User talk:Rhododendrites/2017e

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Rhododendrites, for the period September 2017 - October 2017. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hi Rhododentrites, thanks for the barnstar. :D

I wanted to ask your opinion on Grams (search) article. I just added a sentence about a newsworthy phish scam. Should we include the correct onion address? I listed reasons+references on the talk page. I just want to be totally sure about it and you seem to have longer experience with the Tor articles. --Nanite (talk) 16:14, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

@Nanite: looks fine to me (it seems within the bounds of current practice to include given the sources available). The big issue with that page was the repeated addition of sketchy clearnet urls -- if there's one that has the backing of decent sources, I don't see that there would be any more problem adding it to this one than any other article?

BTW I saw that article about the phishing site. Ran a linksearch to find that it was linked from one article (Agora), added by a single edit account more than 2 years ago :/ — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:23, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Interesting, it looks like the site didn't start as a scam, but got taken over: compare this archive from 2 years ago to what you see on the page now. --Nanite (talk) 00:05, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Libraries. Legobot (talk) 04:35, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Wednesday September 27, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon / Wikimedia NYC Annual Meeting

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Babycastles gallery by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan. This month will also feature on our agenda, upcoming editathons, the organization's Annual Meeting, and Chapter board elections. We will include a look at the organization and planning for our chapter, and expanding volunteer roles for both regular Wikipedia editors and new participants. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming edit-a-thons, museum and library projects, education initiatives, and other outreach activities. We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from all educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery! Wednesday September 27 WikiWednesday Salon / Wikimedia NYC Annual Meeting (RSVP on-wiki or at meetup.com). 7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles gallery, 145 West 14th Street (note the new address, a couple of doors down from the former Babycastles location) We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 00:42, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

• P.S. On the weekend before the annual meeting, you can join: Action=History @ Ace Hotel (Sunday, September 24, 2017)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

This Month in GLAM – Volume VII, Issue VIII, August 2017 Headlines Argentina report: New material on Wikimedia Commons Brazil report: Edit-a-thons to spread mathematics and neuroscience; Women of Culture and other activities Côte d'Ivoire report: Presenting about West African context at Wikimania 2017 Estonia report: First Art Exhibition in the Estonian Wikipedia is now opened France report: Images from Jean-Auguste Brutails Germany report: Collaboration with volunteers and how to "wikify" GLAM-institutions Italy report: Edit-a-thons & goals Macedonia report: WikiWine project; Two days of edit-a-thons Serbia report: Public Domain Photos Donation Sweden report: Connected Open Heritage; Tekniska museet template migration; Stockholm Pride week USA report: WikiMania & Wikiconference North America, Beer, Hip Hop Wikidata report: Meeting Europeana; Conference News WMF GLAM report: GLAM-Wiki team, Wikimania, and updates Calendar: September's GLAM events Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Thanks for your input into the 'task force' discussion; you're right-on, and I think we're seeing the same things. The utter GAME-craftiness of some is just amazing, sometimes, and I had one 'low numbers' case that took ten years to overcome. I'll give you an answer in the RfC when I have more time, but in the meantime, you can look at the case I have in mind if you're interested [1]: if I hadn't done some sleuthing and caught them red-handed, it would still be ongoing, no doubt. Cheers. TP ✎ ✓ 20:18, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Timeline of the Trump presidency, 2017 Q3. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Rhododendrites, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! And I've definitely started using edit summaries, feel free to call me out if you see me forget. ansh666 22:17, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

After careful scrutiny of rubbish and poorly sourced content added on B. Dolan, I reverted it and marked the edit minor in compliance with the use of minor edits by Sysops and Rollbackers: (Minor edits#Exceptions). In a jiffy, without any study of the content I removed you reverted me and restored the rubbish. Then you left a chilly accusation that I don't leave ES, which is false; I did marked it minor, and definition of minor edit is known to every autoconfirmed user at least. You also claimed I didn't leave YOU a talk page message, that I made a revert at certain page!! I don't know how to comment on this. Later, you understand your mistake. Then you silently reverted back to my revision. Hence you made a useless revert and re-revert which wouldn't have happened if you studied the text for 30 seconds. You kept mute because you can't eat the humble pie and apologize for wrongly reverting me. Anyway I don't need that, for there is more important that that. What is important, is for you to review how you use revert and rollback privileges, because you are reverting people blindly without given recourse to due process of examining what was removed or contacting the revertee. I said this because this is not the first time you hurriedly reverted editor without knowing what you're reverting; In this exchange: User talk:Rhododendrites#Fake News Website reverted edit, you equally hurriedly reverted editor who removed unsourced content, later you apologized claiming you misunderstood his revert, after someone reverted your re-introduction of unsourced content. I don't used to engage for long chats here (because that is not what I am here for) but your penchant for split-second reverts without reading and temerity of realizing you grave mistake and keeping mute is particularly worth noting –Ammarpad (talk) 08:32, 8 October 20

@Ammarpad: The point of my initial revert wasn't so much about the content. I looked to see it wasn't vandalism, blatant spam, etc., saw a couple not-the-worst sources in the wikitext, and felt it was a problematic revert. Looking a bit closer, though I think some of it could be salvaged, the sources are problematic enough that reverting isn't unreasonable. So, to be clear, you were right that it should probably be removed. To anyone with experience on Wikipedia, that will become apparent, so yes, you were right about that, and I should've looked closer before my initial revert. Complication mea culpa.

Instead, I should've left the edit alone and left a message on your talk page to raise the issues I mentioned in the edit summary. You reverted someone who is not an experienced editor, but a new user, who added 2,722 bytes of easy-to-AGF content. You used the edit summary "Reverted edits by JoanOfArcadia (talk) to last version by Deoli1" (i.e. a semi-automated description of your action with no information by way of explanation/reasoning/intention/motivation). Even if it's vandalism, it's helpful to others to say even something as short as "rvv" or to otherwise add a word or two more than "reverted". If it's only a vague description of actions, it's typically taken as equivalent to an empty edit summary because it provides no information about intentions/reasons.

When I said in my edit summary "revert with no meaningful edit summary, no reasoning, no user talk page message, and no article talk page message" I was not talking about my talk page (?), but the user whom you reverted. (I was complicit in this too last night, as it looks like I forgot to save before going to bed).

If you don't use an edit summary that gives an actual reason, if you don't leave a talk page message, if you don't leave a user talk message, etc. then how is the new user going to have any idea why the content was removed or, more importantly, what was wrong with it or how to do better next time? That's the whole point.

So TL;DR I'll accept the criticism of my hasty revert, and add a request to use more descriptive edit summaries when not leaving a talk page message. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:07, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM – Volume VII, Issue IX, September 2017 Headlines Argentina report: Edit-a-thon in the Parque de la Memoria and new materials in Commons Czech Republic report: 2017 Edit-a-thon in the Research Library in Olomouc France report: Heritage Wiki Days Germany report: Prepare Your data Ireland report: New Irish partnership Italy report: WikiDonne and Wikidata Macedonia report: Three months WiR at the City Library in Skopje accomplished successfully Netherlands report: UNESCO WiR in Middelburg and Amsterdam Spain report: Culture and Citizenship Switzerland report: Third Edition of the Swiss Open Cultural Data Hackathon Tunisia report: Wikipedian in Residence UK report: Wikidata in Parliament USA report: September Song Wikidata report: Number crunching WMF GLAM report: Running Edit-a-thons, Studying GLAM Uploads to Commons, Project Grants and more! Calendar: October's GLAM events Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy. Legobot (talk) 04:36, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Sunday October 15: Wikipedia @ Open House New York / Weekend Photo Competition

This event is the concluding "upload party" to the Wikipedia @ Open House New York Weekend photo scavenger hunt, and an accompanying Wikimedia Commons tutorial and multimedia hackathon, Learn how to work with your photos to illustrate New York City articles! Note that this is part of the larger Open House New York Weekend activities on Saturday and Sunday, when sites normally closed to the public are open for public visits and photography. If you can, bring your camera/photos to the event, and a laptop if you'd like to engage in adding photos to articles. But this is not necessary. For photos from last year's event, see the OHNY campaign 2016 on Wikimedia Commons. Wikipedia @ Open House New York / Weekend Photo Competition Date: Sunday October 15 Time: 4:00 pm - 8:00 pm Location: Ace Hotel New York. 20 West 29th Street, Manhattan. Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 15:33, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Maroon Bells (11553)a.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 06:51, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Wednesday October 18, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Babycastles gallery by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan. We will include a look at the organization and planning for our chapter, and expanding volunteer roles for both regular Wikipedia editors and new participants. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming edit-a-thons, museum and library projects, education initiatives, and other outreach activities. We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from all educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery! Wednesday October 18 WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC (RSVP on-wiki or at meetup.com). 7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles gallery, 145 West 14th Street (note the new address, a couple of doors down from the former Babycastles location) We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 13:21, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Thank you for noting and correcting the mistake in my edit of Climate Hustle. The orphan tag was indeed incorrect. Any idea why AWB is placing orphan tag in error? I noticed it was seeming to come up quite frequently on my most recent use. Thank you for your contributions. MrBill3 (talk) 23:07, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

@MrBill3: No problem. I'm afraid I don't know why it would place that tag. Perhaps it considers an article to be an orphan if it has two or fewer incoming links? Not sure. IMO the orphan tag is best skipped unless accompanied by other tags/edits to an article, since it's usually a really easy issue to fix rather than tag. It's been a while since I've done a lot of AWB use, but I do remember the orphan tag being occasionally a sensitive issue with some people. FWIW. That doesn't actually have anything to do with the error. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 05:24, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I think restarting AWB cleared up the problem. I appreciate your opinion and to some extent agree that it would be better to do a little work and link the article. I do bits and pieces as well as in depth editing so in some cases I think the tag can call others to the task. Best. MrBill3 (talk) 12:56, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:53, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day, Rhododendrites, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Slightlymad 04:30, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Happy Anniversary R. Cheers to the next ten as well!! Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 04:39, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

@Slightlymad, MarnetteD, and Chris troutman: Thanks! And what an excellent first edit it was. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 05:07, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

I wish I could remember what I edited as an IP. I'm fairly sure there are some more test edits/breaching experiments sorts of nonsense when a professor introduced me to editing Wikipedia in class a yearish before registering... meh. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 05:09, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Dear Rhododendrites/2017e,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for ten years or more.

Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 04:30, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

It’s fine, but, I feel like if you remove that one than you should remove some of the others because Miraheze has a better Alexa ranking than some of the ones listed. It s a very popular wiki host. Thanks. MacFan4000 (talk) 01:59, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

@MacFan4000: Thanks for the note. Just to be clear, "notable" on Wikipedia is wikijargon. See WP:N. It's about being the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. For the purpose of most lists, since Wikipedia is not a web directory, etc., it usually means that an entry should have its own stand-alone article citing sufficient sources to show notability. Alexa rating alone doesn't count for much in terms of notability -- it's sort of how we defer judgment of what's important to other publications rather than make the determination ourselves. If there's a good amount of coverage, you may want to consider starting an article or a draft (e.g. Draft:Miraheze). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 02:56, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Oh I didn't even realize Draft:Miraheze already existed. Looks like it ran into some trouble with notability. If you know of more publications about it, you may want to contribute them there. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 02:57, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

I seen you recently deleted the Miraheze entry on the Comparison of wiki hosting services page. This deletion, I believe was totally unneeded and another example of the rancid deletionist policy which has infected Wikipedia seriously. Miraheze is notable. It has a better Alexa rank than 6 of the listed sites and there is full citations provided. I have reverted your edits. CnocBride (talk) 10:36, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

@CnocBride: I've left a message on your talk page - create the article first before adding it to that page. See Draft:Miraheze. On another note, you have a conflict of interest from your volunteering with Miraheze -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 11:42, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

@CnocBride: Please see two sections up on this page someone else made nearly the same comment. Notability and Alexa rank are not related to each other (except that, I suppose, something with a particularly high Alexa rank is likely to be notable, but the fact doesn't make it notable). I have no idea if it's notable; what matters is that notability be demonstrated before being added to the list (typically by citing a bunch of good sources in an article about the subject). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:39, 30 October 2017 (UTC)