User talk:BrownHairedGirl/Archive/Archive 074: Difference between revisions

click here to leave a new message for BrownHairedGirl
BrownHairedGirl's archives
+ Cumulative index

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 my current talk page

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of 210.17.205.105

A tag has been placed on Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of 210.17.205.105 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Qwerfjkltalk 01:03, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of 202.183.151.253

A tag has been placed on Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of 202.183.151.253 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Qwerfjkltalk 01:03, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Zify

A tag has been placed on Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Zify indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Qwerfjkltalk 01:03, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).

Administrator changes

• ComplexRational
• Extraordinary Writ

Stephen

• Andrew Yong
• Dbenbenn
• DESiegel
• GlassCobra
• Joe Decker
• Nancy
• Pathoschild
• StuffOfInterest
• William Pietri
• Wwwwolf
• Xdamr

Interface administrator changes

Nihiltres

CheckUser changes

Moneytrees

• Ivanvector
• SilkTork

Oversighter changes

• GeneralNotability
• Moneytrees

• Guerillero
• SilkTork

Guideline and policy news

• Speedy deletion criterion A5 (transwikied articles) has been repealed following an unopposed proposal.

Arbitration

• Following the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, CaptainEek, GeneralNotability, Guerillero, L235, Moneytrees, Primefac, SilkTork.
• The 2021-22 Discretionary Sanctions Review has concluded with many changes to the discretionary sanctions procedure including a change of the name to "contentious topics". The changes are being implemented over the coming month.
• The arbitration case Stephen has been closed.

Miscellaneous

• Voting for the Sound Logo has closed and the winner is expected to be announced February to April 2023.
• Tech tip: You can view information about IP addresses in a centralised location using bullseye which won the Newcomer award in the recent Coolest Tool Awards.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:08, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy Seventeenth First Edit Day!

Hey, BrownHairedGirl. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 06:39, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Thomas Hibernicus / Thomas of Ireland

Dear bhg, happy New Year et in terra pax hominibus bonae voluntatis from Germany.

Problem: It seems that both above mentioned persons are either identical or the context was mixed, because in both lemmata appear next to similar works as author's reference. As it is a truly Irish question it would be nice if you could help to solve the riddle. Carpediem192931 (talk) 17:55, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@Carpediem192931: I might have a look if you bothered to post links, but I am not going to go on a fishing trip. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:47, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Good morning and a prospective good weekend,

here are the two lemma:

Thomas of Ireland and

Thomas de Hibernia

Please look for 'Manipulus florum' as identical source.

& thank you for the reply. Carpediem192931 (talk) 08:12, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Help with Draft

Hello! I was wondering whether you could help and improve this draft I started? I am very new here!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:George_Jackson_(conductor) Jacksogh1987 (talk) 17:35, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, @Jacksogh1987, but I have no interest in the topic, and no expertise in it. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:49, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Not to worry, and thanks! Jacksogh1987 (talk) 13:39, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey there! you should definitely ask around in the wikiportals linked in the talk page of your article. I'm more then sure that they'll lend a hand to a new editor. Also, welcome to wikipedia! I hope you enjoy your time here! - MountainKemono (talk) 15:20, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2023

• From the team: We heard zoomers liked fortnights: the biweekly Signpost rides again

• Special report: Coverage of 2022 bans reveals editors serving long sentences in Saudi Arabia since 2020

• News and notes: Revised Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines up for vote, WMF counsel departs, generative models under discussion

• In the media: Court orders user data in libel case, Saudi Wikipedia in the crosshairs, Larry Sanger at it again

• Technology report: View it! A new tool for image discovery

• In focus: Busting into Grand Central

• Serendipity: How I bought part of Wikipedia – for less than $100

• Gallery: What is our responsibility when it comes to images?

• Humour: New geologically speedy deletion criteria introduced

• Opinion: Good old days, in which fifth-symbol-lacking lipograms roam'd our librarious litany

• Featured content: Flip your lid

• Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2022

• From the archives: Five, ten, and fifteen years ago

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:YYYY in women's baseball category header

Template:YYYY in women's baseball category header has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:21, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:GetCountryNameFromDemonym

Template:GetCountryNameFromDemonym has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:57, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps Wikipedia:Bot requests#Accelerated Mobile Pages link eradicator needed is something in your wheelhouse

Everyone agrees that "amp" links are a bad thing (see Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 202#Accelerated Mobile Pages links), but automating their removal requires a two-step that you might be able to figure out. Basically, we need a bot that can test to see whether a link with the "amp" component removed works just as well, and if so remove that component. If not, it should check to see whether the Internet Archive has an archived version of the url to switch to. BD2412 T 00:03, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointer, @BD2412. It sounds like a very good idea, but I will leave its implementation to others. That's partly because because the test step is beyond my current toolkit, but also because of a wider disillusionment.

My willingness to devote time to Wikipedia declined massively last September, when the vindictive mediocrities piled on yet again to denounce me for challenging failures to uphold policy. In this madhatter's tea party, there is no concern whatsoever that an admin asserted demonstrable falsehoods with bolded and underlined emphasis because they had not checked their facts, but outrage that someone challenged the folly.

That was about the tenth such pile-on, and I see little point in risking another. There are several possible explanations for this decline in Wikipedia culture, but the result of it all is that intellectual rigour is treated as a grave sin, while unexamined folly is held up as a virtue. I don't want to waste my time challenging this anti-intellectualism, or to face more of the rage of people who think that robust critique of error is a mortal sin, rather than the essential basis of any collaborative intellectual endeavour.

For example the dominant notion is that contributions to discussions should be brief assertions, and that rebuttal with evidence is unwelcome because it is necessarily much more verbose. That principle rigs discussions in favour of glib pile-ons and against rigorous assessment, which is the complete antithesis of everything I have spent four decades of adult life trying to achieve. The venom with which this vindictive anti-intellectualism is upheld makes it dangerous for me to participate much here: I don't want to expose myself to the pile-ons of the vindictive mediocrity who now dominate Wikipedia.

Seventeen years ago, Wikipedia appealed to me as an open venue for intellectual collaboration, but a generation later the balance of talent has shifted markedly. It seems to have deteriorated into a mutual support club for people who have never been through the painful but vital process of relentless intellectual challenge which I learnt in undergraduate tutorials forty years ago, people who are still at the "well tried, kid" stage of being coddled by a teacher with low expectations.

The result has been that since September, my appetite for Wikipedia has largely waned to the point where I have made less than 50 edits in the last two months, instead of my previous average of tens of thousands per month. That loss of appetite may change down the road, but for now every time I think about resuming work on my long to-do list or on bulk maintenance tasks, I decide that my energies are wasted here and that I would be much better doing some solid writing elsewhere, working with people who actually value robust critique.

Bless you for sticking with it.

Best wishes, BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:04, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I appreciate your position, and hope you feel better about things in the future. BD2412 T 00:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, @BD2412, but I think that depends on whether there is a change of culture here, which seems extremely unlikely. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Can I ask if you feel that misogyny is a part of this. I have been an editor for just on 10 years with 1500+ well researched edits and I have had a new page rejected: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:DiJones_Real_Estate The person rejecting the article suggests resources 'for new editors'. The article is about a company started by a (now deceased) female entrepreneur and has a history section dealing with her achievements, most of which were in the 1990's. The basis for the rejection was 'advertisement'. I have created and greatly expanded articles about several male entrepreneurs and their companies with no trouble at all. I feel the same as you at the moment.PinkAechFas (talk) 05:57, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @PinkAechFas

I have just examined Draft:DiJones_Real_Estate and in my view the biggest problem is a failure to meet WP:GNG. There is not enough WP:SIGCOV in WP:Reliable sources to establish notability. As a result the article relies heavily on puffy coverage in sources of dubious quality, and comes across as promotional. It mostly consists of Jones's own claims rather than the assessments of others.

So I agree with @MarcGarver's conclusion, although I place much more emphasis on the lack of of WP:Notability.

As to misogyny, Wikipedia is a male-dominated environment, and in this sexist world that creates a systemic bias against women, both as editors and as encyclopaedic topics. Both of these are well documented by academic research. The problem is exacerbated by a number of factors, such as the fact Wikipedia's cohort of editors is dominated by young people from one country where discussion of these issues is dominated by a frenzied political and media culture, and by that culture's narrow particularly notions of many crucial concepts such as civility and bias.

I have no other experience of MarcGarver's work, so I cannot form any view on whether MarcGarver might have responded more favourably to a promotional draft about a man with problematic notability. All I can say that in this case their assessment was broadly sound, and I too would have rejected this draft.

So I offer you three suggestions:

1. Spend some time studying WP:V, WP:RS and associated guidance. That will help you to make better judgements about whether a topic is suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.
2. Use full citations, per WP:HOWCITE. Your citations lack source, author, publication date and publication place. Those omissions hugely impede assessment by readers and reviewers of the quality of sources.
   (Personally, I would strongly support a rule that such grossly incomplete citations are unacceptable, and in particular that a draft with those flaws should never be promoted)
3. Study WP:Good Article reviews, to see examples of how these issues are handled.

Hope this helps.

Best wishes, BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 08:33, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

You are also assuming I am a man. My user name is not my real name. MarcGarver (talk) 12:00, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@MarcGarver (talk page watcher) You have a userbox referring to yourself as "he", so it is a reasonable assumption. PamD 13:52, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Not true, @MarcGarver.

I made no such assumption. Note that I used gender-neutral pronouns when referring to you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:17, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

My apologies. I actually meant PinkAechFas, not you, was presuming I was male because my reading of their comments implied that I was unhappy with their draft as it was about a female and this might be a result of my bias. MarcGarver (talk) 17:12, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, @MarcGarver. But best to be explicit about who you are replying to, esp when your comment was placed as a reply to me.

As a general point, it's important to recognise that misogyny is not solely confined to males. When a prejudice is well-established in a culture, it becomes normalised and everyone who does not want to be branded as "troublemaker" etc ends up adopting it to some degree.

Sociologist Michael Flood at the University of Wollongong defines misogyny as the hatred of women, and notes:

Though most common in men, misogyny also exists in and is practiced by women against other women or even themselves. Misogyny functions as an ideology or belief system that has accompanied patriarchal, or male-dominated societies for thousands of years and continues to place women in subordinate positions with limited access to power and decision making. […] Aristotle contended that women exist as natural deformities or imperfect males […] Ever since, women in Western cultures have internalised their role as societal scapegoats, influenced in the twenty-first century by multimedia objectification of women with its culturally sanctioned self-loathing and fixations on plastic surgery, anorexia and bulimia.
Flood, Michael (July 18, 2007). International encyclopaedia of men and masculinities. ISBN 978-0-415-33343-6.

Some of the worst misogyny I have ever encountered has been from other women. I have also had numerous instances of reviewing my own conduct or attitudes, and recognising that I too had been following misogynistic norms. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:35, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

That's something I don't think I had considered before, although it doesn't surprise me as I have seen similar things before (e.g., racism directed at a member of a group from other members of the same group). I appreciate you taking the time to teach me something new, it's always welcome. Best, MarcGarver (talk) 12:07, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Category:Women's Olympic soccer players of the United States has been nominated for merging

Category:Women's Olympic soccer players of the United States has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Crowsus (talk) 12:28, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Women in Red in February 2023

Women in Red Feb 2023, Vol 9, Iss 2, Nos 251, 252, 255, 256, 257, 259 Online events: New: Alphabet run O & P | Black women | Justice | Folklore Continuing: Peace and Diplomacy (year-long initiative) | #1day1woman Tip of the month: Explore Wikipedia for all variations of the woman's name (birth name, married name, re-married name, pen name, nickname) Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events. Follow us on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging