Misplaced Pages

User talk:Dominic: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 08:53, 20 June 2007 editTamokk (talk | contribs)905 editsm →User Sosomk: link← Previous edit Latest revision as of 18:30, 5 January 2025 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,302,034 editsm Archiving 3 discussion(s) to User talk:Dominic/Archive42) (bot 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{| style="border:.5px solid #000000" align=center
|archive= User talk:Dominic/Archive%(counter)d
| Note: '''Welcome to the greatest encyclopedia ever attempted. Please make it better.'''
|algo= old(21d)
|}
|maxarchivesize= 40K
Old talk at ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]
|counter= 42
}}
{{archive box|
], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]
}}


== November 22 + 26: Free Culture Friday and Wikicurious photo event! ==
== RJASE1 -- RFCU ==


{|style="background: white; color: black; border:1px solid #6881b9; margin:0.5em; padding:0.5em;border-radius: 8px;"
Thanks for doing this CU. I'm actually rather glad that they aren't related to RJASE1. For future reference, was it worth filing the request, seeing that you had just completed the checkuser that showed that TortureIsWrong != TortureIsBad = RJASE1? I filed the request to see if there were other socks. Would you have already found that out when you did the first CU? If it was a waste of time, then I want to make sure I don't file that type of RFCU in the future. Cheers, ]<sup>]</sup>]</sub> 14:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
|-
!colspan=2 style="font-size:150%; padding: .4em;"|November 22: ]
|-
| style="padding-left: .6em;" |
]


You are invited to ''']''' at ] on Friday, November 22. This event will feature a reception with ] staff in the afternoon, followed by a more informal salon and game night, utilizing Prime Produce's vast collection of ]s. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome!
==]==


* Friday, November 22, 2024
I am not sure what you mean when you say "unless you have something for me to to compare against". What would you need? ] <sup>]</sup> 16:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
*:''1:30 pm – 7:00 pm''
:It means I need a recent confirmed account, or any previously confirmed IP. ]·] 19:59, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
*:Prime Produce, 424 W 54th St


|-
==My turn to add on==
!colspan=2 style="font-size:150%; padding: .4em;"|November 26: ]
Please take some action before it once again escalates . I btw did not actually revert Hillock, but removed clear trolling by ]. --] 17:45, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
|-
::: Who are you kidding? This all within hours from gettin out of a block on multiple articles:. And the Admin Notice Board yet again: . Can he stay a single day without reverts?--] 18:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
| style="padding-left: .6em;" |
:Also this . --] 22:15, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
]
::Kuban, I just asked you to contain your incivility when you were blocked for edit warring a few days ago, and here you come to show me a link of you calling someone a troll as you revert them? ] As for ], dispute resolution is ]. If either of you continue the reverting without before you've started ], don't be surprised if you are blocked immediately. ]·] 00:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)


You are also invited to ''']''', the third event of the beginner-focused Wikicurious series, at ] on Tuesday, November 26, in collaboration with and ]. All are welcome to attend, especially those interested in ] or contributing to ]. We will explore the art of capturing the moment through photography and learn the basics of Wikimedia Commons, and (weather-permitting) we are also planning a photo walk, so bring your camera (or use your smartphone)!
==Calbrina36==
Noticed this puppy was trolling on RFA's--is this a sock of someone I should know about? I wanna be able to keep an eye out ... the person had the distinctive odor of being from somebody's sock drawer. --]] 20:45, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
:It was no persona I recognized, it was just part of a bunch of run-of-the-mill userpage vandals and troll accounts on an IP. ]·] 21:54, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


* Tuesday, November 26, 2024
== ] ==
*:''3:00 pm – 8:00 pm''
*:Jefferson Market Library, 425 6th Ave
*: is '''required''' for event entry!


|-
Hi, I noticed you recently blocked ]. I appreciate your input on the thread at ]. I was wondering why you said he should be blocked if his actions continue, but didn't mention what you feel should be done now. I appreciate it if you clarified this point at the ]
|''All attendees at Wikimedia NYC events are subject to the ].''


|}
Thanks,


<small>(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from ].)</small>
''']''' ]|] 03:48, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
:I think it's a misunderstanding. Maybe "It is time for a longer block if it has continued." would have been better: I didn't mean if there is more after ''now'', I mean if there has been more misbehavior after the previous block there should be something done. If I hadn't already blocked him before I might have done so when I saw the thread, but I think it's a good idea to make sure the same administrators doesn't block someone many times, if possible, so it doesn't become appear as a personal issue to the person being blocked, which would make it even less likely that they'd get the message. ]·] 03:53, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


--] via ] (]) 15:32, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
::Okay thanks for clarifying that. ''']''' ]|] (Go Red Sox!) 04:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Pharos@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Meetup/NYC/Invite_list&oldid=1256254640 -->


== Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research ==


Hello,
:::Noticed that you blocked him, thanks. ''']''' ]|] (Go Red Sox!) 13:33, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its ] and view its ].
==Revert wars==
Hello, and thanks for your concern over the article. You are indeed correct; when I stepped back and took a look at it, I realize that I have fallen into a "revert war". I never really imagined i'd be one to get caught in it, but I guess the joke is on me. Thank you for your suggestions as well and I will make sure to try those out next, as editing back and forth won't solve anything. Feel welcome to keep watch as a possible mediator too, your input is more than welcome! ] 06:20, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


Take the survey ''''''.
==Hat tip the second==
Dmcdevit, I tip my hat to you once again for uncovering this ongoing abuse., .] 06:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks. I have a feeling he's not planning on leaving it at that though... ]·] 07:53, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
::Heh.]. ] 17:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


Kind Regards,
== ] ==


]
In response to your deletion rationale:


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">] (]) 00:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC) </bdi>
:''<nowiki>'</nowiki>Divisive POV-advocacy user categorizations: please refer to ], ], and especially ]; this promotes no encyclopedic purpose.<nowiki>'</nowiki>''
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins_(reminders)&oldid=27744339 -->


== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==
I would submit to you that:


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
# It is not divisive; it a statement of placement in the political spectrum, and while there may be those who would ''seek out'' categories like this to catch targets for flaming (I myself have not seen such, but I imagine it happens on occasion), I find it impossible that it would ''deliberately offend anyone''.
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
# It is not a statement from a ]; in no way, shape or form does the category 'preach' to anyone; again, it is a statement, and simply that.
<div class="ivmbox-text">
# It is not an expression simply for its own sake, which your citation of ] seems to suggest. It, like ], ''also'' allows a venue of collaboration on topics of concern to libertarian socialists.
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
# It is of service to the encyclopædia, as much as WikiProjects are; there is not enough demand to make a WikiProject for this particular group quite yet, as the number of the category's inhabitants shows.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
With these four points in mind, I would then submit to you a request that you undelete the category. ''']]]''' <sup><nowiki>]<nowiki>]</nowiki></sup> <small> 13.06.07 1020 (UTC)</small>
:Saying "It is not divisive; it a statement of placement in the political spectrum" and "It is not a statement from a ]... it is a statement, and simply that" is setting up a couple of false dichotomies. A "statement" can still be a divisive and advocacy. These categories exist for the sole purpose of grouping users according to their personal points of view, and that does nothing for the encyclopedia. You say that it is a venue for collaboration, but I would seriously question that claim unless you have any examples of such use. I have a political ideology, and other points of view as well, but that does not mean I edit in those articles. Indeed, in your last 1000 edits (an astounding amount of which are userbox-related) I don't see ''any'' edits to articles related to this topic. In fact, it looks like you are simply broadcasting your point of view, which is soapboxing. ]·] 20:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
I think all the political categories should be reinstated. Apparently, they were removed out of process, and process should be paramount in the Misplaced Pages. Further, I agree with the arguments that Blast advances. I also will declare that removal of these categories is far more divisive than the categories themselves could ever dream of being (and divisiveness was never their purpose anyway). ] <sup>] &bull; ]</sup> 16:59, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:07, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
:I'd like to jump in here in support of Blast and Stevie. I notice that ] has just been deleted with the comment: ''"Divisive POV-advocacy user categorizations"''. Dmcdevit, if you really believe that, then please have the courage of your convictions. This category should be deleted only if you also dare to delete ]. If that isn't done, I will look at re-creating the Masculist category. ] 00:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
::Of course, you're absolutely correct that ] should go, but see ].] 00:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
::Yes, I really believe that. I would have loved to have deleted that category that you so wisely pointed out, Gnostrat, but it looks like someone got there before me. Anyway, thanks for your support. ]·] 01:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
::Again, as I stated above in a previous discussion, ''I'' do not edit much in the mainspace these days; yet that is not the point, since ''I'' am not the only 'member' of that category. If you do not edit in the articles which you are affiliated—very well. However, if someone were to come to me and ask 'can you find references for the rise of libertarian socialism in country such-and-such?', then I should be glad to gather references, or refer the person to someone else who can. Further, what I meant was that the statement did not go beyond what it said; if the category was named 'Wikipedians who support libertarian socialism' or 'Wikipedians who think libertarian socialism is the best form of government ever conceived, period', then you would have a point. As it stands (or rather stood), however, it was nothing of the sort. ''']]]''' <sup><nowiki>]<nowiki>]</nowiki></sup> <small> 14.06.07 2111 (UTC)</small>


</div>
:::Actually, Dmcdevit, reading that gloat over yet another category deletion, I'm finding that assumption of good faith is a position you are making rather difficult for me to sustain. At a glance through the political Wikipedians category you can see that it's abnormally bare compared to philosophy or religion, which can be no less "divisive". By definition, dividing is what categories do, so how far does a point of principle stretch? As for ], the phrase I used was "look at"; I don't recall talking about anything disruptive. The current deletions are what I would call disruptive, since if the point of having categories is to promote coordination between people of similar interests, then impeding that communication could prove harmful to the encyclopedia.
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1258243333 -->


{{-}}
:::But let me try to be constructive. If the problem is perceived advocacy, we could exclude any possibility for misinterpretation by simply creating new categories for ''"Wikipedians interested in libertarian socialism/feminism/masculism/whatever"'', which would not require the people in those categories to actually ''be'' libertarian socialists and so forth (i.e. the present 'identity' templates would place editors into 'interest' categories). I don't know if anybody has talked about this but it looks doable to me and I would think it might be a compromise that both sides could find acceptable. As for your current deletions policy, the success of that will be determined by how well the relevant articles fare, as measured by editor feedback no doubt. ] 02:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
== Precious anniversary ==
{{User QAIbox/auto|years=Six}}
--] (]) 10:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)


== Sat Jan 25: Misplaced Pages Day NYC 2025 ==
Hi Dmcdevit,. I have no axe to grind either way about these categories: probably, on balance, I'd prefer their deletion, but it's not a big deal for me either way. I am posting here only because my attention was drawn to these deletions by another editor who posted to my talk page.


{|style="background: white; color: black; border:1px solid #6881b9; margin:0.5em; padding:0.5em;border-radius: 8px;"
However, I can see no speedy deletion criteria to justify the deletion on sight of the long list of categories at , on the grounds that they are "Divisive POV-advocacy user categorizations". You may well be right in that assessment, but why not just put these categories up for discussion at ]? I am minded to restore them, but would first like to hear your reasons for speedy-deleting them rather than nominating them at ]. --] <small>] • (])</small> 22:04, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
|-
*What BHG said, though I have a preference for some of the categories staying. This kind of behavior completely ignores the consensus model of the Categories for Discussion. As I see it, you have a couple of choices: Go to ARBCOM, and see if you can get the entire system of CfD overturned; or participate in the system by actually nominating categories you want to see deleted. But taking the mantle on yourself can't possibly have good results, as at minimum people like me will work to revert your edits, and at maximum people like me will work to make sure you don't have the ability to do it. I'd like to avoid that.--] 14:28, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
!colspan=2 style="font-size:150%; padding: .4em;"|January 25: ]
|-
| style="padding-left: .6em;" |
]


You are invited to ''']''', hosted by ] at the ]'s central branch.
== DRV of Brandt ==


The special focus this year will be the launch of our "400 Neighborhoods" campaign for the city's 400th anniversary and ].
I understand your dismay. I did attempt to talk to AMIB as did a few other people on the talk page of the AfD. He remained adamant and it seemed clear that no productive discussion was forthcoming. I do agree that it might have been a better idea to wait longer. ] 02:52, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


We'll also have ] and you're invited to sign up for one, though space is somewhat limited.
==Hello==
Regarding your comment on the Arbcom enforcement noticeboard. The only way to solve this issue is if Atabek and I, just the two of us with no outside interference, go into an arbcom, where we post our evidence and let the neutral third party admins decide. I will remind you that Atabek was initially going to be blocked for 1 year for this kind of behavior, but wasnt due to a split vote. I'm not here to say anything more than just that I am planning to make a request for arbcom between Atabek. We've tried RFC, I've tried making a peace proposal with him, we've tried mediation, nothing worked, the last step is arbcom. Thanks.] 14:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


* Saturday, January 25, 2025
== Please do not delete a category without depopulation ==
*:''12:00 pm – 5:00 pm''
*:], Grand Army Plaza
*:Afterparty: 6:00 pm – 9:00 pm (off-site venue, TBA)


|-
Dmcdevit, when you attempt to delete a category, please inform the residents in the category to remove them from the pages first and depopulate the category. Deleting category speedily without ] leaves a whole bunch of unnecessary red links. Thank you! ]<sup>]</sup> 21:34, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
|''All attendees at Wikimedia NYC events are subject to the ].''
:As I noted above, a bot is on the job and will get to it eventually. ] is taking care of it. ]·] 06:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


|}
==Some userboxes==
Dmcdevit, ] brought these userboxes to my attention:],] What is your opinion of them?] 04:44, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
:If they were in the template namespace, they'd be speedied. Instead, if someone puts it in the user namespace and transcludes it to pages in a way that is functionally identical to templates, we treat it as if it is somehow different and exempt from deletion. It's completely illogical to me, but, frankly, I have enough on my plate as it is. :-) ]·] 08:20, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


==Classical Liberal Wikipedians==
Hi - Did you delete this category? If so, why? "Classical Liberal" is a widely accepted phrase describing a school of thought.
] 12:54, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
:I don't dispute that at all. The problem is that Misplaced Pages is not the place to promote your personal opinion, and, indeed, categorizing users based on point of view is a bad idea for an encyclopedia seeking cooperation and the neutral point of view. Please feel free to describe yourself as a "Classical Liberal" on your user page (though as a matter of taste I wouldn't) but the category is unnecessary. Thanks. ]·] 01:53, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
::I disagree. I think it is a good check against biases (intended or unintended) because the more I identify my opinions in a context clearly distinct from any Wiki articles, the more readily my edits and contributions to those aricles can be checked and balanced by those with different opinions. ] 19:05, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
::I concur with KConWiki's above comment. ] 09:01, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

==Category:Liberal Wikipedians==

Rather disturbed at the deletion of this page, not least as it was nominated for deletion in March, the result being a VERY strong KEEP. Could you say now why it has been deleted without further discussion. Thanks ] 13:10, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

== Open proxy block for 161.200.255.162 ==

Hi. I see that you blocked 161.200.255.162 (], ], ) on 15 May for being an open proxy. Apparently, the proxy is used by ] and all traffic from the University's networks seem to go through it. I already put an unblock request at ], but thought you might be able to tell me what if the network configurations need to be fixed, so that I may notify those responsible. - ] <sup>(])</sup> 15:55, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

== Request ==

Hello. I have not posted on this page since last Christmas, but I do remember and appreciate how effectively you contributed to reducing revert-warring on a number of Eastern European topics. Now it seems we have a new hot spot, ]. There is a number of editors, apparently all based at the Tartu University, making disturbing edits in contradiction to a bunch of guidelines. Stray picks mostly taken from the first day when I took a look there (note edit summaries):
... Mind-boggling revert warring is accompanied by baiting, accusations of "bad faith" and "patent lies", and a healthy dose of good old trolling in the vein of Bonaparte. ], a Finn who can't be accused of being pro-Russian, seems to be the only non-Estonian editor interested in monitoring these subjects on a regular basis and he has to face an avalanche of complaints from the Tartu guys on ANI and elsewhere (see ] for some context). He asked me for advice, but I really can't figure out what may be done to counter tendentious editing by a team of determined users from the same establishment. When you have some spare time, please take a look at what's going on with Estonian articles. Thanks in advance, ]<sup>]</sup> 17:21, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
:The situation is getting more exacerbated each day, as the ]. I am told that the page has already been the subject of an arbitration, but I'm not sure what it was all about. What a pity that I can't contribute to the project as much as I used to. Furthermore, I'm trying to keep myself away from nationalist disputes and revert-warring. I believe the interested parties should apply to requests for law enforcement or whatever they call it. --]<sup>]</sup> 17:30, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
::I simply don't have time for this any more. It looks like that article has a probation on it, and anyone being disruptive can be banned from editing it or related articles. Perhaps you should try reporting it at ]. Sorry. ]·] 07:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

==Listen up, you might learn something...==
I've dealed before with the likes of you, who go around believing that they have the authority to delete everything based on their high-and-mighty principles of "NPOV" and other assorted crap. Know that the Wikipedian categories you deleted had already survived the deletion attempts of others before you, and they will not end with you. Don't give me your "divisive" garbage, we're not one big, happy, family of hippies. If you can't handle the fact that Wikipedians have varying political opinions, do us all a favour and stay put. I will soon be recreating the Wikipedian categories you deleted, and if you return to your shameful deletionsit ways, I have higher authorities that I can report to. And a good day to you as well. --] 03:21, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
:I'm afraid intentionally recreating previously deleted material might lead to a block. I suggest you use ] instead. Which one is it you dispute in particular? ]·] 07:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
::You have unabashedly deleted "Wikipedians who support Romanian-Moldovan reunification" and "Euroskeptic Wikipedians"; I have read that you have also deleted "Classical Liberals". Nice, shows the kind of person you are. --] 22:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

==Sockpuppetry==
Please, take a look and here . The extent of IP sockpuppeting by ] in the second case, is just incredible. Thanks. ] 16:38, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

==User Sosomk==
Dmcdevit, you might remember this user from ]. After returning from the block Sosomk maintains the same attitude, revert warring and incivility. My
was declined. I asked for it to be reconsidered. ] 01:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
:Well, that was several days ago now. If he continues, well deal with it then. ]·] 07:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

::Now he seems to be careful about 3RR. But this does not makes his edits without merit less disruptive. e.g. Recently he changed the etymology section of the article, promoting something what a medieval theologian has stated to a fact status, and downgrading scientifically referenced material to an alternative. I can not havoc over the article 24/7 like him. ] 08:49, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

== Azeri socks ==

Hi, Dmcdevit.

I have blocked a bunch of obvious socks: {{User|Otvetniyudar}}, {{User|HachikTumanyan}}, {{User|Zhirtibay}}, {{User|Aramgutan}}, {{User|AlexParKinson}}. They are obvious socks of an experienced Azeri user, but I do not know who. Some of the articles' histories shows similar sock blocked "as sockpuppets ot ], but I am not sure that it is him). In the event the master is identifiable he should probably be blocked. Can you do checkuser to identify the master? ] 03:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

:Alex Bakharev, can you please, provide diffs for your claim about "Some of the articles' histories shows similar sock blocked "as sockpuppets ot ]". Also, I would like to draw attentions to this diff as well as accusation made earlier , with an apology provided afterwards . Thanks. ] 07:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

::Also, while making title "Azeri socks", you should check the same report , which has an obvious sock ], which as its history shows, was created solely to make rv's on that page. I understand that this does not fall to "Azeri socks" category, but nevertheless, it's still a sock. ] 07:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

== Incivility ==


<small>(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from ].)</small>
Could you please take a look at ]. I warned him against making offensive remarks such as this one . He just responded with this on his talk page , and left this comment on the talk page for New England . Is there a way you could block a range of IP addresses since he mentioned on his talk page (diff 2) that he can create IP addresses as he pleases? I'd take this too ], but there kind of slow when it comes to responding to my threads. Thanks, ''']''' ]|] (Go Red Sox!) 04:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


--] via ] (]) 17:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
He just left this on my talk page ''']''' ]|] (Go Red Sox!) 04:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Pharos@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Meetup/NYC/Invite_list&oldid=1263682194 -->

Latest revision as of 18:30, 5 January 2025

Archiving icon
Archives

/Archive1, /Archive2, /Archive3, /Archive4, /Archive5, /Archive6, /Archive7, /Archive8, /Archive9, /Archive10, /Archive11, /Archive12, /Archive13, /Archive14, /Archive15, /Archive16, /Archive17, /Archive18, /Archive19, /Archive20, /Archive21, /Archive 22, /Archive 23, /Archive 24, /Archive 25, /Archive26, /Archive27, /Archive28, /Archive29, /Archive30, /Archive31, /Archive32, /Archive33, /Archive34, /Archive35, /Archive36, /Archive37, /Archive38, /Archive39


This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

November 22 + 26: Free Culture Friday and Wikicurious photo event!

November 22: Free Culture Friday

You are invited to Foundation and Friends' Free Culture Friday at Prime Produce on Friday, November 22. This event will feature a reception with Wikimedia Foundation staff in the afternoon, followed by a more informal salon and game night, utilizing Prime Produce's vast collection of board games. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome!

  • Friday, November 22, 2024
    1:30 pm – 7:00 pm
    Prime Produce, 424 W 54th St
November 26: Wikicurious: Capturing the Moment
Jefferson Market Library

You are also invited to Wikicurious: Capturing the Moment, the third event of the beginner-focused Wikicurious series, at Jefferson Market Library on Tuesday, November 26, in collaboration with WikiPortraits and AfroCROWD. All are welcome to attend, especially those interested in photography or contributing to Wikimedia Commons. We will explore the art of capturing the moment through photography and learn the basics of Wikimedia Commons, and (weather-permitting) we are also planning a photo walk, so bring your camera (or use your smartphone)!

  • Tuesday, November 26, 2024
    3:00 pm – 8:00 pm
    Jefferson Market Library, 425 6th Ave
    RSVP on Eventbrite is required for event entry!
All attendees at Wikimedia NYC events are subject to the Wikimedia NYC Code of Conduct.

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

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:32, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to participate in Misplaced Pages research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Misplaced Pages. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Sat Jan 25: Misplaced Pages Day NYC 2025

January 25: Misplaced Pages Day
Brooklyn Central Library

You are invited to Misplaced Pages Day 2025, hosted by Wikimedia NYC at the Brooklyn Public Library's central branch.

The special focus this year will be the launch of our "400 Neighborhoods" campaign for the city's 400th anniversary and WikiProject New York City/400 Task Force.

We'll also have a lightning talks session and you're invited to sign up for one, though space is somewhat limited.

  • Saturday, January 25, 2025
    12:00 pm – 5:00 pm
    Brooklyn Central Library, Grand Army Plaza
    Afterparty: 6:00 pm – 9:00 pm (off-site venue, TBA)
All attendees at Wikimedia NYC events are subject to the Wikimedia NYC Code of Conduct.

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

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)