User talk:ActivelyDisinterested/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

nomination

I have nominated History of Christianity - again - please take a look and criticize at will. Here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of Christianity/archive2 Jenhawk777 (talk) 23:45, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I have some free time tomorrow, so I'll sit down and read it through. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 00:37, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Schazjmd (talk) 16:51, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 18:39, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

For the sake of posterity this relates to this discussion[1] about this edit[2]. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 11:26, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello ActivelyDisinterested, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, Abishe (talk) 22:19, 24 December 2024 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 22:19, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Replying about behavior in Lab Leak talk

I was referring to the consistent and ongoing issue of editors using bullying language and ad hominems to disparage the other editors on this topic (not the comments by user:107.115.5.100). I am not sure if you have been watching this talk topic for very long, but if you have, then you probably already know exactly who and what I'm talking about. I was leaving it vague and general because it was already obvious and didn't need to be specified, just called out. I already contacted the user directly and they steamrolled me on their user page. And no, I am not going to go through initiating a disciplinary process. Lardlegwarmers (talk) 20:17, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

If there are issues and you have diffs to prove them then you should take them to WP:ANI, if you can't you should drop it. You can't decide to not start "disciplinary process" but slight editors who disagree with you by saying they are uncivil and fail to assume good faith. They likely feel the same about you. It's all to easy to get into snipping back and forth, it's why I'll be avoiding the page for a few days. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 20:24, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your input. This is more than just POV-pushing. An editor was making outright rude and derogatory comments on a daily basis. Would you like me to provide diffs? By the way, 107.115.5.100 got blocked from Lab Leak talk, and their harassment wasn't nearly as pronounced. It seems as if their getting involved with WP:ANI contributed to the block. (See: User_talk:107.115.5.100#c-331dot-20250102092500). I'm not excited about the idea of getting sanctioned partly because I reported obvious badmouthing. At any rate, the user with the most egregious edit history seems to have left the page right after I made that post, which I would take as a sign that my topic was a good contribution. Lardlegwarmers (talk) 21:35, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

The WP:ANI page states: All content and conduct issues should be discussed first at the talk page of the relevant article or user before requesting dispute resolution. (emphasis added) Lardlegwarmers (talk) 22:01, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

No I don't want diffs, why would I? Don't make accusations at talk pages, discussion maybe but not accusations. If you discussed it with the user then you should stop at that. The section can read as you asking "When did you stop hitting your wife?", you but the presumption of guilt before the question of it. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 23:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

The IP and the other editors were blocked for edit warring other SPA tags, a dumb argument in a thread that is full of dumbness. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 23:05, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

What's your sense of the distinction between discussion versus accusations? I assumed that leaving out the editors' names made it too vague to be an accusation. Lardlegwarmers (talk) 23:08, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

It really doesn't, it just spreads it around to anyone who seems to not be on your side in the argument. Also please don't point other editors to my talk page to discuss third hand matters. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 23:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

RFC Notice

Hello, this notice is for everyone who took part in the March 2024 AfD on lists of airline destinations. I have started a new RfC on the subject. If you would like to participate please follow this link: Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not § RfC on WP:NOT and British Airways destinations. Sunnya343 (talk) 01:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

RFC Heritage move

I totally understand why you made it its own page, but I notice that moving it seems to have totally cut off the flow of poll responses, which I don't think was your intent. Anyway it's something worth thinking about for next time. Also maybe ping someone for a close if no uninvolved editors are watching the page. GordonGlottal (talk) 21:44, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Don't worry I've kept it on my watchlist to make sure it gets closed, and I'll post a notification to RSN when it happens. The flow of responses had already dried up a bit before I moved it, but with other largish discussions starting up it couldn't stay on RSN any longer. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 23:35, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Need some help.

Hey @ActivelyDisinterested. I needed a little help from you. A user named Eurik12 is constantly removing sourced text about a particular organisation again and again from the articles Kuki National Army, National Socialist Council of Nagaland, and Zomi Revolutionary Army on the name of "Fixed typo" and "Fixed grammar". Can we do something about him? 𝐀𝐃𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐓𝐘𝐀 ♘♞ 08:43, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Nothing I can do, I'm just another editor. I suggest reporting them to WP:AIV, as they appear to only be here to vandalise articles. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 13:07, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks 𝐀𝐃𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐓𝐘𝐀 ♘♞ 15:24, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

syntaxhighlight errors

Hey, your page is listed in Category:Pages with syntax highlighting errors. Could you please fix the errors so the page isn't listed there? Gonnym (talk) 13:40, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

My user pages are a dumping ground of stuff that may well be broken, please just leave it that way. I would suggest focusing on pages that aren't in user space. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 13:42, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

I'm focusing on clearing out that category from all ~800 pages in it, so that actual errors are easier to find and fix. While I understand that sandboxes can contain errors while in development, there really isn't a reason not to fix this small error as it requires just adding lang="wikitext". Gonnym (talk) 13:47, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

I would suggest requesting that the category to is better organised so that non-article pages aren't mixed in with non-main space pages. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 13:51, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

What an awful answer. Don't be surprised if other editors fix the same errors on your page over and over. Gonnym (talk) 13:55, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

And I will point give the same answer, please do not edit my user pages. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 14:01, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

March 2025

Hello, I'm RememberOrwell. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction, such as your addition to Involve (think tank)# and discussions thereof. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. I asked you -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research/Noticeboard#c-RememberOrwell-20250315014100-ActivelyDisinterested-20250314140400 - "to specifically IDENTIFY the violating content - 'contentious comments about a living person' you are talking about. Do you contend 1 is contentious? 2? 3? 4?" - after you accused me of violating BLP with my last article edit. You refused. Instead you again accuse me of the same thing : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research/Noticeboard#c-ActivelyDisinterested-20250315015100-RememberOrwell-20250315013800 even though I didn't make any further article edits, at all, in between. Also, BLPRESTORE says "Material that has been repaired to address concerns should be judged on a case-by-case basis." That applies to the material by Chalk that I repaired. You are insisting on being indiscriminate in your accusations. That is inappropriate conduct. Answer the question, at least WRT to #4, to start. RememberOrwell (talk) 03:39, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

You seem unable, oo determined not to understand policy. I suggest reading WP:BLP in it's entirety before making any additions to content that involves living people. You questions are not answered as they are irrelevant. Do not added negative content about living people to articles based on self-published and primary sources. As to BLPRESTORE you added BLP violating content to an article, that you did so as part of a revert is again irrelevant. You are solely responsible for the content that you add to an article, whether you type it out it or revert it back in. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 10:55, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Reference fixing

Can you take a peek at Shit flow diagram and perhaps figure out why some of the sfn templates aren't linking to the sources, like Peal 2020? Any help would be appreciated. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:04, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

I'm going to make and revert a couple of edits, I'll explain in a moment. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 23:48, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

So you either have to use all the authors in the cites (upto the first four), per my first edit[3], or if you don't want to use that you can setup the |ref= field using {{sfnref}}, per my second edit[4].
A couple of other things. The ref must match the cite exactly, so 'Blackette' will never match 'Blackett' (I checked the linked article, it should be without the 'e'). Also the "Sustainable Sanitation Alliance" cite should always use the |ref= field, if you put "Sustainable Sanitation Alliance" in the |last= field someone will come and remove it (as it's not a proper author). As most editors don't have the error messages on they won't know that they have broken the ref (it's a very common reason for broken links). -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 00:04, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

I meant to say, you can just revert to whichever version of my edits you like - they both work. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 00:05, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much for that. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:08, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Nice to get a chuckle out of being reverted. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 00:12, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

ScottishFinnishRadish used {{sfn}}, it wasn't very effective. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:19, 27 March 2025 (UTC)