User talk:ActivelyDisinterested

RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins

Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

• Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
• Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
• Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
• Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
• Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
• Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
• Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
• Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

A date being "banned" in a TALK PAGE!!

Does this really seem like the behaviour of a reasonable person? Regarding : NIKKI BENZ 2604:3D09:6A86:F300:7932:A573:B23A:D0B1 (talk) 22:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Again they are correct. It may seem strange but Wikipedia takes anything related to a living person very serious, the policy on it (WP:Biographies of living persons or BLP in short hand) applies to every page on Wikipedia not just the articles. That would include not displaying personal information unless it has already been widely reported or stated by the subject. What I would suggest is finding some good sources for the date of birth, and discussing them on the articles talk page. Wikipedia is ultimately a collaborative project, try to understand other editors concerns (even if they seem unreasonable) and work with to come to something you can both agree on. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 22:47, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

User Sangdeboeuf is not engaging responsibly 2604:3D09:6A86:F300:7932:A573:B23A:D0B1 (talk) 22:48, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

I won't stop. Grow up. Isn't very friendly either. The more fuel is put on the fire the more it burns. Spend some time finding sources, come back and prove your right. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 23:03, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

I have put sources. And again I am not even adding it to the article, but to have the date REMOVED from a talk page, how is that conducive to a discussion, when the date in question can't even be mentioned? 2604:3D09:6A86:F300:7932:A573:B23A:D0B1 (talk) 23:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

IP, which part of "BLP policy ... applies to all pages, including talk pages" (patiently explained by me and ActivelyDisinterested above) are you having trouble with? There's nothing special about a random calendar date. How does naming it help the discussion? What's important is whether the sources are reliable or not. The sources you've linked are generally trash. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 05:12, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

I'll have a look at the sources on the talk page and comment there further. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 13:56, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Suissa & Sullivan

My guess is that it has nothing to do with how that paper is being used on this page but that the editor doesn't want to see it successfully challenged as WP:PROFRINGE because of its use on other pages.

[1]

Suissa & Sullivan managing to publish this bit of free-speech trolling in a prestigious journal has been very useful for sympathetic representations of famous bigots. Simonm223 (talk) 18:36, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Sorry Simonm223 Rowling's page is one of the areas I really don't want to get involved with. I stand by my comment at RSN, but have no comment to make on the wider issue. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 18:42, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough. Simonm223 (talk) 18:42, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Deletion of your comment

I didn't mean to delete....something went haywire. I got an EC when first trying to post my comment and when I went to redo somehow it was already in there and I just pressed the button. North8000 (talk) 20:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

No worries I was EC'd twice while posting (I started with a longer comment and then cut most of it). -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 20:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

revision

That must have been an edit conflict, I marked it with underline as a change from the original. Valereee (talk) 22:59, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

I'll strike my request not to change comments that have been replied to, but leave the note explainingy different replies. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 23:06, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

No worries, happens all the time. Valereee (talk) 23:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)