Jump to content

User talk:DMacks/Archive 63

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 60Archive 61Archive 62Archive 63Archive 64

In re: Elliot Page Talk page restrictions

We have long followed and respected your work at WP. We have the appended general and specific requests to make, regarding the article title referenced.

_____

1, In general, we would suggest that it is counter to WP's historical and philosophical raison d'être, to so fully restrict Talk page engagement, that non-registered editors cannot even post requests for article changes. This essentially prohibits, at the given article, a class editors from directly participating with that article's fellow editors. Notably, the class of editors excluded (the non-registered) were consciously and consistently included, beginning with the WP founders, to allow editing very similarly entitled as that of the registered. The baby needs not go out with the bath water. Edits from good non-registered editors need not be excluded alongside vandalism.

I suggest that the article might retain its editing restrictions, but that the Talk page should allow, at least, for non-registered/logging editors to post direct requests for article changes to their article peers. (Yes, we are aware that there is a mechanism to suggest article changes outside of the article's Talk page. But those further clicks take the request outside of the direct review and reflection of a given article's editors and readers, separating parties with similar interests, and convoluting simple question like, "Has this edit been reuested before?".)

_____

2, Regarding the following sentence at the Page article (which opens its paragraph, and is followed by two citations):

On November 9, 2017, it was announced that Page had been cast in the main role of Vanya/Viktor Hargreeves in the Netflix superhero series The Umbrella Academy.

Note, this reflects no proposed change to the wikilink destination; it is only a proposed change to its markup piping/presentation.

Justification: Having reviewed the sentence and its two supporting citations, one must conclude that the sentence is both historically inaccurate, and inccurate to its stated sources. The sources presented make no mention of the Viktor character, only the Vanya; thus, the current presentation confounds an early decision in the series with later developments in the series design and production. For historical accuracy, the article should report only what the citations report—that on that 2017 date, Page was cast in the role of Vanya (as the two citations provided indicate no perception on the part of the series writers/showrunner, in that moment, of the character evolving as it eventually would). Then, further on, as the role evolved, the second character name should be introduced, with that relevant date (with citations reporting that change in series design and related casting).

Note, no motivation with regard to gender issues should be perceived here. This edit is simply aimed at WP:VERIFY compliance, and the historical accuracy of the prose—that the WP article text says what the sources say, and accurately reflects the history of the series as it occurred.

_____

Thank you for your attention to these general and specific requests. Again, I come to you out of continuing respect for your work here, and believing, pragmatically, that a change in the article and its editing status will only take place if suggested by such a one as yourself. (Please feel free to edit/adapt my requests, in any way you see fit.) With kind regard,

98.193.42.97 (talk) 14:23, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP! I will copy your edit-request to the talk-page, as I am not familiar enough with the topic to know wheher it is correct. Regarding protection, unfortunately that specific talk-page has a years'-long history of trolling and other abuse, bad enough that nothing short of semi-protection could solve it. I had tried protecting it for just a few days back in 2020 when there was an acute problem, but it kept re-occcuring after my protection expired, so longer protections have been added as each expires and the problem keeps re-re-occurring (now a total of five admins have taken that action there). DMacks (talk) 14:38, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-35

MediaWiki message delivery 20:29, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Trehalosamine

Hello DMacks, Thank you very much for your revision about the topic of Trehalosamine that I (Nat comp 4) created before. I am not good at editing Wikipedia, and your efforts make this article much better. I would like to talk to you, however, about two things. The first, the structures of 3-trehalosamine and 4-trehalosamine are mixed up. Please check and revise it. The second, some specialist of sugar told me before that the trehalosamine structures you put this time are ambiguous to show alfa-alfa-1,1 bond structure and should be avoided to use. The structure seems somewhat like alfa-beta-1,1 bond although this kind of trehalose structure are sometimes seen in the scientific papers. Therefore, I put the previous version of the structure. I am not a specialist of sugar 3D structure and if you are in the field much deeply than me, I do not persist in it. Thank you for your kind consideration. Nat comp 4 (talk) 01:20, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! I'm an organic person but sugars are not my speciality. I did indeed have a mismatch between the images vs captions. Fixed--good catch!
These images do not agree with alpha,beta. The two rings have the same conformation as each other and the same array of specific stereochemical details as each other. Because they match, it's not "one of each" alpha vs beta. It's true that one of those bonds is "up" instead of "down", but that's because the whole ring is turned over. A concern with the diagram I replaced was that those bonds were not as clearly in any particular direction (not equatorial but not fully axial either). From the monosaccharide nomenclature article:
It's not geometrically correct that the two bonds off that linking oxygen are linear to each other, but that helps keep the two rings in a normal alignment on the screen. I do like that "bird in flight" style you have (with the angle between those bonds), but the actual 3D geometry of trehalose is even more complicated.
So I simply matched the images in c:Category:Trehalose and somewhat followed the Haworth projection (where atomic geometry is not a focus). DMacks (talk) 05:17, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your quick response and detailed explanation. I am satisfied. I respect your kind efforts in Wikipedia. Nat comp 4 (talk) 06:12, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).

Administrator changes

removed Pppery

Interface administrator changes

removed Pppery

Oversighter changes

removed Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past.
  • A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Tech News: 2024-36

MediaWiki message delivery 01:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:MolFormIndex-wrapper

Template:MolFormIndex-wrapper has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 11:39, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-37

MediaWiki message delivery 18:48, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

This Month in Education: August 2024

Tech News: 2024-38

MediaWiki message delivery 23:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-39

MediaWiki message delivery 23:32, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

inline citation feedback

Thank you for your review and for tagging the page regarding inline citations on the Bernadette Thompson article. I’ve made some updates to clarify the connections between specific claims and their corresponding sources, ensuring it’s easier to verify the information.

Initially, some citations were placed at the end of paragraphs where the sources covered thematically related information. I've now added more precise inline citations to ensure that the origins of certain claims are clearer within the narrative. I hope these adjustments resolve the concern and make the article more straightforward to navigate.

I appreciate your input and your help in improving the page! Fashionista345 (talk) 08:32, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

@Fashionista345: Thanks for taking care of that! DMacks (talk) 16:01, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-40

MediaWiki message delivery 22:16, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2024).

Administrator changes

added
removed

CheckUser changes

readded
removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Pending changes request

Hi DMacks, I hope you're keeping well. Would you mind considering my request at WP:PERM/PCR, please? All the best, ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 17:57, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Regarding about simulcast of ABS-CBN programs on ALLTV

Hello, sir @DMacks.... Do you know that several programs from ABS-CBN such as Magandang Buhay and It's Showtime are finally and officially comeback to the original frequencies because it also air on ALLTV...??? And there is the reliable sources for this:

https://trendrod.wordpress.com/2024/06/17/its-showtime-begins-airing-on-alltv/

https://trendrod.wordpress.com/2024/05/01/magandang-buhay-resumes-production-simulcasts-on-alltv-starting-may-13/

Thanks..... 36.69.21.16 (talk) 12:46, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

This is not a topic with which I am very familiar. But also, wordpress does not seem like a reliable source. DMacks (talk) 13:33, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Procedural advice

As mentioned at Talk:Stacking (chemistry)#Split proposal and probably noncontroversial, I am planning to paste a lot of content in Stacking (chemistry) into Pi-stacking, which is a redirect to Stacking (chemistry). Seem reasonable? --Smokefoot (talk) 23:38, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Yup. I responded there. DMacks (talk) 16:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-41

MediaWiki message delivery 23:38, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Blocked editor Alon9393

Good morning! Since you were the one who blocked Alon9393 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), I'm pointing you to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyprus–Saudi Arabia relations, where I noted that a suspected block evader showed up, i.e. Alon9393. This was 181.197.42.150 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). After several relists, another 181.197.42.215 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) showed up who is quite obviously the same person as the previous IP. I draw the conclusion from the IP number itself, as well as the latter IP using the word "notoriety" in an AFD context, which is a dead giveaway for Alon9393 - per his user talk page where this word was brought up. Geschichte (talk) 07:07, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Molecular formula Hill key

Template:Molecular formula Hill key has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:41, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-42

MediaWiki message delivery 21:17, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Phycomin for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Phycomin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phycomin until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdewman6 (talkcontribs) 02:46, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Nobel article controversies

Please whenever you need me write to me in the talk of the article concerned. I have removed the duplicate reference. ReyHahn (talk) 14:09, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks ReyHahn. And sorry I didn't notice the clearly written information on your talkpage about your communication preference! DMacks (talk) 13:37, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

"apprentice"

The use of the word "apprentice" is that of the Boston Globe journalist cited, who does not know better. Scientists do not use this word. The phrasing "operator of the electron microscope" is also the journalist's wording. Scientific colleagues would not call Chow just an "operator." Nykiang (talk) 05:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-43

MediaWiki message delivery 20:49, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Requesting clarity on the comments you’ve left on the article I’ve submitted

Hello, I am requesting clarity on the comment you’ve left on the article I’ve submitted for creation. I have added a host of verifiable references and citations, and have followed reviewers advice at every turn, as clearly shown in the edit log. Therefore, your comment “same BLP unfixed mess” as your reason for repeatedly declining the submission is in no way helpful, and does not seem to represent a good faith attempt at objective editing. Some clarification would be very much appreciated. Hungryscamp (talk) 19:32, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

The article states a birthdate. There is no ref for that fact. The article states "earning first chair in both during middle and high school, but ultimately committed his studies to the guitar, studying jazz at the University of North Carolina Wilmington." but there is no ref for any of those details. The article highlights "multiple seasons of Moonshiners on the Discovery Channel, and Lone Star Law on Animal Planet" but the ref only supports Animal Planet generally. The article states "using the field recording techniques made famous by Alan Lomax.[8]" but ref #8 does not mention Lomax, and this sentence itself appears to be trying to ride Lomax's coattails. "Johnson is a music educator and has cultivated a global following through an instructional platform where he teaches guitar technique and theory[3]" but the ref only supports that he released a single educational item and nothing about a "global following", etc. To put it simply, every fact must have a cited WP:RS reference (so that typically also excludes refs that are mostly interview format or collections of quotes). DMacks (talk) 19:43, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification. I did not provide ref for birthdate, as Wikipedia guidelines state: “The policy on sourcing is Wikipedia:Verifiability, which requires inline citations for any material challenged or likely to be challenged, and for all quotations.” ] I did not see the subject’s birthdate as being information likely to be challenged, which is why I did not provide ref here. I will add reference or remove the birthdate, but I do believe that your leading with that here is evidence that you are making a personalized dispute and not an objective edit.
I would argue, as well, that the ref for the section on high school studies is supported by the article which does mention the subject playing trumpet and baritone at South Brunswick High School. However, I will remove the inclusion that the subject earned first chair in both, since you find that contentious as well.
In your 3rd point, you state that “The article highlights "multiple seasons of Moonshiners on the Discovery Channel, and Lone Star Law on Animal Planet" but the ref only supports Animal Planet generally.” This is absolutely not true, as the second sentence in the article states “His original music has been licensed to Dodge Motor Co, Ken Burns, the Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, PBS, and more.” Therefore, your reason for dispute is again inaccurate. I will, however, include additional citations to evidence the specific shows on those specific networks, as I am doing all that I can to follow protocol.
Re: referencing Alan Lomax’s recording techniques in the section on field recording, the article does describe the recording techniques used to record the referenced album. However, I understand that you are discounting the validity of that reference, based on your assertion that WP:RS “typically also excludes refs that are mostly interview format.” This does seem to be subjective on your part and further evidence that this is personal and not objective editing. However, I will remove the reference to Lomax, to again show my own effort to act in good faith.
Re: your final contention that I did not provide sufficient reference/citation to prove that "Johnson is a music educator and has cultivated a global following through an instructional platform where he teaches guitar technique and theory,” the provided citation does specifically reference “ Justin also recently released a three-part instructional DVD series, Roots Music According to Justin Johnson, about how to build and play traditional roots instruments.” However, you are correct that it does not reference the global following or the further development of that educational platform over the years, so I will add citations to further prove those points. Hungryscamp (talk) 20:48, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
The threshold for "biography of living persons" details is higher than other types of claims, including for reasons of privacy. The threshold for anything that sounds even remotely promotional is likewise (because we as editors are not allowed to editorialize or write non-neutral content). DMacks (talk) 09:45, 27 October 2024 (UTC)