Jump to content

User talk:EllenCT/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 < Archive 8    Archive 9   
All Pages:  1 -  2 -  3 -  4 -  5 -  6 -  7 -  8 -  9 -  ... (up to 100)


Archive for 2019


18:29, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

17:54, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Electronic cigarette aerosol and liquid. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:35, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:15, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2019

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:American International Group. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:12, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Electric smoking system. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:45, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Connecticut Invitation

Thank you for your recent contributions to one of Wikipedia's Connecticut-related articles. Given the interest you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining WikiProject Connecticut? We are a group of editors dedicated to improving the overall quality of Wikipedia's Venezuela-related content. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants. Please see our list of open tasks for ideas on where to get started.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page. We look forward to working with you in the future! ―Matthew J. Long -Talk- 07:12, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:13, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:GWR Records

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:GWR Records. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

PolitiScales

Hi, I saw your link to the PolitiScales website. I've never heard of it before and there were a couple of questions that made no sense to me without looking up the term (GMO was one). There were also a couple of typos! Anyway, I did the thing for a bit of fun and came out as "Humanity - Order - Socialism". I've just got to work out what all that means now! Socialism is particularly awkward because, for example, the use of that word in the US is much further to the centre-right than it is where I am in the UK. So, I'm not sure how meaningful the assessment may be but it was a bit of fun. - Sitush (talk) 10:23, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sitush: please post the URL it gave you, I really like the sub-scales. Have you seen Socialism (disambiguation)? I get a slightly higher score on communism than capitalism, and I'm still only a social democrat, not even a democratic socialist. EllenCT (talk) 15:19, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Here you go. Make of it what you will. - Sitush (talk) 15:26, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting, thank you. I love that quiz, it's got four times the dimensions of the scales used by libertarians, and is like night and day compared to the frequently-horseshoed one dimensional left/right mass media lowest common denominator. 😀 For the offense of being so far into punitive justice, I sentence you to update the statistics in the Wrongful execution article. 😀 EllenCT (talk) 15:41, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ha! Again, the UK justice system is very different to that of the US, certainly in terms of the extent of punishment. We're pretty lax by comparison, or so it seems. FWIW, I can't think of a situation where I would support the death penalty, and I knew Britain's last hangman. I can't recall what it was but there was a question, other than that relating to GMOs, which I didn't understand at all and simply clicked on "neutral". I do think it is slanted towards the US in questions and so possibly also in terms of how the algorithm works. - Sitush (talk) 15:52, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, it was not my intention to attack you in the discussion about the banner thing. Like a good few other people, I find RTG extremely difficult to understand but I think they have that impression. It just seems that your proposal involving copyright fees etc is so different to everything else you've said that perhaps you are or were getting frustrated. As for Jimmy Wales, well, he isn't the god many people who frequent his talk page seem to think that he is: there's a long-drawn chat about this at User talk:Iridescent at the moment but, of course, the saga and the criticisms go back for years. Invoking his name gets a lot of people's backs up, means little to those who are indifferent about him, and doesn't usually result in any useful action on his part. That's why someone else appealed earlier for you not to do it. But ultimately it is, of course, up to you. - Sitush (talk) 16:32, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talk to us about talking

Trizek (WMF) 15:08, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:16, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:American International Group. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 February 2019

16:38, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of northernmost items. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:29, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

Information icon Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to White genocide conspiracy theory. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. --Guy Macon (talk) 01:34, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Guy Macon: which specific contribution do you claim was not supported by a reliable source? EllenCT (talk) 01:39, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Guy Macon:, you templated a regular, established editor. Again. I believe I've mentioned thou before. I think it'd be nice if you stopped doing this, as it's a little obnoxious. It's one thing for a new editor who needs to be scolded and taught the basic rules. Between established editors... if you have something to say, say it. If you can't be assed to take an extra 30 seconds to do that, maybe you instead go concentrate on whatever it is that requires your attention to the degree that you're not able to engage in collegial dialogue here. Just saying. Herostratus (talk) 11:22, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  1. There is no policy against templating a regular, established editor. Go ahead and try to get consensus for such a policy. See how far you get.
  2. There is an essay (WP:DTR) advising against it, but there is also another essay that has a far better argument (WP:TTR).
  3. EllenCT isn't a new editor who needs to be scolded and taught the basic rules. EllenCT is a regular, established editor who needs to be scolded and taught the basic rules.
  4. EllenCT's continued WP:IDHT behavior makes it impossible to "engage in collegial dialogue here". I have tried. Dozens of other editors have tried. It is a waste of time.
  5. See Talk:White genocide conspiracy theory, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#White genocide conspiracy theory is unbalanced and Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard#Are these edits to White genocide conspiracy theory original research? where many experienced editors have told EllenCT that they are engaging in Original Research and and pretty much nobody has supported their proposed changes.
  6. Please stop "mentioning" this to me. You are wasting your time. Your opinion is noted. My answer will not change.
  7. Finally, it is generally considered rude to criticize someone on another person's talk page. You should criticize them on their own talk page. In particular, criticizing me on EllenCT's talk page will only encourage them to continue their WP:OR editing. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:37, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I answered you on your talk page. Herostratus (talk) 19:10, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, that's no fun.

The Special Barnstar
It's tough when a suggestion you feel strongly about gets pile-on rejected. It feels like the whole world is against you, and is stupid to boot. But I applaud you for feeling strongly about this Ellen. You should. It speaks well of you. As you can see, it's not going to be possible to take your suggestion, because of the rubric under which we publish. But you have the moral high ground, at least. That's worth a star. Carry on! Herostratus (talk) 11:12, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:43, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

March 2019b

Don't edit other peoples comments. WP:TPOC. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:15, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was genuinely unaware use of the {{interrupt}} template to create inline replies was contrary to policy. EllenCT (talk) 20:20, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Did it ever occur to you to read WP:TPOC when I told you you were violating it?
WP:TPOC says
"Generally, you should not break up another editor's text by interleaving your own replies to individual points; this confuses who said what and obscures the original editor's intent"
and
"You should stop if there is any objection".
That is really quite clear. I do not believe that you did not understand it.
TPOC also has a prominent link to WP:TALKPAGE, which is also crystal clear:
"Add your comment below the last entry in the discussion. If you want to respond to a specific comment, you can place your response directly below it."
In the ANI you filed, veteran administrator Doug Weller wrote: "She is ignoring what a number of editors have told her about basic policy. If she continues with this I think sanctions might be appropriate."[32]
Ideally, you will now respond with something along the lines of "I meant well, but I realize that I screwed up. The next time I get a warning on my talk page I will read the policy/guideline linked to and will follow it. If I think that the warning doesn't apply for whatever reason, I will ask an experienced administrator to confirm that the person who gave me the warning got it wrong."
That's what I would like to see, but your ongoing pattern of behavior leads me to believe that you will not "get it", so I am going to lay out exactly what will happen the next time you violate a policy or guideline.
  • I will warn you once, on your talk page. I will add a direct quote from the policy or guideline that you violated.
  • I will not bother debating or discussing your behavior on your talk page or on any article talk page, because you didn't listen the last five or ten times I did that. I will join the discussion if you ask an honest question about the policy/guideline on a noticeboard.
  • If you violate the policy or guideline again after my warning (including using a revert to reintroduce the violation) I will go directly to WP:ANI with a detailed timeline of what you did and when.
  • The next step is up to the admins. I estimate an 80% chance that the ANI report will result in you being blocked. a 20% chance that you will get one final warning, and less than a 1% chance that the result will be that I did not understand the policy or guideline and should not have given you the warning.
None of this has anything to do with any content dispute. User warnings and ANI reports are for user behavior, not article content. Feel free to keep arguing in favor of the content you prefer, as long as you can do so without violating Wikipedia's policies and guideline.
Now would be a good time for you to dial back the aggression, listen to what you are being told, and try to make peace. Now would be a very bad time to double down on the not listening and fire up your flamethrower. I'm just saying. --Guy Macon (talk) 06:35, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Did it ever occur to you to read WP:TPOC when I told you you were violating it?
I did. I think it would help us if I could understand why you didn't think I was quoting your comments as WP:TPOC instructs when I copied them below their original location with my answers interspersed and replaced your original talk page comments exactly the way they were. That's essentially the way they are now, although they are much more legible with the quotebox templates. I think it would help us bridge an understanding if you can help me see why after I did that, you deleted my responses for a third time. EllenCT (talk) 08:01, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This has already been explained to you multiple times, and I simply do not believe you when you claim that you don't understand such simple rules as "You should stop if there is any objection". I do know this, though; if indeed you are actually incapable of understanding Wikipedia's rules when they are explained clearly, then per WP:CIR you are going to have to stop doing things when you are warned not to do them whether you understand them or not.

Here is a copy of where this was explained to you. Don't expect me to go to this much trouble the next time you feign ignorance. It is your job to figure out what the rules are and follow them.

At 07:55, 19 March 2019 (UTC) You copied my comments to a new section (retaining my signature, making it look as if I had written those words in that section) and interspersed your comments.[33] This was a WP:TPOC violation: "you should not break up another editor's text by interleaving your own replies to individual points".

At 11:08, 19 March 2019 (UTC) I deleted the edited cut and paste of my comment.[34] as I or any other editor am allowed to do when you violate TPOC. In am allowed to delete my comments because they are my comments. I am allowed to delete your interspered editing of my comments because they violate TPOC.

At that time I added the following advice:

Nowhere in TPOC or any other policy is there an exception to the rule against editing other people's comments just because you tacked on a {{tl|interrupt}} template, nor are you allowed to cut and past other people's comments (along with their signature) and edit the cut and pasted version. Please read WP:TPOC and follow Wikipedia's rules.
The usual way that this is handled without a WP:TPOC violation is to use this format:
In the comment above, Larson E. Whipsnade says "the moon is made of green cheese". I disagree. According to[35] the moon is made of Regolith. --~~~~'

At 17:28, 19 March 2019 (UTC) you completely ignored the above advice and once again posted the edited version of my comment.[36] This was another WP:TPOC violation: "You should stop if there is any objection".

I am done playing games with you. Your "I was genuinely unaware" and "I think it would help us if I could understand why" song and dance does not pass the WP:DUCK test.

Violate any Wikipedia policy or guideline that any editor has previously warned you about and I will file a report at ANI requesting that you be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Violate any Wikipedia policy or guideline that you have not been previously warned about and I will post a single warning on your talk page. Pretend that you didn't understand the warning if you want; I will simply ignore you. Feel free to ask someone else.

Violate any Wikipedia policy or guideline after I warn you about and I will file a report at ANI requesting that you be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Please don't fool yourself into thinking that you are the first person to willfully and repeatedly violate Wikipedia policies and guidelines while feigning ignorance or that Wikipedia's administrators will allow such behavior. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:02, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Guy Macon has now shown an example of how you should do that. I hope you will follow that example. Doug Weller talk 16:09, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I read, agreed to, and tried to abide by the WP:TPOC policy back when I put his comments back into their exact initial state. I was trying to ask why he felt justified in continuing to remove my responses to his comments after I had quoted them below their original position. I don't understand why he keeps suggesting I am still trying to defy the policy. Since he is upset by the question, I'll stop asking. EllenCT (talk) 02:31, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:PCCW

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:PCCW. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

/r/The_Donald WGCT content fork

Hey, I noticed you made a few consecutive edits that each added an identical paragraph (starting with "While /r/The_Donald participants generally agree that white genocide is occurring...") to multiple subreddits:

I don't have much to say about the content of the paragraph itself (though I would suggest adding a text attribution for the long quote that constitutes the second paragraph). My concern is mostly that this seems like a WP:CONTENTFORK. What do you think about keeping the full paragraph in one of these articles (probably /r/The_Donald) and abbreviating or removing the copies from the other two articles? Colin M (talk) 19:48, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Colin M: do you think this doesn't qualify as legitimate under WP:RELART? EllenCT (talk) 20:36, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I can see how these three articles (particularly Reddit and /r/The_Donald) would have common information. But I don't think they should all have the same level of detail on this topic (i.e. /r/The_Donald's views on WGCT). My reading of the paragraph is that it's primarily about /r/The_Donald, which is why I think, if it belongs anywhere, it's in the article for that subreddit. The paragraph directly relates to /r/The_Donald, and relates to Reddit only insofar as /r/The_Donald is a part of Reddit. So I think WP:SPINOFF/WP:SS are relevant policies here. As for how much of the content to include in White genocide conspiracy theory, I guess it depends on how prominent /r/The_Donald is among places where WGCT is espoused. I don't have the domain knowledge to comment on that. Though the second half of the paragraph seems to be about the Charlottesville rally rather than WGCT, so I'm doubtful that transplanting the whole paragraph into White genocide conspiracy theory is appropriate. Colin M (talk) 21:30, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy to trim the text in the other two articles, and have done so. EllenCT (talk) 21:37, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, thanks! Colin M (talk) 22:10, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:04, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

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 genetically modified organisms, commercially produced agricultural chemicals and the companies that produce them, broadly construed. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. 

In addition to the discretionary sanctions described above the Arbitration Committee has also imposed a restriction which states that you cannot make more than one revert on the same page in the same 24 hour period on all pages relating to genetically modified organisms, agricultural biotechnology, or agricultural chemicals, broadly construed and subject to certain exemptions.

Kingofaces43 (talk) 19:31, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar!

The Business and Economics Barnstar
I hereby award this barnstar to editor EllenCT for many quality contributions to our economics articles. FeydHuxtable (talk) 18:36, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Long have I been aware of your fine work in economics. I've two GA's in this topic class ( Lord Keynes & Currency war ) yet I'm conscious I've not contributed as much value here as yourself. Just on the issue of bug decline though, there might be something to say for mostly staying out of that. The problematic editor on that topic has a long (possibly uniformly successful) history in getting mainstream scientists sanctioned or at least frustrated. There's a risk that as you seem to have some past dealings with them, they may be able to weaponize it against you. Up to you of course, and there wouldn't be any harm if you made the occaisonal improvement to the article or voiced an opinion or two strictly on the content side. FeydHuxtable (talk) 18:36, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Raiffeisen Zentralbank

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Raiffeisen Zentralbank. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ARCA archived

Your clarification request has been archived at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms#Clarification request: Genetically modified organisms (March 2019). For the Arbitration Committee, Miniapolis 13:34, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 March 2019

16:29, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:24, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Ellen

Those editing restrictions sure are tough, aren't they? Just trying to spread some knowledge and share some information but those darn gatekeepers think they have a monopoly on truth. Don't we trust Wikipedia to auto-moderate? Don't we trust Wikipedians to reach a consensus? Don't we trust our editors to contribute meaningfully and earnestly? Honestly? What happened to assuming good faith? Now everyone with less than X edits is treated like some worthless plebeian or anarchist vandal and left to cry in futility on the talk pages. So much for Being Bold! Anyway, thanks for hearing me out. Have a good one! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SK8RBOI (talkcontribs)

Hm, I haven't looked at what this is probably about since I put up an RFC tag. I guess I better. EllenCT (talk) 02:34, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:00, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rocket Lab

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rocket Lab. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Winged Blades of Godric

Hello, EllenCT. You have new messages at WP:RX.
Message added 05:51, 16 April 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WBGconverse 05:51, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:National Thowheeth Jama'ath#Urgent: Tell Twitter and YouTube to remove these accounts that belong to the perpetrators of the attacks. 2600:1700:BBD0:8050:796A:F7DB:EFDF:F2A6 (talk) 05:16, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:2019 Sri Lanka Easter bombings#Urgent: Tell Twitter and YouTube to remove these accounts that belong to the perpetrators of the attacks. 2600:1700:BBD0:8050:796A:F7DB:EFDF:F2A6 (talk) 05:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19:08, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Motusbank

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Motusbank. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22:27, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 April 2019

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Content from the former 2nd paragraph

The former 2nd paragraph of Special Counsel investigation (2017–2019) can be found at [67]. Javert's version cut over 6KB of text, that's astonishing to me. I'm sure what you added isn't in the body of the article, so do what you will. starship.paint (talk) 02:03, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also reminding you at Mueller Report, I'm pretty sure the bolded parts of the 2nd paragraph in the lede are not in the body. Please fix that, I think I've already pinged you about this multiple times. starship.paint (talk) 02:06, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The report identified links between Trump campaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government,[11] about which several persons connected to the campaign made false statements and obstructed investigations.[12] However, the investigation did not establish that the campaign "coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities", and did not pursue any charges under conspiracy statutes and statutes governing foreign agents, with the exception of Paul Manafort and Rick Gates who were found guilty of criminal offenses stemming from their prior lobbying work for the Ukrainian Party of Regions.[12][13]

16:27, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Juul

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Juul. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

00:48, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bitcoin Cash

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bitcoin Cash. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Electric smoking system. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:33, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2019

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:China–United States trade war. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:24, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

17:06, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your questions

Thanks for your questions re the Fram issue. Just for clarification: "which appears to be factually accurate and does involve threats or stalking": did you miss out a "not" there? Fut.Perf. 19:56, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Future Perfect at Sunrise: yes I certainly did! Thank you! Fixed it. EllenCT (talk) 19:59, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

on democracy

Thank you for On Democracy, including a cover image, for adding quality to articles in the news such as 2019 Sri Lanka Easter bombings, for adding to economics articles based on scientific background, for reflecting arbcom candidates, for commenting the Signpost, for asking specific questions, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:08, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:37, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 14

Newsletter • June 2019

Updates: I've been focusing largely on the development side of things, so we are a lot closer now to being ready to actually start discussing deploying it and testing it out here.

There's just a few things left that need to be resolved:

  • A bunch of language support issues in particular, plus some other release blockers, such as the fact that currently there's no good way to find any hubs people do create.
  • We also probably need some proper documentation and examples up to even reference if we want a meaningful discussion. We have the extension documentation and some test projects, but we probably need a bit more. Also I need to be able to even find the test projects! How can I possibly write reports about this stuff if I can't find any of it?!

Some other stuff that's happened in the meantime:

  • Midpoint report is out for this round of the project, if you want to read in too much detail about all the problems I've been running into.
  • WikiProject Molecular Biology have successfully set up using the old module system that CollaborationKit is intended to replace (eventually), and it even seems to work, so go them. Based on the issues they ran into, it looks like the members signup thing on that system has some of the same problems as we've been unable to resolve in CK, though, which is... interesting. (Need to change the content model to the right thing for the formwizard config to take. Ugh, content models.)

Until next time,

-— Isarra 21:43, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17:29, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Electric smoking system. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The June 2019 Signpost is out!

21:22, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Electric smoking system. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TBAN appeal

Regarding your recent "preliminary" appeal to AN, I'd like to apologise on behalf of the community that it was received as harshly as it was. I think the response was over the top but wasn't around at the time to try to help.

If you want any advice on how to construct an appeal, please email me using the "Email me" link at my user page. I know I was involved in the placing of the ban and if you don't want my advice in an appeal then just ignore me. GoldenRing (talk) 09:08, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GoldenRing, I hope you realize you actually have no right to apologize on behalf of anyone else - but it is kind of you to offer advice on an appeal. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:55, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Fair call, that was badly worded. I was offering sympathy for someone I thought was harshly treated. GoldenRing (talk) 11:02, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair enough. I thought the "preliminary" appeal was misplaced, but I also thought the reaction was a bit harsh. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:04, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all. I really appreciate your kindness. EllenCT (talk) 17:22, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:12, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Goop (company)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Goop (company). Legobot (talk) 04:25, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:29, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of common misconceptions. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

13:07, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Voodoo Doughnut

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Voodoo Doughnut. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21:42, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2019

13:24, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Thanks for creating On Democracy.

User:Doomsdayer520 while reviewing this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:

Thank you for your new article about the book "On Democracy".

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Doomsdayer520}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 20:21, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Cloudflare

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Cloudflare. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18:19, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Signature Bank

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Signature Bank. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:20, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bitcoin Cash

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bitcoin Cash. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Binary relations

Hi! I saw that you placed that template on some pages, but reverted yourself at reflexive relation and transitive relation. I'd just like to ensure you noted that both properties are tacitly required in every line, as noted in the caption. Their all-"" columns are omitted just to save horizontal space. Best regards - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 16:33, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:IHeartRadio Canada

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:IHeartRadio Canada. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 August 2019

09:07, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Being Bold barnstar

The Being Bold Barnstar
I would like to award you the "Being Bold Barnstar"
for your recent contributions to Wikipedia. — Ched (talk) 23:10, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Wittington Investments

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Wittington Investments. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Casting aspersions without evidence

Please go around and add evidentiary links to your “paid editing by Laura Hale” comments. If you don’t have evidence of what you are alleging , please remove the comments. Jehochman Talk 09:47, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I included [130] at the top of the evidence I linked to. EllenCT (talk) 10:39, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Could you be more specific about what paid editing you’re referring to? I think a lot of observers are unclear. Also, if you are satisfied that I restored your comment please say so at ANI so others don’t waste their time troubleshooting a resolved issue. I’m or airplane WiFi. My connectivity may be sporadic today. Jehochman Talk 10:47, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. EllenCT (talk) 10:48, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I just wanted to thank you for everything you've done since this Fram business started. It's rare to find someone with integrity. I think you've been admirable in your determination. Just wanted to let you know that it's appreciated by at least some of us...—Chowbok 13:14, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help. Newyorkbrad for arbitrator! EllenCT (talk) 02:08, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Iraq War

I'm sorry for getting mad at you over the Iraq war in 2013.

CJK (talk) 22:32, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CJK since I can't remember that long ago, I recommend creation of Political Positions of Valerie Plame if you want forgiveness. Not from me -- if I hadn't forgiven you already I'd have probably already remembered you -- but from my best guess at the karmasphere. EllenCT (talk) 02:09, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Calvin Cheng

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Calvin Cheng. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Noah Kraft

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Noah Kraft. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 15

Newsletter • September 2019

A final update, for now:


The third grant-funded round of WikiProject X has been completed. Unfortunately, while this round has not resulted in a deployed product, I am not planning to resume working on the project for the foreseeable future. Please see the final report for more information.

Regards,

-— Isarra 19:23, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 September 2019

16:50, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

15:35, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Honda Ridgeline

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Honda Ridgeline. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

23:33, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Walmart Canada Bank

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Walmart Canada Bank. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

14:29, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Effective altruism. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:13, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2019

Please comment on Talk:IWG plc

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:IWG plc. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:47, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Accountability statistics for Board/C-suite

Re your comment on the ED's talk page: This sounds like a good idea. Why don't you start it on Meta? It could also have some details on where/when the individuals have been responsive to questions, maybe some relevant history and perhaps some general quotes from the WMF about responsiveness to community concerns... (I'm not sure what would be entered for new-ish hires to the C-suite, like Ingersoll, Arville, Merkley, and Keton, who haven't really had an opportunity to demonstrate either responsiveness or non-responsiveness. Maybe just leave it as something like "Unassessed" for a while.) --Yair rand (talk) 15:55, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom questions

When I saw your Q2 I thought "Ouch, that hits the spot". Excellent question, and it's elicited some interesting answers so far (especially Worm's, I think). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:59, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Bitcoin Cash

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bitcoin Cash. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22:03, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Silicon Valley BART extension. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20:16, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:51, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2019 Hong Kong protests. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 November 2019

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Autonomous sensory meridian response, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Lingula and Culmen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:58, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bitcoin Cash

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bitcoin Cash. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16:38, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Grand Canyon University. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

00:16, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

20:05, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 December 2019