| Revision as of 18:39, 8 February 2021 editSluzzelin (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers34,746 edits →What's related to Ira Matetsky: a new occasional feature: some (but not most) suggestions really are surprising← Previous edit | Revision as of 09:08, 10 February 2021 edit undoSoStr934 (talk | contribs)1 edit →nyb: new sectionTag: RevertedNext edit → | ||
| Line 77: | Line 77: | ||
| :::{{ping|Iridescent}} Thanks for the link to the thread. I had misremembered it as being on your talkpage. Regards, ] (]) 21:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC) | :::{{ping|Iridescent}} Thanks for the link to the thread. I had misremembered it as being on your talkpage. Regards, ] (]) 21:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC) | ||
| ::::I realise you didn't invite us to post all the interesting examples we found (and it ''is'' a fun game, per SandyGeorgia). Still, I didn't expect the three algorithmic suggestions from the article on ] to be ], ], and ] ... ---] ] 18:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC) | ::::I realise you didn't invite us to post all the interesting examples we found (and it ''is'' a fun game, per SandyGeorgia). Still, I didn't expect the three algorithmic suggestions from the article on ] to be ], ], and ] ... ---] ] 18:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC) | ||
| == nyb == | |||
| NYB, you can keep blanking pages related to my arbcom case all you want, it doesn't change the mistreatment i got then. WTT sunk my arbcom bid and then turned ya'll against me taking my bit. I thought you were an arb of character and sound judgement but you are nothing more than WTT's right hand man. To think i voted for you various times for Arbcom (i said it you can't block me for admitting i voted for someone becuase i've been blocked already tons of times by ya'll). I hope you and WTT are real cozy up in there. You are a lawyer but i should have known that all lawyers are nothing more than slimy snakes. NY is a hub of corporate monsters like yourself | |||
| Kevin G () 'rm' aaaan | |||
Revision as of 09:08, 10 February 2021
| This is Newyorkbrad's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Advance answer to tomorrow's trivia question
Roy Blunt, Amy Klobuchar, Zoe Lofgren, and Rodney Davis. Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:57, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- Who is going to get Best Actor, Best Supporting Actress, Best Actress and Best Supporting Actor awards on C-SPAN this afternoon (and possibly evening too)? ;) wbm1058 (talk) 14:25, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- Actually, the question is, "Who are the four tellers?" I just created the redirect. – wbm1058 (talk) 19:32, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- Well, this turned out not to be the story.... Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:35, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- Actually, the question is, "Who are the four tellers?" I just created the redirect. – wbm1058 (talk) 19:32, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Piling on
Hey, Brad. I just wanted to let you know that you don't need to preface anything whenever we disagree. I already know you to be without bias and with a great sense of objectivity. Now, I realize I didn't follow up when you responded to my "Unconscionable" objection, and I'm sorry about that. Because it was actually a really good answer. You were right about the language being merely emphatic rather than having had any connotations of an insult. And trust me, even if I were to count it as a vindication —which I do not— having Justin away for the foreseeable future totally sucks. Because he's an amazing editor and an awesome guy. Anyway, again, I'm sorry for not following up, I was just a bit rattled (on as well as offwiki) at the time, so somehow it just never came to pass, even though it should have. Well, better late than later. Because I think it's important I let you know that even when we disagree, I pretty much always find insight and humanity in thoughts. After all, I have voted for you more times than to any other arbitrator in the history of the Committee. I 've always held you in the highest esteem and that hasn't changed. Kind regards, El_C 09:28, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
- @El C: Thank you for this post and your kind words. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:54, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Apologies
Apologies for the accidental rollback --Guerillero 02:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Guerillero: No problem. I used to perpetrate a few of these every year, which I also had to apologize for, until I got a new smartphone, which has a built-in confirm screen when the rollback button is clicked. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:55, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Friday Jan 15: ONLINE Misplaced Pages Day NYC
| January 15, 6pm: Wikimedia NYC celebrates 20 years of Misplaced Pages | |
|---|---|
 Misplaced Pages Day is always a big day for Wikimedia NYC. While we cannot meet in person, we still have something special planned. We will begin the event with the debut of a new video celebrating our community. This will be followed by a panel discussion with some of the people you'll see in the video talking about Misplaced Pages's 20th anniversary, Wikimedia New York City, and the amazing work they do on Wikimedia projects. The event will be broadcast live via YouTube. Feel free to ask questions for the panel through the chat! We will also have some NYC wiki trivia you can participate in, with confectionery prizes.
| |
![[REDACTED]](https://u3vuiephb.global.ssl.fastly.net/File:Wikimedia_New_York_City_logo.svg){kind=link}
(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 14:50, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Happy Adminship Anniversary!
Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!
Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU 18:11, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
What's related to Ira Matetsky: a new occasional feature
My attention was focused recently, I believe through comments by Iridescent, on the fact that whenever an article is viewed in mobile view, an algorithm automatically selects three "related articles" to display at the bottom of the page. While I see the value of this feature, it was noted that BLP-like problems can easily arise if unsuitable articles are auto-selected.
For better or worse, I remain a BLP subject myself, so I will research this issue using an unscientific sample size of one. As of today, the three "related articles" linked to Ira Brad Matetsky are:
- Rex Stout bibliography. This is a completely suitable choice. I've done extensive research and writing about Stout and I'm cited three times on that page.
- Gregory D'Auria, a justice of the Connecticut Supreme Court. I'm sure he is a fine person and judge, but I've never had any connection with him or heard of him. He's no better or worse a "related article" for me than any other judge in the whole country outside New York.
- Tom Asimou, "an American lawyer based in Phoenix, Arizona who specializes in cases involving missing persons." The two of us have in common being lawyers, but that's not my location, not my practice area, and I'm not sure why the program thinks he's more "related" to me than any of the thousands of other American lawyers with articles.
So, on this round, one good hit, nothing overtly objectionable, but two befuddlements. I'll update this section occasionally when the related articles change. Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:24, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- From my mobile view, I was offered the first two, however top billing went to a senior partner at GSLZ. –xeno 01:46, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- Who even reads down there to find these things? I got Mark Z along with Stout and D’Auria. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:07, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- Not sure what percentage of people scroll down that far ... but it's just something that I noticed when it was pointed out as a feature of mobile view. It's not a huge deal, but it's not nothing, either. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:12, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- Worth watching for example of BLP problem, but it could take eons to come across one. Have fun with that ;) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:15, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- Right, hopefully it's never an issue. I just checked a few other pages and the links looked mostly sane, so fingers crossed. Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:25, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- Whatamidoing (WMF) may be just the person to provide some input about how those random links are chosen, and what can be done should they become BLP-problematic. Well, at least I can pester with a ping, anyway :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:41, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- The Related Articles feature is just pre-loaded search results. The actual search results can be overridden for any article through the addition of a magic word whose name escapes me at the moment. @Redrose64, can you find the code? Template:Related pages is a redirect to the main Navbox template, and Template:Related articles is a redirect to the See also template, and I can't find anything in the Help: namespace. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:06, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
- Whatamidoing (WMF) may be just the person to provide some input about how those random links are chosen, and what can be done should they become BLP-problematic. Well, at least I can pester with a ping, anyway :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:41, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- Right, hopefully it's never an issue. I just checked a few other pages and the links looked mostly sane, so fingers crossed. Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:25, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- Worth watching for example of BLP problem, but it could take eons to come across one. Have fun with that ;) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:15, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- Not sure what percentage of people scroll down that far ... but it's just something that I noticed when it was pointed out as a feature of mobile view. It's not a huge deal, but it's not nothing, either. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:12, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Here's a curious one: I checked the links for the last mainspace article I wrote from scratch, which was Thomas McDade. One of the three links is to the novel The Doorbell Rang. That's a great link, as there is a wonderful anecdote about McDade and The Doorbell Rang. Except that ... McDade isn't mentioned in The Doorbell Rang article, The Doorbell Rang isn't mentioned in McDade's article, and beyond that, there doesn't seem to be a single page on the whole Internet that connects the two of them or even mentions them both. The surface connection between the two articles, which the algorithm must have picked up on, is a superficial one. Maybe the AI goes deeper than we think.... Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:04, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- Curses for having me hunting and pecking from a mobile device. Even checking my most interesting articles and BLPs, I have come up with nothing unusual yet ... but this will de fun entertainment for long car trips. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:15, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- With no technical knowledge of this feature but based on knowing how WMF devs's minds work, my guess for how it made the Thomas McDade connection is that it uses Special:WhatLinksHere/Thomas M. McDade to find other pages that have similar incoming links but that aren't currently linked to each other, on the grounds that this will potentially be something in which you're interested which you wouldn't have heard about otherwise. Per my comments in the thread NYB alludes to above (which is now a bit confusing as somebody took it on themselves to unilaterally split it up and archive the sections separately so it now begins mid-conversation), you don't have to look too far to find inappropriate suggestions. The inappropriate suggestions aren't restricted to obscure new pages where the software hasn't enough information to work on, either; as I write this Stupidity is suggesting Deaf-mute. ‑ Iridescent 06:24, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Iridescent: Thanks for the link to the thread. I had misremembered it as being on your talkpage. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
- I realise you didn't invite us to post all the interesting examples we found (and it is a fun game, per SandyGeorgia). Still, I didn't expect the three algorithmic suggestions from the article on Death to be Bhagavata Purana, Gaudiya Vaishnavism, and List of numbers in Hindu scriptures ... ---Sluzzelin talk 18:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Iridescent: Thanks for the link to the thread. I had misremembered it as being on your talkpage. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
- With no technical knowledge of this feature but based on knowing how WMF devs's minds work, my guess for how it made the Thomas McDade connection is that it uses Special:WhatLinksHere/Thomas M. McDade to find other pages that have similar incoming links but that aren't currently linked to each other, on the grounds that this will potentially be something in which you're interested which you wouldn't have heard about otherwise. Per my comments in the thread NYB alludes to above (which is now a bit confusing as somebody took it on themselves to unilaterally split it up and archive the sections separately so it now begins mid-conversation), you don't have to look too far to find inappropriate suggestions. The inappropriate suggestions aren't restricted to obscure new pages where the software hasn't enough information to work on, either; as I write this Stupidity is suggesting Deaf-mute. ‑ Iridescent 06:24, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
nyb
NYB, you can keep blanking pages related to my arbcom case all you want, it doesn't change the mistreatment i got then. WTT sunk my arbcom bid and then turned ya'll against me taking my bit. I thought you were an arb of character and sound judgement but you are nothing more than WTT's right hand man. To think i voted for you various times for Arbcom (i said it you can't block me for admitting i voted for someone becuase i've been blocked already tons of times by ya'll). I hope you and WTT are real cozy up in there. You are a lawyer but i should have known that all lawyers are nothing more than slimy snakes. NY is a hub of corporate monsters like yourself Kevin G () 'rm' aaaan