User talk:Valereee/Archive 2

Chris McDermott
The information is listed on the page, in the Information Box, in the top right hand corner of the page. SportsEditor518 (talk) 07:26, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks,, and I see that most of the information is there, but it isn't as detailed -- the sections mentioned a couple of years he didn't play for that first team. Plus you removed the reflist template. valereee (talk) 11:32, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

I've noticed that some years are listed when he didn't play for that club. A way to fix that is just to put the other years he played for the club under the years 1981-1990, which is done on many Wikipedia sport pages. I've seen that the stat that he Captain-Coached a team is not there, I'll added it. Other than that all of the other information and honours he has are listed accurately in the Career Highlights section. The current formula is the formula used in nearly every Australian rules footballer's Wikipedia page. It accurately describes all of the information, and I think we should follow that tradition.SportsEditor518 (talk) 12:47, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Also removing the references section was an oversight, I'll be happy for it to be put back.SportsEditor518 (talk) 12:55, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * No objections, with those changes. Thanks!  valereee (talk) 12:56, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Yeah he got replaced on a radio station by Mark Bickley. I've found a reference for it, I'll add it. The SANFL Player Retention Scheme was a scheme set up by the South Australian National Football League in the 1980's to stop it's best players from leaving the league to play in the Victorian Football League, which became the Australian Football League. The reason for this was the VFL in the 1980's started expanding into a national competition, and the SANFL didn't want to lose it's best players. I also have a reference for him being chased by Carlton.

The phrase he chose to stay loyal, means he chose to stay in the SANFL, therefore being loyal. I'm not sure what reap the rewards mean, but I have a reference for both of those statements. He was called Bone because he had his Nose broken several times playing Football, and therefore it was in a unfortunate state. I have a reference for both of those statements.

I also have a reference for the phrase life after Football and the statement that goes with it. I'll add all of those references.

I'm open to discussions about re styling the article to make it more in a encyclopedia tone. But I do think all of the information accurately describes his career, and parts of his life, and should be in the article in some form.SportsEditor518 (talk) 04:30, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

User:Valereee/Disappearance of Brogan Dulle
Hi, I have undeleted this article as requested, and moved it into your user space on top of your older draft. – Fayenatic  L ondon 16:54, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * thanks so much! valereee (talk) 16:58, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Now that you have re-used the material and blanked that user page, shall I delete the user page? The material will always now be accessible in the history of the Social media article. – Fayenatic  L ondon 19:53, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * That would be great -- is there a better way for me to do that besides just blanking the page, or does it require an admin to do it for me? valereee (talk) 20:09, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, only admins can do it, but if you have any others like that you could add db-author.
 * Lists: Special:PrefixIndex/User:Valereee/, Special:PrefixIndex/User talk:Valereee/. – Fayenatic  L ondon 20:13, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Gah! I have indeed seen that before -- sorry!  :D  valereee (talk) 20:24, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cincinnati chili
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cincinnati chili you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Calvin999 -- Calvin999 (talk) 09:20, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Cincinnati chili/GA1
Just to let you know that I have completed my review. — Calvin999 10:59, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cincinnati chili
The article Cincinnati chili you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Cincinnati chili for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Calvin999 -- Calvin999 (talk) 11:20, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cincinnati chili
The article Cincinnati chili you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cincinnati chili for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Calvin999 -- Calvin999 (talk) 15:21, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
Hi Valereee. You may want to consider removing all of the symbols with the question marks at the DYK nom page. Despite apparently being approved, the errors will likely hold up the nomination from being promoted, because people may skim by it assuming there are problems, when there are not. North America1000 06:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Northamerica1000 -- I tried striking it through but that looked even worse, so I finally just removed it with a note saying why I'd removed it. valereee (talk) 11:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Putting GA reviews on hold
Valereee, I noticed that you edited the WP:GAN page directly, attempting to put Traci Lords: Underneath It All on hold. Since the page is controlled by a bot and refreshed every 20 minutes, the "on hold" has since disappeared.

The instructions on how to put nominations on hold are on the GAN instructions page, which also includes reviewer instructions for passing, failing, and everything else, along with instructions on how to nominate articles. You'll want to look over that section; it has a lot of useful information. I always take a look at it to remind myself of what to do, and in the case of passing and failing, to copy and paste the templates needed.

I have fixed it for you this time: basically, you go to the article talk page and change the GA nominee status field so it reads "onhold". The bot picks up the change, usually within 20 minutes. Thanks for taking on the review! BlueMoonset (talk) 15:49, 30 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Gah! Sorry, and thanks!  New to this!  valereee (talk) 15:54, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Cincinnati chili
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Teens vs. adults re-earning trust after a period of bad behavior
Re: "Once an adult person has done something at all shifty I can never trust them again; certainly three years after the most recent bad behavior of, say, a 40-year-old would not convince me they had changed."

I have good news: Adults who do bad things can and do change.

I've known a number of people who have done some pretty bad things as adults. Some of them have, in 12-step terms, "hit bottom" or "had a wake-up call" and, with a lot of help, a lot of determination, a lot of work, and a lot of time, done a complete 180 in their behavior that actually "stuck." Yes, it takes a few years after the turn-around before others will be convinced its both genuine and permanent, but I would invite you to consider that people you may know who have several years of living responsibly after a period of irresponsible living may be trustworthy individuals.

A disclaimer: I'm being a bit selfish in asking this of you: I am one of those people who is in that long period of hard work:  A few years ago I was living irresponsibly. Some of that behavior spilled over to Wikipedia. While I've come a long way, I am not living as responsible a life as I want to or know that I need to. I hope that 5 or 10 years after I am consistently living a responsible life, nobody who knew my past will have any reason to view me as untrustworthy merely because of my past behavior.

By the way, your main point about teenagers being a lot faster to change their attitudes and behavior is very well taken. A 14 year old with anti-social behavior who changes his behavior by age 15 may be trustworthy in my eyes by age 16. A 30 year old with the same behavior who changes his behavior a year later may take 2 or 3 years before I would trust that he has completely and permanently changed. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)  03:51, 13 October 2015 (UTC)


 * point well taken -- yes, I do know people can actually change, and I'm glad you've made a conscious decision to do so, and I hope the people around you who may have been affected by your previous choices are indeed willing and able to give you their trust back. My concern re: Wikipedia is that because it's a basically anonymous place -- we can know a person's history, but we very seldom actually know the person face-fo-face -- it may be a lot harder to notice if a person starts doing shifty things again.  It's easier to hide; all you have to do is log out and the likelihood is you won't be caught behaving badly unless someone gets suspicious and decides to try to connect your login persona with your IP.  Which unless that person has certain tools means a ton of work, because they have to convince convince someone who does have those tools.  In real life, when, say, a problem drinker starts drinking again, the drinking and resultant bad behavior can't be done by an alternate persona.  I should instead have said that in an anonymous environment, I'm less likely to trust someone who has behaved badly before.

Your question
A partial answer can be found at WP:SPCU. For more details, you can ask questions at Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations. I didn't close the SPI, meaning that a clerk will come along and evaluate the evidence, taking into account my technical finding. My guess is it will be closed with no action, but that's not a call I care to make.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:46, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Olga Ravn
Hi Valereee. I really don't know how this article deletion thing works as I can't remember being involved in anything like this before. If you take a new look at Olga Ravn, I think you'll see that it has been significantly improved with a number of additional citations. Is there a special procedure for having the template removed or are you able to do that yourself? Whatever the real problem of notability, I can see that your selection of this article for possible deletion has certainly had a positive effect on its development. Thanks for your interest. If you would like to become more closely involved in this area of development, you might be interested in seeing what we're doing at Women in Red.--Ipigott (talk) 13:05, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, -- someone will close it soon, as it's gotten all Keeps!  Including one from me -- I agree, the AfD totally turned it into a good article!  valereee (talk) 15:07, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I see the tag has been deleted - so we've achieved our objective. If you can write articles like Valerie Taylor (novelist) or Jean-Robert de Cavel, then you could help out with women architects too. Pick someone interesting from WikiProject Women/Women in Red/Women in architecture and make a start.--Ipigott (talk) 15:26, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

PC
Hi, I'm contacting you because you made a point about the pejorative use. Pinc/Aqu is trying to forcibly remove "ordinarily" from the article. Without that it simply reads pejorative. It would help if you were to simply create a new talk section where you clearly voice your opinion on whether you want ordinarily removed or not and whether you strongly oppose and support something. You don't have to do anything after that. I'll handle any further arguments in the section. --Mr. Magoo and McBarker (talk) 02:14, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

I've also mentioned about replacing it with "commonly." What do you think? You could talk about this suggestion as well. --Mr. Magoo and McBarker (talk) 02:30, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, I guess we're "voting" on it now. If you're interested, please visit the talk page. --Mr. Magoo and McBarker (talk) 23:09, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

TAFI talk

 * Hello :


 * You are invited to participate in this discussion at the TAFI talk page regarding improving the automation of project processes and management of the project. Your input is appreciated.

Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on

November 2015 newsletter
– Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on 23:45, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Help needed at DRN
You are receiving this message because you are signed up as a volunteer at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. We have a number of pending requests which need a volunteer to address them. Unless you are an inexperienced volunteer who is currently just watching DRN to learn our processes, please take a case. If you do not see yourself taking cases in the foreseeable future, please remove yourself from the volunteer list so that we can have a better idea of the size of our pool of volunteers; if you do see yourself taking cases, please watchlist the DRN page and keep an eye out to see if there are cases which are ready for a volunteer. We have recently had to refuse a number of cases because they were listed for days with no volunteer willing to take them, despite there being almost 150 volunteers listed on the volunteer page. Regards, (Current DRN coordinator) (Not watching this page) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:48, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Bot automation at Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement
 Greetings WikiProject TAFI members!

Over the past two weeks, there has been extensive discussion on introducing bot automation to assist with maintenance of the Today's Articles for Improvement project. A bot has now been approved for trial and will carry out the weekly duties. The bots first run will occur around 00:00, 22 November 2015 (UTC) (midnight on Sunday).

If you have been assisting any of the weekly maintenance tasks, please refrain from doing so this week. The bot needs to be tested and proven it can do the job, and it only gets one chance per week. The tasks will include:
 * Adding the new scheduled article to Wikipedia talk:Today's articles for improvement and removing the entry from Articles for improvement
 * Set up the schedule pages for the new TAFI, except the adding of an image and caption
 * Adding TAFI to the new article for improvement, remove TAFI from last week's article and add Former TAFI to the talk page
 * Notify relevant WikiProjects that the new TAFI is within their scope
 * Send a mass message to everyone on the notification list of the new TAFI selection

Updating the accomplishments and archiving selections is still done manually, along with daily tasks such as adding approved entries to the articles for improvement page. These will become automated in the near future.

We hope the bot proves to serve well, and by carrying out the routine housekeeping tasks we can boost the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the project. thanks you for your service in helping with the weekly tasks in the past, and for your cooperation during this trial period :)

Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:48, 21 November 2015 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • for all project notifications

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Valereee!


Happy New Year! Valereee, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Liz Read! Talk! 23:44, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Disambiguation link notification for January 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Robert Goulet
 * added links pointing to Bells Are Ringing, South Pacific and Dream Girl


 * Ed Ames
 * added links pointing to Shenandoah and South Pacific


 * John Kenley
 * added a link pointing to Variety


 * Kenley Players
 * added a link pointing to Variety


 * Paul Lynde
 * added a link pointing to Don't Drink the Water

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:37, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to the Google Doodle task force
– Sent using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:54, 2 February 2016 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Today's articles for improvement

Help with Uproxx?
Hi Valereee! I'm reaching out to see if you might have some time to review a draft I wrote for the Uproxx article (I have a financial COI and wrote it for Uproxx). The draft and my notes are on the Talk page here. I reached out to a few WikiProjects to find reviewers, but haven't had any luck. I know the article may not quite match your interests, but since you were such a thoughtful reviewer on Wednesday Martin, I figured I'd give it a shot! I appreciate any help, but completely understand if you don't have the time/interest. Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 14:41, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * , sorry -- I really just can't get excited about the subject, and I have limited editing time and excessive curiosity, so I try to work on projects that interest me for whatever reason. The Martin article interested me really only because I'd started it, which is something I tend to do when I try to find info on Wikipedia and discover there's no article. Feel free to ask me about future projects, though! I have a very quirky tendency to be interested in a given subject, you can never tell. valereee (talk) 16:04, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I completely understand. Thanks for the response. I'll be sure to let you know about other projects though—and feel free to ping me if you ever want me to look at something as well. Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 16:23, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

PC
Valeree, I am replying here so as to not 'clog' the ANI. I am the first person to admit that we all know anecdotally other uses, often ironic, of 'PC'. But we simply can't work on the basis of including my/everybody's/anybody's personal evidence. That is why I have suggested a 'historic approach', ('came to prominence'/ 'entered mainstream use') which does NOT involve OR and does not attempt to cover current (private?) use. One of the IP's who got very annoyed about the current lead, and who made exactly the argument you cited, (it's not critical/not ironic where I work!), proceeded to give umpteen examples of how at his place of work, 'PC' meant boringly, tediously, over-earnestly 'correct'. I think he even used the word 'boringly'. Pincrete (talk) 18:12, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * , I totally get that it takes us directly into OR to use the evidence of our own ears. TOTALLY get that. Which is why I'm not suggesting we mention in any way that sincere use is still common.  All I'm asking for literally is that we not use the fact it's primarily REPORTED on in its pejorative use to try to prove that i'ts primarily USED that way. valereee (talk) 18:16, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That is a sensible suggestion of the kind that gets us out of cyclic, futile arguments. Just for the record, I have little interest in the subject, got involved only to 'soften' prior wording, foolishly put it on my watchlist and have felt a moral obligation since. It is actually (IMO) a very mediocre article, which fails to mention what the criticisms were, what was criticised (mainly gender/race policies), or indeed pretty much anything that a 'non-Anglo', or anyone not already familiar with the subject, would need to have explained. Pincrete (talk) 18:31, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I am in the same boat. :) valereee (talk) 19:01, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikiproject Food and Drink Newsletter – March 2016
– Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on 17:26, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:39, 10 March 2016 (UTC)