User talk:Tamzin/Archive/13

ANI Topic

Just dropping a note to let you know, I have no issues with the thread you raised at ANI. You are someone who has been on the of a particular brand of editor, different to the one I end up on but no less militant and convinced of their "truth" of the world (yours are actually worse than mine.) I hold you in the greatest respect. Raising a question over the block and asking for a review was a perfectly reasonable thing to do and I welcome the oversight and have zero issues. Canterbury Tail talk 18:13, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@Canterbury Tail: You beat me to posting something on your own talk. :) I hope you know I'm entirely genuine about you being a good admin, and I hope that the strength of my wording in the AN/I post (CC @Floquenbeam) didn't come off as... I don't know, histrionic. I really try to avoid playing the social capital games of adminspace these days (cf. File:On the backrooms (essay by Tamzin).oga), and to me here that just meant saying how I feel and seeing if anyone agreed, not preparing a meticulously worded objection that could start the papertrail for further proceedings, which ironically led to stronger wording than I've used in cases where I expected a dispute to land at ArbCom. In other words, with apologies to Pascal, if I had more anger, I would have written a nicer letter.

All the best. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 23:09, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

A note

I saw your name today so I just stopped by to drop you a note. I raised an eyebrow when I saw you helped close the ADL discussion because of the star of David on your user page. However, I could not find fault with the close. Another thing, if I had been actively editing when you stood at RFA I would have opposed based on your political stance. But now, I would not oppose a Tamzin RFA. Have a great weekend! Lightburst (talk) 04:33, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry if this came out wrong Tamzin, I saw your name today so I came here to leave a note. I really think your work here is great. Today, I would want you to be an administrator. Good job on the ADL close you showed great impartiality. I think I have been staring at my screen too long and it came out wrong. Leeky has let me know it was not a good message. I will go to bed now. Lightburst (talk) 05:53, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

@Lightburst: I believe you that it wasn't your intention to say anything hurtful here. And I do appreciate the vote of confidence (although these days I don't particularly care who thinks I'd be a good admin, one luxury of not being an admin). But I do think it's important to understand why theleekycauldron was taken aback at this, and frankly why I was taken aback. One of the main points I tried to make as an admin, which I still see as worth taking the time to fight over even now (see above), is that it's not appropriate to judge editors by their religion, sexuality, ethnicity, et cetera. Saying (or implying) that you saw someone as likely to be biased based on their religion/ethnicity is still doing that, even if your ultimate conclusion is a favorable one. The one-off favorable conclusion doesn't actually offset the initial biased assumption, and calls into question whether you would be inclined to (explicitly or not) use religion or ethnicity as the basis for criticism if you didn't agree with a Jew's close of an Israel-related RfC. You won't find me in the sanctions thread, because I don't want to play any part in the fucked-up way this site handles user conduct issues; but if I can give some constructive, restorative advice, I'd ask you to consider why it is that you think someone acknowledging affiliation with a specific group should be seen as potentially tainting their (quasi)administrative actions, and whether that's an approach that is fair to minority groups, given that members of less marginalized groups are often able to signal their membership without it being seen as remarkable, but are no less prone to bias (for instance, a man saying "I have a husband" might be seen as showing bias on LGBTQ topics, but a man saying "I have a wife" is not; yet over 95% of the U.S. has opinions on LGBTQ rights). Whichever way the thread goes, I think that's a good question for you—and anyone—to consider. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 16:04, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Hey, you're a good friend, you know that? That was powerful and nice for you to reach out to me afterwards. Sorry you've had to put up with some embarrassing and annoying stuff from me lately, but that was really kind. You deserve this barnstar. The Night Watch (talk) 16:36, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

@The Night Watch: I don't "put up" with anything. I haven't done anything I didn't want to do since July 2013. You're nice to chat with. :) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 00:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

It's something I worry about a little, that I say something wrong! I was always the "quirky loner kid", and social situations cause me high stress. Yes, even online ones, go figure. It's always a learning process for me. But yeah, you're fun to talk to. Don't overexert yourself, per usual :) The Night Watch (talk) 02:17, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi

I am not sure what to think about this. Polygnotus (talk) 17:46, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

@Polygnotus: I try not to have opinions on categories when I can help it. Do you have a specific question? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 20:24, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

A great attitude. Well, I am no expert on the matters at hand, being born boring, but I stumbled across it accidentally and I wondered if the claim that calling transgender men "male" could be slightly awkward is correct (and if so, why). Valereee has you listed as an expert on their userpage (and as willing to answer questions) so I figured I might as well ask. Polygnotus (talk) 20:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

I am not aware of any authority, descriptive or prescriptive, that considers it correct to call trans men "men" but not to call them "male". As far as I know that's just a lexicological myth borne of hasty explanations of the gender/sex distinction. "Male" and "female" can refer to gender, "man" and "woman" to sex.

Ceterum censeo content categories delenda est. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 20:49, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Ah, my AI says male refers to sex and man refers to gender. Polygnotus (talk) 20:46, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

And this is why it is good to ask experts instead of trusting AI. Thank you! Polygnotus (talk) 20:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

September thanks

story · music · places

Thank you for what you told my friend Graham! - I thought of you earlier today when I added a RS to an article that was on DYK 10 years ago, my story today, - I think of you often that way, with thanks for having pointed out that not all singers' biographies are of equal quality. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:31, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Rubber-stamping

Can you please "close" this RfC? Contentious topic, etc. TrangaBellam (talk) 16:09, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Celebrity Number Six

On 4 October 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Celebrity Number Six, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that retired model Leticia Sardá had no idea that she was the subject of a four-year global search? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Celebrity Number Six. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Celebrity Number Six), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 16,206 views (675.3 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of October 2024 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:27, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Celebrity Number Six

The article Celebrity Number Six you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Celebrity Number Six for comments about the article, and Talk:Celebrity Number Six/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of TompaDompa -- TompaDompa (talk) 15:01, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Mandel

Do you have any theory what's behind these [1] edits? Fwiw, I think [2] counts as "published". I keep reverting because It's right there in The New Yorker!!! Wikipedians don't question The New Yorker!!! Without good reason, anyway. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:19, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: My theory has been that, due to our past own goal, that section gets an unusual amount of attention for the personal life section on a relatively low-profile BLP, leading to a lot of tilting at windmills by people who care more about the idea of being right than actually being right. It's certainly an unusual pattern of edits, not just from that IP either, but about sufficiently disparate topics that I doubt it's socking. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 21:50, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello there

It's that the Face Reveal on your image! 77.77.218.177 (talk) 08:43, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

'zinbot

Hello Tamzin, I hope you are doing great. I noticed that 'zinbot has not reviewed any RfDed redirects since 17 April 2024. Maybe it needs a fix? – DreamRimmer (talk) 06:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

@DreamRimmer: I think @TheresNoTime was looking into this, as they run that side of the bot. Hey Sammy! Fox sighting recently here! First in over a year. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 16:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

I'll take a look when I get a moment ^^ and oh cool, the foxes are back! 🦊 — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 18:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

*foxen -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 21:37, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. If you ever need an extra pair of hands to help maintain this tool in the future, I'd be happy to help out :) – DreamRimmer (talk) 12:03, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@DreamRimmer @Pppery, also @Robertsky: Very sorry for the delay here.  Fixed There were a few issues, primarily that no one made the requested notification when Ahecht modified the template's output in April. Still, it's my fault this took so long to fix. Ideally I'd like to make the bot load a cached version of the template's output periodically, to remove the dependency on manual updates, but I'm still mulling over the best way to dynamically turn that output into a regex without letting through false positives. It was suggested at some point in the past that maybe my conservativism in looking for the exact output of {{subst:RfD|<redirect>}} was excessive, since while it does reduce the risk of patrolling vandalism, that's a very low risk to begin with, and any such vandalism would usually be low-visibility, plus vandalism can always occur after the patrolling regardless. So I'm tempted to just check for an {{#invoke:RfD... and leave it at that. But I'm not sure yet. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 23:22, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I must've missed that box since all the others were talking only about breaking changes, not just HTML changes. My mistake. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 03:53, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Article improvement

Hey Tamzin, the concept of gender nonconformity came up in a discussion and I know you've done some good work on LGBT-related topics. I figured I'd ask if you have any ideas or are interested on working on this? No issues if not, I realize that most Wikipedians already have crazy to do lists as it is. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 00:27, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

@Clovermoss: I think I have my hands full right now with rewriting Transgender sexuality, and then a few projects lines up after that too. Thanks for the offer though. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 01:46, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough. Most Wikipedians have a lot on their plate but I figured the worse I could get is a no. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 01:47, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Shitposting warning

Please refrain from shitposting on Wikipedia as you did at Andrew Tate. Your edits have been hidden as part of a collapsed discussion.

• If you are engaged in shitposting with another editor, please discuss the off-topic shit with the editor at their talk page, not the article talk page.
• If you are engaged in any other form of shitposting, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's shitposting guidleines, and please do not continue to make shitposts that appear shit. CNC (talk) 00:20, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Holy crap, I had my finger on the rollback button! Knitsey (talk) 00:25, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

I find this very homophobic against @Drmies. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 01:34, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for sticking up for me, Tamzin. I'm having a hard enough time already with my identity, and now I'm getting collapsed? That's almost like being canceled, isn't it? I'm being oppressed. That's it: I'm going to pet my dog and make creme brulees for my kids. (Is that a gay enough thing to do? I'm so confused.) Drmies (talk) 01:38, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Wrong diff links in ANI thread comment

Hi, sorry, this may not be worth this message, but I thought I'd let you know that the last two diffs you linked in your comment in today's Lightburst ANI thread ("commented again" and "replied") are not the ones you meant to link, I believe (the correct ones are just one away for each though, so it's not like the sources for the quoted text are impossible to find). Feel free to ignore/remove this message :) Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 23:32, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

@Felida97: Oh, thanks! It was the issue that comes up if you cycle through diffs using "next". Fixed now. :) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 00:23, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Canada-India talk page

Sorry to bug you over this, Tamzin, but since you just closed the split proposal, I'm hoping you saw the "poisoning the well" comment directed towards me just before.[3] One of the diffs they do show is me literally giving an apology. I get they think my conduct is subpar but I don't think laying that all out there (complete with the aforementioned PA and others in there) and then wanting me to discuss content in the next paragraph is fair. Could you by chance remove the PAs? ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  01:48, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

@GhostOfDanGurney: I am not an admin, and closed the discussion just as any ol' content editor chipping in. If you have a user conduct concern, you should bring that to WP:AE under ARBIPA, or to WP:AN/I if you prefer worse feedback. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 01:51, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Special:Diff/1255305234

Hi Tamzin. I completely misread your comment so I removed my reply. Would appreciate if you would remove yours too since that's not how I intend to respond. It's getting late where I am so I'll see about writing a proper response tomorrow. -Fastily 06:49, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Sure. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 06:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@Fastily: For what it's worth, I really avoid participating at AN/I as much as I can help it. So maybe it conveys how alarmed I was at your treatment of Clovermoss and Fathoms Below that I felt I had to make an exception. Or maybe it doesn't; not like you're under any obligation to think I have good judgment. Either way, I've said my piece in the thread, and I'll leave it to calmer minds than mine (that's a joke, it's AN/I we're talking about) to figure out where to go from here. So no need to ping on reply or anything like that. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 08:45, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Didn't see you had fixed the others...

Please see Template talk:Archive top yellow#Semi-protected edit request on 4 November 2024, same css spillover problem as the others you fixed. – 2804:F1...86:83AA (talk) 19:56, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@Elliiiiiiiiiiii weren't you gonna do this? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 20:43, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Fixed it now. And yes I was meaning to do so earlier, but I forgot. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:52, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

SOM:Ledecite does not mean you do not have to put citations in a entire section

You have reverted my edit on Whitestripes,Ledecite means like,a paragraph, not a whole citationless section, UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 20:21, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

(talk page jaguar) No, WP:LEADCITE very specifically articulates that citations are generally not required in the lead section of an article, as it is meant to be a summary of the cited material in the body. Remsense ‥ 论 20:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, Remsense has it right. I've elaborated in my revert summary. Note in particular that LEADCITE contemplates misunderstandings of this nature, and explicitly uses the word "lead sections": As editors are often unaware of this guideline, good faith should be assumed when {{citation needed}} tags are added to lead sections sometimes erroneously. {{Leadcite comment}} can be added to article leads that often attract unwarranted {{citation needed}} tags. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 22:17, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

then what is the point of the existence of Template:US? UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 22:30, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

To be used in any section except the lead. Maybe the template's documentation should say that. If you see a lead section that contains statements not verified in the body of the article, there's {{Lead extra info}}. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 22:33, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

That template is for sections that require references. The lead does not require references. Remsense ‥ 论 22:36, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

@Tamzin,Okay you are right UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 23:18, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Species close

Not the sort of result my comments were seeking to create, but thought I'd let you know I appreciate the careful wording, which must have taken some time. Best, CMD (talk) 08:19, 19 November 2024 (UTC)