Contents
Hi
Hi how have you been? Hope you had and are having a happy holidays! I just started doing vandal reversion. I think you might find it interesting. To start out, just hit "Recent changes" at the area on the left, and look for anything that might be a problem. You can filter on "Likely Have Problems", "Very Likely Have Problems", etc. If a particular editor seems to be adding bad content, then it is worth checking out their edit history in case they have been vandalizing a number of articles. It's more interesting than I expected. Some of the vandals are quite clever. If you start getting involved, I can point you to some more advanced tools I just started using that make it easier. --David Tornheim (talk) 01:11, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
- Hi there, David, thanks for the good wishes. I hope your new year is the best one yet! Actually your idea does intrigue me. Much of Wikipedia is in a state of disrepair, from what I am noticing. With the massive decrease in editors and the increase in bullying, few are around doing the necessary clean up work (or was it always this bad?). petrarchan47คุก 23:52, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi
Hi there, I see you're editing the Jetsunma Ahkon Lhamo page. I've been meaning to re-write this page since 2014, but have mostly been batting away vandals. Got burned out on Wiki in 2007 after the Tibet pages were flooded with Chinese editors. Anyways, let's work together to produce a balanced article. Longchenpa (talk)
- Hi there @Longchenpa:, I somehow didn't see this message from you until just now. I noticed that your idea of "balanced" doesn't seem to align with mine - I did make a few changes to your edits, as you've probably noticed by now. In general, the article has been hurt by whitewashing and overlooking the seminal piece on the subject, namely "The Buddha from Brooklyn". The book has only been used for "positive" or neutral information but the preponderance of critical content from the book has been left out of Wikipedia. This creates a biased article that looks a bit more like we are promoting the subject rather than writing an encyclopedic article.
- Please consider whether you have a potential WP:COI with the subject, by virtue of belonging to her church or something like that? If so it can hinder the process here. For instance it makes a change from "psychic channeler" to 'psychic consultant' seem like a good idea, when to a neutral observer interested in encyclopedic coverage, this change makes no sense and raises red flags.
- I would appreciate if you would read WP:COIEDIT. If in fact your interest in the subject is from nothing besides wanting to improve Wikipedia, cool. If you do have a relationship of some sort that would constitute a COI, please disclose this relationship as per the rules, and we can move forward from there. Thank you for understanding! petrarchan47คุก 20:50, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
- One additional note, if you do determine that you might fall into the "COI" category, this does not mean you won't be able to work on the article, it would simply mean that you would propose changes on the talk page, and other editors make the changes if they have support. petrarchan47คุก 06:26, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Jason Leopold NPOV tag
Hi, i responded to your addition of the NPOV tag and comments at Jason Leopold. Can you let me know what more needs to be done to address your concerns? thanks. Bonewah (talk) 15:24, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
- Hi there, I made a note at the talk page. I do think there are some things still missing from the article, but I should be able to add them myself in a bit. petrarchan47คุก 21:08, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:35 mm film
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:35 mm film. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Ralph Northam
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ralph Northam. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Petrarchan47, thank you for your comment on this RfC. Per WP:RfC, "Keep the RfC statement short and simple." The basic question is whether Northam's comments should be explained in two sentences or four paragraphs. That's the subject of the RfC. Sparkie82 (t•c) 14:10, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:The NeuroGenderings Network
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The NeuroGenderings Network. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 7 April 2019 (UTC)