User talk:GorillaWarfare: Difference between revisions

Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the GorillaWarfare Room! Archives

June 2023 – present May 2022 – May 2023 September 2021 – April 2022 April 2021 – August 2021 December 2020 – March 2021 August 2020 – November 2020 January 2020 – July 2020 April 2019 – December 2019 August 2018 – March 2019 January 2018 – July 2018 July 2017 – December 2017 October 2016 – June 2017 August 2015 – September 2016 August 2014 – July 2015 August 2013 – July 2014 November 2012 – July 2013 April 2012 – October 2012 November 2011 – March 2012 April 2011 – October 2011 December 2010 – March 2011 September 2010 – November 2010 April 2010 – August 2010 November 2009 – March 2010

I have finished enough of Consciousness of guilt (legal) to go public with it. Further development will be appreciated. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 18:38, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The second edit was unintentional, as I thought I’d done something wrong and it simply hadn’t updated.

I do not know how to add the citation the information regarding his arrest came from the Orange County Sheriff’s Department and is listed on a local page which displays local arrests.

if you can tell me how to add the citation, I will do so.

This is the link.

(Redacted)

I am not a random person, I know Shane and his family personally. It wasn’t my intent to unfactually defame him but rather give a more accurate glimpse at who he is. 2601:203:284:C70:5C2E:3499:E6BC:2CA9 (talk) 22:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:BLPCRIME and WP:BLPPRIMARY: "Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person. ... A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations and arrests do not amount to a conviction. For individuals who are not public figures—that is, individuals not covered by § Public figures—editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed or is accused of having committed a crime, unless a conviction has been secured." GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 22:10, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Thank you for clarifying. 2601:203:284:C70:5C2E:3499:E6BC:2CA9 (talk) 22:14, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I was pleasantly surprised to see your name popping up in my feed for yesterday's episode of Better Offline, I really enjoyed listening to it! Was great to hear somebody talking on a public platform about how Wikipedia works and why it's so important. I particularly enjoyed the discussion towards the end about the rise of AI and the 'enshitification' of the internet, and why that has made maintaining Wikipedia is so important in this context. When I started editing a few years ago, I had similar thoughts about the oligopolisation of the internet by big social media companies, but now with AI and the dead internet theory, having a community-based source of reliable information is all the more vital.

I do hope this leads to more people contributing to the platform, as Ed Zitron pleaded for at the end; a recent feature by The Guardian succeeded in bringing at least one or two new people into the Women in Red project, so I'm really pleased to see folk actively promoting more people getting involved. Anyway, I digress. Thank you so much for doing this podcast episode, I really appreciated it. :) --Grnrchst (talk) 10:13, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bounced onto here to say thanks as well, I parasocially knew you before EdZ, but was happy to see your name pop up. tedder (talk) 04:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to you both, I'm so glad to hear it's being well received! GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 15:33, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I'm reaching out to you as a new page reviewer. I noticed you just deleted the page Miyosmart as A7 within three minutes of the page creation. Can you explain your reasoning? Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:23, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the page made no credible claim of notability and lacked any references. It was created by a user whose only other contributions have been vandalism and apparently trying to game autopatrolled. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 00:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the article had just been created (by a very new user) and it didn't appear to be outright vandalism, why not let it sit for at least an hour (or send to draft) to see if the editor improves it? A quick Google Scholar search shows multiple hits for the lenses. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:34, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Further, the lenses are a product, which do not qualify under A7. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:35, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted it rather than moved it to draft per WP:DRAFTIFY. However, since you seem interested in working on it, I've draftified it. You're right that it's a product — that's my mistake, I misread it to be the name of the company. Best of luck with the article. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 00:39, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Mostly, I was just curious about your decision as I had saw it pop up during a page review, and I went in to copy edit and format, then it had been deleted before I could publish, which was surprising. At NPP, we have a guideline to wait at least an hour to recommend deletion and/or draftify unless there are serious content concerns to avoid being bitey. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:44, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Is it okay if I recreate draft article (about fever dreams), that was deleted by you in 2023? This time I have better sources. (User Masem advised me to ask this question from the admin who deleted the article.) --Pek (talk) 17:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend drafting it first, and going through WP:AFC. I'm concerned that you don't seem to have a much better grasp of the sources needed for new articles (a concern I see is shared by some others, e.g. User talk:Pek#New articles and sourcing), and especially with topics that brush up against WP:MEDRS I think it would be best if there was a second set of eyes on the article before it went to mainspace. If another editor reviews it and finds it acceptable, I certainly have no qualms with the page being recreated at that point. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 17:26, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I made an draft article. Could you please review it, check if the sources are good enough and if they are, could you move it to mainspace? Here is the article. --Pek (talk) 11:13, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see Drmies has already left you some feedback, which is pretty much what I would have said. I have to say I'm disappointed to see that, although you've swapped out a few sources, the article is largely the same poor quality as your previous attempt. I'm really not sure where the disconnect is here, but can you not see the vast difference between the types of sources you've used in this draft and the types of sources used in high quality medical articles like, say, Oxygen toxicity?

Popsci sources like Discover's "Bizarre Fever Dreams Are Common, But Science Hasn't Figured Out Why", or sources from mattress companies, are not WP:MEDRS — and the latter are probably not even plain WP:RS. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 15:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | May 2024, Volume 10, Issue 5, Numbers 293, 294, 305, 306, 307 Online events: New: Press women | Alphabet run U, V & W | Central and Eastern Europe Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities Wikimedia CEE Spring 2024 - contest with certificates of participation and prizes The Wikipedia Library: #1Lib1Ref - May 15th to June 5th Tip of the month: Use open-access references wherever possible, but a paywalled reliable source is better than none, particularly for biographies of living people. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 06:16, 28 April 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Care to explain? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.174.63.111 (talk) 15:51, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happily. Wikipedia must adhere to a neutral point of view, and editorializing a person's tweet as "celebrat[ing] news of the indiscriminate killings" based on the tweet itself (WP:OR) and an op-ed in an unreliable source falls far short of NPOV, not to mention WP:BLP sourcing requirements. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 15:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why not edit the contribution so it fits within NPOV? I think it's hardly OR that the tweet was made and picked up in the press by more than one source.^[1] As the qoute states, in response to his tweet the UK governments antisemitism offered his own advice. The author of the tweet has not distanced himself from it either - quite the opposite. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.174.63.111 (talk) 16:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The onus is on you to find the proper sourcing, and The Sun absolutely isn't it (WP:THESUN). GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 16:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, the tweet itself is not a source, nor are the hundreds of tweets since, and neither is any mentioning of the tweet in the press, neither an op-Ed, not straight forward report with qoutes from UK political figures such as Lord Mann responding to the tweet? The understanding of the SUN being a non-RS is to do with unreliable reporting of events as to whether they occured, but that tweet occured. It's in the public domain, on the internet archive. Anyone with an internet connection anywhere in the world can view it. How can this not be added to the article? 201.174.63.111 (talk) 16:23, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are two issues here: the inclusion of the tweet in the article, and then — if included — how the tweet is described. We should first tackle whether the tweet should be included. In order to justify including it, you need a reliable source, or preferably several, to support that it's noteworthy enough to include in encyclopedia article about the organization. If the mere existence of a tweet was enough to justify inclusion, as you note, there would be hundreds of them in any article about a subject with a Twitter account (or, in this case, many hundreds of tweets in articles about organizations that have employees who tweet). So far you have not been able to come up with any reliable sources. The Sun is so unreliable it has been deprecated from being used at all. If you would like to argue about that, take it to WP:RSN, but in the meantime you'll need better sourcing.

Please recall that people tweet all the time, and political figures respond to tweets all the time. Wikipedia is not a repository for documenting every Twitter spat that's ever happened; it's for describing subjects in an encyclopedic fashion. If there is substantial reliable coverage of a tweet, it can potentially be included, but I'm not seeing that here. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 16:30, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand? Without getting into a debate of whether The Sun is a generally a RS, I think you need to answer some specific questions in relation to this article: Did The Sun invent that a) the tweet occured b) the tweet's contents c) that Pawel Wargen was its author d) that Pawel Wargen is Progressive International's coordinator of its secretariat e) that Lord Mann as the government's antisemtism adivsor responded with a qoute in the article f) that Progressive International was organising a fringe event at the Labour Party conference?

Pawel Wargan is the coordinator of the organisation's secretariat, I'd say that would lead it to meet notability guidelines. I think any other conclusion would be almost perverse, but that's me. 201.174.63.111 (talk) 16:41, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a question of whether the tweet happened, it's a question of if it's noteworthy enough to include.

If merely being the coordinator of the organization's secretariat is sufficient for tweets to be included in the article, then by my count, we would need to get to work including 17,482 tweets in this article, including ones like "It makes more sense to eat ice cream in the winter because it doesn't melt."

But that's ridiculous, of course — we only include tweets if they are particularly noteworthy, and in this case, if they are so noteworthy that they should be included in an article about an organization (rather than one about the person who sent the tweets). How do we establish noteworthiness? Coverage in secondary, reliable sources — which, at least at this time, does not seem to exist. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 20:09, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, it meets notability criteria because unlike the tweet you posted, in I'm sorry, but that not at all that convincing and rather absurd ad absurdum, it is a) from when the author took on his role and not a decade prior b) concerns his political views, in so far as he is part of a political movement c) was printed in the UK press, as opposed to any of the other 17,000 tweets, in a daily paper with a daily circulation in the millions d) provoked reactions from the UK government's antisemitism spokespersons and Chair of Jewish Labour as reported in said article e) was then picked up in another daily article f) is highly relevant to that organization's activities and viewpoints as listed in point 8 of their Gaza resolution on their website: (8) Reject the false equivalence of colonizer and colonized, recognize that the violence of the oppressed is a response to the original condition of their oppression, and uphold the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to resist, enshrined in UN Resolution 2625, as "the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial domination, apartheid and foreign occupation by all available means”;^[2]

You haven't really convinced me that the tweet shouldn't be referenced. Quite the opposite. The more I look into it, the more convinced I am it should be there. I also see the article somehow fails to mention that the Bernie Sanders Institute never joined the organization once it was up and running for fairly obvious reasons - the tweet author's views being amongst them (the Secretariat is described itself on its own website as the "coordinating body of the Progressive International." So, I imagine its general coordinator has quite a big role, not dissimilar to the general-secretary of the party.)

Lastly, I would say, not including the content in some form is not a good look for the encyclopedia, given how it has been perceived to have behaved on this issue, amongst segments of the world's Jewish population. It comes across as suppression.^[3] I don't think this should be dismissed. 201.174.224.174 (talk) 18:10, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are certainly welcome to argue at WP:RSN that The Sun (again, a deprecated source) is a sufficient source to include the tweet if you are so convinced that this is my error and not yours, but as I've already explained at length, I don't think you will have much success.

I understand that you feel the tweet is significant and noteworthy, but Wikipedia policy requires that Wikipedia content reflect the prominence of material in secondary reliable sources. As of yet, I have not seen a single secondary reliable source (The Sun excluded for aforementioned reasons) that mentions it, much less describes it as significant to the degree that it should be included in an encyclopedia article about the organization as a whole. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 19:44, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

wdym reddit is unreliable? it's literally where all the discussion from the beginning was taking place and where it was officially announced it was found? tf? what source do you want then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:BB8:2003:D:455:305C:EF88:7EC0 (talk) 16:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:PRIMARY and WP:UGC. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 20:04, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

Nyttend

• JohnOwens
• Killiondude
• MelanieN
• Nihonjoe

Bureaucrat changes

Nihonjoe

CheckUser changes

Joe Roe

Oversight changes

GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

• Phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship review has concluded. Several proposals have passed outright and will proceed to implementation, including creating a discussion-only period (3b) and administrator elections (13) on a trial basis. Other successful proposals, such as creating a reminder of civility norms (2), will undergo further refinement in Phase II. Proposals passed on a trial basis will be discussed in Phase II, after their trials conclude. Further details on specific proposals can be found in the full report.

Technical news

• Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Conflict of interest management has been closed.

Miscellaneous

• This may be a good time to reach out to potential nominees to ask if they would consider an RfA.
• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in May 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 15,000 articles awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!
• Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is open until 9 May 2024. Read the voting page on Meta-Wiki and cast your vote here!

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The information that you provided on Wikipedia about the Arepa origins is not true. Please do your research properly. 76.66.100.7 (talk) 21:27, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the sourcing in the article, including [1]. If you have sources that contradict these, feel free to provide them. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 21:29, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FYI that editor is an LTA WP:LTA/GF36. I have reported her as such where possible. FYI she is on a /40 mobile range and not a /64. wizzito | say hello! 01:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | June 2024, Volume 10, Issue 6, Numbers 293, 294, 308, 309, 310 Online events: New: LGBTQ+ women | Wiki Loves Pride | Women in Music | Alphabet run X, Y & Z Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities Women in Green Good Article Edit-a-thon June 2024 - Going Back in Time The Wikipedia Library: #1Lib1Ref - May 15th to June 5th Tip of the month: Find a Grave is NOT a reliable source (as it is user-generated content). It can be used to look for biographical clues. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 07:04, 23 May 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

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

Administrator changes

Graham Beards

• Deskana
• Mets501
• Staxringold

Bureaucrat changes

• Deskana
• Warofdreams

Oversight changes

Dreamy Jazz

Guideline and policy news

• Phase II of the 2024 RfA review has commenced to improve and refine the proposals passed in Phase I.

Technical news

• The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Venezuelan politics has been closed.
• The Committee is seeking volunteers for various roles, including access to the conflict of interest VRT queue.

Miscellaneous

• WikiProject Reliability's unsourced statements drive is happening in June 2024 to replace {{citation needed}} tags with references! Sign up here to participate!

Women in Red | July 2024, Volume 10, Issue 7, Numbers 293, 294, 311, 312, 313 Online events: New: Translation contest 2024 | Science Fiction and Fantasy | Women in Sports Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities Wiki Loves Sport 2024 22 July - 22 September Tip of the month: A foreign language biography does not guarantee notability for English Wikipedia. Check the guidelines before you start. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 14:27, 30 June 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for help cleaning up TESCREAL article! Bluethricecreamman (talk) 16:59, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of TESCREAL at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! PearlyGigs (talk) 20:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, GW. Apologies again for my mistake. I like the DYK concept and I'll try and do more there. Best wishes. PearlyGigs (talk) 21:26, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Not the first time it's happened, and I've certainly made similar mixups myself. Happy editing! GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 21:49, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

• Elli
• HouseBlaster
• Pickersgill-Cunliffe

• Brianga
• De728631
• Georgewilliamherbert
• Hyacinth (deceased)
• ProveIt
• The Night Watch

Technical news

• Local administrators can now add new links to the bottom of the site Tools menu without using JavaScript. Documentation is available on MediaWiki. (T6086)

Miscellaneous

• The Community Wishlist is re-opening on 15 July 2024. Read more