User talk:TylerBurden
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 1.5 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
 | This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
Administrators' newsletter – February 2025
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2025).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversighter changes
Technical news
- Administrators can now nuke pages created by a user or IP address from the last 90 days, up from the initial 30 days. T380846
- A '
Recreated' tag will now be added to pages that were created with the same title as a page which was previously deleted and it can be used as a filter in Special:RecentChanges and Special:NewPages. T56145
Arbitration
- The arbitration case Palestine-Israel articles 5 has been closed.
Religion and Ethnicity. I think I understand what you mean
[edit]Hi @TylerBurden! I know we have gone over this topic a lot, but when you removed Religion from the InfoEthnicBox, saying "What is the point of including this here?" I thought you meant that Religion information is Irrelevant to an ethnicity. But what I now think you meant was, "Let's have religion information somewhere else in the article rather than the infobox", am I right, or at least do I have the right idea? Servite et contribuere (talk) 01:10, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Servite et contribuere Basically, yes, since there is usually more nuance to an ethnicity and religion than can be summed up in a few words, a location like a section on religion is more appropriate. --TylerBurden (talk) 23:14, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- TylerBurden Just to be clear before I tell you this, this is Not a request for mental health support, but I have Autism and ADHD; and that might be why when you said: "What is the point of including this here?" (When removing religion from the InfoBox), I didn't quite understand what you actually meant at first, (I don't understand what people say sometimes, and I Initially thought you meant was that the religion information is totally irrelevant). Now I get what you actually meant, it's not that religion stats are irrelevant, your point was just that rather than using the infobox, it's better to sum it up in some words to give further description, such as when that became the main (Or possibly only legal) religion in the homeland (Meaning where they are Indigenous to/Where their ancestors came from, like Norwegians from Norway) of those people, And I honestly think it is a good point, some ethnicities and nationalities are more difficult than others. I also do strongly agree that terms like Majority and Minority are oversimplified. Like for Norwegians, there is a good description on the religion status that is not in the InfoBox, even though the sentence is actually quite simple, but gives more of a description than the InfoBox. I would advise against removing infobox status that has percentage numbers, as that actually does provide official numbers. But I get your point, and it is a great point, giving a further description can give readers further information for questions readers might have like: "Why did that become the prominent (Or only legal) religion?" "When did it happen?" "Who was behind it?" "Was it mainly done by the monarch (Or leader)?" "Was there a successful movement?" "Is it still the prominent religion among those people?" "And if it has, when did it Start declining?" "Where is the diaspora (Of whatever ethnicity it is an article on) most and least religious?" "How does the religious beliefs of the diaspora (Of whatever ethnicity it is an article on) differ by country?". An actual description in a religion section can give people those answers. I totally get your point. If some of these were points raised by me, please let me know. Thank you Servite et contribuere (talk) 07:52, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
- @TylerBurden I am glad you only took a break. I hope you are doing well. Anyways, I admit we have gone over this so many times, but I totally get your idea with Religion and Ethnicity InfoBox. Honestly, with no intention to cause any disrespect, I honestly think the words in two of your edit summaries: "What is the point of including this here?" Might not get your intended message out that it oversimplifies things. I try my best to say precisely what I mean in pretty much all edit summaries, to make sure that as many users as possible understand me. Servite et contribuere (talk) 11:38, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
- @Servite et contribuere I'm sorry that you misunderstood what I meant, I could have been more clear in my summary. But I'm glad that we seem to be on the same page now. TylerBurden (talk) 17:54, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
- TylerBurden Glad we now are on the same page. Also, some ethnicities and the religious beliefs are more complicated than others, however, on simple Wikipedia, the oversimplification of an article about Finnish Americans is OK, because Simple Wikipedia is meant to be, well simple. But on the simple Wikipedia, an article on American does't even have religion in the InfoBox which signals that it is one of the most complicated in the world for Ethnicities/Nationalities. If a Simple Wikipedia article doesn't have religion in InfoBox, then it is likely too complicated, even for the Simple Wikipedia. Thank you Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:28, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
- @Servite et contribuere I'm sorry that you misunderstood what I meant, I could have been more clear in my summary. But I'm glad that we seem to be on the same page now. TylerBurden (talk) 17:54, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
Sources and their places in a text
[edit]If a fact is sourced, the source is put in a note ending the sentence. If there is another source for some other fact, this should not be put in a parenthesis in the other sentence, but should better be put in a new sentence after the other sentence. That is what I have done in the article on suecophile. If you revert it again, you are violating the rules of academic sourcing, which is not what an encyclopedia should do. Your way of arranging the text is not good for the credibility of Wikipedia. Tara M. Lee (talk) 06:11, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Norwegian Canadians
[edit]Hi @TylerBurden,
Just wanted to clarify that the Norwegian Canadians map wasn't actually original research. I've updated the file to include a source, which is the 2021 Canadian Census; I can see how it came across as OR. Thanks for your vigilance.
Thiqq (talk) 00:21, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2025
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2025).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversighter changes
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment is open to discuss whether AI-generated images (meaning those wholly created by generative AI, not human-created images modified with AI tools) should be banned from use in articles.
- A series of 22 mini-RFCs that double-checked consensus on some aspects and improved certain parts of the administrator elections process has been closed (see the summary of the changes).
- A request for comment is open to gain consensus on whether future administrator elections should be held.
Technical news
- A new filter has been added to the Special:Nuke tool, which allows administrators to filter for pages in a range of page sizes (in bytes). This allows, for example, deleting pages only of a certain size or below. T378488
- Non-administrators can now check which pages are able to be deleted using the Special:Nuke tool. T376378
Miscellaneous
- The 2025 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, Arcticocean, Ameisenigel, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, Galahad, Nehaoua, Renvoy, Revi C., RoySmith, Teles and Zafer as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
- Following the 2025 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: 1234qwer1234qwer4, AramilFeraxa, Daniuu, KonstantinaG07, MdsShakil and XXBlackburnXx.