(8 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
* [[User:Jclemens/RFAStandards|My RfA Standards]] |
* [[User:Jclemens/RFAStandards|My RfA Standards]] |
||
== Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C == |
|||
== Nomination of [[:Where is Kate?]] for deletion == |
|||
<div class="afd-notice"> |
|||
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">[[File:Ambox warning orange.svg|48px|alt=|link=]]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article [[:Where is Kate?]] is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to [[Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines|Wikipedia's policies and guidelines]] or whether it should be [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deleted]]. |
|||
<section begin="announcement-content" /> |
|||
The article will be discussed at '''[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Where is Kate? (3rd nomination)]]''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. |
|||
:''[[m:Special:MyLanguage/Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Election/2024/Announcement – vote reminder|You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.]] [https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Translate&group=page-{{urlencode:Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Election/2024/Announcement – vote reminder}}&language=&action=page&filter= {{int:please-translate}}]'' |
|||
Dear Wikimedian, |
|||
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div> [[User:IgnatiusofLondon|IgnatiusofLondon]] (<span style="font-size:85%;">he/him</span> • [[User talk:IgnatiusofLondon#top|☎️]]) 11:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
⚫ | |||
You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process. |
|||
== Hello == |
|||
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 [[m:Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Election/2024|voting page on Meta-wiki]] to learn more about voting and voter eligibility. |
|||
Can you help me with your opinion at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yuuki (Sword Art Online Character)]] [[User:The dogcat|The dogcat]] ([[User talk:The dogcat|talk]]) 05:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:What do you need help with? Writing a good Wikipedia article about Yuuki? I'm not the best person to help; what availability I do have I usually funnel into processes like AfD and DRV just because there is so much to learn to participate well there. [[User:Jclemens|Jclemens]] ([[User talk:Jclemens#top|talk]]) 06:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::@[[User:Jclemens|Jclemens]], Thanks but can you check the opinions? [[User:The dogcat|The dogcat]] ([[User talk:The dogcat|talk]]) 08:01, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
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 [[m:Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Charter|review the U4C Charter]]. |
|||
== Recreation of [[Where is Kate?]] == |
|||
Please don't recreate this redirect without consensus. If you feel [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Where is Kate? (3rd nomination)|the AfD decision]] to not leave a redirect was incorrect, or that the closer's summary was inaccurate, please take this up via [[Wikipedia:Deletion review]]. — [[User:The Anome|The Anome]] ([[User talk:The Anome|talk]]) 09:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well. |
|||
:I see that {{ping|Ingenuity}} has changed their mind (see discussion on their talk page). Given this, I've undeleted the page and restored it to your version with the redirect. I will also unprotect it. — [[User:The Anome|The Anome]] ([[User talk:The Anome|talk]]) 10:06, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Hi, {{U|The Anome}}, and thanks for the notifications. I'm just up and won't have time to respond in detail until later, but do you understand that your deletion of the redirect was an IAR move not authorized by speedy deletion policy? If not, I can go through things with you on both why 1) deleting the redirect wasn't an appropriate action in the first place, and 2) keeping a redirect there is actually the more encyclopedic outcome. No rush to get back to me on this--I believe this is far more ''important'' than it is ''urgent''. Cheers, [[User:Jclemens|Jclemens]] ([[User talk:Jclemens#top|talk]]) 15:14, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
On behalf of the UCoC project team,<section end="announcement-content" /> |
|||
[[m:User:RamzyM (WMF)|RamzyM (WMF)]] 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:RamzyM (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Coordinating_Committee/Election/2024/Previous_voters_list&oldid=26721206 --> |
|||
== Interviews, independence, primary or secondary == |
|||
Hi, Jclemens, |
|||
I hold you in very high respect. When we come together, I make an effort to express a different perspective to avoid being labelled as being your acolyte. |
|||
Recently at DRV, I now have lost track, I wrote something about interviews being primary, but then mentioned fact checking, but fact checking doesn’t happen during an interview and so it separate that. Do you remember? |
|||
⚫ | |||
:Sure, and thanks for coming here to ask. When this "interviews are primary" thing was hashed out, I wasn't active in policy discussions, I believe, so that happened without my input, and I think that summary doesn't do it justice. |
|||
:An interview in a major publication will fact check the interviewees statements and often seek concurring or dissenting witnesses. Think NYT, WSJ, etc. where the interviews are long form pieces that broadly intersperse supporting data into the "interview." |
|||
:Contrast that with a fansite verbatim interview with a celebrity. Pretty much verbatim, back and forth, no fact checking and no real critique. |
|||
:The former is a very different critter than the latter. We're treating "an interview" as if the latter was the only case of an interview. In fact, the nuanced spectrum between the two needs a lot more thought applied. While it might be obvious that anyone profiled in a major publication's long form interview has enough coverage elsewhere so that notability isn't an issue... there's more to it than that. [[User:Jclemens|Jclemens]] ([[User talk:Jclemens#top|talk]]) 20:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 20:49, 21 May 2024
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present. |
I'm no longer an administrator, so if you're looking for someone to undelete something I deleted, you'd be better off asking at WP:REFUND
Position Essays may help you understand my point of view with regard to...
Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C
- 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)
Interviews, independence, primary or secondary
Hi, Jclemens,
I hold you in very high respect. When we come together, I make an effort to express a different perspective to avoid being labelled as being your acolyte.
Recently at DRV, I now have lost track, I wrote something about interviews being primary, but then mentioned fact checking, but fact checking doesn’t happen during an interview and so it separate that. Do you remember?
- SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:54, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, and thanks for coming here to ask. When this "interviews are primary" thing was hashed out, I wasn't active in policy discussions, I believe, so that happened without my input, and I think that summary doesn't do it justice.
- An interview in a major publication will fact check the interviewees statements and often seek concurring or dissenting witnesses. Think NYT, WSJ, etc. where the interviews are long form pieces that broadly intersperse supporting data into the "interview."
- Contrast that with a fansite verbatim interview with a celebrity. Pretty much verbatim, back and forth, no fact checking and no real critique.
- The former is a very different critter than the latter. We're treating "an interview" as if the latter was the only case of an interview. In fact, the nuanced spectrum between the two needs a lot more thought applied. While it might be obvious that anyone profiled in a major publication's long form interview has enough coverage elsewhere so that notability isn't an issue... there's more to it than that. Jclemens (talk) 20:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC)