Misplaced Pages

User talk:Geometry guy: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:35, 18 January 2010 editMattisse (talk | contribs)78,542 edits →ownership culture: edit conflict - amendment← Previous edit Latest revision as of 00:12, 19 November 2024 edit undoMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,134,948 edits →ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery 
Line 1: Line 1:
<!-- Just a comment to start my talk page--> <!-- Just a comment to start my talk page-->
]
{{tocright|limit=2}}
Welcome to my (rather minimalist) user and user talk page: please leave comments, questions, complaints, or just general chat below. I can't promise to reply, but if I do I will reply here: if I take a while I will ] on your talk page. Please provide '''direct links to issues you raise'''. I like to help out and have experience with templates, but my wikitime is limited. I have access to ], but I don't generally use them to deal with vandalism or editor conduct (although I am willing to help with both of these issues sans tools).


Welcome to my (rather minimalist) user and user talk page: please leave comments, questions, complaints, or just general chat below. Please provide '''direct links to issues you raise'''. I am contributing rather sporadically at present and can't promise to reply, but if I do I will reply here: if I take a while and it is important, I will ] on your talk page.
"Official" abbreviations of my username include G'guy, G-guy, Gguy and G guy. I promise to be at most mildly irritated by approximations relating to horses.

Archives: ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]
<div style="clear:both"></div>

== ] ==

What is "compelling prose". I seek knowledge not argument. Is compelling when you convince a criminal to stop crime? So the tyre article would convince people to buy Nokian tyres? I don't think that is what you meant. I don't want to sell tyres to anyone. I don't even use Nokian tyres.

By compelling, do you mean interesting? ] (]) 01:59, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

: It means engaging and easy to read - indeed a pleasure to read. It is '''not''' about selling tyres! At the moment the article seems repetitive and detailed, and lacks flow. Find a ] on a similar topic and compare the writing style. '']'' 18:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
::There is one FA about a popular politician that is not very well written, poor flow and style. However, I think the politician's supporters have made it a FA because they think that a star means that the politician is good. The star should mean the article is good, whether the article is about a saint or a criminal. But thanks for the idea about comparing articles. ] (]) 16:27, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
:::I've no idea why you consider an article on a "popular politician" to be similar to one on a manufacturing company. For the latter, try articles like ]. '']'' 23:26, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

== Self-harm ==

Hi, first I'd like to wish you a happy New Year and thank you for your continued involvment in the GAR process, it is appreciated. Secondly I would like to ask for your comment on the Self-harm GAR page as I am a little frustrated now and I require someone to look at the bigger picture and see what actually needs to be done to make the article GA and which bits should be on the future wish list and dealt with on the article talk page instead of the GAR page. Many thanks. ] (]) 21:42, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

: There seems to have been a misunderstanding, in which Doc James has considered himself to be still the primary reviewer, whereas in fact this is a community GAR, with no such reviewer. I have reverted. My apologies if I have deleted any significant comments. I think a fresh restart is the best way forward. '']'' 22:50, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

::Thank you for your help and nothing significant got deleted. A fresh restart sounds good. I really feel the references on the article are good and I have put a lot of effort into them which is why I got a bit upset by feeling a little un appreciated. Thanks again. ] (]) 22:54, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


{{Archive box|box-width=300px|search=yes|auto=yes|style=background-color:#F9F9F9; border-color:#AAAAAA; float:left}}
{{tocright|limit=2}}


<div style="clear:left"></div>
Thanks for that I though it was an individual reassessment by mistake. Wondering how "No action" is appropriate however? There continues to be issues of references, prose, and insufficient detail regarding causes even though it has made substantial improvements over the last two weeks.] (] · ] · ]) 22:57, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
: It allows for a fresh community GAR. There's too much baggage in the current one (in my view). If you disagree, then please try to restore constructive interactions with fellow editors in the current review. An apology there would be a good way to start. '']'' 23:05, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
::An apology for what? The mistaken close?] (] · ] · ]) 23:14, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
:::You may prefer the restart option. The apology would be for mistaking the GAR for an individual one and acting accordingly (including the close in particular). Up to you anyway. '']'' 23:17, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
::::Have done. Do you have any comments about the article?] (] · ] · ]) 23:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
:::::Not today. '']'' 23:24, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


== ] ==
::::::Okay can we just leave it open until others comment?] (] · ] · ]) 23:38, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


Thanks for your comment ]. I'm from a much more recent generation of active content editors (I was rather young in 2007 :) ) and have an interest in wikihistory. Around the time of that archive, I was running ] that led to, so far as I can tell, the statistically largest decrease in the project's history, and reading a lot of archives of GAN-related talk pages from the 2007-2009ish era to try work out a historiography of the process. I coincidentally noticed that comment recently and was excited to notice you were still looking around. If you have a longer answer on that, I'd love to hear it, but the short answer is of great value as well -- I noticed the same tendency reading those late-2000s archive, and it's interesting to try trace the history there. (I was ''surprised'' to find out how contentious "GA icons on articles" were.) ]] 11:33, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
== Nominations that have lasted a long time ==


: Nice to meet you Vaticidalprophet: I'm impressed by the most recent GAN backlog drive, and that now ] articles are GAs. With your interest in wikihistory, you probably know more about GA project history than I can remember accurately. For example, you may already know about the ]. This is no longer active, but a list of articles it produced can be found at ].
Hi Geometry guy, what should be done when GAN reviews are old and nothing seems to be happening. e.g. ] or GANs that appear deserted with no recent activity? There are some that go back to last fall. (I have sent reminder notes to a few nominators who have not responded to their article reviews.) Regards, —] (]) 21:08, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
: The articles most closely concerning GA are ], ] and ].
: I can understand your surprise about how contentious GA icons were in 2008, as I felt this at the time. I think the problem in part was a polarization of positions (similar to what we see in US politics today) where one side (mostly GA reviewers) insisted that GA deserved the same recognition as FA, and another side (mostly FA reviewers) insisted that it had not earned such recognition. Moderate positions are boring, but there were moderate editors on both sides, who put forward the view that a GA icon should not be a big deal, but GA needed to improve its quality control.
: I suspect ], which checked all early GAs for quality, had a significant impact on the ultimate acceptance of a GA icon. However, you can also see around 2008 that many editors (such SandyGeorgia and myself) already saw that we were on the same team regarding article improvement, and GA and FA came to understand and respect each others' processes.
: I have not been active on Misplaced Pages for a while, but it seems to me that GA and FA are islands where editors care about article quality above ideology and social status, and hope that the collaboration and common interest between the projects remain good.
: I will be happy to say more about the history as I recall it, but perhaps you should write down the results of your researches somewhere, and ask for comments. '']'' 23:17, 21 November 2023 (UTC)


== Howdy ==
: There is no general recipe: ping the reviewer, or (later, if no response) close as "not listed" and start a new GAN review. You can get good advice at ]. '']'' 23:21, 14 January 2010 (UTC)


Glad to see you're occasionally active. Hope you're doing well; would be good to see you around more. ] (] - ] - ]) 02:44, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
==RE: Thanks==
No problem! Let me know if you see any other similar things cropping up (nasty-looking GARs, or GARs without much detail) and I'll do what I can to intercede. If you feel like practical thanks in the same sort of area, I have four unreviewed GANs up :). ] (]) 20:03, 15 January 2010 (UTC)


: Nice to see a familiar name after so much time. '']'' 22:43, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
== Technical question ==


== Good article reassessment for ] ==
Hi -- I know you're an expert on the use of bots and templates and so forth, so I was wondering if you had any ideas about a way to improve the ]. It seems to be low traffic, and I can see why -- it would be very difficult and time consuming for someone to insert their own list of reference works into a page like this, and almost as hard for a content writer to use the page. I created ], which I am adding to periodically; this is much easier for me to maintain but less useful for others unless they happen to know of it. What would be nice is a way to add templates or category tags to individual reference library pages such as mine and to have a bot assemble the results into a catalogue of some kind. For article writers, that bot's catalog page would be a first stop on the way to finding sources. Any thoughts on a way to make this happen? ] ] 15:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] ] 01:10, 27 November 2023 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message ==
: It is not clear how best to organize all this information. One interpretation of your question would be to set up a page organized by subject area and in each section there would be a list of pages (like your own) where sources related to that subject area can be found. It wouldn't be so hard to do that manually. I could automate it using templates and categories: on each page of sources (like your own) editors would add a template indicating which subject areas they have sources for; this would put such pages into categories, and then a category listing bot would compile the list. I'm not sure whether that is much easier than the manual approach, but it could be done without a bot request. Beyond that, we would need to have a clearer idea what "a catalogue of some kind" would look like. '']'' 20:23, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
::I think that could work. I'll think about it and might post a suggestion for a local resource page at one of the projects for which I have relevant sources. That is, there could be a subpage of ] that contained a list of links to users' reference library pages. That would mean I should break up my page into project-specific pages, which is easy to do. I would suggest that other project members do something similar, and we'd see if the results were useful. I suspect a reasonably narrow scope and a moderately active membership are prerequisites for success (as they are for so many things here); without the narrow scope a million books could be listed. "Science fiction" might be narrow enough; "history" isn't, but "Anglo-Saxon history" might be. Thanks for the input -- I'll let you know what happens, if anything. ] ] 22:26, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px; max-width: 100px">]</div>
:::It isn't strictly necessary to break up pages in a project-specific way if categories are used, but I leave it to you to refine the idea for now. '']'' 23:00, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2023|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
== reversion ==


If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)</small>
You unstruck the comments you told me to strike. Why? Regards, —] (]) 00:26, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
: I only advised you to strike one comment. That remains struck. Your other contributions are much appreciated: see for an example. Unfortunately, because you reacted in haste, without consultation, you are currently banned from the page. I hope that before these 6 months are over you will have learned to take your time. '']'' 00:36, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
:: I am currently banned from the page? Wow, that will teach me not to contribute! Lesson learned. Will not contribute substantively to an article. Glad you let me know, as I did not realize that I was banned from the page. Misplaced Pages is serious. I am amazed that I am banned from a page to which both you and RegentsPark said I had made substantial positive contributions. I guess that is the logic of Misplaced Pages. Certainly provides an incentive to me to positively contribute! Can't get over that. Banned from the page! Wow, and Wow! And you suggested that I wait a day or so to contribute to a page from which I am banned. Wow! Regards, —] (]) 01:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
::: Wake up Mattisse. Read your own talk page. I banned you there. Now start learning to read and think before you react. Thanks, '']'' 01:07, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
::::Sorry. I don't see it. I did a "find" on "banned" on my talk page and came up with nothing. Perhaps you could point out your statement more clearly. It is best to be clear in such communications. Regards, —] (]) 01:13, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
:::::You are still better at typing than reading: '']'' 01:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


</div>
:::::This is rather distressing. Geometry Guy's ban was so plain that even I saw it, and this subsequent wriggling is uncomely. --] ] 01:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
</div>
::::::I agree. '']'' 01:34, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2023/Coordination/MM/02&oldid=1187132049 -->


== December music ==
Lesson learned. I will make no further contributions to the article. Banning me now ensures that. I will wait the 36 hours to delete my comments. Thank you for all you suggestions. I will be very careful not to contribute anything substantive to articles in the future. You have made it very clear that I will get "in trouble" for doing so. And I am being banned from the article, why? I attempted to strike the comments, but you reverted my strike.
{{User QAIbox
| title = ]
| image = Ehrenbach, plum tree with frost.jpg
| image_upright = 0.8
| bold = ] · ]
}}
Nice to see your name on my watchlist! - I returned to DYK because (almost) nobody else handled the topics, and survive the discussions which also have become shorter. - ] is about ], on her centenary. - ] died OTD. -- ] (]) 18:15, 2 December 2023 (UTC)


My ] is about ], - it's an honour to have known him. --] (]) 15:00, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
(I have no wish to contribute to the article further, although my contributions thus far have been major. Such is Misplaced Pages.) Thank you Malleus for continuing to be so interested in everything concerning me. I am (almost) flattered. Regards, —] (]) 01:31, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
: Nice to see you here also, Gerda. I admire your energy in highlighting daily stories, music and places. '']'' 15:52, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
:: Thank you ;) - today, I have ], of the works of a musician born 300 years ago. Don't miss the pictured doggie! --] (]) 09:08, 22 December 2023 (UTC)


== Good article reassessment for ] ==
:Addendum. How is it "wriggling"? Why do you allow such unflattering characterizations on your talk page, and even support them? I take that as an insult and personal attack. I am only waiting to strike my comments from the article talk page. I have no intention of contributing again. Is this an effort to put any comments I make in an unflattering light. Please explain. I have not attempted and will not attempt to contribute to the article ever again. I did not know about the ban because I did not attempt to contribute. All I want to do is strike my comments. Regards, —] (]) 01:46, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 02:54, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
:: is a ban, nothing more, nothing less. You do not have to edit any article to see this, only to read your own talk page. '']'' 01:54, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
:::Sorry. I get lost in verbiage. Too much commenting. I have learned to disregard most of it. As I said, I have no intention of ever editing the article again. I guess that is why your ban did not register as meaningful. I will wait until the ban has ended to revert your unstriking of my comments. It certainly makes contributions unrewarding, and I will take that to heart. Sorry that I sought to improve the article. Big mistake! (I notice that my additions are being retained and are not destructive, but I will add no more.) Regards, —] (]) 02:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
::::"Sorry" is a start, but not yet sorry for the right reasons. The rest I will take to your talk page. '']'' 10:41, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


==ownership culture== == 2024 ==
<div style="margin: auto; max-width: 32em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba( 192, 192, 192, 0.75 ); border-radius: 1em; border: 1px solid #a7d7f9; margin-bottom: 1em; padding: 0.5em 1em 1em; color: black;" class="ui-helper-clearfix">
*In my arbitration the ] was mentioned as a distructive behavior for Misplaced Pages. But in this case, ownership or "lead editor" status was being assumed by others, e.g. So the sin is for me to accept it, since others are assuming it? Me being banned assures it. Wait until it is a FA as suggested. We will see who it "belongs" to. Regards, —] (]) 16:58, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
{{User QAIbox
::<ec> (amended to clarify to match discussion in rest of thread, as SandyGeorgia just added quote below to her statement without noting her amendment) —] (]) 18:35, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
| image = Abel Fest Köthen.jpg
:* All right, that's enough. I have intentionally stayed out of this, and yet here you are bringing me in ("ownership was being assumed by others ... "). That should be noted as a sample of how you escalate issues. Articlestats show that Moni3 is the lead editor there, plain and simple, no other assumptions. May I suggest that the mentors are heading into a danger zone here? Discussions are spread across multiple pages, and ''all'' related threads should be moved to and consolidated to the Monitoring page, where you can all deal with this in one place? That is its intended purpose, and in spite of other editors staying out, this does not appear to be de-escalating, so using the Monitoring page might keep everything in one place. ] (]) 17:09, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
| image_upright = 0.9
}}
<center>
<br /><br />]


]
::*I agree that Moni3 is the "lead editor" or has ], however you want to phrase it. And undoubtedly, as <s>you</s> is suggested, it will be her FA. It is Geometry guy who says she is not. Regards, —] (]) 17:17, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
<br /><br />
</center></div>
Same location pictured as 2019. -- ] (]) 21:01, 2 January 2024 (UTC)


On the Main page: ] who ] --] (]) 20:05, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
:::Addendum. The discussions are on my talk page and here. That is not "spread across multiple pages". Please to not inflame the situation. The arbitrators stressed that I should not be "baited". You appear to be doing that here. Because I used a diff of yours to imply ownership or "lead editor", which you agree is the case, is not a reason for you to enter this thread. But thank you for confirming my views on the "lead editor" bit. Regards, —] (]) 17:22, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
{{User QAIbox
:::: Stop the escalation. You brought in the thread on Moni3's page, and now you're accusing me of baiting because I got involved in developing a guideline. ] (]) 17:25, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
| image = Hazel, Ehrenbach.jpg
| image_upright = 0.8
| bold = ] · ] · ]
}}
Today ], with related music and new vacation pics --] (]) 23:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC)


== Good article reassessment for ] ==
::* (post-ec addition) Further, Moni has taken a lead in establishing a guideline for similar articles, and I joined in that completely ''unrelated'' issue, so bringing me in to this is unhelpful and unnecessary provocation. And please do not put words in my mouth: I have never made any mention of any potential FA. ] (]) 17:19, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. <span style="border:#000000;border:2px solid #000000;padding:2px">'''λ''' ]]</span> 05:51, 2 February 2024 (UTC)


== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==
:::*Thank you again for confirming my point of view regarding the "lead" editor bit. Now I think this can be dropped, as the disagreement over whether there is a "lead editor" or not is between me and Geometry guy. Regards, —] (]) 17:24, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
::::* Try to read what I wrote: ''Moni has taken a lead in establishing a guideline for similar articles, ...";'' that has been my area of involvement. ] (]) 17:30, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
:::::*I think Moni3's response to SandyGeorgia's comment shows that she read the meaning of comment the same way I did. Regards, —] (]) 17:40, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
Back to the point at hand: there are now five threads involving three user talk pages, in addition to the original article talk issue. I suggest the advisors/mentors move all of those to the Monitoring page to keep it all in one place, contain discussion, and prevent escalation. I should be able to comment on Moni's talk page on an unrelated guideline issue without seeing it spread to another user talk page I watch. That is the purpose of the Monitoring page; please use it so the rest of us can stay out of this, and avoid having this spill over into Moni's unrelated attempts to develop a guideline. End of my involvement. ] (]) 17:48, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


</div>
*Citing supportive diffs from a talk page does not mean that the talk page is "involved". This discussion is between me and Geometry guy. I merely gave some diffs from a talk page to support my point to him. There is no reason for SandyGeorgia to have involved herself in this, although I thank her for supporting my point. However, she is not part of this discussion and may feel free to disengage. This discussion is taking place on two talk pages only. Please do not spread it further. Regards, —] (]) 17:52, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/02&oldid=1258243447 -->

Latest revision as of 00:12, 19 November 2024

Welcome to my (rather minimalist) user and user talk page: please leave comments, questions, complaints, or just general chat below. Please provide direct links to issues you raise. I am contributing rather sporadically at present and can't promise to reply, but if I do I will reply here: if I take a while and it is important, I will drop a note on your talk page.


Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35


Misplaced Pages talk:Good article nominations/Archive 30

Thanks for your comment here. I'm from a much more recent generation of active content editors (I was rather young in 2007 :) ) and have an interest in wikihistory. Around the time of that archive, I was running a GAN backlog drive that led to, so far as I can tell, the statistically largest decrease in the project's history, and reading a lot of archives of GAN-related talk pages from the 2007-2009ish era to try work out a historiography of the process. I coincidentally noticed that comment recently and was excited to notice you were still looking around. If you have a longer answer on that, I'd love to hear it, but the short answer is of great value as well -- I noticed the same tendency reading those late-2000s archive, and it's interesting to try trace the history there. (I was surprised to find out how contentious "GA icons on articles" were.) Vaticidalprophet 11:33, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Nice to meet you Vaticidalprophet: I'm impressed by the most recent GAN backlog drive, and that now 1 in 174 articles are GAs. With your interest in wikihistory, you probably know more about GA project history than I can remember accurately. For example, you may already know about the Featured Content Dispatch Workshop. This is no longer active, but a list of articles it produced can be found at Template:FCDW.
The articles most closely concerning GA are Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2008-05-19/Dispatches, Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2010-03-15/Dispatches and Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2010-11-15/Dispatches.
I can understand your surprise about how contentious GA icons were in 2008, as I felt this at the time. I think the problem in part was a polarization of positions (similar to what we see in US politics today) where one side (mostly GA reviewers) insisted that GA deserved the same recognition as FA, and another side (mostly FA reviewers) insisted that it had not earned such recognition. Moderate positions are boring, but there were moderate editors on both sides, who put forward the view that a GA icon should not be a big deal, but GA needed to improve its quality control.
I suspect GA Sweeps, which checked all early GAs for quality, had a significant impact on the ultimate acceptance of a GA icon. However, you can also see around 2008 that many editors (such SandyGeorgia and myself) already saw that we were on the same team regarding article improvement, and GA and FA came to understand and respect each others' processes.
I have not been active on Misplaced Pages for a while, but it seems to me that GA and FA are islands where editors care about article quality above ideology and social status, and hope that the collaboration and common interest between the projects remain good.
I will be happy to say more about the history as I recall it, but perhaps you should write down the results of your researches somewhere, and ask for comments. Geometry guy 23:17, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Howdy

Glad to see you're occasionally active. Hope you're doing well; would be good to see you around more. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:44, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Nice to see a familiar name after so much time. Geometry guy 22:43, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Spinixster (chat!) 01:10, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

December music

December songs
story · music

Nice to see your name on my watchlist! - I returned to DYK because (almost) nobody else handled the topics, and survive the discussions which also have become shorter. - Today's story is about Maria Callas, on her centenary. - Aaron Copland died OTD. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:15, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

My story today is about Michael Robinson, - it's an honour to have known him. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:00, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Nice to see you here also, Gerda. I admire your energy in highlighting daily stories, music and places. Geometry guy 15:52, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
Thank you ;) - today, I have a special story to tell, of the works of a musician born 300 years ago. Don't miss the pictured doggie! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:08, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Norfolk, Virginia

Norfolk, Virginia has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:54, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

2024



Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy New Year

2024

Same location pictured as 2019. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:01, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

On the Main page: the person who made the pictured festival possible --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:05, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

story · music · places

Today a friend's birthday, with related music and new vacation pics --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Call of Duty 2

Call of Duty 2 has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. λ NegativeMP1 05:51, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2024 (UTC)