THC Science

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4

This page has archives. Sections older than 730 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Thanks

...for that series of edits to Gamergate. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 11:41, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just trying to understand for myself what the whole thing is. "Torturously complex" doesn't begin to describe it. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 19:15, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I want to give you my thanks as well. Normally I'd use the thanks tool but you've been prolific and the sum total is just great. Goodonye. --Jorm (talk) 22:34, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33

I am posting this on your talkpage out of an abundance of caution solely because you recently edited Talk:Sarah Jeong and, as the message says, not suggesting any policy violation by you. Abecedare (talk) 01:48, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV / AESTHETIC

Hi SdeBoeuf! I *don’t think* your recent edit to WP:NPOV has worked as intended?

You inserted it as a policy shortcut alongside WP:SUBJECTIVE. Both link to the same bit of WP:NPOV . . I’m not sure if you intended the duplication? (or are you thinking that AESTHETIC may be more expressive / more likely to catch the reader’s attention productively?)

And - this baffles me! - both links actually render redirect-pages. The reader has to click through them to reach anything the reader is likely to recognise as an intended destination.

The two pages differ - and your link brings up the weirder by far of the two! It’s really earnestly telling me something; but I have no idea of what, or of why or when it might matter!

( I also have a suspicion I’m not putting this in the right location and style for a talk-page entry; but I’m vague on how to check and don’t want to get deflected! I wanted to send you an email: but I got a screen saying *my* (!) email address is not carved deeply enough in the relevant stone. Sorry for any infelicities: no offence intended! )

SquisherDa (talk) 11:40, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting back - and for the pointer to the Shortcuts write-up. There’s some useful stuff in there!

In terms of the original problem, though - if it is a problem? - I’m still doubtful that the intended effect is to fill the user’s screen with a page s/he simply has to click through. It reminds me of links that lead to a DAB, which the reader has to click through without yet having seen anything the writer intended. So it still looks to me as if neither of those shortcuts in the NPOV article is working as intended? But maybe they are / maybe there’s something here I don’t understand (well, actually, yes, we can be pretty sure there is); and I’m certainly happy if you are.

SquisherDa (talk) 14:22, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what problem you're referring to. A shortcut allows links to pages and sections without having to type out the full page name. If the redirect is working properly, no clicking through is required. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 14:33, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

mmm . . have you tried it? (“If the redirect is working properly”: I think you might have put your finger on something there!) :-) SquisherDa (talk) 14:47, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't see what the problem is. Could you be more exact? —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 15:43, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bit pushed for time *right* now . . I’ll see if I can sort out something like a screen-print (well, a diff-kinda-thing) later :-) SquisherDa (talk) 15:55, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here’s what I’ve been getting: [[ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:SUBJECTIVE&redirect=no ]].

But I think the ‘problem’ is that the shortcuts box is meant to be a *list* of shortcut aliases applying to this location . . whereas I thought it was a kind-of on-the-spot ‘see-also’ arrangement. I was clicking on the listed shortcuts expecting to land *somewhere else* and learn new things! - and getting results no-one has really anticipated! (So yes, there was quite definitely owt I didn’t understand!!) SquisherDa (talk) 18:04, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Draft talk:Joan Kelley Walker

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Draft talk:Joan Kelley Walker. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Content forking

Please read WP:RELAR. You have removed content citing WP:CONTENTFORK several times now, but merely duplicating content on several articles does not imply that the material is a content fork. This is only a notification, and I'm not watching this talk page. wumbolo ^^^ 18:00, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.