Misplaced Pages

User talk:Lightbreather: 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 15:33, 12 July 2014 view source (Username or IP removed) Suggestions, Template:In use and your Sandbox: Fixed typoTags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit← Previous edit Latest revision as of 00:13, 19 November 2024 view source MediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,139,932 edits ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Archives|search=yes|collapsed=yes}}
{{editnotice
{{nobots}}
== Get well soon ==


Sorry to see the note on the top of this page. At least you were allowed back last year and got in 278 edits. Hope to see you back sometime in 2023. ] (]) 18:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
| text = <big>I'm an experienced editor outside Misplaced Pages, but ''an intermediate-level editor in WP.'' If I do something questionable, tell me - but nicely please. And point me to a WP policy or guideline, if you have it. - ''Lightbreather''</big>


:I am back. Worked on (still working on, actually) a few things with my doctors and I'm feeling quite a lot better. Knock wood, it sticks. I created a new article today. Would you like to look it over? It's about Amy Kelly, author of ''Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Four Kings''. It needs a little more work, but I think it's a good start. I'll probably take a break for a bit... Don't want to overdo it. ] (]) ] (]) 22:41, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
}}
::Super. If you can improve on that you're a better writer than me. Based on "evidences of seriousness of purpose and promise of success" I recommend you for the honor roll of WikiProject historical biography writers. Prose of this quality has not appeared on Misplaced Pages in many a long day.
::I took a look at the lead of ] and it cracked me up a bit. After fifteen years of marriage and two daughters her husband agreed to an annulment (heaven forbid royalty ever divorce) on the grounds of ] within the fourth degree (but why was the marriage allowed in the first place, and it took 15 years to figure that out?) So then she just remarries other royalty committing the same crime in the third degree! I can see how that's fodder for a best-selling book (and maybe a TV miniseries too). Sure, take it easy, no need to work harder than you feel up to. – ] (]) 02:48, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
:::What kicked this off was hubby and I were watching ''The Lion in Winter'' (one of our favorite "Christmas" movies). Then we got to talking about Eleanor. He likes to read historical nonfiction, so I said, You should read ''Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Four Kings''. And I bought him a used copy. So he's sitting there looking at it, and then his phone, and he said, There's no Misplaced Pages article on Amy Kelly. And I said, What? And there you go!
:::Thanks for the positive feedback. I truly appreciate it. BTW, what is the "Review" process? It doesn't leave anything in the reviewer's history. I've always wondered about that. ] (])
::::There are multiple review processes. One is ]. Another is ] (see ]). Another is ] (see ] – you too may apply to join the ]). Another is ] (behold that detailed flowchart!). You can see in my that I marked revision 1136740705 of page ] patrolled – that's just a matter of checking a box. I confess I didn't use that flowchart as part of my review process. Your writing is so many levels above the average I see that I didn't think it was necessary. The new page reviewers are a more elite group (currently , plus administrators). And then there's ], which uses a "Curation Toolbar". I have trouble keeping track of it all. That's why there's a disambiguation page! ''']'''. – ] (]) 21:45, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
:::::I see. I was aware of peer reviews, but not all the others. Thanks for explaining - and for your kind words. ] (])


== Pending Proposal for Kessler Foundation ==
{{Archives}}


Hi. I see you’re a member of the WikiProject Medicine/Society and medicine task force. I’ve made a number of proposals to update the article about ], a charity that supports people with disabilities. Several have been reviewed but a few remain. The request is posted here ]. I have a conflict of interest, and do the edits myself. Would you possibly have time to look at these? I appreciate your time. ] (]) 20:14, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
== In reference to your NRA 3O request ==
:Sorry, I don't remember joining a medicine task force. Good luck with your proposals. ] (])


== ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message ==
]. Regards, ] (]) 21:43, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
:Thank you. I'll see where that goes, and possibly just go to the RSN. ] (]) 21:46, 11 June 2014 (UTC)


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
==Gun Show Loophole==
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px; max-width: 100px">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2023|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


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.
I was wondering if you might know what the protocol is for changing that section header. Should I wait for more people to respond to my query on the talk page, or did Cullen have the final say on that? I thought I'd ask you instead of just going straight to the Tea House, but I'll leave you alone, if you prefer not to be bothered. Thanks again for talking ] (]) 16:00, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


If you wish to participate in the 2023 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>] (]) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)</small>
:From what I gathered at the TeaHouse, there needs to be some sort of consensus on a compromise for any disputed changes to be made. I'm not sure how many editors there are, but there are 55 watchers currently. Is there a chance that most or all of them are going to chime in with different opinions? Seems like that would be kind of a cluster****. Not to mention the way the talk board is formatted could lead to major confusion. Anyway, thank you for the vote of confidence. I really just want to improve this article, and I don't really care about sides. Chow for now. DN 18:31, 23 June 2014 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
::Consensus is a tricky thing. There is also the ] policy. That said, articles related to gun control are under discretionary sanctions now, so we must not be turds. Take it slow. Be respectful. Follow the rules. But don't let either side intimidate you. (I was bullied and tag-teamed mercilessly when I first started here.)
::I support the Second Amendment, but I also think we could have better regulations. IMO, a lot of the Misplaced Pages gun related articles have a decided pro-gun or gun-rights POV. Like you, I only want to improve them, which from my trained editor's eye, usually means adding some ] using high-quality ], ]. (The quality of the sources some of these guys cite is terrible.)
::Again, if you have any questions, I will do what I can to help. It really just takes time. And knowing a few editors who will give advice, kindly, is nice, too. For the first few months I edited here, I felt so lonely. Almost gave up many times, but I kept hanging in there. Remember to breathe - and don't let anyone bait you. And remember to sign all your posts with the four tildes. You seem to keep forgetting that. ;-) ] (]) 19:08, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
::PS: If you do rename that section header, do it with only the first letter capitalized - "Gun show loophole" - per ]. ] (]) 19:10, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


</div>
I don't plan on editing the header without a consensus, or at least a compromise, which by the way, doesn't seem like much considering how biased "controversy" sounds to anyone with a different point of view. Speaking of which I found some articles that may help dispute that...
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2023/Coordination/MM/02&oldid=1187132049 -->


== Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C ==
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2013-02-13/html/CREC-2013-02-13-pt1-PgH481-3.htm


<section begin="announcement-content" />
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/dec/16/opinion/la-ed-guns16-2009dec16
:''] ''


Dear Wikimedian,
http://www.salon.com/2012/07/24/gun_owners_vs_nra_leadership_salpart/


You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.
"So, if 69 percent of NRA members favor closing the gun show loophole, that's an issue where there's really not as much controversy as some might want us to believe."


This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the ] to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.
http://www.publicnewsservice.org/2010-09-07/gun-violence-prevention/gun-show-question-stirs-controversy-at-mn-state-fair/a15829-1


The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please ].
I also feel kind of like I'm being ignored by everyone but you...


Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.
Cullen's demeanor really surprised me since he basically ignored my response and then said something on my talk page that seemed somewhat contradictory to his recent statements..."I probably won't have much more to say on the gun show issue. I rarely enjoy editing in divisive topic areas, and find this particular area polarizing. As I take a middle ground personally, I find both sides of the dispute to be inflexible."


On behalf of the UCoC project team,<section end="announcement-content" />
I guess I'll be backing you up for a while, since no one has responded to me, really. ]


] 23:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
:Cullen is a pretty good guy, in my experience. I think he's just trying to prevent edit warring, which happens a lot on these gun-related pages. However, some of the worst offenders (who happened to push pro-gun POVs) were banned a couple of months ago, and discretionary sanctions on the subject in general were put into place, so, believe it or not, this discussion is going pretty well. ] (]) 21:24, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:RamzyM (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Coordinating_Committee/Election/2024/Previous_voters_list_2&oldid=26721207 -->
::I am not ignoring you, DN. I own a business and have to devote 90% of my attention the needs of paying customers, and didn't have time to respond to every one of the points you made, many of which were good ones. I just commented that I would be happy with a compromise section heading that you suggested. Once this is resolved, I will probably take the article off my watch list, for reasons previously stated. ] ] 22:25, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
:::Cullen, please excuse me while remove my foot from my mouth. ] (]) 23:08, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
::::No need, DN. You are new here and are conducting yourself well so far. ] ] 23:49, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==
Is it just me, or does Mike seem to have a somewhat obstinate demeanor about him? ] (]) 01:38, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
:No, it's not just you. Stand your ground, but don't let him bait you. I think he's one of those best-defense-is-a-good-offense guys. I just keep on responding civilly. ] (]) 01:56, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
The more I look at it, the more I am starting to think the term "Gun Show Loophole" needs it's own page on WP. The other editors do not want this term associated with the "Gun Show" page, and I can only think of a few particular reasons why. Nothing against them, I just think that if they believe the two terms should be separate, it wouldn't be such a bad thing. The page will never improve if editors are constantly at odds, as it is now. ] (]) 08:10, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
:I was thinking the exact same thing. My granddaughter is here but she'll go home later today. Can we talk then? ] (]) 14:11, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-text">
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.


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.
I've been putting together potential sections and links in my sandbox. I'm not sure if you're able to view any of it, but I'd love some feedback before I start adding it to the talk page later. Hope you are having a good day. ] (]) 20:53, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
:Great! Yes, I can look at it. I'll try to get to it later today. ] (]) 21:17, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
:So I just went to your sandbox and I saw a lot of small sections with raw URLs, but I didn't see anything that looked like a finished draft that you would move into the article. Do I need to look somewhere else? ] (]) 01:14, 27 June 2014 (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>] (]) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
Sorry I haven't added much to it yet. I keep finding bit and peices and adding them to my sandbox. I have something to add to the criticism section later. I keep seeing references that also refer to GSL as "The Brady Law Loophole" or "Private Seller Loophole"-FYI. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 18:46, 30 June 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:OK. Well let me know when you have something you want me to look at. Remember the scope of the article... it shouldn't go off into detail about other gun-control and gun-rights related topics (though mentions of, summaries, and Wikilinks to other articles are OK). You might want to look at what I've been doing on the ]. Specifically, I added a Universal background check section and I've been bringing some of the other sections up to date and ]. I am saving the lead for last, per the good advice of ]. ] (]) 19:02, 30 June 2014 (UTC)


</div>
I've added to the controversy section. Please make edits as you and Anastrophe see fit. ] (]) 06:09, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
</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/02&oldid=1258243447 -->
I'm beginning to suspect that some of the editors on GSL might be taking advantage of my inexperience in order to assert their WP:POV on the subject. Delete this message after reading. ] (]) 07:58, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
:POV pushing on both sides of the issue is common on all articles relating to gun control. Saying "delete after reading" is not a good tactic, since the edit history of this page is there for all to see. I have seen that comment. Transparency is best. ] ] 06:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
::Cullen - Please understand that I simply do not wish to share specific info with anyone other than LB. I do not trust the intentions of some of the people here, but I see your point, and feel rather ridiculous, now. ] (]) 07:58, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
:::You're doing fine, DN. I'm sure Cullen didn't mean for you to feel ridiculous. I know exactly how you feel - I've been there myself - and I'm trying to keep an eye on that article and your work. ] (]) 22:06, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

== Erin Bilbray ==

Yea, I posted without !voting. I'm not sure what my option is. Clearly she is/will be notable. Not sure if the current sources support that. ] (]) 21:18, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

== Re comment ==

"That shouldn't really matter, but I share my thinking on this in case you really only can imagine use of these terms as indicating an editor who's trying to present synthesis. However, of course, whatever his/her gender, ''it doesn't really matter'', unless DN truly breaks a rule".

Bringing up gender, suggesting (passively) that it matters, then suggesting it doesn't matter, in order to attack my behavior is unacceptable. Gender is irrelevant in an anonymous medium. Your presumptions about what I may or may not 'imagine' are uncivil, and the passive suggestion that gender matters in how an editor responds to or interprets another editor's comments is uncivil.

There isn't a single word of my comments that you called out that are: personalized attacks, that don't assume good faith, that violate any WP rules. I tendered some helpful guidance to a new user. I do not appreciate being threatened by a "warning", which seems a patent attempt to cow and silence me. If my impressions are incorrect, well, I truly apologize. Clarification may help. Why are you "warning" me? If you believe I'm violating the rules, you have an obligation to approach administration with your concerns. They can clarify for you whether your impressions are correct. In the meantime, 'warnings' strike me as baiting. ] (]) 18:29, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
:I believe my obligation is ''first'' to discuss concerns with you and ''then'' to seek outside help. And if you do keep doing what you're doing - which appears to me to be biting a newcomer - then I will escalate my complaint. In the meantime, if you have a complaint with my behavior, by all means, take it to admin. ] (]) 18:34, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

:I also warned you because there are discretionary sanctions on gun-control related pages. ] (]) 18:35, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

::I am aware of discretionary sanctions. I am not biting the newcomer (which is a new addition to what you first warned me about - are you attempting to game the system? That can be particularly dangerous when discretionary sanctions are at play). I've violated not a single rule. I've not employed attacks, ad hominem, or anything less than civil discussion with Darknipples, and have provided useful guidance to this newbie. I repeat what was one of the first things I had to explain early on: Blunt is not uncivil. Please don't conflate the fact that I do not raise my pinkie whilst sipping tea to mean that I am attacking users and violating the rules. I am not. ] (]) 18:56, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

:::Assuming we're talking about the same post (the one that I referred to on your talk page), if you think that was completely in line with ], I don't know what to say except that I disagree. Ditto for this reply that you've made to DN since then. Again, if you have a complaint about my behavior, and my answers here don't satisfy you, please take it to admin.] (]) 20:29, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

:::Your disagreement is noted. We will have to agree to disagree on the scope of civility within the bounds of policy. ] (]) 21:25, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
== Replaceable fair use File:ErinBilbrayforCongress2014headshot.jpg ==
]
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of ]. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the ]. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have ''no free equivalent''; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Misplaced Pages. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

# Go to ] and add the text <code><nowiki>{{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}</nowiki></code> '''below''' the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <code><your reason></code> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
# On ], write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, ], or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on <span class="plainlinks"></span>. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the ]. If you have any questions, please ask them at the ]. Thank you. <!-- Template:di-replaceable fair use-notice --> ] (]) 23:30, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
==Orphaned non-free image File:ErinBilbrayforCongress2014headshot.jpg==
<span style="font-size:32px; line-height:1em">''']'''</span> Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see ]).

Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> ] (]) 23:30, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

== FYI ==

Citations do not necesarrily have to be in any particular format (although, I personally think everyone should make use of the citation templates and when adding cites to an existing article they should be in the same format, but that's just me).--] - ] 16:51, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
:Thanks, Mike. When I made that edit, I didn't mean that he/she should use like WP:CS1 or something like that, only that he/she had used... what's it called? (hang on, while I look it up) - ] like the "'''Do not''' use this style" in that WP:ECITE article. ] (]) 22:04, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
::Ah, ok, gotcha! Yeah, bare url's in article space like that are a pet peeve of mine, too. Looks like you got a triple crown (unformatted, bare url and a blog as a source). Good work!--] - ] 22:13, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

== ARE, My last request... ==

Why bother with this...

"My last request, barring any other accusations by Scal, please check out this discussion, including the edit summary that deleted it:"

Are you trying to give credence to my comments? --] - Just your ] banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... ] 20:33, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

== Suggestions, ] and your ] ==

In light of this , it would seem that you are unaware of these templates, ]. Part of the disruption that occurred in the ] article was because I and no one else knew that you were "in the middle of expanding the section and is working from 1963 forward". These templates are typically used as a common courtesy and as a practical tool whenever making a major copy edit or (as often with your style of editing) a series of edits.

If you find these template too restrictive, you might want to consider using your ] for article development instead of a place to store random links, content, or other information you deem worth saving. That way you can as many edits as you like, take as much time as you like to locate sources, and hone your text before loading the content to Main Space. For example if you wish to start a new article or section you can create a specific subdirectory by simply typing the article name in your browsers URL box. Something like... (don't forget the slash) and then (assuming its not in use) when the page comes up that says "'''Misplaced Pages does not have a user page with this exact name.'''", just click the "'''Start the User:Lightbreather/sandbox/"New Article page name"'''" link and you'll have a blank article space. You do not want to add Categories on these pages and it affects main article space, that should be done once its moved to Main Space.

Now that you have been made aware of these items, obviously you can choose to use them or not, but their use is in the spirit of ]. I would have to say that the use of the templates is in your best interest as well as many others that you interact with. In fact, I plan to start using them again as I had forgotten about their existence. I have also added a link on your Sandbox page for your convenience. --] - Just your ] banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... ] 17:53, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

:Thanks, but yes, I already knew about these features/options, though I apparently was using my user space wrong because I wrote this "http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Lightbreather/Laura_Langbein" in my space, but not in my sandbox. I use my sandbox mostly to hold snippets of text temporarily and to hold sources.
:As for the in-use tag, I was aware, but when I read about it I chose not to use it. I haven't been aware of any other editors of articles that I watch/work on using it either.
] (]) 15:32, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 00:13, 19 November 2024

Archiving icon
Archives
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6
Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9
Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12
Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15
Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18
Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21
Archive 22Archive 23Archive 24

Get well soon

Sorry to see the note on the top of this page. At least you were allowed back last year and got in 278 edits. Hope to see you back sometime in 2023. wbm1058 (talk) 18:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I am back. Worked on (still working on, actually) a few things with my doctors and I'm feeling quite a lot better. Knock wood, it sticks. I created a new article today. Would you like to look it over? It's about Amy Kelly, author of Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Four Kings. It needs a little more work, but I think it's a good start. I'll probably take a break for a bit... Don't want to overdo it. Lightbreather (talk) Lightbreather (talk) 22:41, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Super. If you can improve on that you're a better writer than me. Based on "evidences of seriousness of purpose and promise of success" I recommend you for the honor roll of WikiProject historical biography writers. Prose of this quality has not appeared on Misplaced Pages in many a long day.
I took a look at the lead of Eleanor of Aquitaine and it cracked me up a bit. After fifteen years of marriage and two daughters her husband agreed to an annulment (heaven forbid royalty ever divorce) on the grounds of consanguinity within the fourth degree (but why was the marriage allowed in the first place, and it took 15 years to figure that out?) So then she just remarries other royalty committing the same crime in the third degree! I can see how that's fodder for a best-selling book (and maybe a TV miniseries too). Sure, take it easy, no need to work harder than you feel up to. – wbm1058 (talk) 02:48, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
What kicked this off was hubby and I were watching The Lion in Winter (one of our favorite "Christmas" movies). Then we got to talking about Eleanor. He likes to read historical nonfiction, so I said, You should read Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Four Kings. And I bought him a used copy. So he's sitting there looking at it, and then his phone, and he said, There's no Misplaced Pages article on Amy Kelly. And I said, What? And there you go!
Thanks for the positive feedback. I truly appreciate it. BTW, what is the "Review" process? It doesn't leave anything in the reviewer's history. I've always wondered about that. Lightbreather (talk)
There are multiple review processes. One is Misplaced Pages:Peer review. Another is Recent changes (see Misplaced Pages:Recent changes patrol). Another is Misplaced Pages:Pending changes (see Misplaced Pages:Reviewing pending changes – you too may apply to join the 7,813 reviewers). Another is Misplaced Pages:New pages patrol (behold that detailed flowchart!). You can see in my patrol log that I marked revision 1136740705 of page Amy Kelly patrolled – that's just a matter of checking a box. I confess I didn't use that flowchart as part of my review process. Your writing is so many levels above the average I see that I didn't think it was necessary. The new page reviewers are a more elite group (currently 726 members, plus administrators). And then there's Misplaced Pages:Page Curation, which uses a "Curation Toolbar". I have trouble keeping track of it all. That's why there's a disambiguation page! Misplaced Pages:Reviewing. – wbm1058 (talk) 21:45, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
I see. I was aware of peer reviews, but not all the others. Thanks for explaining - and for your kind words. Lightbreather (talk)

Pending Proposal for Kessler Foundation

Hi. I see you’re a member of the WikiProject Medicine/Society and medicine task force. I’ve made a number of proposals to update the article about Kessler Foundation, a charity that supports people with disabilities. Several have been reviewed but a few remain. The request is posted here Talk:Kessler_Foundation#Kessler Foundation Edit Requests – October 2022. I have a conflict of interest, and do the edits myself. Would you possibly have time to look at these? I appreciate your time. Dogmomma529 (talk) 20:14, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't remember joining a medicine task force. Good luck with your proposals. Lightbreather (talk)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:09, 2 May 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) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)