Welcome to Wikipedia, TucanHolmes! Thank you for your contributions. I am HiLo48 and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me
}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! HiLo48 (talk) 03:03, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Talk:Smallpox
Hi, I suggest your read
WP:3RR and explain why you think the discussion should not be collapsed. And note, it was not closed. Graham Beards (talk) 16:16, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply
]
It shouldn't be collapsed, because there is still a productive part of the discussion on whether a FAQ section at the top of the talk page should be added for users offended by the image, to ensure this issue doesn't resurface forever.
So why did you not say this in an edit summary? Graham Beards (talk) 16:23, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I found it to be obvious. Sorry, I should have clarified that. TucanHolmes (talk) 16:32, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It takes two to tango. My apologies for not checking the history and missing your comment.Graham Beards (talk) 16:38, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Talk:Smallpox - survey
I see that you've also searched for unbiased outside opinion on the photo. I appreciate that and I'm more convinced this was a good thing to do as we came to the same conclusion. Thanks! – attomir (talk | contribs) 23:02, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for wrapping up your findings so thoroughly. It would've taken me ages to present my results. TucanHolmes (talk) 10:48, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users
are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review
Happy St. Patrick's Day! I hope your St. Patrick's Day is enjoyable and safe. Hopefully next year there will be more festive celebrations. Best wishes from Los Angeles. // Timothy :: talk
Red Eclipse, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its
grading scheme
to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now
create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation
if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to
Not sure what you mean by your edit summary admonishing me for whatever it was. I copy pasted one sentence from the body of the article into the intro to improve it, as lots of people do, I don't see anything wrong with that, but you remove it and say what I pasted wasn't correct. If it wasn't correct why was it in the body of the article? You make no sense. (Personal attack removed) --Max Loungeroom (talk) 04:47, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
remain civil. I'm sorry if my edit summary was too harsh; the information that you re-included had been removed during a previous copy edit, because it gave too much room to trivial information (note the "too much room", I'm not saying that this info shouldn't be included in the lead at all). The old lead focussed primarily on historical or internal details, and devoted almost no space to the actual structure of the language; compare the lead of English language. The Montevideo Resolution is primarily concerned with UNESCO (and the United Nations as well, but that's not the point); the problem is the way you phrased it: In 1954, the United Nations granted official support to Esperanto as an international auxiliary language in the Montevideo Resolution.—this creates the impression that Esperanto is used as a working language of the UN (which it isn't). I will also adjust the paragraph concerning this topic in the article body. TucanHolmes (talk) 08:51, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
Barnstar
Hi TucanHolmes, this is Staplerhorse here. I loved your work on the Esperanto article, so I'd love to give you this. :)
Thank you very much! That article has some great content in it, it just needs a little attention :). TucanHolmes (talk) 16:30, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Community Sanctions Alert
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in
page-specific restrictions
, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the
I saw your work on articles related to anarchism and wanted to say hello, as I work in the topic area too. If you haven't already, you might want to watch our noticeboard for Wikipedia's coverage of anarchism, which is a great place to ask questions, collaborate, discuss style/structure precedent, and stay informed about content related to anarchism. Take a look for yourself!
Feel free to say hi on my talk page and let me know if these links were helpful (or at least interesting). Hope to see you around. czar 01:41, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users
are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review
Request for applications for position of Wikipedian-at-Large, Aotearoa New Zealand
Kia ora! The Wikimedia Aotearoa New Zealand User Group invites you to read about the call for applications for a Wikipedian-at-Large for Aotearoa New Zealand in 2024. Group members are happy to explain the process and discuss ideas with interested editors.
Invitation to an in-person meetup in Mohua / Golden Bay
Thinking about your summer break? Think about joining other Wikipedians and Wikimedians in Golden Bay / Mohua! Details are on the meetup page. There's heaps of interesting stuff to work on e.g. the oldest extant waka or New Zealand's oldest ongoing legal case. Or you may spend your time taking photos and then upload them.
Golden Bay is hard to get to and the airline flying into Tākaka uses small planes, so we are holding some seats from and to Wellingtonand we are offering attendees a $200 travel subsidy to help with costs.
Be in touch with Schwede66 if this event interests you and you'd like to discuss logistics. Schwede66 09:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Books & Bytes – Issue 59
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 59, September – October 2023
Spotlight: Introducing a repository of anti-disinformation projects
You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as
contentious
. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the
TucanHolmes, in this contentious topic area, repeatedly restoring unsourced content is unacceptable. Please reconsider your approach. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:04, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Any editor could gather this material, just look at the linked articles. It is obvious and easy to find, and my "restoration" is already tagged as needing citations. This is an abuse of policy. TucanHolmes (talk) 16:12, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's actually not true at all. If I go to the linked articles, I have no idea where to look for info on "TERF island" and how each group has contributed to the label. I did some searching for such sources and was not immediately successful. If you think any editor could, please be that editor. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Firefangledfeathers: There seems to be a misunderstanding here. I am operating under the assumption that the material in question is merely supplementary, since the contentious claim you refer to isn't actually present in the text. TucanHolmes (talk) 16:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hm. I don't think of the content you're adding as being supplementary, since it's an entirely new claim that wasn't present in the prior version. I'm not sure what you mean by "contentious claim you refer to isn't actually present in the text". Do you think this discussion is heading into content dispute territory, such that it might be better continued at talk? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:27, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]