User talk:Carrite
 | These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
| These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
| These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
| These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
| These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
| These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
| These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
| These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
| These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
| These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
| These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
| These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
And so on and so forth...
[edit]RAN
[edit]
In memory of content writer Richard Arthur Norton, lynched at AN after 13 years and 6 months at Wikipedia.
Administrators' newsletter – May 2023
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.
Technical news
- Progress has started on the Page Triage improvement project. This is to address the concerns raised by the community in their 2022 WMF letter that requested improvements be made to the tool.
Arbitration
- The proposed decision in the World War II and the history of Jews in Poland case is expected 11 May 2023.
Miscellaneous
- The Wikimedia Foundation annual plan 2023-2024 draft is open for comment and input through May 19. The final plan will be published in July 2023.
Football in 1893, 1899 sections
[edit]Carrite, I see you've added "Football in 1893" and "Football in 1899" to a number of college football team season articles, like 1899 Oregon Agricultural Aggies football team. This is great information about its too much generic detail for articles about one particular team. This stuff really belongs at 1893 college football season and 1899 college football season. I wouldn't be opposed to some sort of note on team season articles, perhaps attached to the schedule tables, that explains pre-modern scoring schemes. Jweiss11 (talk) 15:15, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
- You could be right. Then again, it is pretty damned easy to skip a rules synopsis and pretty damned essential for a reader to have a grasp of the rules of the given year to make heads or tails of a seasonal summary. I don't feel religious about the matter, delete what you wanna. Carrite (talk) 18:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
- I went head and removed the sections from a bunch of team season articles, leaving them at the Oregon Agricultural articles. I think these sections do belong at 1893 college football season and 1899 college football season, and it's substantive content that you assembled. Do you want to added them to those articles? Jweiss11 (talk) 17:17, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- That would seem to be a good alternative play: a series of annual rules sections in the Season articles. I've had in the back of my mind doing some sort of football rules by year series but that might be a good way to consolidate information with a See Also link that could get everyone who needs to be taken up to speed to that point with a click. I knew as I was pasting in multiple text blocks that it was kind of cumbersome way to address the issue, which is why I kind of stopped with the West. Carrite (talk) 17:30, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
File:Johnson-olive-m.jpg listed for discussion
[edit]
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Johnson-olive-m.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — Ирука13 02:05, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- I will never participate in a Commons deletion discussion nor will I ever again upload to that dysfunctional Lord of the Flies institution. Carrite (talk) 02:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- It is actually not on Commons, it is on the English Wikipedia. You are welcome to comment, though the discussion can be closed at any point now. Ymblanter (talk) 10:21, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Your ACE question
[edit]I appreciated your question at ACE; I'd have asked it if I had more questions.
If you notice anything else from that list that you think would be helpful to ask, I'd very much welcome your doing so. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 19:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
- I really don't like the trend towards secret cases with secret evidence. Arbcom has long suffered from the problem of being translucent rather than transparent — secret cases are simply opaque. I can't think of anything else that's a pressing single question. I feel like I already used my two... Thanks for the feedback. —tim /// Carrite (talk) 20:02, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, that's understandable.I will say, on this question, where you stand probably depends quite a bit on where you sit. There are cases that the committee has to hear privately, and also can't really say exactly why it has to hear them privately. The hope is that the community will elect arbs who it will trust when those decisions come up. My sense is that we're not drawing on a large enough pool of candidates for ACE elections to truly result in that kind of broad community trust, so it's an understandable (but unfortunate) dynamic that when the committee does have to make those calls, there are folks who will feel compelled to criticize those decisions — even though I'm sure they would've made the same call if they were in an arbitrator's shoes.Based on your guide, I'm aware that I probably would not be receiving your vote if I were running, so I'm not expecting to convince you, but I hope you would agree that there are multiple possible good-faith perspectives on this question. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 21:13, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately there are also bad faith perspectives. I dunno, I think we've got at least 9 sensible choices and 7 of them or so should get seats, so things will be improved over the depleted committee that has been grinding towards the finish this year. I agree that a couple more choices would help with the winnowing. Carrite (talk) 21:59, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, that's understandable.I will say, on this question, where you stand probably depends quite a bit on where you sit. There are cases that the committee has to hear privately, and also can't really say exactly why it has to hear them privately. The hope is that the community will elect arbs who it will trust when those decisions come up. My sense is that we're not drawing on a large enough pool of candidates for ACE elections to truly result in that kind of broad community trust, so it's an understandable (but unfortunate) dynamic that when the committee does have to make those calls, there are folks who will feel compelled to criticize those decisions — even though I'm sure they would've made the same call if they were in an arbitrator's shoes.Based on your guide, I'm aware that I probably would not be receiving your vote if I were running, so I'm not expecting to convince you, but I hope you would agree that there are multiple possible good-faith perspectives on this question. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 21:13, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
[edit]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 Wikipedia 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) 00:23, 19 November 2024 (UTC)