User talk:Hey man im josh/Archive 24
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Hey man im josh. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | ← | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 |
About your revert
Hello. I saw that you reverted some edits on Only on Earth because of COI concerns. However, the version you reverted to is clearly promotional and unencyclopaedic. I cannot revert right now because I am on a smartphone, but are you able to go back and find an appropriate revision to revert to? The text before the revert, while not entirely NPOV, was more neutral than the current text. QwertyForest (talk) 13:33, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- @QwertyForest: I think it has some puffery language, but I'm not sure I'd go as far as saying it's clearly unencyclopedic. I actually think the version I reverted away from was more promotional and that the version I reverted to includes less puffery. I do think the revert is an improvement on the state of the article, but I also recognize the article can definitely be improved upon. Pinging Rickyurs, the article's creator, regarding this. Also noting it could use a few more sources for various parts of the article. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:42, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
January 2025 NPP backlog drive – Points award
![]() |
The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia | |
This award is given in recognition to Hey man im josh for accumulating at least 500 points during the January 2025 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions helped play a part in the 16,000+ articles and 14,000+ redirects reviewed (for a total of 19,791.2 points) completed during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog! – DreamRimmer (talk) 01:45, 7 February 2025 (UTC) |
January 2025 NPP backlog drive – Streak award
![]() |
Unnecessarily complicated Gears Award | |
This award is given in recognition to Hey man im josh for accumulating at least 150 points during each week of the January 2025 NPP backlog drive. Your contributions played a part in the 16,000+ articles and 14,000+ redirects reviewed (for a total of 19,791.2 points) during the drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to help reduce the backlog!– DreamRimmer (talk) 01:45, 7 February 2025 (UTC) |
The Signpost: 7 February 2025
- Recent research: GPT-4 writes better edit summaries than human Wikipedians
- News and notes: Let's talk!
- Opinion: Fathoms Below, but over the moon
- Community view: 24th Wikipedia Day in New York City
- Arbitration report: Palestine-Israel articles 5 has closed
- Traffic report: A wild drive
My understanding is that a player isn't inducted into the HoF until the induction ceremony. Re this edit, isn't it technically premature? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:32, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oh gosh, you just reminded me that we (NFL editors) had a similar discussion last year in which I think we basically decided to reflect the announced results? I can't say for sure though. By all means, you're welcome to revert it @Gonzo fan2007. I think he's TECHNICALLY in the hall of fame already, based on the web page, and based on this, but that the enshrinement doesn't take place until August 2nd based on that second link. The second link also says
The Hall of Fame’s membership, including the newly elected class, now stands at 382.
, which leads me to believe they consider them hall of famers. The time between them being announced and the ceremony is annoying because of the ambiguity of it all. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:41, 7 February 2025 (UTC)- Makes sense to me. Thanks for the clarification. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:06, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
WikiBullying?
Hello Josh, Please do not attempt to wiki bully me with threats. Thanks. LgShai (talk) 08:24, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- I see that you're a new admin. Two more experienced admins didn't threaten me. Please do not abuse your new admin powers to threaten or passively wiki bully wiki users. Thanks. LgShai (talk) 08:42, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- @LgShai: I'd certainly not call myself new to being an admin after being one for 16 months. I'm not seeing any admins aside from Liz and myself on your talk page. Additionally, Liz did say you'd be blocked, that's what "loss of editing privileges" means.
- Let me be extremely clear. As mentioned elsewhere, if you continue to harass others with entirely inappropriate personal attacks, I will not hesitate to block you. This is meant to protect Wikipedia and its editors.
- I'm sorry you feel that you're allowed to harass and insult others without consequences, but I do not feel that way. There will be consequences if your behaviour does not improve, as you've been told by multiple admins. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:31, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Just noting some diffs for my future reference:
- The reason I didn't go ahead and give you a short-term block was because, on your talk page, you promised to use Wikipedia "correctly" in the future after Vanderwaalforces reminded you that there's a person on the other side of the screen that you're insulting. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:58, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Tells editors they're morons and brainless fools and then complains about feeling bullied? The chutzpah is strong in this one... Serial (speculates here) 14:39, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- You must be mad lol. Falsely accusing me of editing pages, then searching other places to attack me. LgShai (talk) 00:24, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- @LgShai: Do not get into fights on my talk page or try to antagonize others. The only one mad here seems to be you, and entirely unnecessarily so. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:44, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- You must be mad lol. Falsely accusing me of editing pages, then searching other places to attack me. LgShai (talk) 00:24, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Tells editors they're morons and brainless fools and then complains about feeling bullied? The chutzpah is strong in this one... Serial (speculates here) 14:39, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
The redirect The Most Expensive City In The World For Expats has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 8 § The Most Expensive City In The World For Expats until a consensus is reached. | Looks like it's an outdated redirect, but can be fixed real quick to direct to a more updated page! Lukeh486 (talk) 01:27, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
Tangent-peacockery, maybe???
Hey josh, quick question since I don't know who else to ask and I just saw you reviewed Drf (thx):
The bad editing practice of starting to talk about some tangent that's only somewhat related to, and itself not even the subject of the article, what is that called? It's at the tip of my tongue, but I can't remember what the term for that here was. It goes something like this:
- Fnord is an oncologist. His second cousin twice removed Fnorberg once composed a symphony that premiered at the Royal Albert, where it was very well received [and here are some citations].
Do you know what I'm talking about? I swear I read something about this sort of thing somewhere here, maybe an essay – and maybe there's even a Template: or something, but I can't recall the actual details. Thanks for your attention. ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 21:34, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Here for unrelated reasons - I think you want WP:HATSTAND (unfortunately I have recently become very well acquainted with this essay) Rusalkii (talk) 22:18, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- THANK YOU! Yes! That is what I was looking for. ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 09:21, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
Article idea
Hi, since you are a very prolific NFL editor and as an administrator, would it be possible without violating wp:NPOV to discuss the bogus conspiracy theory that the NFL rigs games to favor Kansas City? I’ve heard it for a few years and it’s gotten some press coverage. I am concerned about potential violations of WP:NOTNEWS. Thanks! -1ctinus📝🗨 16:46, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- @1ctinus: I actually discouraged someone about creating an article on the subject. Fact of the matter is, reffing in of itself is subjective, and there's so many places errors can be made. There's also the aspect that certain players know how to play the game and get more flags, Josh Allen and Patrick Mahomes being two examples of it. I don't like it, but that's exactly how it is. Additionally, one thing a lot of people don't consider, is that good coaching staffs can pick up on ways that players often foul and give the refs a heads up mid or pre-game, as something to look out for. This is entirely appropriate and normal, and it's something that happens pretty much every game. I have very strong feelings about the fact that people seriously overestimate and overstate how NFL games are rigged. As mentioned, some people just know how to draw flags and get favorable calls, and if the Chiefs were to be explored in that regard, I'd urge folks to look at the 2010s Packers, they got so many phantom calls from my (Lions) perspective that it certainly felt that way. As I've grown and learned to understand the game more, I've found that a lot of people throwing fits about the flags often don't understand that some folks are actually calling flags to the letter of the rule, and that the refs are human and just miss things.
- That's also a big reason why we need more technology in the game so that things like first downs and ball placement aren't just being guessed at by eye sight. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:54, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
Just a note on the above, when I changed the table format and add the Career accomplishments section, I was really thinking that the "Awards" column would be true awards, those handed out to players/coaches at the end of the season (i.e. List of Green Bay Packers award winners type of stuff). The reasoning was that these type of things are what are considered for enshrinement, whereas for most of these, the anniversary team recognition came much later after enshrinement. Not saying you have to remove them or anything, just wanted to note what my intention was. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:09, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- I think your point regarding the anniversary teams is solid for some candidates, but I also think it's a significant accolade that does help for enshrinement in a number of cases now. The article is in decent shape for now, but I'll definitely give it some thought prior to moving forward with a nomination of it some day. Thanks for the feedback @Gonzo fan2007, always appreciated! Hey man im josh (talk) 16:14, 10 February 2025 (UTC)