|
|archivebox=yes
|maxarchsize=400000}}
== BLP-violating draft ==
Hi! I'm a little torn here (I also admit to being a little intimidated, having seen your name on things like Arbcom decisions as One Who Speaks Sense). While it's certainly nice to see an admin taking care to consider a speedy nomination instead of just hitting delete, I'm concerned that in [[Draft:Denezpi v. United States|this draft]] you then restored completely unsourced information alleging a named person was responsible for (and convicted of) various heinous offences. I've gone ahead and removed every instance of the name from the draft but remain concerned the surname is still in the title, the offending material is still archived in the history, and also by the question of if simply restoring it unedited was really in compliance with [[WP:BLPREVERT]].
Am I wrong? I probably am, to be fair, but something about this feels not in-tune with BLP policy. [[Special:Contributions/78.149.135.163|78.149.135.163]] ([[User talk:78.149.135.163|talk]]) 20:13, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
:Technically some stuff is cited - there are links in the Infobox to case related materials - including the Oral Argument whcih establishes some of the facts, though you are of course correct nothing is cited in-line. I wasn't going to point that out in the decline because the bigger point remains: this is a US Supreme Court case and so if there are negative facts about a BLP, well that's just the way it goes sometimes and for speedy deletion purposes this was not negative enough to justify deletion. Replacing the person's name with other language until better citation can be done in the draft does seem appropriate to me as well. And thanks for the kind words. [[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] ([[User_talk:Barkeep49|talk]]) 20:24, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
::<nods thoughtfully> Thanks for the quick response. If I were a better writer/researcher I might try and source/expand the draft myself, as it strikes me as a reasonably important question of law. Certainly it seems better than the other drafts I found around the same time (now gone but see my deleted contribs for examples). Unfortunately I don't think I'm competent to do it. Thanks for all you do around here. [[Special:Contributions/78.149.135.163|78.149.135.163]] ([[User talk:78.149.135.163|talk]]) 20:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
== Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service ==
[[File:Internet-group-chat.svg|48px|left|alt=|link=]]Your feedback is requested  at [[Talk:Mahatma Gandhi#rfc_E20113F|'''Talk:Mahatma Gandhi''']] and   [[Talk:Anti-Defamation League#rfc_AD503A2|'''Talk:Anti-Defamation League''']] on "Politics, government, and law" request for comments, and  at [[Talk:Imane Khelif#rfc_1443510|'''Talk:Imane Khelif'''  on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment]]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of [[WP:FRS|Feedback Request Service]] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by [[WP:FRS|removing your name]].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by [[User:Yapperbot|Yapperbot]] :) | Is this wrong? Contact [[User talk:Naypta|my bot operator]]. | Sent at 12:32, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
== WikiCup 2024 August newsletter ==
The fourth round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 29 August. Each of the 8 contestants who advanced to Round 4 scored at least 472 points, and the following contestants scored more than 700 points:
* {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant15|Generalissima}} with 1,150 points, mostly from 3 [[WP:FA|featured article]]s, 2 [[WP:FL|featured lists]], 7 [[WP:GA|good articles]], and 13 [[WP:DYK|did you know]] nominations;
* {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant15|Arconning}} with 791 points, mostly from 2 featured lists, 8 good articles, 4 did you know nominations, and plenty of reviews;
* {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant15|AirshipJungleman29}} with 718 points, mostly from a high-multiplier featured article on [[Genghis Khan]] and 2 good articles; and
* {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant15|BennyOnTheLoose}} with 714 points, mostly from 1 featured article on [[Susanna Hoffs]], 2 featured lists, and 3 good articles.
Congratulations to our eight finalists and all who participated. Contestants put in extraordinary amounts of effort during this round, and their scores can be seen [[Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2024/Round 4|here]]. So far this year, competitors have gotten 36 featured articles, 55 featured lists, 15 good articles, 93 [[WP:ITN|in the news]] credits, and at least 333 [[WP:DYK|did you know]] credits. They have conducted 357 featured content reviews, as well as 553 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 30 articles to [[Wikipedia:featured topics|featured topics]] and [[Wikipedia:good topics|good topics]].
Any content promoted after 29 August but before the start of Round 5 can be claimed during Round 5, which starts on 1 September at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. If two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether for a good article, featured content, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on [[Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed]]. Remember to claim your points within 14 days of earning them, and importantly, before the deadline on 31 October.
If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see [[Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring|this page]]. Further questions are welcome on [[Wikipedia talk:WikiCup]] and the judges ({{User|Cwmhiraeth}}, {{User|Epicgenius}}, and {{User|Frostly}}) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! <small>If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from [[Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send]].</small> [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 03:11, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Epicgenius@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send&oldid=1241501495 -->
== Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment ==
[[File:Internet-group-chat.svg|48px|left|alt=|link=]]Your feedback is requested  at [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2024#rfc_C10B5F7|'''Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2024'''  on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment]]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of [[WP:FRS|Feedback Request Service]] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by [[WP:FRS|removing your name]].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by [[User:Yapperbot|Yapperbot]] :) | Is this wrong? Contact [[User talk:Naypta|my bot operator]]. | Sent at 02:32, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
== Administrators' newsletter – September 2024 ==
:@[[User:Colin|Colin]] you could delete that and make a new link you use in your response. [[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] ([[User_talk:Barkeep49|talk]]) 19:10, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
Thank you Barkeep, [[User:ScottishFinnishRadish|ScottishFinnishRadish]], [[User:Valereee|Valereee]] and [[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] for considering my case as fairly as you can. I can only conclude that all four of you must have been terrible people in a previous life, and brought back to spend your evenings moderating the bickering of folk on the internet. -- [[User:Colin|Colin]]°[[User talk:Colin|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 21:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
:Thanks for closing, I did think we had a consensus for a general reminder re: AGF though. [[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] ([[User talk:Vanamonde93|talk]]) 21:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
::@[[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] Did we? You and I agreed, SFR was ambivalent to negative and Valereee didn't really comment on it. I'm obviously not opposed but I'm not sure it was there. [[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] ([[User_talk:Barkeep49|talk]]) 21:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
:::I guess I see [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=1245936683&diff=1245948753 this] as assent, but we can just ask {{U|ScottishFinnishRadish|him}}. [[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] ([[User talk:Vanamonde93|talk]]) 22:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
::::I'm pretty ambivalent. I don't think it does much, but I didn't want to hold up a possible consensus. [[User:ScottishFinnishRadish|ScottishFinnishRadish]] ([[User talk:ScottishFinnishRadish|talk]]) 23:13, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
:::::@[[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] if you want to amend a statement to my close please do so. [[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] ([[User_talk:Barkeep49|talk]]) 00:15, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
::::::Thank you, I will make a minimal amendment. [[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] ([[User talk:Vanamonde93|talk]]) 00:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
== AE, travel ==
::::::::::"Without a clear demonstration of what exactly the problem is"? The allegations were very clear in identifying what the problem is. [[User:IOHANNVSVERVS|IOHANNVSVERVS]] ([[User talk:IOHANNVSVERVS|talk]]) 20:22, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::Sorry for missing that question earlier. I wish there was a good tutorial for learning about AE. The rules and procedures are written in the box labeled "Important information". But how to write effective AE reports is something that doesn't exist as far as I know. However, most of the advice on how to write an effective [[Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Party_Guide/Case_request#Making_a_statement_at_a_case_request|ArbCom statement]] would also apply to AE. [[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] ([[User_talk:Barkeep49|talk]]) 23:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
:Very clear evidence was presented that user x was misrepresenting the source you provided and which he and user y repeatedly reverted. His claim that the variant on the [https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/cleft-sentences-it-was-in-june-we-got-married wh-cleft structure] "What happened in 1948" was vague was shown to be false as it was clearly defined in the source as "massacres and expulsions at gunpoint" "which led to over 80 per cent of the Palestinian population being violently forced to flee". What BK49 seems not to want to say is that it is easier for AE admins to treat AE as though it were WP:AN3 where simple revert-counting is normally addressed. I too was sorry to see that the complaint was not treated seriously, as the evidence presented was very clear and in the context of a larger complaint it will likely be successfully muddied. While someone could reinitiate the same case with exactly the same evidence, mentioning both user x and user y, it would have been much simpler to give a 1RR warning without unilaterallyfalsely claiming that you were unilaterally edit-warring when there were {{purple|three}} people involved, counting user x (who made claims on the talk page) and user y (who did not).-- [[User:SashiRolls | SashiRolls]] <sup>[[User_talk:SashiRolls | 🌿 ]] · [[Special:Contributions/SashiRolls| 🍥]]</sup> 21:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
::The reason I haven't said {{tqq|What BK49 seems not to want to say is that it is easier for AE admins to treat AE as though it were WP:AN3 where simple revert-counting is normally addressed}} is because I don't think it's true. Instead I think {{tqq|The ask for a separate report is showing it's being taken seriously. Rather than nothing happening because it is buried as a small part of a large discussion of which it is not the focus, its own report means that conduct would be the focus.}} [[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] ([[User_talk:Barkeep49|talk]]) 15:37, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
== Just making sure ==
|