User talk:Chicdat
| This is Chicdat's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 14 days  |
The Signpost: 22 March 2025
[edit]- From the editor: Hanami
- News and notes: Deeper look at takedowns targeting Wikipedia
- In the media: The good, the bad, and the unusual
- Recent research: Explaining the disappointing history of Flagged Revisions; and what's the impact of ChatGPT on Wikipedia so far?
- Traffic report: All the world's a stage, we are merely players...
- Gallery: WikiPortraits rule!
- Essay: Unusual biographical images
- Obituary: Rest in peace
Request For Comment - Infobox Weather Damage Estimates
[edit]There is a new ongoing request for comment discussion, with the goal to solve the various disputes on weather-related articles (such as tornadoes or hurricanees) on how to best utilize damage estimates in the infobox. Your comments are highly-requested, as the result of this discussion will affect all weather-related articles. This notice is being sent to all editors who have recently edited weather event articles.
You can view and participate in the discussion here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather#RFC - Weather Infobox Damages. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:23, 23 March 2025 (UTC)
Your comment here is an allegation of misconduct. If you wish to substantiate it, take it to ANI. An article TP is no place to make such an allegation and a WP:PERSONALATTACK without substantiation. I suggest you strike that part of your comment. Cinderella157 (talk) 11:36, 31 March 2025 (UTC)
Tendentious editing is a pattern of editing that is partisan, biased, skewed...
I beg you to substantiate how you have not acted in that manner in these RMs. I see no examples of your !voting for a lowercase page name to be moved to uppercase. A personal attack is an attack against that editor personally, e.g. You are an idiot. In no way was my comment a personal attack, although I will on second thought strike the hyperbole at the end, wanting of course to keep a collaborative editing environment. 🐔 Chicdat Bawk to me! 11:42, 31 March 2025 (UTC)- Cinderella157 complaining about a personal attack. Pot meet kettle? Threats to take an issue to ANI means you want to waste people's valuable online time with something that you should be able to handle with a little discussion (or just not letting words affect you so much). Randy Kryn (talk) 11:56, 31 March 2025 (UTC)
- As with any P&G (actually, WP:TENDENTIOUS is an essay) it needs to be read in full and not take quotes out of their fuller context where to do so might misrepresent what is said in the fuller context, such as the above, which more fully states:
Tendentious editing is a pattern of editing that is partisan, biased, skewed, and does not maintain an editorially neutral point of view.
But the spirit and intent of NPOV applies to content (what is said) rather than style, which is neutral in the context of content. It continues:It may also involve repeated attempts to insert or delete content in the face of the objections of several other editors, or behavior that tends to frustrate proper editorial processes and discussions
[emphasis added]. In this context frustrate refers to the process and not how editors might feel. It would be synonymous with undermine or subvert. Working within the proper editorial process and contributing cogent arguments to discussions is by definition not tendentious. I would suggest you also read Accusing others of tendentious editing and WP:WIAPA as to whether this could be seen as a personal attack. As for your question, see here. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:14, 3 April 2025 (UTC)- Very well. I will drop the stick now. Although I still don't believe my comment was a personal attack and certainly didn't mean it that way, I can see how it could be perceived as such. As consensus is moving towards the threshold for capitalization being a significant majority, there's very little that I need to say before consensus is reached, so I will probably be staying out of these capitalization discussions in the future, for the most part. 🐔 talk:Chicdat|Bawk to me!]] 13:30, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
- And there you go, the bludgeoning, criticism, and even veiled hints of further action if you continue your honest comments, have nudged into your good work. The result: "I will probably be staying out of these capitalization discussions in the future". You lasted longer than most. I've been at it for over 10 years, and a few editors, as you've seen and at a couple points stood up for me (thank you sincerely), give me a going over from time to time. Have learned it's part of the process. Thanks, it's been good reading your comments and seeing the icon! Randy Kryn (talk) 14:00, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
- Very well. I will drop the stick now. Although I still don't believe my comment was a personal attack and certainly didn't mean it that way, I can see how it could be perceived as such. As consensus is moving towards the threshold for capitalization being a significant majority, there's very little that I need to say before consensus is reached, so I will probably be staying out of these capitalization discussions in the future, for the most part. 🐔 talk:Chicdat|Bawk to me!]] 13:30, 3 April 2025 (UTC)