This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SlimVirgin (talk | contribs) at 01:38, 16 April 2021 (→How we correctly address the 6 million European Jews). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 01:38, 16 April 2021 by SlimVirgin (talk | contribs) (→How we correctly address the 6 million European Jews)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Archives |
---|
2013: Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec |
15 January 2025 |
|
Action | Count |
---|---|
Edits | 166395 |
Edits+Deleted | 177980 |
Pages deleted | 3279 |
Revisions deleted | 146 |
Logs/Events deleted | 1 |
Pages restored | 479 |
Pages protected | 2386 |
Pages unprotected | 483 |
Protections modified | 376 |
Users blocked | 1417 |
Users reblocked | 20 |
Users unblocked | 251 |
User rights modified | 21 |
Users created | 5 |
Category:Pages using PMID magic links has been nominated for deletion
Category:Pages using PMID magic links has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:04, 1 April 2021 (UTC)Category:Pages using ISBN magic links has been nominated for deletion
Category:Pages using ISBN magic links has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:05, 1 April 2021 (UTC)Administrators' newsletter – April 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).
- Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS
- Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
- Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the
delete-redirect
userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.
- When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
- Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)
- A community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure is open until April 25.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Refs format
Hello, SlimVirgin. I notice on Talk:Susan_Gerbic#Citations that you proposed to "change the list-defined references to ref name= within the text". I am happy either way, but I would like to understand the reason for the change. I don't want to distract the conversation there just for my curiosity, so I thought it better to ask here. Most other editors I have had the discussion with found the list format easier to work with, so I would be interested to know why you prefer to go back to the inline layout. --Gronk Oz (talk) 01:48, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Gronk, list-defined refs mean the ref is never where you need it. Usually it will be in the vicinity, or if used a lot you can remember the closest use. But with list-defined, they're always at the end, usually not with good ref names and never in alphabetical order, so every single time you need to check something, you have to go hunting. SarahSV 01:55, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for that! I grew up with inline refs and never really got used to the list format - but I thought it was just because I am too old to learn new tricks... --Gronk Oz (talk) 02:05, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- We're too old to learn new bad tricks. SarahSV 02:11, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for that! I grew up with inline refs and never really got used to the list format - but I thought it was just because I am too old to learn new tricks... --Gronk Oz (talk) 02:05, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Good ol days
:) Selfstudier (talk) 13:15, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
re. sex
See Talk:Sex#change_to_lead,_part_2 for the discussion that led to the changes in the lead. In short, whether "sex" is a category, a category, a characteristic, or an attribute was roundly debated. Initially, editors (including Crossroads) resisted "attribute" since it wasn't found in any cited materials. Mathglot eventually considered whether it was simply a common sense issue, and Newimpartial relented on his initial misgivings. Ultimately Crossroads made the edit nearly verbatim as one of my numerous alternatives, yet the wording is ungrammatical, hence my ultimate edit. --Kent Dominic·(talk) 01:49, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
If you continue to be ping'ed for discussion without replying at that page, you'll be reported for reticence, apathy, and aloofness. If you continue to side with verbiage that is demonstrably deficient in representing the stated intent of its proponents, you will be enrolled in the Hogwarts School to begin a course in Magical Makeovers for Arbitrary and Capricious Behaviors. --Kent Dominic·(talk) 21:42, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- Kent, please do report me for reticence, apathy, and aloofness. It will be a fascinating discussion, but—predictably—I'm afraid I'll be too reticent, apathetic and aloof to take part. I look forward to my Magical Makeover. SarahSV 01:58, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Am I allowed to "LOL" at ^that^? — Ched (talk) 02:59, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- This now makes three people who seem to get my sardonic sense of humor. --Kent Dominic·(talk) 16:29, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Am I allowed to "LOL" at ^that^? — Ched (talk) 02:59, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
How we correctly address the 6 million European Jews
Thank you for your tireless work on the Holocaust article; it is not only extremely appreciated, but also extremely necessary. What is less necessary but bugging me nonetheless, is how to address the Jews who were murdered. I personally believe using an article to collectively title "the Jews" shows more respect and is a better way of honouring their memory. We see them as "the Jews" who perished in the Holocaust, not merely Jews. Personally I think the counter-arguments to this, such as "flow" have been weak and inconsiderable, and in the case of the actual structure of said first sentence previously discussed, incorrect.
I know it's only one word, but I feel it an important one nonetheless. 2A02:C7F:F84E:D300:E495:B144:447A:264A (talk) 22:37, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- I agree, and I will try to restore it. I want to take a look first at who is arguing for what. SarahSV 01:38, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
kitten! :D