User talk:Elinruby/Archives/2022/May

Post your comment again without removing mine at the same time please
See -  GizzyCatBella  🍁  03:24, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Don't be discouraged by POV railroad Moxy - 03:26, 30 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Two maple leaves, but only one in HD! El_C 12:21, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Pantone version vs Wikiproject version :-) Moxy -Maple Leaf (Pantone).svg 15:54, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Some people enjoy distracting others
As your editor-friend: My advice to you is to not respond to an editor who is trying to distract you by making you play fetch and being passive-aggressive. You are a good editor, you volunteer your time, and you work very hard to improve so many articles on here. Those who have no intention of trying to help to make an article better, will be passive-aggressive to intentionally try to distract good editors like you. Don't take the bait. They're not worth it and you know they're not. If I were you, I'd go in and delete that last edit you made. Let them fetch their own stuff. And most off all, they're not the type of person you want on your skin, let alone under your skin. Shake it off, delete, and ignore. Much love & respect, BetsyRMadison (talk) 00:33, 2 May 2022 (UTC)


 * P.S. I've noticed that some editors on this website will be passive-aggressive in order to get another editor sanctioned or banned etc., All the more reason to ignore passive-aggressive editors, ignore their insults, and just focus on what you've volunteered to do here: edit to make articles better. BetsyRMadison (talk) 00:37, 2 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I am fairly certain that's what she is doing. I'm out of this now, don't worry. But she demanded a reply, and she got one. It would have been a mistake to ignore her. She probably has you and I confused btw. She asked me not to ping her, and I am fairly certain I haven't, at least not for several days. So... don't ping her, Remember, it is easier for me to prove I am here to build a wikipedia, since I have been doing it. Elinruby (talk) 00:46, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, I trust your judgement. Over the years, I've noticed the type of person who wants 'control' so bad, they try to silencing others by bullying, lobbing veiled threats, making up fake reason to report them to authorities, etc. are very insecure people. Very sad. BetsyRMadison (talk) 01:29, 2 May 2022 (UTC)i


 * Lol, I did ping her, just before she asked me not to ;) and then I said I didn't remember doing it. Clearly it's time for dinner. :) you may want to look at my attempt to summarize the article down the bottom of the AfD, just to make sure I didn't leave out anything important, but there are two people at the bottom trying to talk some sense, and I remember one of them from elsewhere as pretty sensible. Less is more at this point. Since I asked them to, they may try to put an end to this Elinruby (talk) 02:00, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

You know who's really bad at distracting others, veiling threats and making up fake reasons to be there? Children's magicians! I want you to dig up everything you can on those unsung threats to reality, turn that seedy-looking stub into a Pulitzer-worthy scathing report, print it out, put my name on it, turn it sideways, step on it and have it on every desk of every publishing house there is by Tuesday or you're fired!

Seriously though, I kid, you can have the credit. Or even tell me to take the job and shove it. I have the authority and clout of a grapefruit. And not everyone's cut out to mess with low-level wizards, even if they aren't as dangerous as they appear. But if somebody doesn't expose the racket, somebody else is going to yoink that Pulitzer! Think about it.

Anyway, keep up the good work on whatever it is you do here and thanks for thanking me twice in the Ukrainian disinformation hallway the other day. It's the little things like that that can really brighten a self-deprecating narcissistic colleague's nightshift, you know? I appreciate it, at least. 🎖 InedibleHulk (talk) 11:55, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks I think LOL. Gee there I go again Elinruby (talk) 12:03, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

April 2022
I've just noticed that Boud was able to do his comparable page split in 2-3 hours earlier this week on the 2022 Invasion article. It might be worthwhile to ping him to get some ideas concerning how to move your page split forward after 2-3 days. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:05, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

I am proceeding if slowly. Is there a particular reason for your hurry? I started with a trim for wordiness and am currently verifying the references. If you recall, Boyd didn't want to do this because it would be a lot of work. He is right, unless there is some urgent need to just truncate. FWIW the references do look good so far, but I don't see why I should take that on faith. Elinruby (talk) 00:49, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Sounds ok. The article seems like it may have more activity when Russia starts the second phase of the invasion which news sources are saying is immanent. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:55, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

I get that, though CNN says it will rain in eastern Ukraine and if the Russians are smart they won't take tanks out in the mud. But that is not a factor in my calculations. I just got home and am working on it now. Pacific timezone, if that helps. Elinruby (talk)
 * Nice edits at the Invasion article earlier this morning. Just some final notes on your Media section there, doesn't 3 March come before 11 March in the section, and shouldn't all the page redirects (Main, See also, Further information) all be grouped at the top of the section? I'll try to support whichever way you decide to go on this. ErnestKrause (talk) 17:18, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

I wondered about the redirects. Since they didn’t really annoy me, I left them the way I found them, but sure, I can move them if you like. Ditto chronological order. Elinruby (talk) 19:00, 24 April 2022 (UTC)


 * It looks like its ok to go ahead and start bulking down the Legal section of the article, possibly down to 3-4 paragraphs. That would be something like one paragraph per section, and then pull all the redirects to the top of the section same as for Media when you have time for it. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:17, 10 May 2022 (UTC)


 * OK. I am working on another article but it's currently gridlocked, so I would consider that not only more important, but a welcome change of pace. Possibly tonight, but if not, soon. Elinruby (talk) 01:00, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
 * did a lot of condensing and now need a break. Not finished as there is a lot of overlap with the daughter articles and I haven't been to that well very much yet. But break Elinruby (talk) 12:40, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
 * That's really a useful improvement so far, though health concerns have to come first. After you take a Wikibreak you might feel better. Nice edits. ErnestKrause (talk) 13:56, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

I’ll be back, maybe tonight. It was just that given the article I did it in a lot of fiddly small edits. There is less chance of making a mistake and it’s easier to see what I did that way, and to undo anything that needs to be undone. The thing is, the War crimes article is a powder keg with multiple noticeboard cases, which itself could stand a trimming, so there is a lot of back story to cover before I even touch it much, and the articles on the court cases need to be fleshed out and updated. Most of the linked articles as well. I do have a couple of questions. For example: It does seem to be undisputed that the war is a crime of aggression, and at least one of the references says this is unquestionable, but we also say this in wiki voice, so I am assuming it would be better yet to quote some authority on this? Was this point ever discussed? Also, war crimes and humanitarian war crimes all seem to be different things, but this is a top-level article so I guess definitions should be at a strict minimum that applies to the invasion? But. TL;DR= I don’t think there is much more space to be gained by trimming, and most of the spinning off remains to be done.

One other thing: as to the media section, somebody apparently really feels strongly about the difference in depiction between Ukrainian refugees and Syrians for example. I think this is a very valid point and I can understand some bitterness about it, but it is after all a small part of a small part. I am thinking that the best way to deal with this might be to let it ride for the moment, expand the child article on this point, and maybe add in a redirect before coming back to this? Whoever put it back it probably thinks it got deleted because racism, and didn’t see the spinoff. What do you think? Elinruby (talk) 20:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Both the issues you raise are of varying importance; the war crimes comparsion to crimes against humanity is the more weighty one. For this question, sometimes it comes down to a matter of whether the events take place inside the borders of one country without any war declared, as opposed to being acts committed accross borders when a war is declared. The same crime committed inside of one country (like Rwanda many years ago) would be called crimes against humanity; while the same physical acts of violence committed by soldiers at war would be called war crimes (like Calley in Viet Nam). As you know, Russian is still calling the current invasion a 'special military operation' in the absence of a formal declaration of war, which means that the precise form of accusation against Russia, for example at Bucha, still needs to be resolved.
 * Regarding your second point about the Media section, at present that section still looks ok. Different editors will have different emphasis they wish to place and the current edits still look on the acceptable side of things. Those were good edits you made for these two sections on Media and on the Legal section. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:32, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Go in peace, my child
Don't patronise me, my "child". I'm an old-age pensioner, both my parents are dead, and I have grandchildren. I'd hazard a guess that you are younger than 30 - you seem to lack maturity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrDemeanour (talk • contribs) 1:01, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

I deeply apologize if I came across as patronizing. This was not at all my intention. I was trying to make a joke and put you at ease because you said you felt like a gatecrasher. Obviously I failed, so I am truly sorry. As for my maturity, well. I was very irritated, not with you, and imho had good reason to be. As somebody who has been patronized most of today, I do however regret having apparently done the same to you. Pax? Elinruby (talk) 11:13, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Use proper indentation why replying
Pay attention to how you enter your replies on the discussion pages. As explained in WP:THREAD: ''Comments are indented using one or more initial colons, each colon representing one level of indentation. Each comment should be indented one more level than the comment it replies to'', you often use far more colons than it's needed, it makes the talk page unreadable. If you can pls edit your existing comments, especially on Talk:Ukrainian_Insurgent_Army_war_against_Russian_occupation Marcelus (talk) 07:41, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

RE: Email
Hey. I got your email, but as a general rule, I only disclose my email address to users whom I've pretty much known for years. So I'm afraid for the time being any queries you have for me will need to be limited to on-wiki. But while I can't really respond to specifics from the email, I think I can give you a few more general, non-specific explanations:


 * 1) I am on the record in stating (on multiple occasions) that I think GCB should be TBAN'd from WP:ARBEE. But I also doubt whether you, too, are suited to be editing that topic area.
 * 2) I don't really have time to look into the weeds of this conflict. The bad RM close was just obviously problematic in a rather simple way (i.e. just a normal !vote masquerading as a close; see my notes at WP:AEL). But even if I did have time, I doubt I'd be acting on this dispute single-handedly. I mean, I suppose could, but it would suck (for me). No matter what, they'd bound to be a lot blowback, so I'd rather spread the heat as it were. Thus, I'd probably defer the matter to WP:AE even if I did have time right now for a deep dive.
 * 3) Part of the confusion, I think stems from the role played by WP:APL in contradistinction to ARBEE. While, like WP:BALKANS used to be, it is a subset of ARBEE, whether a subset or running in parallel (as seen in in WP:AA2, WP:KURDS and to a lesser extent WP:ARBIRP), the key point is that it has more stringent requirements. So, to what extent APL comes into effect for this page, would be something I'd also recommend seeking further clarification on at AE or maybe even WP:ARCA.
 * 4) I don't like GCB taking it upon herself to provide arbitration enforcement on the AfD for that page, because she is both an involved editor (the AFD's filer no less) and also not an admin. If anything, I think her striking !vote comments did a dis-service to her own position. I also think it was inappropriate. A note to the closer about WP:500/30 in a way akin to how spa or canvassed are usually expressed (i.e. absent striking) would have sufficed and would have served everyone better (herself included).

That's about all the scattered thoughts I have about this atm. HTH. El_C 12:21, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your thoughts, as there does seem to be a policy issue here which I may or may not fully understand. I am fine with you not disclosing your email; I was merely trying to comply with the please no admin requests on my talk page thing. I agree that there is more here than any one human can deal with. My own frustration stems largely from two issues.
 * The original author is not being allowed to defend her work, which is a serious piece of scholarship, although it appears to have some omissions, perhaps stemming from drafting the article based on Ukrainian sources and only then supplementing it with Russian and Polish sources. I am really not sure, as I haven't yet managed to have a conversation with her. (Gender inferred from name, and may be wrong) If I do ever manage to reach her I will tell her that is it seems to me that the simplest way to remedy this is for her to polish the English in one of her drafts in a different topic area. She has 19k+ global edits, btw. I am not asking for you to do anything about this, just pointing to it as an example of how an implementation of the policy appears on its face to be unfair in practice, in this admittedly edge case. And also reinforcing that this is the reason for my own involvement.
 * The moving-target nature of the various rationales in the prod, RfM, AfD, and NPOV cases make it really hard to discuss, especially when they include outrageous comments like the fact claim that there was no occupation of Ukraine, therefore there was no resistance to it. My previous editing on World War 2 has focused on the Western Front, so I am learning the facts on the fly and can't rely on what I am being told on talk pages.
 * Anyway, thanks for listening and for sharing your thoughts. I may have further questions about this. Would it be OK to ping you here? I promise to no do so excessively, but I am unfamiliar with several of the acronyms and may want to ask you something once I look them up. 21:18, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Hey. Sorry, for the belated response, I seem to have missed your ping. By all means, if you have any further queries or inquiries, feel free to drop me a line. But (big caveat), not about this page, please. It has gone rather off the rails for me, so it's probably best if I were to just refrain from any further anything concerning it. Regards, El_C 18:02, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the copy editing
Thanks for the recent copy edits at a couple Ukraine-related articles! You're good at that. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:27, 21 May 2022 (UTC)