User talk:NorthBySouthBaranof/Archives/2018/February

New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Hello, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

Backlog update: New Year Backlog Drive results:
 * The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
 * We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!
 * We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update: If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
 * Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

Disambiguation link notification for February 14
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Scott Pruitt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Hill ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Scott_Pruitt check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Scott_Pruitt?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

please stop insulting me
I am not interested in hearing your opinion of my ability (or lack thereof) to understand words correctly. It's one thing to ask me what I think about the meaning of something, but it's another thing altogether to proffer a derisive opinion of me by stating what you think about me as a person in demeaning terms, such as you did here. Please stop. Xerton (talk) 02:49, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
 * It's not an insult to state that you don't know what words mean. It's a suggestion that you learn. When different people come to a similar conclusion through differing processes, that is pretty much the opposite of "groupthink." NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 02:55, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Please understand the following:
 * You are not a linguistic expert
 * Even you were, you are not an expert in assessing the minds of other people
 * But even if you were that too, I am not interested in your opinion of my level of understanding
 * If you want to say that you think I am misusing a word or term, go right ahead, but DO NOT tell me that don't know what a word means. In one instance, I've made a mistake; in the other, I am defective. And that you doubled down by telling me I need to "learn", tells me your message is that I am defective. Thus, I am asking you politely to please keep your personal opinion about me to yourself. Xerton (talk) 03:05, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
 * PS: Please read Groupthink which states Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome. This quote exactly backs up how I use the word; but I did not use it on the page you insulted me on. I said "group", not groupthink, though perhaps I should have. Xerton (talk) 03:08, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know how you feel. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 03:11, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok, let's drop it now. Also, I do see where I said "group-think", so though I feel that my usage was correct there, I do see that I mis-cited myself during this dialog. Xerton (talk) 03:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Simple Request
Hi there,

I recently noticed your comment mentioning me as a "fascist snowflake." As I am sure you are well aware, personal attacks aren't appropriate here. I ask that you do not do so and apologize for the ad hominem.

Cheers!

TorontonianOnlines (talk) 20:28, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Did I trigger you? Can't handle it when someone calls you what you are? Sad! Maybe don't make racist-apologia edits on the encyclopedia and then start ridiculous ANI threads when people call you on your bullshit. I don't apologize to white supremacists and if you have a problem with that, feel free to take it up on ANI. Oh wait . Have a nice day. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 20:40, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm hardly being emotional and you're the one who seems rather upset. You were and are being uncivil and I'm merely pointing out that that sort of behaviour is inappropriate. Thanks. TorontonianOnlines (talk) 22:06, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Doug Wardlow
Not disputing the reliability of SPLC. Their characterization of him does indeed belong in an encyclopedic article, however, their further analysis should not extend out an opinion piece, otherwise every written article would be worthy of Wikipedia entry. SPLC analysis does not belong in the summary section of any wikipedia page, it belongs in the ===views=== section to maintain neutrality of the article. I agree that deletions do not contribute to Wikipedia--neither do contributions without discussion. Per your request, this conversation should be moved to the talk page. Your request, however, should work both ways.

Koncurrentkat (talk) 17:00, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree that there was too much in the lede, and have moved the detailed discussion to his Career section. I’ll discuss further on the Talk page. Thank you. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 17:03, 27 February 2018 (UTC)