Jump to content

User talk:HouseBlaster

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from User talk:BlasterOfHouses)
Welcome to my talk page!
Note: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave me a message here, I will respond to it here as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. Unless you request otherwise, I will ping you so that you know I have responded. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there.

Thank you!

Hello, HouseBlaster,

Once again, we have a number of categories which should have had articles and categories moved to them by User:JJMC89 bot III that weren't and they are empty. For example FM-Class cardiology pages is empty and it should have pages from Category:FM-Class cardiology articles moved to it on December 1st but they weren't. Should I give you a list of categories? Or go to someone else or post this on a talk page related to CFD? It seems like this happens mostly with Speedy Renames. Thank you for tolerating all of my category questions. Liz Read! Talk! 03:12, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Liz! I am going to ping MSGJ to take a look at this. They are both the {{WikiProject banner}} guru and the person who originally suggested the rename. MSGJ, would you be able to update the module now that all of the categories have been renamed? Thanks, HouseBlaster (he/they) 15:06, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it's on my priority list. Hoping to get to it later today! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:33, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We still have Category:FM-Class cardiology pages and Category:FM-Class toxicology pages that keep showing up on the Empty Categories queries we do on Quarry. I think they need some tending to. Liz Read! Talk! 03:10, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll ping MSGJ. Liz Read! Talk! 03:11, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added {{empty cat}} to the latter. Don't see an issue with the former? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:22, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Monárquico1975 (16:49, 9 December 2024)

[edit]

Hello Jony, I would like to ask in what forum one would best explain how an article I got very angry over could be improved? Maybe you have a link. Thank you in advance --Monárquico1975 (talk) 16:49, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Monárquico1975, and welcome to Wikipedia! The best way to improve an article you got very angry about is to be bold and do it yourself! Help:Getting started has some advice, and I am here to answer any questions you might have. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 16:53, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I already got started. I will ask if something weird comes up.
One other question:I thought this was a totally private message to my "mentor" that was named ZI Jony. Could you censor my first name in the text above? Monárquico1975 (talk) 17:11, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done. HouseBlaster (he/they) 20:56, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Jordanttran (20:39, 9 December 2024)

[edit]

Hello I'm apart of Valentino Khan's management team. I made a request for changes to be made to his wikipedia account. When will it finalize? --Jordanttran (talk) 20:39, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have not submitted an edit request; you should do so by following these instructions. Only edit requests are reviewed; the oldest one in the queue has been sitting there for a month. Your changes need to be backed up by citations to secondary, reliable sources; YouTube is not a reliable source. Primary source citations are only allowed occasionally, and all the sources you listed at the talk page are entirely primary. You will need to fix that before submitting an edit request unless you want it to be declined.
I will warn you: Paid editing is very much frowned upon here. We are a volunteer service, and you are not the first, second, thousandth, or even ten thousandth person to try paid editing. You should read this essay on the topic of paid editing, this other essay on when your boss tells you to edit Wikipedia, the entirety of the reliable source guideline, and the "words to watch" guideline. It is a lot of reading, but this is the reality of paid editing on Wikipedia. It is not easy, and is probably not worth your time. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 20:53, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a way to not make myself a paid editor? I just want his page to be updated. Jordanttran (talk) 23:06, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jordanttran: Short of quitting your job, no. As long as you are working as part of Khan's management team, you are considered a paid editor. HouseBlaster (he/they) 23:08, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2024-50

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 22:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from StarsinAirI (19:22, 10 December 2024)

[edit]

Hi! I am working on a number of provenance research projects. One of my plans is to create a page for the Center for Art Law. No rush. The organization is a nonprofit -- itsartlaw.org --StarsinAirI (talk) 19:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

StarsinAirI: Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! To qualify for an article, the Center for Art Law must meet our notability guideline for organizations. You can read about that at Help:Your first article § Notability – should this topic have an article?
Having read that section, do you have two or three reliable sources which meet all three of the criteria? Thanks, HouseBlaster (he/they) 21:14, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But how long does it take Amogelang22 (talk) 14:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed there are many:
Law schools and Libraries in multiple higher education schools list the Center as a resource (eg.
https://fitnyc.libguides.com/c.php?g=878494&p=6309617
https://lawlibguides.luc.edu/artandculturalproperty
https://www.law.berkeley.edu/experiential/pro-bono-program/slps/current-slps-projects/arts-and-innovation-representation/
https://guides.brooklaw.edu/art_law/organizations
There has been coverage in the news:
https://abovethelaw.com/2019/06/new-yorks-art-law-center-looks-to-empower-creators/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewerskine/2023/12/04/the-center-for-art-law-report-on-anti-money-laundering-and-art-review/
https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-despite-graffitis-global-popularity-cities-criminalize
https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2020/03/27/us-copyright-law-comes-under-scrutiny-as-new-legislation-makes-its-way-before-congress
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/editors-picks-june-13-2022-2125449
Links to the Center's expertise have been made/posted by other independent organizations (eg.
https://nationalsculpture.org/opportunity/center-for-art-law/
https://1995unidroitcap.org/center-for-art-law/
https://artinres.com/articles/free-and-affordable-legal-resources-for-artists-by-state StarsinAirI (talk) 19:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@StarsinAirI: Alright! Let me share my analysis of these sources. We only want coverage in the news; citations to the Center are not considered. Therefore, I have focused on that part:

Created with templates {{ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{ORGCRIT assess}}
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Secondary? Overall value toward ORGCRIT
Yes Yes Yes Full-length article on the subject Yes
Yes No Written by a Forbes contributor, which are considered generally unreliable due to minimal fact-checking Yes Full-length article on the subject Yes
Yes Not sure whether this is considered reliable No Does not talk about the Center as an organization; we need more than name drops Yes
Yes Yes No Trivial mention; we need more than a name drop Yes
I cannot tell if they have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy No We need multiple paragraphs' worth of information; this not even a single full paragraph Yes

We have one reliable source which meets all three of the criteria I gave you, but we need some more. Do you have any others like that first source you shared? Then we will be in business :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 20:57, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Amogelang22 (talk) 21:23, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here are a few others:
https://hyperallergic.com/536499/center-for-art-law-in-new-york-launches-an-immigration-clinic-for-visual-artists/
https://www.artwatchinternational.com/review-f-for-fake/
https://arteza.com/pages/protecting-your-artwork-in-the-age-of-ai-leveraging-the-center-for-art-law
https://secretsofartmagazine.com/2020/01/helping-artists-to-navigate-legal-waters/
https://www.easthamptonstar.com/arts/2021129/estate-planning-artists
https://www.obs-traffic.museum/center-art-law
Events:
https://www.aamg-us.org/artlawcenter/
https://www.clm.com/art-law-judith-wallace-presents-at-the-center-for-art-law/
References:
https://biblioteca.luiss.it/en/resources/center-art-law
https://artinres.com/articles/free-and-affordable-legal-resources-for-artists-by-state
https://copyrightalliance.org/event/copyright-law-clinic-event/
https://www.culturalheritagepartners.com/advice-for-the-next-generation-of-art-and-cultural-heritage-lawyers/
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/center-for-art-law-irina-tarsis-on-pursuing-art-law/id1519596187?i=1000553831162
https://www.guidestar.org/profile/82-3614849
https://secretsofartmagazine.com/2020/01/helping-artists-to-navigate-legal-waters/
https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1828&context=iplj
https://grantees.brooklynartscouncil.org/2020/center-for-art-law/
https://www.manacontemporary.com/event/art-contracts-101-with-center-for-art-law/
https://www.lexology.com/firms/1242259
https://www.obs-traffic.museum/center-art-law
https://www.familywealthreport.com/article.php/Reviewing-%22Center-for-Art-Law-Report-on-Anti_dash_Money-Laundering-and-Art%22
https://www.pryorcashman.com/events/the-essentials-a-guide-to-artist-dealer-relationships-and-contracts
https://tech.cornell.edu/news/how-an-art-lawyer-found-a-home-at-cornell-tech/
https://www.aals.org/about/publications/newsletters/aals-news-summer-2022/spotlight-section-on-art-law/ StarsinAirI (talk) 05:09, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
StarsinAirI, that is a lot of sources for me to dig through. Would you be able to present the three of them which best meet the criteria? We only need two or three sources, and we already found one. Thanks, HouseBlaster (he/they) 20:43, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Amogelang22 on Teju Babyface (08:43, 11 December 2024)

[edit]

Hello my mentor Can you help me with the article that I am working on --Amogelang22 (talk) 08:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Amogelang22! I have a very full plate at the moment, so I will have to pass. However, I am more than happy to answer any questions you might have. Best of luck! HouseBlaster (he/they) 14:17, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please check that 1968 Buenos Grand Prix article for me Amogelang22 (talk) 14:34, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But thanks Amogelang22 (talk) 14:38, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your edits to 1968 Buenos Aires Grand Prix look great to me! HouseBlaster (he/they) 14:40, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank Amogelang22 (talk) 16:39, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your mentorship helped me Amogelang22 (talk) 16:40, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

<3

[edit]
you're a kind hearted person, and a good friend.

thank you. VortexiusV (talk) 20:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, VortexiusV! HouseBlaster (he/they) 20:58, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
you're welcome !!
(。・ω・。) VortexiusV (talk) 20:59, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance

[edit]

Hi

I would like to request your assistance. I am trying to follow the rules, but I am new to the acronyms and terminology. Before I get into my request, I want to clarify that my request for arbitration concerns the blocking of information from TMA, not the content of any potential edits. Right now, the dispute concerns the complete blocking of any information from anybody who wants to cite this journal. Therefore, all the comments about promoting myself, COI, paid work, etc. are not part of the dispute. Plus, I have not made any edits to the “collatz conjecture”. All I did was ask people to“consider” possible edits by posting on the “talk” page. I did not have any editing rights at the time or an account with Wikipedia. Any edits would have had to be done by some else. I did not want to get this involved in the process. At the time, I thought Wikipedia pages were only concerned about facts and presenting the latest information. I will state for the record – I have no connection with TMA except I submitted by paper to this journal and they published it. I had not heard of this journal until about 5 months ago.

It was ruled that my request for arbitration was premature. Please let me know what other method/process needs to be considered before going for arbitration. So far, I have contacted Eppstein by private-mail (using an account he disclosed), sent him a copy of my peer-reviewed published paper, presented my proposed edits on the talk page of the collatz conjecture seeking a discussion of the correct wording of any edits (someone closed it after 2 days), tried to file a dispute resolution (closed as not appropriate), send messages to Eppstein’s talk page to discuss his complaints to see if we could come to a compromise (closed), filed a request on “reliable source” page seeking an unbiased, neutral editor to assist in coming to a decision ( presented all the facts showing TMA is not a predatory publication or unreliable source) (closed after a few days), sent email to Wikipedia “office” asking for the assistance of an unbiased, neutral editor (told this was not possible) and finally after a few weeks found the arbitration site, opened an account, made the required edits on various pages that have nothing to do with this issue, and finally filed a request for arbitration. What more do I have to do before I can request arbitration. However, I do not think anything short of arbitration will get Eppstein to consider the facts about TMA.

Before this dispute with Eppstein I had never heard of a predatory publication or whether a scientific journal was or was not a reliable source. I am just using the definitions as written by Wikipedia to base my defense of TMA. If Wikipedia is going require those criteria cited by Eppstein to disallow TMA as a citable journal, then the definitions need to be changed. Until then, I am going to stress that TMA is OK. ISTCC (talk) 21:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ISTCC. Arbitration is only able to adjudicate conduct issues. Determining whether a source is reliable is a content issue, and therefore will never be ready for arbitration.
As for the complete blocking of any information from anybody who wants to cite this journal, we regularly block sources from use on Wikipedia. Nobody would doubt that we avoiding citing The Onion, for instance, and we have a similar requirement for sources which lack a reputation for fact checking and accuracy. We even have a deprecation process for sources which are unsuitable for any citations. That Wikipedia is systematically refusing to allow citations to a particular journal is nothing out of the ordinary.
You should be careful of forum shopping, which occurs when you keep raising the same question at different venues hoping for a different result. You will be blocked from editing if you continue. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 22:19, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was not forum shopping. The requirement for arbitration is that the person exhasaut all available methods of resolving the issue before going to arbitration. This is a conduct issue because Eppstein is blocking the journal without support from Wikipedia procedures. There is no content issue because no content is under consideration. The dispute is about the journal TMA only and why it is being blocked. It is a scientific journal with an editorial board with distingiushed scientists, peer-reviewed examination and only modest publishing fees ($200 compared to over $3,000 for the Number Theory journal). There is no reason to block this journal other than a biased opinion, withoiut any first hand knowledge.
I have only been trying to have an unbiased, neutral editor make a decision on TMA. Have them look at the facts, rather then the unsupported statements of people. The definitions written by Wikipedia show TMA is not a predatory publication and it is a reliable scientific journal. However, no one is looking at the facts and just taking the biased opinion of an editor who is citing reasons not listed by Wikipedia. Wikipedia is either a source governed by rules and procedures, or it is a biased source that allows editors to make up reasons to block what they do not like, even if it is true. Tell me, what is the procedure when an editor begins making his own rules and stop people from adding information that meets Wikipedia standards. Do you let him continue without stopping him or do you tell him to follow the rules? I only have been insisting that Wikipedia follows its own rules. That is all. ISTCC (talk) 09:07, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 December 2024

[edit]

Did you implement the move at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 November 21#Ministers of the Victoria state government? This category was moved in error, and is supposed to be at Category:Ministers for the Suburban Rail Loop rather than Category:Ministers for the suburban rail loop (Victoria). StAnselm (talk) 19:00, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It should be fixed momentarily; thank you (sincerely!) for catching my mistake. Apologies for the error. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 19:35, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin December Issue

[edit]


MediaWiki message delivery 18:03, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2024-51

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 22:22, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol January 2025 Backlog drive

[edit]
January 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
  • On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled.
  • Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points.
  • Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note

[edit]

I had an "edit conflict" with one of your closes, while adding my comments. They add more information, and presumably shouldn't impact the results of the close, so I went ahead and added them. But feel free to revert them if you think it's appropriate. - jc37 21:04, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries; it obviously wouldn't impact the result (for those of you keeping score at home, it was Special:Diff/1263821068). Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 21:06, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Admin's Barnstar
For your tireless efforts in making this site better. Pyramids09 (talk) 05:41, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Pyramids09 :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 05:42, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025 GAN Backlog Drive

[edit]

January 2025 GAN Backlog Drive

  • On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for good article nomination reviews will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age of nominations reviewed.
  • Each article review will earn 1 point; for each 90 days an article has been in the backlog, an additional half-point is awarded; one extra point will be awarded for every 2500 total reviewed words.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays!

[edit]

Happy holidays, HouseBlaster! It was great meeting you and hanging out at WCNA. Culver's was the burger place! Here's to improving Wikipedia and good conversations at Wikipedia events in the new year! Daniel Quinlan (talk) 05:22, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Daniel, it is appreciated! And thank you for jogging my memory about Culver's :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 05:32, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays!

[edit]
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

I'm more than happy to make this a tradition. I appreciate I haven't been as active as I would like to be on Wikipedia lately, and next year is looking to be just as hectic, if not more so, in real life. That said, I'm just glad I can help out in whatever small ways I can manage. Enjoy your holidays!


Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

— Qwerfjkltalk 12:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Qwerfjkl. Don't worry about activity; real life always comes first. We eagerly await your return :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 19:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Skuncc (13:07, 22 December 2024)

[edit]

Hi HouseBlaster! How should I use my sandbox? My previous mentor just focussed on a silly edit I did and would not provide much sincere guidance --peeeeeee-yew! (talk) 13:07, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you are having a happy holidays! peeeeeee-yew! (talk) 13:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Happy holidays to you too, Skuncc! You can use your sandbox to test edits, but it is completely optional: If you don't have anything you need to test, you are not required to use it. Happy editing, and let me know if you have any other questions :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 19:32, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could this get me banned

[edit]

I don't know if you are the one I should ask this to, but because you're the enforcer of my unban I'll just ask you (sorry if it's disturbing): Would adding an infobox to Novy God violate what I'm restricted from editing on or not? Viceskeeni2 (talk) 19:22, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Viceskeeni2: Adding an infobox would be okay, but mentioning Armenia or Azerbaijan would be a violation. You are always welcome to ask questions on my talk page about the topic ban. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 19:30, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So if I add "Caucasus" as a region where it's celebrated or add the Armenian/Azerbaijani name, would that be a violation Viceskeeni2 (talk) 21:20, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Viceskeeni2, correct. Best (and happy holidays!), HouseBlaster (he/they) 21:21, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay thanks, Happy New Year! Viceskeeni2 (talk) 21:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings

[edit]
Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message
Thank you, ACN :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 02:30, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By:NameNoQuality

[edit]

@HouseBlaster 157.173.110.60 (talk) 21:16, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean? HouseBlaster (he/they) 22:13, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]