User talk:Valereee/Archive 38

Help archiving a talk page?
Hello Valereee with three Es! I'm messaging you because I noticed your activity at Help talk:Archiving a talk page. Would you mind providing assistance with starting an archive for a very long talk page? I'm trying to get more attention for the latest discussion at Talk:Ibn Arabi, but the talk page is long and hasn't been archived ever. What would you advise as the easiest method to start an archive? MezzoMezzo (talk) 13:30, 31 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi, @MezzoMezzo! I've set up an archives for you and tested it. A bot should be by at some point to finish archiving all the older posts. If you want to hurry the process up, you can also install User:Evad37/OneClickArchiver.
 * For future reference, you can go to Help:Archiving (plain and simple). Copy/paste/save. —valereee (talk) 13:47, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh, thank you so much! I hope that didn't take too much of your time. I'm a little scared of screwing the archiver bot up massively, but I guess that we all have to start somewhere. I'll give it a try. MezzoMezzo (talk) 21:22, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * If you don't screw something up massively now and then, you're not being WP:BOLD enough. EEng 21:34, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * If I don't embarrass myself regularly I figure I'm not taking enough risks. Fortunately this has never been a problem for me. —valereee (talk) 21:39, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * @MezzoMezzo, it took seconds. :) With the plain and simple instructions, you'd almost have to be actively trying to screw something up. I wrote those instructions to give myself a simple way to insert archives. —valereee (talk) 21:38, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg BusterD
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Kees08 • Nickshanks • Protonk • Schissel • Ultraexactzz • Wknight94



CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg TheresNoTime

Oversighter changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg TheresNoTime
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg ST47

Guideline and policy news
 * An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news
 * Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import.

Arbitration
 * Following an amendment request, the committee has clarified that the Talk page exception to the 500/30 rule in remedy 5 of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 case does not apply to requested move discussions.

Miscellaneous
 * You can vote for candidates in the 2021 Board of Trustees elections from 4 August to 17 August. Four community elected seats are up for election.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:19, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

academic articles and citations
Your discussion elsewhere (at Talk:Jennifer Manlove ) has led me to realize that I ought to change my standard practice in listing a scientist's articles:


 * Currently, I've only been  adding lists of most cited articles. Most researchers want to give their most recent articles, and that's significant from their point of view--they need to attract students and postdocs. I have been thinking about routinely adding such a list if it isn't present. It is not only vanity or advertisement, but relevant to someone who might happen to have heard of a scientist, to wonder what they are currently doing as well as what they have done (and that relevance to the general reader is the basic criterion I use for content)
 * Your question there has shown me  that I ought to do it, and I shall start adding  it, when it's a person who is still active. i'm not sure how many to list, or if I should include the number of citations--because if it's a 2021 publication, there won't be many until 2022. I need to experiment, and then change the standard advice that I give.  Meanwhile,  I think you can do whatever is reasonable in the circumstances, as long as you say why they're included.  This isn't one of the areas where articles really have a rigid standard form.

I want to thank you for leading me to re-evaluate. I keep saying people here shouldn't be stubborn, and that means me also.  DGG ( talk ) 03:14, 2 August 2021 (UTC)


 * @DGG, lol on not being stubborn. :) What actually led me to write that article was a comment you'd made at an AfC review that said two publications with 200+ citations was the minimum needed to prove notability. I remembered that I had come across this woman maybe six months ago, couldn't find much in RS, and wasn't sure whether an h-index of 44 was high enough in sociological research, as I know it differs in various fields. When I saw your comment, I went back and checked, and sure enough she had two where she was lead/sole author with over 200 plus one where she was sole author with almost 500. I figured between that and the h-index, it was worth taking the risk even with no significant coverage in typical RS. —valereee (talk) 15:51, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Please stay off my talk page
I don't appreciate personal attacks. You are not welcome on my talk page. Please leave me alone. DN (talk) 00:22, 4 August 2021 (UTC)


 * For the curious. —valereee (talk) 00:30, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

An admin barn star for you
Thanks, ! That says so much about you. —valereee (talk) 00:52, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Darknipples
Hi valereee! I hope you're doing well! I just wanted to message you after a little bit of time has gone by since the whole "darknipples discussion" over at ANI and see how you're doing. I hope that you saw my message to Darknipples on his/her user talk page; we'll see what happens, but what he/she decides to is ultimately their choice. I'm really happy to see that you left an apology on their user talk page and that you owned up to the message you initially made. It paints maturity and wisdom to do that, and it's definitely not easy at times to do. Hell, I'm sure that I can speak for the both of us when I say that we've seen many instances where users on Wikipedia, regardless of how clearly and substantially their behavior has been pointed out to them as inappropriate and wrong, straight-up refuse to acknowledge their mistakes, apologize for them, and commit to learning from them. I commend you for putting aside your frustrations and for doing that. :-)

I want to encourage you to continue to learn and grow on Wikipedia, and to not be hard on yourself over the situation. It was a mistake, it happens, we all make mistakes, and we're not perfect. We're humans; it's how it goes, and the perfect Wikipedia user will never exist - never has, never will. I also want to encourage you to reflect on your role as an administrator on Wikipedia as well. Back in the day, possessing the administrator toolset was regarded as "no big deal", and we of course both know that we're no different than any other editor on Wikipedia when it comes to policy - we just have a few extra buttons (like 3 or 4... okay maybe like 5 lol) that we can press. That's how the policy states that the role should be seen as. However, the reality of the situation is that many (if not most) users just don't see it that way. We're very often seen as leaders on the project, and we have to constantly and consistently set the example for how to edit, how to behave, how to communicate with others, how to react to situations, how to resolve disputes, and many other things. That's just what's come with the role as the years progressed and the project grows. Whether we like it or not, that's how it is... you can't say that I'm wrong, can you? ;-)

You weren't acting in the role as an administrator when you left that message, but as you can see - many pointed out your role on the project as an administrator regardless. You have to have thick skin as an administrator, and as damn hard as it can be, you can't allow your personal thoughts and feelings to cloud your judgment and your responsibility to the community to be that leader that many (again, if not most) expect us to be. We have to go about situations with consistent and fair resolve, and respond to them and act in a level-headed mindset. It's the internet; things are going to offend you. Things are going to piss you off and make you want to want to respond and act with two middle fingers pointed in the air. Is "Darknipples" a username that I would choose? Oh hell no. If I saw that username pop up in the new user log, you bet that I'd be watching their contributions and ready to block them if they started vandalizing or disrupting the project - guaranteed. In the end, we just have to accept the situation and move on, and I hope that you can do so.

Keep up the great work here! Take and understand the feedback you received, reflect on it, learn from it, call it a small bump in the road, and move on. :-) If I can encourage you to do one thing, I hope that you'll think about the things that I've said, and that you'll continue to grow, learn, improve, and come out of this better than when you went into it. Our role comes with a lot of responsibilities, whether they be apparent and defined by Wikipedia policy, or they be inadvertent and not defined. Let's do our best to make this project a great place to volunteer and contribute to, and lets use our role as leaders to be the level-headed example of how we should handle these situations. :-)

I hope you have a great day, I wish you happy editing, and I hope you know that my user talk page is always open to you should you need someone to talk to. :-) My very best -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:35, 5 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Sure thing, Oshwah! Best to you. —valereee (talk) 10:16, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

East Timor link
Hi Valereee, just checked out T:DYK/Q3. Regarding the Dili hook, I would be interested to know if you think it would be helpful to wikilink to East Timor. Often more 'obscure' countries are linked. As the author it's not obscure to me, so I would appreciate the second opinion. CMD (talk) 12:46, 5 August 2021 (UTC)


 * @Chipmunkdavis, I think it would be fine to do that, although the target article is East Timor's capital city, so the bold link is almost as good for providing context as the direct link would be. I think it could go either way. Having only a single article linked in a hook does seem to get more views, if that matters to you. :) As you're the author, and it looks like both the reviewer and the promoter didn't have an opinion on this, I think it's up to you. —valereee (talk) 14:45, 5 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I've never gotten stupendous view numbers, and I don't intend to start now. However, no change is easier than change, so I'm happy to leave it per your opinion. CMD (talk) 14:53, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Princeton & BranchHistory
Thanks for your recent intervention in Princeton & BranchHistory. As BranchHistory probably has COI with the only article edited by this author, how do we remove this author's edits with out getting into another revert war? Over the years, I suspect, this author has managed to keep other authors from improving the article, by reverting other editor's contributions. I would like the article to go back to Special:Permalink/1036332326 before other authors can come in and make meaningful contributions to the article.

How long we need to wait for the author to disclose COI? Pinecar (talk) 23:32, 4 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Well, they've explicitly denied a conflict of interest and have never edited Branch, Texas, so there may be no actual COI. A passionate opinion about a subject can look and act a lot like a COI. We don't necessarily remove an author's edits for being COI edits, even when there's undisclosed paid editing. We scrutinize them for point of view problems and other policy issues. They haven't edited since I asked them about a COI, let's give them a chance to answer.
 * Thanks Pinecar (talk) 15:54, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Your preferred version pretty much removes everything in two sections. I can see reorganizing it into a single section and tightening it up, I can see arguing that anything other than a short fact, like a number or date, that has to be sourced to primary documents isn't important enough to include, I can see arguing that if it's that important, it should be spun off into Branch-Princeton border dispute with just a short mention at Princeton, but you've even removed stuff about government ratings that seems to be sourced to a newspaper? —valereee (talk) 11:02, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Spinning up Branch-Princeton border dispute - good idea.
 * Government rating WP:UNDUE weight. I could add a shorter version back with more recent data.
 * Appreciate you taking the time reviewing the article and the changes. Have a great vacation next week. Pinecar (talk) 15:54, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Founding Member
Hello Valereee, I'm sending you this link to emphasize the use of "founding member" as a example of how important that designation is to a musician. In case, in the future if you question the legitimacy of using the term to describe any musician and their contribution to a band.Cheryl Fullerton (talk) 00:13, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/rolling-stones-charlie-watts-us-tour-1207707/#?utm_source=onesignal


 * Hey, . So, discussing the phrase 'founding member' in general terms w/re my opinion on a point of general policy is probably okay as long as we're careful.
 * To me it looks like Rolling Stone is simply pointing out a fact that some people might find surprising, not trying to make some point that because he wasn't a founding member, Watts is less important. I don't think many people would consider Watts some sort of replacement player. Well, maybe those two earlier drummers would lol...
 * For context, there's a short mention in the body at Charlie Watts that the band had been formed before he joined it, and no mention in the lead. There's no mention of "founding" members at The Rolling Stones; early iterations are discussed, and the lead only mentions that Watts was part of the first "stable lineup".
 * In deciding whether a descriptive term should go into the lead (or even be used at all) we don't take into account how important that term is to an article subject. We take into account how neutral the term is. If reliable sources were consistently using the descriptive term "founding member" for anyone who was a founding member, we might decide it was a neutral industry-standard term. If the term were mostly being used promotionally, such as on a subject's personal website or in social media and affiliated sources, we would probably decide it was a promotional term.
 * My opinion on this term is that it sounds non-neutral and promotional except when there's some good reason to use it -- like for pointing out that Watts, for instance, wasn't actually a founding member. But even then...meh. Certainly that's not important enough for the lead in either the article about Watts or the article about the Stones, IMO. And the facts surrounding his joining the band are described in both articles without needing to use that term. I probably wouldn't remove mention that he "wasn't a founding member" from the body of those articles if someone added it. I'd certainly question it in the lead as being not important enough. Hope that helps. —valereee (talk) 14:02, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * In deciding whether a descriptive term should go into the lead (or even be used at all) we don't take into account how important that term is to an article subject. We take into account how neutral the term is. If reliable sources were consistently using the descriptive term "founding member" for anyone who was a founding member, we might decide it was a neutral industry-standard term. If the term were mostly being used promotionally, such as on a subject's personal website or in social media and affiliated sources, we would probably decide it was a promotional term.
 * My opinion on this term is that it sounds non-neutral and promotional except when there's some good reason to use it -- like for pointing out that Watts, for instance, wasn't actually a founding member. But even then...meh. Certainly that's not important enough for the lead in either the article about Watts or the article about the Stones, IMO. And the facts surrounding his joining the band are described in both articles without needing to use that term. I probably wouldn't remove mention that he "wasn't a founding member" from the body of those articles if someone added it. I'd certainly question it in the lead as being not important enough. Hope that helps. —valereee (talk) 14:02, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * My opinion on this term is that it sounds non-neutral and promotional except when there's some good reason to use it -- like for pointing out that Watts, for instance, wasn't actually a founding member. But even then...meh. Certainly that's not important enough for the lead in either the article about Watts or the article about the Stones, IMO. And the facts surrounding his joining the band are described in both articles without needing to use that term. I probably wouldn't remove mention that he "wasn't a founding member" from the body of those articles if someone added it. I'd certainly question it in the lead as being not important enough. Hope that helps. —valereee (talk) 14:02, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * My opinion on this term is that it sounds non-neutral and promotional except when there's some good reason to use it -- like for pointing out that Watts, for instance, wasn't actually a founding member. But even then...meh. Certainly that's not important enough for the lead in either the article about Watts or the article about the Stones, IMO. And the facts surrounding his joining the band are described in both articles without needing to use that term. I probably wouldn't remove mention that he "wasn't a founding member" from the body of those articles if someone added it. I'd certainly question it in the lead as being not important enough. Hope that helps. —valereee (talk) 14:02, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Talk Page Oddity
Hey Valereee, I got a post on my talk page about the Princeton, Texas page. Apparently I edited the page, which I had to check the history....it was in 2013. Anyway, the user who contacted me (User:Pinecar) is asking me (and many others) to get involved in a slow-speed revert-war. I'm not sure why they care about this lawsuit and I feel there might be some personal involvement there, because why would they be so keen on getting something from 2011 deleted if they weren't?

Regardless of that, the revert-war is concerning. Even more concerning is the user getting other users involved in it. I think this requires an admin's input, so I am bringing it to you. Hopefully this doesn't instantly devolve like last time. :) -  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 13:11, 2 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks, @Neutralhomer, I've posted a request for them to discuss. —valereee (talk) 16:06, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated. :) -  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 16:13, 2 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks —valereee & Thanks Neutralhomer . Saw this note just now. I do not have any personal involvement with the Branch/Princeton lawsuit. I am not in the city (former/current), county or even the state. I did reach out to the previous authors of the article, in an effort to improve the quality of the article on wikipedia (that's currently rated as B). Let me know if there is a specific concern about my action, glad to revise my understanding and actions.
 * In my current assumption/inference - the excess information in the article managed to stay on the article, as User:BrachHistory (with 100s of hours of contribution to this only article in wikipedia) has kept other authors from making changes - with out responding to concerns raised in the article's talk page. Pinecar (talk) 17:48, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

DN's username
I am curious if you would care to go into a bit more detail with me about why you took umbrage with DN's username.

Understand that I've found you to be a very reasonable and insightful editor, and I don't expect anything you say here to change that. In other words, I'm not asking you to "justify" anything, but to clarify your thoughts, and of course, only if you're willing to do so.

Also, as another editor with a potentially-sexually-suggestive username, I'm curious as to your reaction to mine. I seem to recall that someone mentioned something to me once about it, but it was a long time ago, and I couldn't recall any details.

Anyways, I hope this doesn't come across as demanding or recriminating. I'm quite certain you were acting in good faith, I just didn't understand your perspective, and would like to. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants  Tell me all about it.  15:26, 5 August 2021 (UTC)


 * @MPants at work, not at all.
 * The term “dark nipples” is sexually charged, as dark nipples are in some cultures fetishized, as a search shows (and for those who don't see any difference between Darknipples and Palemoustache, that one comes up nothing seems to match this search), and arguably also racially charged, as women of color often have darker nipples. A google image search on dark nipples is not safe for work. If you can’t or don’t wish to click on that one, the images are all of women’s dark nipples, nearly all displayed in a sexualized manner and some frankly pornographic, and although I scrolled down only a few times, there seemed to be none of men’s nipples. This would seem to indicate that this term is not only sexual (and possibly racial) but also targeted specifically at women's rather than all nipples.
 * A sexually-charged user name targeted at women is always going to make some women editors uncomfortable. Because of the racial component, it might make women of color even more uncomfortable. Women and people of color are already in the vast minority here. I suspect the name makes some male editors uncomfortable, too, as they may also see it as being targeted at their female colleagues. The fact this user name isn’t a blatant policy violation doesn’t mean it’s not still problematic. Something that makes women uncomfortable working here is a problem.
 * An additional concern is that these kinds of issues -- similarly to calling a woman 'cunt', remarking on her looks when you dislike what she's saying, telling a joke that reduces women to existing primarily as a means for men to satisfy themselves sexually -- can tend to encourage others to also dismiss women's contributions.
 * At any rate, that's my thinking on it, and thank you, actually, for giving me the opportunity to clarify my thoughts.
 * Re: your own user name. It certainly never struck me as sexually suggestive. Even trying to find something...I suppose some could assume you're referring to your penis as Thor's Hammer? But even if you told me that was indeed your pet name for your little buddy, I wouldn't find it anything sexually suggestive that was targeted at women. I'd actually find that funny -- either you poking fun at yourself, or you smugly or defensively bragging; either way, funny. :) Er, sorry for being indelicate. It's not actually sexual suggestiveness that is the issue for me. It's sexual suggestiveness targeted at women, especially here. If your username was MyPenis, I wouldn't care. If it was IWantToPutMyPenisInYourMouth, I'd object. —valereee (talk) 15:51, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Followup: I remember a similar discussion during @Girth Summit's RfA. The username in some people's minds (including mine) could be interpreted as vaguely sexually suggestive, but that possible interpretation was not targeted at women. The possible sexual interpretation would be similar (self-deprecating/smug/defensive) bragging. :D —valereee (talk) 16:05, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for explaining this. I do see your perspective more clearly now. I don't really share it, but it's nonetheless a very reasonable POV which I respect, so I'm not motivated to argue with you about it. I agree that DM's response (in editing your comment) was completely uncalled for, and can certainly understand how it could come across as a misogynistic response.
 * FWIW, I've seen some indications that DN may be a woman, though they've expressed a desire not to be gendered, and that should be respected (I don't believe saying "may be a woman" is gendering them, but if DN notices and objects, I'll happily erase that statement, and for obvious reasons, I won't enumerate what those indications are).
 * WRT my user name, it is, in fact, a three part joke. The first refers to my long-standing interest in Norse mythology and Viking-age Scandinavian history/culture. The second part refers to the fact that in the 90's, I actually owned (and, I'm too old to be ashamed to admit) frequently wore a pair of hammer pants. And it tickles me to no end that we actually have that article, stub or not.
 * The third part, which is the actual genesis of the name, you've already figured out. Though in my defense, it was a moniker bestowed upon me, not something I chose for myself. Which is not to suggest that it's necessarily accurate. You can remain as un-enlightened on that along as everyone but my wife, my old girlfriends and my locker-room compatriots. Cue the references to U Can't Touch This and "only one who is worthy may wield the power of Mjolnir". I hadn't ever thought of Girth Summit's name in that way, but I can see it, now.
 * And you don't have to worry about being indelicate with me. I'm a foul-mouthed goofball. I recently joked about having sex with a horse (ummm, I swear, it was funny in context). I understand the utility of tactfulness, but never really developed any need for it.
 * And I'd like to add that I frequently regret the fact that WP is predominantly a straight, cis white, male space, even though I'm straight, white (in all the ways that matter, at least) and quite comfortably a cis male, myself. I wish there was more we could do to get more women and POC editing this project. I've personally recruited at least one person of color, but my most recent attempts to recruit a woman backfired when I showed her a AfD that, I didn't realize until it was too late, was dominated by a homophobic screed. I can certainly sympathize with efforts to make the project more broadly appealing. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  16:35, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes, Girthgate. If I'd thought that was the way most people would have interpreted it, I would never have chosen it as a username. I came quite close to changing it at that time in response to the concerns, but I was (and remain) quite attached to it; after discussion with the people who'd expressed concerns, and after I created User:Girth Summit/My username, the number of people who actually wanted me to change it reduced to zero, so Girth I remain.
 * I've never thought has sexual connotations. In the UK, 'pants' refers exclusively to underwear (not trousers), so there's that, but pants is a very common primary-school-level insult: smarty pants = smartass, stinkypants = you smell bad, etc. To my British ears, I always thought that 'Mjolnirpants' sounds like a self-depracating way of saying 'I have north Germanic heritage, and I don't take myself too seriously'. A sexual meaning never occurred to me.
 * Darknipples - yeah, I can see why you would be concerned about that. It's not risque so much as in-your-face, and it's on that intersection between objectification of women and of people of colour. The stuff about 'men have nipples too' is bollocks rubbish: men's nipples are not treated in the same way as women's nipples, on the internet or anywhere else. If I saw it in the new accounts feed, I would be looking at their contribs and expecting to see a throwaway vandalism-only account (and I think it's about the most offensive account name that I've come across that wasn't attached to a VOA). I'm glad that, at the least, they have a signature that makes the username less 'in your face'. Girth Summit  (blether)  16:40, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * We assumed you were attached to it. —valereee (talk) 16:46, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Oof! Girth Summit  (blether)  16:52, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * In DN's defense (read: for the purposes of making this quip), I can say with assurance that I do not object to nipples in my face, regardless of their tint. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  16:56, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I guess I'm the one who started Girthgate so I will weigh in here. I was wrong to oppose the RFA due to that, and thank Girth Summit that they never held it against me, and in fact even tremendously helped me get Edward McClaren to a mention on the main page at DYK. GS is an excellent Wikipedian and the name has no bearing on that. Girth I can't remember if I ever saw that user page describing your name, and I apologize for not commenting there at the time. That said, I learned my lesson about user names so I won't comment about DN, but you can probably guess what I think about it. Mr Ernie (talk) 18:03, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * No worries, I knew your concerns were genuine, I wouldn't hold that kind of thing against someone. (Erk, no innuendo intended...) Girth Summit  (blether)  18:12, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm quite certain that pledge will disappoint a few editors. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  18:55, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That's okay, lots of men don't share it. Even some women don't, although pretty much every woman I've ever met has been either dismissed or sexually harassed in the workplace, many of us multiple times, and online it tends to be much worse. Ask any woman who uses a dating app what happens when she ignores or rejects a man. —valereee (talk) 16:56, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I know this is a bit tangential, but... I never understood the temper tantrums some men throw when women don't simply hurl themselves at them. It's as if they grew up thinking those "sexy singles in your area are desperate for YOU" ads on sleazier websites are telling the truth and literally everyone else is lying about the way women in general feel about dating.
 * That, and dick pics. I'm a big, red-blooded, manly man, but I've gotten weirded out by women sending me unsolicited nudes. Is it really that difficult to figure out that women aren't turned on by unsolicited dick pics? Or do they think it's funny, maybe? It's not. Dick jokes can be funny, but if some guy's dick pics qualify as jokes, then he might want to keep that a secret... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  18:35, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm quite certain that pledge will disappoint a few editors. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  18:55, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That's okay, lots of men don't share it. Even some women don't, although pretty much every woman I've ever met has been either dismissed or sexually harassed in the workplace, many of us multiple times, and online it tends to be much worse. Ask any woman who uses a dating app what happens when she ignores or rejects a man. —valereee (talk) 16:56, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I know this is a bit tangential, but... I never understood the temper tantrums some men throw when women don't simply hurl themselves at them. It's as if they grew up thinking those "sexy singles in your area are desperate for YOU" ads on sleazier websites are telling the truth and literally everyone else is lying about the way women in general feel about dating.
 * That, and dick pics. I'm a big, red-blooded, manly man, but I've gotten weirded out by women sending me unsolicited nudes. Is it really that difficult to figure out that women aren't turned on by unsolicited dick pics? Or do they think it's funny, maybe? It's not. Dick jokes can be funny, but if some guy's dick pics qualify as jokes, then he might want to keep that a secret... ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  18:35, 5 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Women are sending you unsolicited nudes?
 * I think some men assume that a dic pic is, for many women, a similar attractant as a beaver shot is for many men. Message from 99% of the female population: it's not. We don't care what your penis looks like, in any state. Many of us appreciate it for what it can do, but looking at it doesn't really enhance the experience. —valereee (talk) 19:04, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, a few did, a long time ago. Not so much anymore. I think it happened twice, but there might have been an incident I've forgotten.
 * Yeah, I mean, it's pretty obvious some of these guys think that, I just can't imagine being dumb enough to actually believe it. Even when I was dumb enough to think women would be attracted to me if I acted like a complete douche-nugget in public, I still knew that randomly showing some woman ole Mjolnir would be more likely to get me a face full of mace than a date. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  22:37, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Relevant link ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  14:26, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Frank N. Furter got there first with the anticipation gag. Good song though. It's given me a real urge to eat cake. Girth Summit  (blether)  14:39, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Frank did it better, too. (You've got to wait long enough to make it work.)
 * Still Alive is actually my older son's favorite song. (My younger son's favorite: Behemoth - O Father, O Satan, O Son!. I have to play it for him once or twice a week. He calls it "the medieval song".) ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  15:11, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That was the first time I'd listened to it in years - I was trying to place what the synthesised voice in Tom Cardy's song reminded me of, and it came back to me. Just listened to it again like three times - it really is an excellent song and a great performance.
 * Can't say I feel the same about Behemoth. This is more my speed when it comes to metal. Girth Summit  (blether)  15:36, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hell yeah. Iron Maiden is well within my bailiwick. I'm a fan of Behemoth, but I honestly couldn't tell you what my boy sees in them. I had to literally train my ear to extreme metal when I was a teen to be able to appreciate it. You might like this though: been one of my favorites for many years. Truth be told however, this is what I'm currently listening to. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  16:43, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hmm that Maiden song is like the boom-bap of metal. I do like the Ningen Isu song, though it's a bit melodic for my taste. Drmies (talk) 16:49, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hey those old guys can play! Lululu! Drmies (talk) 16:51, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: July 2021
About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 07:23, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Now watching...
Hey Val. So, we're probably not the target demographic, but I've been liking Motherland: Fort Salem (just finished watching S02E08), a military fantasy taking place in an American revisionist history setting. Maybe you've seen...? If not, might be worth checking out. And because I'm super-mature, quote: On Rotten Tomatoes, the series has an approval rating of 69%. Yay! As an aside, the role of VPOTUS is played by Victor Webster, whom I've been a fan of ever since he played Rachel Nichols' (who is great!) detective partner in Continuum (2012), a series which, btw, I recommend even more than Motherland. Kind regards, El_C 16:58, 11 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I am so there. Finding it on JustWatch right now...ooh, hulu, that works.
 * What I have found that if a movie has the highest number of stars, it's probably too highbrow for me. Those second-best star-rating movies are always my favorites. I really am not sure I want my entertainment to make me think. I spend way too much time in my head already. —valereee (talk) 17:20, 11 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Cool beans! Yeah, I think Motherland has some nice flair. Continuum does, too. Besides Continuum, I also liked Rachel Nichols in Meskada (2010), which I notice was generally rated as average'y by reviewers. Hmm. In their review of the film, TV Guide provides a decent liner note:


 * "In Meskada, Nick Stahl stars as Noah Cordin, a police detective who lives and works in Hilliard, a prosperous suburban community. When a burglary leads to the murder of a young boy, Noah is assigned to the case, along with a detective from the county sheriff’s office, Leslie Spencer (Rachel Nichols). The victim’s mother, Allison Connor (Laura Benanti), is a wealthy widow and a local politician with a certain amount of influence as a member of the Meskada County Board of Commissioners. Allison is deeply distraught after the death of her son, and Noah and Leslie are under pressure to find the killers as soon as possible."


 * It's a decent police procedural, if you're into that sort of thing (I am). El_C 18:13, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm even into really cheesy police procedurals. I've watched the Law & Order series, and also Criminal Minds. Both incredibly cheesy. I mean, I don't watch them watch them. Not sitting there with a notepad checking for instances where the continuity person fluffed it so I can update IMDb a la minute. I watch reruns while I'm knitting. :D —valereee (talk) 19:55, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I like some of the original, earlier Law & Order. Not finding a lot I'm liking with Dick Wolf's latest projects, though, tbh. Though, Chicago P.D. is pretty good (I'm a Jason Beghe fan). El_C 20:44, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Have you watched The Shield? Best ever. They stick the ending, which is unusual. Don't read ahead. —valereee (talk) 20:54, 11 August 2021 (UTC)


 * If it's police procedurals that interest you, I would recommend Homicide: Life on the Street. They made 122 episodes, from 1993 to 1999, it says here.  It's set in the same universe as the Law and Order shows, but for my money the writing is way more interesting, and with an excellent cast too.  You might want to start with season 1 episode 1 and keep going from there.  With that said, it's a case of "so many TV shows, so little time".  — Mudwater (Talk) 21:56, 11 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I remember liking it, Mudwater. I liked The Shield, too, Val. Those were solid procedurals to be sure. I suppose more recently, True Detective (season 1) has set a new bar that'd be difficult to reach. But I agree, Val, that a procedural doesn't need to be a masterpiece to be worthwhile. El_C 23:30, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Cats
"Like herding cats" – if the cats are deaf and blind. EEng 23:17, 9 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I have a blind cat. He at minimum moves along when I accidentally kick him. —valereee (talk) 23:54, 9 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Do u have a cat to baby sitting? El_C 17:09, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I actually do catsitting! I housesit for people who have cats through a matching service: they give me free lodging, I give them free house/pet care. Even exchange, although I've also gotten some nice little gifties from grateful cat owners. I've been to DC, Philadelphia, Chicago, various resort towns...it's a hoot. I got my daughter and my niece into it, my niece is on a housesit with a cat right now. :) —valereee (talk) 17:16, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That's awesome! Cats, purring people together since the dawn of time. (With a brief intermission in Middle Ages Europe — they were, like, 'why don't we try petting plague rats, instead, for a while.') El_C 18:20, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Right? I've had dogs, hamsters, rats, guinea pigs, gerbils, fish...cats rule. —valereee (talk) 19:58, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I've had several cats → infinite love. They are for sure the best. Also, back in the homeland, I had parrot named Tee-Tee. But I didn't have the heart to clip his wings, so after a few months, he flew away when my grandpa left the door open accidentally. A couple of days later I saw him hanging out at a tree by my school. He might still be alive today (they live to like 70 and I don't think there's any natural predators, food or environmental concerns). Oh Tee-Tee. El_C 20:28, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * During the pandemic, I was given two kittens that had been abandoned in a park (long story). I'd had cats before but never two siblings and wow, it's different than having a solo cat. At least they keep each other entertained when they aren't crashing into furniture & leaping off boxes. But I enjoy it, soon enough they will be mature and spend all of their time sleeping through the day. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 20:42, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Good luck with that, @Liz. My experience has been that, yes, they keep one another company (so you can go to work, travel, etc., without them being lonely) but the crashing into furniture and leaping off boxes lasts well into the second decade. :D One of my four-year-olds almost knocked a TV off its stand yesterday because I'd put on Cat TV and she was sure those cheeping sounds were coming from behind it. —valereee (talk) 20:47, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Related: [Https://twitter.com/sanadesweet/status/1410699281653239812?s=12 https://twitter.com/sanadesweet/status/1410699281653239812?s=12] —valereee (talk) 20:49, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Wait, there's a Cat TV? Is that a DVD or a channel? I should try Animal Planet or National Geographic and see if they pay any attention to a screen. Right now, their favorite activities are eating plants and climbing to the top of kitchen cabinets where I can't reach them. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 21:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * @Liz, it's a channel. I think it's on YouTube, maybe? At any rate, people leave it on for their cats when they want to keep them entertained. It's video and audio of small prey species lol —valereee (talk) 21:49, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * And cats climbing to where you can't reach them, even with a spray bottle: treat them as you would a troll here. They're just doing it for the attention and entertainment value. —valereee (talk) 21:52, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Actually, they get up there and take naps. When I notice things have been quiet for a while, that's where I check. The main problem is that sometimes they lie on their backs and paw the popcorn ceiling which I think is full of asbestos. But they are good boys, I'm glad they get along with each other. I'll look for that YouTube channel. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 02:55, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * OMG on the popcorn ceiling! Cats. Honestly. I have one who jumps onto the kitchen counter (where she's not allowed) and before I can tell her to get down, leaps from there to a 6-inch wide ledge over a stairway. No one can reach her there; her sister is not as athletic. You just can tell she loves that. I would swear she actually looks smug. —valereee (talk) 10:59, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Cat musicians and musician-hopefuls can do with a bit of expansion, btw... El_C 22:18, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Revert-sock
13:00, 12 August 2021 Valereee talk contribs blocked DanyloPushkar talk contribs with an expiration time of indefinite (account creation blocked)

Same shit in the same place:

rollback: 1 edit [welcome] (Undid revision 1038474203 by Lembit Staan (talk)) Tags: Undo Non-autoconfirmed user rapidly reverting edits Please intervene ASAP. Lembit Staan (talk) 04:23, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

ANI SPI comment
Valereee, I understand you may be upset, but I am shocked by your comment: "I have to say it's kind of mind-blowing that anyone would think it was okay to publicly accuse someone of faking their own death in order to sock simply because arbcom didn't decide in your favor last time." I do not believe you are in a position to judge the evidence or my motivation. Please strike your comment. Please trust me here. Kolya Butternut (talk) 20:37, 14 August 2021 (UTC)


 * KB, I'm not upset. I'm more dumbfounded. It's just jaw-dropping that anyone could think this was an okay thing to publicly do, even if it's true, when arbcom's just gotten the info. —valereee (talk) 20:52, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Try to put additional disclaimer on the pages?
Hi, I think you're trying to put additional disclaimers at the pages Free speech. While it seems to be good faith edit, in fact, this is not needed and highly POV; as where to put "additional" disclaimers is very subjective. All pages and articles already have disclaimers linked in bottom of every page (and in some where it's linked twice).

Difference of edit that you involved: 1Way4Together - J. Smile &#124; Awards and similar items are not for sales 04:10, 23 August 2021 (UTC)


 * @J. Smile (Love & V.A.V.I), I was going back over your policy page edits, concerned about your lack of understanding of policy and the changes you had made to policy pages because of it. Because so many of your changes to policy pages had been unhelpful and even harmful, I reverted anything I didn't immediately understand. I'm not going to mess with that particular page again as it's not a policy I have a lot of experience with myself, which should really tell you something: I've got 45K+ edits over fifteen years, and there is policy on WP that I would never consider touching except to fix a typo. As you've been told multiple times by multiple editors, you should be concentrating on fixing articles, not making changes to policy pages. This is a very odd pie chart and January 2021 is just strange for someone who'd really only been editing a few months. —valereee (talk) 12:13, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Hmm
Well, WP:NOTTHERAPY is blue, and there's too much openheartedness there for my taste, but there's no personal information, right? But there are other troubling aspects here--the contributions display...how shall I put it...something of a lack of competence, and of common sense. Like, this. If User:Fowler&fowler wants to run a zoo, meh. But this? Drmies (talk) 16:04, 23 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I think they're very young, and my concern is predators. I've gone ahead and just removed the final 2 paras, will email oversight. —valereee (talk) 16:06, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * And yes, the reason I was checking the user page was because I was thinking 'needs to be added to my watch.' —valereee (talk) 16:09, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

User page…
Hello Valereee, I see you left a message for Drmies saying you were worried about my user page. What do I need to change and what do I replace what I changed with? Twilight Sparkle 222 (talk) 16:20, 23 August 2021 (UTC)


 * @Twilight Sparkle 222, I've removed the sections I was concerned about. You don't have to leave it that way; if you want to re-add those, it's up to you, as there was no actual personally identifying information there like a phone number or email address. With younger editors, we always want to make sure you are editing safely here. Best to you. —valereee (talk) 16:23, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much Valereee. You're very helpful. Twilight Sparkle 222 (talk) 16:25, 23 August 2021 (UTC)