Swatjester
![]() | This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics:
|
Sept 25: WikiWednesday Salon NYC
editSeptember 25, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon NYC | |
---|---|
![]() You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Metropolitan New York Library Council in Midtown Manhattan. Is there a project you'd like to share? A question you'd like answered? A Wiki* skill you'd like to learn? Let us know by adding it to the agenda.
We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Wikimedia New York City Team ~~~~~ |
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)
DF21
editHello I did add a reference/source to my edit.https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3109809/chinas-aircraft-carrier-killer-missiles-successfully-hit-target 158.223.166.78 (talk) 16:23, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
- You added an incorrectly formatted external link to a section that does not take external links, with no indication as to what claim it is supposed to be supporting. That's not adding a reference, that's linkspam. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 16:36, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
annual warrior competition
editThe sky sword unit is a Chinese special forces unit belonging to the PLAAF Airborne Brigade 158.223.166.78 (talk) 16:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
- You need to provide a properly formatted reference for that claim. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 16:53, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
editHello, Swatjester. Thank you for your work on Mako (missile). SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 10:54, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
People will object
editWith regard to "people will object just to the re-organizing despite what WP:PGCHANGE and WP:PGBOLD say," I'd change "people" to "one person in particular." Can you say Wikipedia:Status quo stonewalling? - Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 16:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- I think the number of people who would do this is quite a few, unfortunately. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 18:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Thu April 25: WikiNYC Hacking Night
editApril 25: Hacking Night @ Prime Produce | |
---|---|
![]() You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for NYC Hacking Night at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan. It is intended primarily for technical contributors, though newcomers are welcome as well! All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Wikimedia's Technical Code of Conduct. Meeting info:
|
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)
--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Beautifully said
editAt User talk:Σ. And I didn't understand at all the OP's response to my post. I mean *really* - it didn't make any sense. At all. And now that I think of it I bet they used ChatGPT or some AI tool to write that exceedingly wordy and incredibly nonsensical reply... I thought about posting exactly how to adjust the archiving and maybe tell them the editor who instituted the archiving (because I did a search! SO hard y'know) but then I thought Naw they're experienced, they should know this stuff or at least be able to look it up & learn how. - Shearonink (talk) 14:59, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, it was pretty strange. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 16:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
ANI
editThanks for your your comment. I am the instigator of the AN/I thread, although because AN/I is semi-protected, I am not able to post there. Perhaps you could carry the following over, as a response to your question? Thanks. Also pinging @Ravenswing: who redoubled your request. 100.36.106.199 (talk) 20:18, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
Well you can read the long WPM thread, especially the more recent part (starting here), but in essence the complaint is about a continuing violation of policies/guidelines on original research and synthesis, and an unwillingness to adjust in the face of criticism or consensus. Outside of the good summaries by CodeTalker and Imaginatorium just above, I think the clearest indication of the latter problem is captured in this comment. In this series of edits [1] [2] [3] you can see Radlrb repeatedly restored WP:SYNTH content after objection (and while the actual edits on the article are just the two of us, you can see from associated discussions that numerous other editors have endorsed my diagnosis, e.g. [4][5]). The problems are quite widespread, as explained e.g. in this message. 100.36.106.199 (talk) 20:18, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
Question
editHello, I've seen your name being frequent when looking so I'll ask you. Do you it's a concidence that BMarGlines (files), Junebug3000 (files) and DMA180guy (files) seem to upload the exact same kind of files, with the exact same filename patterns and also edit the same kind of Wikipedia pages related to radio stations? There is Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BMarGlines/Archive which confirmed that BMarGlines and Junebug3000 were unrelated but there is just something that bugs me. They may perhaps all just use the same source and that's why everything is so similar. What do you think? Sockpuppets or just coincidence? FYI BMarGlines is blocked on Commons. Jonteemil (talk) 16:14, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think there is some off-site coordination going on, but I'm not sure it's sockpuppetry. DMA180guy has a different mannerism of speaking than BMarGlines and Junebug3000. My suspicion is that they're all involved together from logopedia, but probably separate individuals. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 22:53, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, okay. Then I guess I'll just sit tight I guess. Thanks for your response. Jonteemil (talk) 21:41, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Check the investigation
editHello there is a another sockpuppet account of a previous user who was blocked weeks ago. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Samirlalas Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 19:43, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Make sure to check out the investigation for this user as this is serious. Thanks. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 20:26, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue 220, August 2024
edit
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:17, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
I expect I'll want to launch an RM on these at some point, but I'll leave it for now. Still too many other balls in the air. But check out some sources, like this one with "standard missile" (about the Rim 66B and 67B, not the 161, though). And lots from the 70s that use "Standard missile" or just "Standard", making it seem that maybe "Standard" is the name [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]; also STANDARD missile. Most of the mentions of RIM-161 and SM-3 don't say standard missile, but the ones that do capitalize it (except this one). It's all very much of a mess. Dicklyon (talk) 04:04, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- The usage in the first source appears to be a general stylization error, as I see it also does not properly capitalize "TOW" (an acronym) and refers to the "Tow missile." It's a transcript of a Congressional hearing, I would not expect it to be accurate in stylization or adherence to naming conventions. The all-caps STANDARD version is similarly apparently an error in stylization (see, a page or so prior, their reference to HARPOON for Harpoon (missile). Obviously nobody's suggesting that all-caps is correct for the capitalization of Harpoon (which is not an acronym) right? Why would we expect it to be different for Standard? These types of sources are frequently in error -- just because they're governmental in nature, or even related to the DOD, doesn't necessarily make them correct or authoritative. Whether "Standard" or "Standard Missile" is the name is debatable and probably worth some deep-dive research (which should have been a discussion *before* moving, as I keep pointing out), but either the all-lowercase version isn't it. Compare similarly with the four missiles that it replaced (RIM-8 Talos, RIM-24 Tartar, RIM-50 Typhon, and RIM-2 Terrier; all obvious proper names, and the RIM-7 Sea Sparrow. We would not think to decapitalize those, it would not make sense. Doesn't make sense here either. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 05:17, 18 August 2024 (UTC)