0+ contributions to Wikipedia." Definitely not true...
- Assuming you can treat 0 in that matter, it feels probably true! CMD (talk) 01:50, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
- @#ifexpr:47000 > 0|true}} returns true.]
:D
(Look closer, all the userboxen in the top section are silly, including the bottom two, each of which is randomized between two silly options each time you purge the page—expanded to the right for your convenience, since it just took me 7 tries (1⁄128!) to get both options for the top one.) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 16:26, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
WP:ANI#RW abuse
Done, thank you. Fragrant Peony (talk) 09:33, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Pickersgill
- Calaisiens shelter from 'Mystery pirate cannonfire', blame Britain
@Pickersgill-Cunliffe: Any news? I can extend the review period for a week, if needed, but it would be good to get the thing sorted before too long. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:23, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Amitchell125: I have been promised wifi by the 23rd. I do not currently have it. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 08:57, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Pickersgill-Cunliffe: - I'll extend your nomination until 1 Dec then.Amitchell125 (talk) 09:01, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- A likely story... -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 09:03, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
Why don't you like being called Tammy?
Is there a personal reason for it? 2607:FEA8:FE10:80D0:19BA:6297:7766:A64 (talk) 02:29, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- Many brave Tamzins died in the Great Tammy Wars. Some find strength in looking back, but I find it easier to forget. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 02:37, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
You’ve got mail
I’ve sent you an email. ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 02:51, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
'zinbot question
Out of curiosity, how often does it run? I just found 4 RFD redirects in the queue, which is rare. I started poking around and the BFRA says "probably every 30 minutes". One redirect was RFDed at 18:55 and I reviewed it 20:49, so it's actually not every 30 minutes, right? MB 04:58, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
- @MB: Thanks for bringing this up. 'zinbot runs 30 minutes after the last run ended, so like, 30 minutes plus 0 to 20 seconds. I can't say for sure what happened in this case, but I'm guessing the issue is on PageTriage's end: Sometimes pages take a while (hours, even) to get added to the queue, and so, while it may look like 'zinbot has missed them, it's really that they were only added to the queue since the last 30-minute cycle. I can't think of any way to verify that that's what happened here, but perhaps, if you see this happen again, don't patrol the page, and see if it's still unpatrolled in 30 minutes? If so, definitely let me know. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:02, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
- OK, I saw one today that was in the queue for about 40 minutes already, and the bot got it on the next run. Whatever was causing the delay yesterday isn't happening today. MB 19:46, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
Thanks for the tips on socks/vandals.
LilianaUwU (talk / contribs) 09:56, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Transitioning as a lede-worthy event
So, I've been working at Kimberly Reed, and I'm wondering whether placing some mention of her transition in the lede is okay, or not okay. One of her most important works deals with her transition, but only as a secondary theme. I feel like saying in the lede "She is a transwoman" is way too much? She was not notable before her transition. Advice appreciated. Valereee (talk) 00:01, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Valereee: I would tend to treat it like any other personal life DUE question. Since the article isn't long enough to merit a multi-paragraph lede that gets into personal life stuff, I think the question would be whether you want to have mini-synopses of her two documentaries in the lede; if so, then mentioning her trans-ness in the context of Prodigal Sons would seem merited. If not, it's probably undue to mention just on its own, in that short of a lede. But just my opinion as to how I'd write it (and I've only written one biography of a trans person); it's not something I'd remove if I saw in the lede as a standalone fact. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 02:32, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you! That's a really helpful way of considering it. I'm not sure brief summaries are really helpful there, as both documentaries have their own articles and are only described briefly in this article, so I'll just leave it out. I just accidentally came in (was looking for Jack Smith (lawyer)'s wife, whom he'd mentioned in an interview had produced Dark Money, got to this article, and thought...nah, we'd be seeing at minimum mentions in right wing media lol), got interested in her backstory, and stayed to clean up (the article was disorganized and had a lot of unsourced content, a lot of stuff that was sort of fancrufty). I want to watch both documentaries, they sound fascinating.
- Thank you again, also, for being willing to be Your Queer Tour Guide.[FBDB] It's very helpful to know there is someone to go to with stupid questions. Valereee (talk) 12:17, 21 November 2022 (UTC)]
64?
Hi Tamzin. I’m confused because the only mention of “64” was by you, I never mentioned a 64, did I? Anythingyouwant (talk) 14:59, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
- @WP:/64 for more information), so when looking at an IPv6's contribs, it's necessary to also look at the rest of their /64's contribs, which can be done by appending /64 to the end of the URL. In this case, the /64's contribs confirmed my suspicion that the IP was Ethiopique (who has long been obsessed with 2000 Mules). -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 15:04, 21 November 2022 (UTC)]
- Okay, thanks for clarifying and for investigating too. I guess the matter is dealt with completely, which is good, much appreciated. Anythingyouwant (talk) 15:06, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Gracias
...and you know why, I think.
Wow
Bravery Barnstar. | ||
I'm going to assume it's bravery, anyway. We'll see if Stephen Harrison will have to write another article. Good luck! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 23:44, 21 November 2022 (UTC) |
- @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: And now for my thoughts on the Arab–Israeli conflict, Kennedy assassination, and Waldorf education... /j -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 11:04, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Waldorf education? did someone tell Statler about it? haaaa ha ha haa... theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 11:34, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
DYK for Atkinson Hyperlegible
On 22 November 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Atkinson Hyperlegible, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that to optimize Atkinson Hyperlegible for visually impaired people, its designers intentionally broke the rule that a typeface should be uniform? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Atkinson Hyperlegible. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Atkinson Hyperlegible), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:03, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Hook update | ||
Your hook reached 14,248 views (593.7 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of November 2022 – nice work! |
theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 04:07, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Congrats Tamzin! I have to wonder how you can make hooks get lots of views... ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 04:14, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Blaze Wolf: A quirky taste in article topics, a former middle school teaching aide's sense of what keeps people engaged, and, of course, a large botnet with spoofed useragents. /j -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 05:32, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
ACE2022
I usually let ACE answers speak for themselves, but I would appreciate it if you could clarify or correct what you have written here: I believe [my block] was consistent with policy as written at the time, and to my knowledge you are the only person to suggest that it wasn't
. I have never commented on the specific block, because I don't know what it is. I have said in general terms that non-functs blocking based on private evidence is (and always has been) against policy, but I am far from the only person to do so: almost everybody in the ARBN thread also said as much, and it was the overwhelming consensus of the subsequent RfC. – Joe (talk) 09:11, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Joe Roe: The block that sparked the Committee's statement—which I've already publicly said was of GBFEE—was not based on any private evidence. Now that this has been clarified, could you please correct the mistaken assumption in your ACE question? Thank you. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 09:29, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- I would be happy to. Which part is incorrect? To clarify, when I said
ArbCom's initial communication about one of your blocks
, I was referring to your own comment at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 49#Special Circumstances Blocks:And, apparently, basically no one has exercised that option on a case that wasn't "highly sensitive" until I did a few weeks ago on a very complex behavioral block, I gather sparking this discussion.
– Joe (talk) 09:40, 23 November 2022 (UTC)- @Joe Roe: The statement
your reaction to ArbCom's initial communication about one of your blocks was apparently that they were wrong and you were right
is incorrect because ArbCom's statement was not in opposition to my block, and indeed not about my block. I invoked a provision of policy. ArbCom subsequently removed that provision. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 09:46, 23 November 2022 (UTC)- Well, we'll have to agree to disagree about that last part. But I didn't know you'd changed your mind about ArbCom's announcement being in response to your block; happy to revise that. Could you please also correct the record about me being
the only person to suggest
something? – Joe (talk) 09:51, 23 November 2022 (UTC)- @Joe Roe: I haven't changed my mind about anything. My policy-compliant block led ArbCom to change the rules on that kind of block. The statement was not framed as a criticism of my decision to make that block or invoke that provision. You are indeed, to my knowledge, the only person to say that it was. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 09:58, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- But I didn't say that Tamzin. I said the statement was
about
one of your blocks – solely because you yourself previously said that that block hadsparked the discussion
. To reiterate, I have never expressed an opinion on whether your block was consistent with policy, because until you just told me now I didn't know what it was. So that part of your answer is simply untrue. Whatever, good luck with the election. – Joe (talk) 10:17, 23 November 2022 (UTC)- @WP:ADMINACCT—which is the only reason I'm pinging you; no response is necessary or desired. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 13:37, 23 November 2022 (UTC)]
- @
- But I didn't say that Tamzin. I said the statement was
- @Joe Roe: I haven't changed my mind about anything. My policy-compliant block led ArbCom to change the rules on that kind of block. The statement was not framed as a criticism of my decision to make that block or invoke that provision. You are indeed, to my knowledge, the only person to say that it was. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 09:58, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Well, we'll have to agree to disagree about that last part. But I didn't know you'd changed your mind about ArbCom's announcement being in response to your block; happy to revise that. Could you please also correct the record about me being
- @Joe Roe: The statement
- I would be happy to. Which part is incorrect? To clarify, when I said
"Marked Frontier Ventures as reviewed"
Hello. I see that you "marked Frontier Ventures as reviewed", but you did not leave a comment on the discussion. What do you mean when you mark this as reviewed if you do not leave a review of the redirect in that discussion? Ghost of Kiev (talk) 17:48, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- @NPP's help is not needed. See Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/'zinbot. Anyways, did you get an Echo notification about this? The bot should be set to not notify. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 12:14, 24 November 2022 (UTC)]
You've got mail!
Message added 18:45, 23 November 2022 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can
Sorry for emailing again, but there was a new development you should probably know about. ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 18:45, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
Cetacean needed
Apropos to absolutely nothing, I just wanted to stop by and say I love your [cetacean needed]. We all need one! :) Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:11, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Of course we all need a cetacean. Otherwise our lives would have no porpoise. Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:35, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- whale I'll be... theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 19:58, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Oh no, what did I start?! Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 20:23, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Do you want to put this thread under seal? Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:35, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- I think we otter consider it. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 20:36, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Nar… well OK then. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 21:44, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- I think we otter consider it. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 20:36, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Do you want to put this thread under seal? Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:35, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Oh no, what did I start?! Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 20:23, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- whale I'll be... theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 19:58, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Admin's Barnstar | |
This year I'm thankful for 12 new admins to add to the admin corps. Thank you for volunteering to take on more responsibilities on the project. We're lucky to have you! Liz Read! Talk! 19:09, 24 November 2022 (UTC) |
A vandal is disrupting the Geography of Bolivia page
Hi Tamzin! How are you? I wanted to inform you that an IP has been vandalizing[1] the Geography of Bolivia page. I quickly reverted the vandalism, but they are still active. Could you please block them? I don't want them to vandalize any other pages. Professor Penguino (talk) 01:10, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- @preventative purpose. Feel free to re-report if they resume editing disruptively. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 01:52, 26 November 2022 (UTC)]
- Sounds good. Professor Penguino (talk) 01:59, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
References
- ^ "Geography of Bolivia", Wikipedia, 2022-11-25, retrieved 2022-11-26
New NeuroSex sock?
Hi Tamzin, Unfortunately, it appears that NeuroSex is back again with a new sock. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Antfightclubcatsup Would an investigation be possible? Thanks. Keyhound (talk) 18:15, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Rev/del?
Does this need rev/del [2] (comment about stepdaughter) at Talk:Musk family. Thanks, Knitsey (talk) 18:41, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I've deleted it. Thanks Knitsey for reporting it.-gadfium 21:09, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Your talk page is semi-protected
Some trolling went on. Cullen328 (talk) 22:46, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
The article BUMD has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
The first one is called BUMdes, not BUMD, the second one is BUMD, just to avoid having the same initialism for two very similar concepts. Removing the first one leaves us only with a redlink which wouldn't help as a redirect (not explained at target), so deletion is the best solution here.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
- @Fram: Thanks. Village-owned enterprise used the abbreviation BUMD when I created the DAB, but I see that's been changed, so, G7'd. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 16:28, 28 November 2022 (UTC)]
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the
The
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
Thank you for standing. After the first question, I found more candidates I could support than seats to be filled, so I asked a second. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:14, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
BLP self-deletion request help
(In advance, apooigies for ambiguities here. I am trying to say as little identifying about the article in question as possible to respect said individual's privacy) A not particularly notable person on whom there is a Wikipedia article requested that the article be deleted. They did so through means that would not themselves work as it doesn't meet an important criterion for deletion in the method they requested, but I was wondering what the best way would be to get this page deleted (also, to I guess validate if the request is actually from the person who it claims to be from). What would you say the best way to proceed here is? TartarTorte 14:39, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- @certain circumstances when an article's subject requests a deletion discussion. On the other hand, deletion is not guaranteed, and doing this runs the risk of a Streisand effect, wherein you draw more attention to an article that might otherwise have been ignored. If you do wish to avail yourself of this option, please email info-enwikimedia.org, if possible from an email address that is verifiably yours, and say that you are requesting deletion of your article. Please say in the email that you consent to your request being shared publicly; by default, all correspondence to that address is covered by a non-disclosure agreement, so we need an explicit waiver. If you'd like me to be the one who takes a look at the email, feel free to include "attn: Tamzin" in the subject line and say I told you to write in.Hope that helps. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 20:26, 30 November 2022 (UTC)]
snicker
They are not currently attributing in compliance with the CC BY-SA, so, they should do that if they don't want to get
Nomination of Vattakara for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Vattakara, 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/Vattakara (2nd nomination) 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) 01:01, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- @SD0001: Seems that if revisions are revdelled, XTools attributes all of their content to the editor behind the next non-revdelled revision? -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 01:04, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Redirects to Persona 3
Just spotted your CSD revert, thanks for the feedback, I'll redact my messaging. Thanks again ♥ ~ Chip🐺 12:31, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- @ChipWolf: No worries.
:)
And apologies for the cross-post. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 12:33, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
Thanks for introducing me to some excellent templates on your userpage :)
– SJ + 16:15, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
XNR of sockpuppet
Hi Tamzin, when nominating a redirect for Rfd I noticed that User talk:Moscowamerican is a XNR to User:Infinitepeace, both of whom it appears are sockpuppets for User:Okip. The XNR seems odd, and there is no sockpuppet notice at User:Moscowamerican. I know you work in this area so thought you would be able to take a look and clean this up rather quickly. Cheers Mdewman6 (talk) 02:54, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Mdewman6: Thanks, redirect removed. @GeneralNotability and Dreamy Jazz: Should SPIhelper overwrite redirects if the blocked user's talkpage is one? -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 03:00, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
FYI
Hi, I noticed you blocked 104.153.242.129 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) for evading a block and mass deleted a number of their pages. Another IP under the same /24 CIDR range (specifically 104.153.242.128/29 range), 104.153.242.132 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), has been mass creating pages, including re-creating some of the ones you've deleted. I came across this while data mining so I'm just letting you know that this user has apparently continued evading their block. Uhai (talk) 18:56, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads-up, CIR-hand/outright-bad-faith-hand). And nuked. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 19:10, 6 December 2022 (UTC)]
Re Re R(F)C that is malformed and misleading
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Thanks for your comment on this. FYI: I did used to operate an account 2014 until earlier this year, and found many parts of wiki were getting quite toxic ala other social media in these day, I have always used IP's both previous to that and subsequently, and always from other locations or devices that were work, borrowed etc. until the recent change as above. I have never had a ban or even a warning and not been involved with any disputes on either side, so this is a first for me. I note GoodDay got involved very quickly, he was one of the user recruited (on his talk page) for the RFC the other was Golbez [[3]]. I cannot find any more canvassed user although I suspect there are more, via DM or pings from the two user mentioned here.
Anyway to the crux of this post, what should I do now? Wait for further admins to ask for details/proof/back-up? Answer some of the errr comments by involved users? Defend my report and actions? I do not want to drag this out or turn this into another another toxic bun-fight, any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. 2404:4408:638C:5E00:E41C:B4B2:FB86:9A61 (talk) 19:11, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
- GoodDay commented on the RfC before[4] I contacted him for help with publicizing the RFC on WikiProject talk pages.[5] Shortly after I created the RFC, Golbez started a discussion about the same topic at Talk:List of governors of Florida. The natural response to that, on that page, was to invite the editor to join the RFC, so as not to have the same discussion in multiple places. A notice about the RFC was similarly posted at Talk:List of United States senators from Nebraska [6], where I had engaged in a discussion with users disagreeing with me. So, to conclude, you are shamelessly lying. Surtsicna (talk) 19:52, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
Outside Connections
Hey Tamzin, you said that I was using multiple accounts, or coordinating editing outside of Wikipedia. I am not using several accounts, but AG5263 is indeed my classmate. I was simply trying to be humorous since he is my friend, and my intent was not vandalism, and I am NOT collaborating with him on editing, and even if I was, what is the issue with that? I'm not trying to be rude, I am simply wondering what I did wrong, and if you could show me. I will not edit AG5263's user page or talk page again with the intent of being humorous anymore, but I may help add to it, but not with a vandalizing or humorous intent. Thank you, Matthew. MasterMatt12 (talk) 22:20, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) @MasterMatt12: Special:Diff/1125907784 certainly looks like vandalism to me. So there's what you did wrong: you called another user a bunch of mean nicknames and moved their talk page. As for User:AG5263, their block log has a big stinking notice to the effect of "the technical logs on this account prove that multiple accounts are being used by one IP/computer/person", and saying the user "is my friend" suggests that either your friend is doing something shady or you're doing something shady. Tamzin was just covering all her bases. casualdejekyll 22:26, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you casualdejekyl, I understand what I did that was wrong and was interpreted as vandalism and I won't do it again, I intended it to be making fun of him and didn't expect this to be as big of a deal as this, but I am wondering why he is blocked, and why they say that his IP address has several accounts?? He has one account, and so do I, the only time I or my friend did things on the same IP address is when we accidentally edited signed out, and why does he have an edit ban on his account? He understood that it was just a mean remark and put a bunch of wikilove on my talk page saying that, and that apparently was considered as using several accounts on an IP address? I'm a bit confused about what is going on right now. And he is my friend, that is why I put the mean messages on his talk page because he would know that it wasn't real and intentional vandalism since he is my friend, and I wouldn't do that if it was some random person because they would probably think I was being serious, and if anyone has an edit ban it should be me, not him. Once again, I am not trying to be rude, I am simply trying to find out what is happening, and how to resolve what is going on.
- Thanks, Matthew. MasterMatt12 (talk) 23:23, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
- @MasterMatt12: Your warning was for inappopriate behavior regarding accounts you're connected to, and it doesn't sound like you dispute that that's what happened, except inasmuch as you dispute that your actions were inappropriate. (They were, and if you do things like that again you will wind up blocked.) If your friend has questions about their block, they can follow the instructions in the block notice they were given. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:39, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- Alright I understand, and I apoligize for my actions, it won't happen again and I hope I can continue contributing here. I have a question though not about my friend, I understand why he was banned, I am wondering why User: DA9523 is blocked since I he is not related to the 4 accounts User: AG5263 has. Thank you, and once again I apoligize. MasterMatt12 (talk) 13:28, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- @MasterMatt12: That account too is welcome to appeal. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 21:07, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
- Well I guess this mess is over, and I don't think User:DA9523 is open to appeal, since he already asked to be unblocked, and the administrators said that he was confirmed to be connected to the other AG5263 accounts and that he can't explain what happened. Thank you anyways. MasterMatt12 (talk) 21:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
- @MasterMatt12: That account too is welcome to appeal. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 21:07, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
- Alright I understand, and I apoligize for my actions, it won't happen again and I hope I can continue contributing here. I have a question though not about my friend, I understand why he was banned, I am wondering why User: DA9523 is blocked since I he is not related to the 4 accounts User: AG5263 has. Thank you, and once again I apoligize. MasterMatt12 (talk) 13:28, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- @MasterMatt12: Your warning was for inappopriate behavior regarding accounts you're connected to, and it doesn't sound like you dispute that that's what happened, except inasmuch as you dispute that your actions were inappropriate. (They were, and if you do things like that again you will wind up blocked.) If your friend has questions about their block, they can follow the instructions in the block notice they were given. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:39, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
You've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can
Welp
Hi Tamzin. I just closed Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 1#Final(?) batch of mainspace archive subpage redirects and found that XFDcloser deleted all the talk pages of these redirects, which, of course, include talk page archives. I usually would take care of it myself, but I'm off back to work shortly and won't be able to look into it for the next few hours. If you're available, could you look into this and restore whatever talk page archive is necessary? I'll clean up everything else when I have the time to do so. ✗plicit 03:58, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Explicit: Think we just bumped into each other halfway through.
:)
-- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:38, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Fuckboy
...and there's this. Drmies (talk) 15:38, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- Alright, we need to get Fuccbois and Fuccboi up for a double DYK! Drmies (talk) 15:50, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Just stumbled across this with no context, but looks like fun! ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 01:21, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- you have my bow. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 01:25, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Just stumbled across this with no context, but looks like fun! ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 01:21, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Your Power, would the latter be up your alley? -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 02:17, 9 December 2022 (UTC)]
- I wasn't tempted to revert but I just saw it and was extremely confused. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 02:19, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- @big, real life workto balance at the moment, so unfortunately I can't do much... to save you folks some trouble though I found some sources y'all can use to further flesh out the article
- https://www.philstar.com/lifestyle/lifestyle-features/2022/09/13/2205560/cinemalaya-widens-horizons-regional-filmmakers
- https://www.pep.ph/guide/movies/148665/best-filipino-movies-2019-a759-20200116-lfrm2
- https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/showbiz/chikaminute/768774/aswang-film-on-war-on-drugs-wins-big-at-2020-famas-awards/story/
- https://pop.inquirer.net/78545/not-your-ordinary-fbois-3-gripping-things-about-the-film
- What did I tell you?"]
📝 "Don't get complacent..." 02:41, 9 December 2022 (UTC)- I'm working on Fuccboi, so if someone wants to take Fuccbois, we could make this a thing :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 03:02, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'll add something to Fuccbois. But the first thing on the list is (talk) 03:42, 9 December 2022 (UTC)]
- I’ll work on Fuccbois. Think I’ve found enough sources to address the GNG concerns. ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 17:23, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- Just made What did I tell you?"]
📝 "Don't get complacent..." 09:23, 10 December 2022 (UTC)- Looks good now :-) (talk) 12:58, 10 December 2022 (UTC)]
- Welp, looks like we did it. Now the only question remaining is how to incorporate them both into a hook. ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 18:55, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Fuccbois won awards and Fuccboi's "bros" and "baes" received praise? (Also, not-it on the QPQs.]
:P
) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 21:01, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
- @
- Welp, looks like we did it. Now the only question remaining is how to incorporate them both into a hook. ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 18:55, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
- Looks good now :-)
- Just made
- I’ll work on Fuccbois. Think I’ve found enough sources to address the GNG concerns. ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 17:23, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'll add something to Fuccbois. But the first thing on the list is
- I'm working on Fuccboi, so if someone wants to take Fuccbois, we could make this a thing :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 03:02, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- Whoa, that's crazy. I can't believe the size of those articles. Here, you can have this one, Template:Did you know nominations/Volodymyr Kozhukhar. Drmies (talk) 21:41, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
WP:STOPIT
WP:3RRREALLY? Girth Summit (blether) 23:56, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Draft:Mi Shebeirach...
...is absolutely fascinating. I didn't know any of this. Your work is appreciated as always. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 04:21, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Ezlev: Neither did I! Nor almost any Jew I've talked to since starting on this. Nor most of the Jews surveyed in the ethnographic study mentioned in the article, apparently. But you know what I noticed while writing it? We have a) no article on LGBT synagogues (and LGBT-affirming denominations in Judaism is a mess) and b) no top-level article on Judaism and LGBT topics! -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 21:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Nice work! Cullen328 (talk) 22:22, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Cullen328: Thanks. I'd had the thought to link to it when posting on your talkpage, and was surprised to see it was a redlink. I'd expected to write a few paragraphs, maybe just barely enough for a DYK, but got drawn in as I learned the whole history of Friedman's version and the queer Jewish community of San Francisco. So, thank you for having indirectly sent me down that fascinating journey. I hope all continues to improve for you and yours, baruch HaShem. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 21:26, 10 December 2022 (UTC)