User talk:Rhododendrites/2019f

WikiCup 2019 November newsletter
The WikiCup is over for another year! Our Champion this year is, who over the course of the competition has amassed 91 featured pictures, including 32 in the final round. Our finalists this year were:


 * 1) with 964 points
 * 2) with 899 points
 * 3) with 817 points
 * 4) with 691 points
 * 5) with 388 points
 * 6) with 146 points
 * 7) with 145 points
 * 8) with 74 points

All those who reached the final will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field. Awards will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!


 * wins the featured article prize, for a total of 7 FAs during the course of the competition.
 * wins the good article prize, for 14 GAs in round 5.
 * wins the featured list prize, for 4 FLs overall.
 * wins the featured picture prize, for 91 FPs overall.
 * wins the topic prize, for 7 articles in good topics in round 2.
 * wins the DYK prize, for 14 did you know articles in round 5.
 * wins the ITN prize, for 7 in the news articles in round 1.
 * wins the reviewer prize, for 56 good article reviews in round 1.

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved much this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.

We have opened a scoring discussion on whether the rules and scoring need adjustment. Please have your say. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2020 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth 14:18, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Category talk:Transportation in the United States by county
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Category talk:Transportation in the United States by county. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Your observation at ANI
Hi again ,

Thank you again for your observation at ANI that ANI is not normally the venue for de-escalation, but the more I thought about WP:ANI and all the ANI drama, I wondered whether we could seriously cut down on the admin noticeboard/incidents and require that, before bringing an editor or an issue to WP:ANI (other than blatant vandalism and obvious sockpuppetry, the editor must use WP:DR instead. Do you think it would be worthwhile for me to bring that proposal to the Village Pump, policy section? If so, do you have any suggestion(s) as to wording of either or both the proposal or rationale that would help to have the proposal achieving consensus in favour of support (i.e., passing)?

Best,

- --Doug Mehus (talk) 20:34, 7 November 2019 (UTC)


 * The administrators' noticeboards are good places for raising behavioral/conduct issues that could not be resolved through other means. ANV for vandalism, AN3 for edit warring, ANI for most everything else other than sock puppetry which is what SPI is for. Importantly, it's not a place that can/should resolve content disputes, which is what a lot of the other DR processes are intended to resolve (3O/DRN/RfC). So if someone is persistently pushing a POV, exhibiting battleground behavior, attacking other users, etc. and doesn't seem to show signs of wanting to change despite discussion, ANI may be able to resolve that behavior. If there's just a strong difference of opinion, that's for the other DR processes. The main exception is arbcom, which is also just for behavior, not content, but for sprawling/intractable/sensitive issues that can't adequately be addressed elsewhere. For all but the most obvious and egregious examples (and sometimes even then, as with vandalism), there's a general expectation that there's been some talk page page activity, warnings, attempts to discuss, etc. before bringing a matter to one of those other processes.
 * So in general, although the relationships between the various noticeboards and DR processes can be messy at times, I think what you probably mean by suggesting people go through DR first is already kind of the case. If you were to bring a matter to ANI without first trying to resolve it through talk pages, etc., or if it's a content dispute, it will likely be closed without action. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 21:38, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , Thanks for your reply! Hey, are you on non-Wikipedia discussion forums (i.e., WP:Discord or WP:IRC)? I always appreciate your replies, and thought it might be good to start building a non-Wikipedia editing buddy list. I don't use IRC, though. Doug Mehus (talk) 23:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm on IRC once in a while (with this username), but when I am it's usually just on in the background or to ask a quick question or to request revdel. Haven't tried Discord yet (or Telegram, or the other newfangled platforms the kids are using these days :) ).
 * BTW it doesn't matter to me, but pinging someone on their talk page doesn't really have a function (a notification is generated anyway, which is the primary function of a ping). &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 00:56, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , LOL, I assumed you were the same age is me—that is mid-twenties to mid-thirties, no? Doug Mehus (talk) 01:37, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: October 2019
About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 09:01, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rojava
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rojava. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process
Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Saturday Nov 16: Wikipedia Asian Month Edit-a-thon @ Metropolitan Museum of Art
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Nov 20: WikiWednesday Salon NYC
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 36
 The Wikipedia Library Books & Bytes

Issue 36, September – October 2019 
 * #1Lib1Ref January 2020
 * #1Lib1Ref 2019 stories and learnings

Read the full newsletter Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!
Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Textus Receptus
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Textus Receptus. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2019
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:24, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

2020 Endorsements
doesn't deleting a bunch of stuff feel a bit unnecessary, i mean Trump's endorsements aren't deleted, so why these people... not to mention i looked on your page, and apparently your a Feminist? so i'm guessing you removed some stuff just so you can protect celebrities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.122.10.206 (talk) 23:24, 1 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Not deleted yet. I started with the democratic lists but don't plan to end there.
 * Basically we had a big discussion to determine what should be included in such lists. It was closed a couple days ago and so is now being implemented. The rule of thumb on these lists moving forward is:
 * Is the person notable (generally, does the person have a Wikipedia article)? If yes then...
 * Is the endorsement covered by a reliable source that's not connected to the endorsee or endorser? If yes then...
 * Is the endorsement clearly an endorsement as covered by that reliable source? If yes then include in the list. Otherwise, it should be removed (from any list of endorsements). You're welcome to do this yourself, but I'd be sure to cite this RfC when doing so. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 23:29, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Um. Went to save the above and saw the last bit you added: apparently your a Feminist? so i'm guessing you removed some stuff just so you can protect celebrities - I have no idea how you're making a connection between my removing endorsements that don't fit the inclusion criteria listed above and being a feminist. No idea what "protect celebrities" means in this case. I'm literally removing all endorsements that don't fit into the above from the lists. See also: WP:AGF. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 23:29, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Ok, maybe i was being a bit harsh... but some of the people i added seemed like they had clear endorsements. like Vincent Waller with Bernie Sanders, or a bunch of WGA members being Warren supporters, so at least i tried giving a bit more info on stuff, also the new rules seem a bit unfair to the people who worked hard and spent a long time with these pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.122.10.206 (talk) 02:38, 2 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I can empathize with that. I think most of us who spend a good amount of time on lists have been in a position of losing a good amount of work because unclear rules became clearer or because the rules changed. It's frustrating, but these consensus-building processes we have are what make Wikipedia able to function. There was a big discussion advertised in many places across the project for more than a month before it was closed and it got overwhelming support for all three of the above criteria. The idea is that while we do lose some information, Wikipedia is better for it in the long run. Granted, you kind of have to know where to look for those discussions to get involved while they're going on. WP:CENT is where the most important discussions happen (or the discussions which affect the most content), and it's where this RfC was listed. You can also learn more about what an RfC is and how it's advertised here: WP:RFC (there are many more RfCs than are posted to CENT). &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 03:50, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Endorsements
Hi Rhododendrites. Now that the RfC has ended, I think it would be a good idea to memorialize the results in a guideline. I'm willing to take a stab at it, but in the meantime, we can create a shortcut to the closed RfC. Variants of WP:ENDORSEMENT have already been claimed. Perhaps something like WP:POLENDORSE or WP:POLIENDORSE. Any ideas? - MrX 🖋 23:34, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I was thinking the same re: shortcut, but figured it may be better to wait until it's archived? No strong opinion there, though. WP:ENDORSERFC is a possibility, too...
 * BTW I've gone through all of the republican and democrat lists now. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 00:01, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * FWIW (for MrX and any other pagewatchers), the endorsement pages could use more watchers. There's already some pushback to implementing the RfC (after all, I am a far-left/far-right POV pusher making arbitrary changes to scrub endorsements of [every] one particular candidate). &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 00:11, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing the cleanup. I will add the Republican endorsement list to my watchlist. We can permalink to the current RfC location for now, then change it when it's archived. WP:ENDORSERFC is as good as anything I can think of at the moment.- MrX 🖋 00:15, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I best recommend a WP:EDN. ミラP 00:19, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , yeah I was also thinking that edit notices would be helpful. Rhododendrites, what do you think? Would it be overkill? - MrX 🖋 03:21, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Does not seem like overkill in this scenario, since it's been demonstrated that people really want to add other kinds of endorsements even after posting the RfC results. I generally don't see a need for an edit notice on list articles unless there are persistent attempts to insert material that an edit notice might prevent. Worth a shot. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 03:31, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

I know i certainly have a problem with these new rules... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.122.10.206 (talk) 02:45, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 04:28, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Superchickens
This is not what I expected. Specifically, that the opposite is the case: even some of the keep comments acknowledge that the topic doesn't exist (or isn't notable). The article now kept is about a "manner of team recruitment," which takes its name from an analogy with the Muir study. It is not an article about the Muir study or about super chickens. What "even the delete commenters acknowledge" exists is the study itself. That's not this article, though. Some people proposed using the content to write about the study (e.g. Levivich, and also mentioned by Lightburst) or merging it into an article on the scientist as some sort of application of their research. That's all well and good, but the "super-chicken model" which is the subject of the article shouldn't be kept as it is. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 16:59, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, we're discussing it over at Talk:Super-chicken_Model. Please join in, your views will be important. I suspect the consensus will be to move the title to Super-chicken study which seems more appropriate. SilkTork (talk) 19:10, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Did you know
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Did you know. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: November 2019
About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 14:04, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Message from Project North Carolina
Hello Fellow North Carolina user,

I have reorganized and updated the content for the WikiProject North Carolina. I hope it is useful to improving collaboration.

User:G._Moore Talk

Antifa Supporters on Wikipedia
can i ask you something, could you report a few users named Arms & Hearts, Aquillon, Tsumiki, Simonm223, Wumbolo, Grayfell, and Doug Weller for their apparent support of far left terrorist group Antifa, which has openly and brutally attacked people who they deem as fascists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.122.10.206 (talk • contribs) 20:40, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Supporting a group or having a political ideology isn't against any rules on Wikipedia. All that matters is that their editing summarizes what reliable sources say. If e.g. the New York Times says "Antifa is bad" and someone edits to say "The New York Times says Antifa is good" then yeah, there would be a problem. Otherwise, people can believe what they want unless it violates Wikipedia policy. See also: WP:NPOV/WP:V. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 01:45, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

actually, thats what they're doing, they're intentionally removing factual information from news sources from the Antifa page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.122.10.206 (talk) 23:01, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Antifa is not a subject I know all that much about. I haven't looked at the article in question, but will say that just because something is factual or reported in a source isn't a guarantee of inclusion either. The consensus-building process determines what's included/omitted, guided by Wikipedia policies and guidelines, factoring in things like the relative quality of sources, due weight, relevance, etc. We do have dispute resolution processes if you would like to pursue them. If you feel someone is violating Wikipedia rules, you can always go to WP:ANI and file a report, but the standard for evidence is pretty high (and it's typically a last resort). Not something I think I can help with in this case. &mdash; Rhododendrites  <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk \\ 21:51, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Dec 18: WikiWednesday Salon NYC
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Cheers

 * So BTW,, is this actually your favorite drink this time of year? Can't say I've heard of it, but I'm intrigued. Ultimately, I think my preference to avoid raw eggs will likely win out, though... &mdash; Rhododendrites  <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk \\ 17:23, 28 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I've tried it a time or three though not for many years now. Like most warm alcohol drinks it goes down easily and one or two is more than enough :-P MarnetteD&#124;Talk 19:29, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Be well at Christmas

 * And on that note, I see that there is no change at Super-chicken Model, though there appears to me to be a consensus for Super-chicken study. Unless you have an objection, I'll move the article to that name either today or tomorrow. SilkTork (talk) 15:53, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#FF4646; background-color:#F6F0F7; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:0.5em 0.5em 0 0.5em; border-radius: 1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);;" class="plainlinks">Happy Holidays text.png Hello Rhododendrites: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers,  D Big X ray ᗙ Happy Holidays!  18:38, 24 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Good luck
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:#fff; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:8px; " class="plainlinks"> 豊かな十年へようこそ/WELCOME TO THE D20s Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune. このミラPはRhododendritesたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます！ フレフレ、みんなの未来！/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE! ミラP 02:45, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 December 2019
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:38, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays text.png
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#1D4E89; background-color:#0f4c81; border-width:2px; text-align:left; color:white; padding:3px; max-width:750px; border-radius: 1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);>

Rhododendrites, Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.

– 2020 is a leap year   – news article. – Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year Send New Year cheer by adding     to user talk pages.

–  North America1000 23:03, 31 December 2019 (UTC)