Jump to content

User talk:Swatjester/archive28

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


November 22 + 26: Free Culture Friday and Wikicurious photo event!

November 22: Free Culture Friday

You are invited to Foundation and Friends' Free Culture Friday at Prime Produce on Friday, November 22. This event will feature a reception with Wikimedia Foundation staff in the afternoon, followed by a more informal salon and game night, utilizing Prime Produce's vast collection of board games. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome!

  • Friday, November 22, 2024
    1:30 pm – 7:00 pm
    Prime Produce, 424 W 54th St
November 26: Wikicurious: Capturing the Moment
Jefferson Market Library

You are also invited to Wikicurious: Capturing the Moment, the third event of the beginner-focused Wikicurious series, at Jefferson Market Library on Tuesday, November 26, in collaboration with WikiPortraits and AfroCROWD. All are welcome to attend, especially those interested in photography or contributing to Wikimedia Commons. We will explore the art of capturing the moment through photography and learn the basics of Wikimedia Commons, and (weather-permitting) we are also planning a photo walk, so bring your camera (or use your smartphone)!

  • Tuesday, November 26, 2024
    3:00 pm – 8:00 pm
    Jefferson Market Library, 425 6th Ave
    RSVP on Eventbrite is required for event entry!
All attendees at Wikimedia NYC events are subject to the Wikimedia NYC Code of Conduct.

(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) 15:32, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Arbitration election

Hello, Swatjester,

This might not be my place to say but I noticed that you posted some questions to a candidate but didn't sign the comments so it's not easily apparent who the questioner is. could you remedy that? Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 04:40, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Good catch, I didn't realize I missed it. Thanks, fixed. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 05:11, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Nominations now open for the WikiProject Military history newcomer of the year and military historian of the year

Nominations now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2024! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Nominations are open here and here respectively. The nomination period closes at 23:59 on 30 November 2024 when voting begins. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:21, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 223, November 2024

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 12:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards

Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2024! The top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki. Cast your votes here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2024. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. MediaWiki message delivery via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Palestine-Israel articles 5 arbitration case opened

You offered a statement in an arbitration enforcement referral. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Evidence. Please add your evidence by 23:59, 14 December 2024 (UTC), which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction. For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 06:14, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Queen Elizabeth Class Displacement

Queen Elizabeth Class Displacement SeaCeptor (talk) 00:51, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Attacks on the United States

Hey Swatjester! I came across your profile during some of your recent editing in regard to the Syrian conflict and I noticed from your userpage that you are interested in U.S. military history. Well, I've been working on a big project over the last few weeks: Attacks on the United States. The aim is to have a list of every time the U.S. (government/military) was attacked.

Well anyway, I wanted to see if you would be interested in helping me put together some of the summaries for the list. I am fairly sure most of the attacks themselves are on the list. But, I'm still working to get the summaries and references put together for each of them. If you are interested or have any questions, feel free to message me back here or on my talk page anytime! If not, I completely understand. Keep up the good work on Wikipedia! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 19:52, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

I'll try to keep an eye out, at the least I'll add it to my watchlist to keep track of any vandalism issues. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 19:57, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Palestine-Israel articles 5 updates

You are receiving this message because you are on the update list for Palestine-Israel articles 5. The drafters note that the scope of the case was somewhat unclear, and clarify that the scope is The interaction of named parties in the WP:PIA topic area and examination of the WP:AE process that led to two referrals to WP:ARCA. Because this was unclear, two changes are being made:

First, the Committee will accept submissions for new parties for the next three days, until 23:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC). Anyone who wishes to suggest a party to the case may do so by creating a new section on the evidence talk page, providing a reason with WP:DIFFS as to why the user should be added, and notifying the user. After the three-day period ends, no further submission of parties will be considered except in exceptional circumstances. Because the Committee only hears disputes that have failed to be resolved by the usual means, proposed parties should have been recently taken to AE/AN/ANI, and either not sanctioned, or incompletely sanctioned. If a proposed party has not been taken to AE/AN/ANI, evidence is needed as to why such an attempt would have been ineffective.

Second, the evidence phase has been extended by a week, and will now close at 23:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC). For the Arbitration Committee, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Turbo

let's not help this guy get 500. I asked a question and now regret it. Doug Weller talk 15:12, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 224, December 2024

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 12:42, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For your work in the move review and reopening of the 2024 Israeli incursions into Syria discussion. Rc2barrington (talk) 21:23, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
I don't think I've gotten a barnstar in at least a decade, maybe longer. Thanks! ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 21:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

"Israeli Invasion of Syria".

Hi, we recently interacted when we both contacted a user to explain why he marked a request-move discussion on the 2024 Israeli Invasion of Syria page closed. To date the user, AndreFarfan, has not responded with any clarifications (and in the meantime another user on the article's talk page also pointed out that the action seemed unjustified_. Since then the discussion was archived by the user, Lowercase sigmabot III. According to their talk page the account is a bot which is not maintained and it's talk page is not monitored. It apparently closed the discussion on the basis of an algorithm and can't contacted about it (without emailing, which would compromise a user's identity). I do not yet have the extended confirmed user status needed to participate in discussions on that page, so I am reaching out to you as it was clear that you wish for the discussion to be conducted in a proper, by-the-rules manner in which a single non-admin user can't arbitrarily shit down the discussion when there is zero indicator that it has ended. Would it be possible for you to revert the archival of the discussion and revert its closed status as the AndreFarfan had no apparent justification and has failed to provide any when requested to do so by multiple users? (Disclaimer: I am relatively new (which is why I can't participate in the discussion), so I don't know what exactly the rules in this situation are.)

Also gonna take a second to thank you for your service (according to your user page), "thank you" seems so pathetic when I can't even begin to imagine the sacrifice that service in the armed forces requires but I hope it means something to you. Shaked13 (talk) 01:49, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. With regard to the move discussion, the archival is not actually important -- the important thing is that a Move Review discussion was started at Wikipedia:Move_review. That was why I was reaching out to Andre Farfan on their talk page and waiting a few days for a response, as per the process for opening a move review. As they were unresponsive, I went ahead to go create the move review discussion only to find that someone else had already beat me to it. In any event, the move review will analyze whether the move was conducted within process and in this case should hopefully conclude that it wasn't, and either relist it, or conduct a proper close themselves. As a note, since that is a formalized discussion relating to a contentious topic area in Wikipedia namespace, only extended-confirmed editors (at least 500 edits, 30 days old account) can participate in that discussion. Otherwise there's nothing else to do -- the move review can take some time (straightforward ones are pretty quick over a few days, complex ones can last weeks) and when concluded, the closer of the move review will take any actions necessary on the article. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 02:31, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
User talk:Σ (which is redirected from User talk:Lowercase sigmabot III) is monitored, by me (amongst others). I explained at User talk:Σ/Archive/2025/February#Israeli Invasion of Syria why the thread was archived. Briefly: Lowercase sigmabot III does not know whether a thread is ongoing or not, all it knows is how long it is since the thread was last posted to. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 21:53, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Yep, I figured it was automated; that's why I mentioned to Shaked13 that the archival didn't really matter so long as someone remembered to request the Move Review in time. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 00:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

What am I doing wrong?

I edited the campaigns for the 509th Infantry. Why did you revert it? I put the source in “external links.” What part of this is incorrect? 50.51.88.60 (talk) 00:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Two problems. First, external links is not where references go -- those should be properly formatted with <ref> tags in-line with the claim they are supporting. More importantly however, the website you were citing to does not satisfy Wikipedia's reliable source guidelines. This is frequently an issue when citing to unofficial unit association websites such as the one with the 509th -- they're often of dubious reliability and while they may be right (or may not be), we have no good way of verifying that information is accurate. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 00:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Reply

Thank you for your response. As I said before, I am new to editing on Wikipedia and am still figuring some things out. I will keep these things in mind for the future. Sorry to have taken your time; I appreciate it. 50.51.88.60 (talk) 01:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

No worries. As a note, you don't need to make a new section when replying (though perhaps that's a setting you have configured if you're editing using your phone or using the visual editor). You can normally just reply below the line from the person you're talking to. Hope this helps. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 02:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)


Reply and an edit

I want to start by saying I saw in your reply that I don't need to make a new section when replying but I’m not sure how to do that, so I just added a new topic. I edited the campaign participation credit for the 24th Infantry Division by adding the Central Pacific Campaign credit to the tree list. In the “references” I added to sources the link of where I got this information (https://www.armydivs.com/24th-infantry-division). Did I do this right or is there something else I need to do? 50.51.88.60 (talk) 04:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Close, but not quite in the right place and a couple of mistakes. So first, you added the reference in the wrong location. As you can see here, you added it directly to the end below the template for the references section. That makes sense from the perspective of a reader, but doesn't actually work -- what you actually needed to do is to add that reference in-line, directly after the thing you're citing. So in this case, that would be immediately after the words you added ""Central Pacific"; that's where you'd want to add the reference. A properly formatted reference will automatically add itself to the right reference section and update it's number as needed, which is why we always put them in-line with the content it is supporting. Your addition wasn't formatted properly though, so it didn't automatically do that. One additional issue -- the link to Central Pacific goes to the wrong page -- that's a disambiguation page, not the specific page you wanted (which was probably Central Pacific Area. So what you'd have wanted to add would have been "*[[Central Pacific]]<ref>https://www.armydivs.com/24th-infantry-division</ref>", but change the words "Central Pacific" to whatever the correct name of the page you're linking to is. (There are fancier/better ways to format the reference but that's the simplest way that works). Hope that helps. Let me know if you need further assistance. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 21:41, 31 December 2024 (UTC)


Reply and Edit (Continued)

So I did add the correct link for “Central Pacific.” I redirected it from the region page to the “Attack on Pearl Harbor” page since the 24th first engaged the Japanese there. I thought “Central Europe” would just direct to the Attack on Pearl Harbor, so that’s the mistake I made there. Also, on another page for a British Army brigade it had “Monte Cassino” spelled incorrectly (as Monte Casino) so I corrected it. I don’t have to put a reference for that do I? Could you write a numbered list I could follow for the correct way to attach the reference? I really appreciate your help; thank you. 50.51.88.60 (talk) 02:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

For a misspelling/typo change, no that doesn't require a reference. You might start with this video from the Wikimedia foundation (it's short, 2 minutes) that walks you through how to cite a source. Youtube link. (You can probably skip ahead to about halfway through, to the part at about 1:10 where they start talking about "<ref>" tags. The part before this is a one-time setup that's already been done for you on most articles already, it's the second half with the Ref tags that you have to do each time.)⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 02:56, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
This one may also be useful for helping with editing user talk page (which work the same way as article talk pages), though depending on what device you use to edit it may look somewhat different. Youtube link. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 02:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on Intelligence Support Activity

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Intelligence Support Activity, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 01:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Sat Jan 25: Wikipedia Day NYC 2025

January 25: Wikipedia Day
Brooklyn Central Library

You are invited to Wikipedia Day 2025, hosted by Wikimedia NYC at the Brooklyn Public Library's central branch.

The special focus this year will be the launch of our "400 Neighborhoods" campaign for the city's 400th anniversary and WikiProject New York City/400 Task Force.

We'll also have a lightning talks session and you're invited to sign up for one, though space is somewhat limited.

  • Saturday, January 25, 2025
    12:00 pm – 5:00 pm
    Brooklyn Central Library, Grand Army Plaza
    Afterparty: 6:00 pm – 9:00 pm (off-site venue, TBA)
All attendees at Wikimedia NYC events are subject to the Wikimedia NYC Code of Conduct.

(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) 17:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 225, January 2025

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 07:17, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

PLAAF involvement in Vietnam

I hope you’re well. I noticed that my recent edit on the PLAAF page was reverted, and I would like to kindly ask for a reconsideration. In my edit, I referenced the deployment of both PLAAF and PLAGF units, including anti-aircraft units, during the Vietnam War. This information is based on sources that highlight the significant involvement of Chinese forces in supporting North Vietnam during the conflict.

I understand there may be concerns regarding the accuracy or the context of my addition, and I’d be happy to discuss it further or provide additional sources to clarify. I believe this aspect of the Vietnam War is an important part of the PLAAF’s history and would appreciate the opportunity to have the edit restored.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Here is my current non English sources I found, is these source acceptable to re add it?:

Source1: https://news.ifeng.com/history/1/jishi/200811/1107_2663_867254.shtml
Source2: http://hprc.cssn.cn/gsyj/wjs/gjyz/201606/P020180416372852730156.pdf 

AussieSurplus1510 (talk) 09:51, 14 January 2025 (UTC) AussieSurplus1510 (talk) 09:51, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Your source did not support the edits you were trying to make -- it made no mention of the PLAAF, it simply referenced "air defense units" without any indication of what branch they belonged to. That source also does not meet our standards for reliability -- it's simply an aggregator republishing content without endorsement of its accuracy, and the original source was not reliable. Neither of the two sources you've provided here are sufficient either -- the first is a highly biased opinion piece that makes grandiose claims while failing to state their methodology or evidence; the second is a student paper from the PLA's military academy. You need to find reliable, neutral, non-CCP sources for this claim. Additionally, it appears that you may be using LLM translation to help with your editing -- I strongly suggest avoiding using that in the article, as it's a very quick way to get blocked from editing. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 16:50, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
So does mean these policy may also applies at other language Wikipedia? Because about months ago I was being reported by someone and got blocked on Japanese Wikipedia for one week because I used machine translation and LLM, as they said to my talk page at there. AussieSurplus1510 (talk) 14:13, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Every language Wikipedia makes their own policies, for the most part. Those may be identical, or may be different. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 17:43, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Cinderella157 (talk) 03:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5 closed

The arbitration case Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5 has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

  • All articles whose topic is strictly within the Arab-Israeli conflict topic area shall be extended confirmed protected by default, without requiring prior disruption on the article.
  • AndreJustAndre, BilledMammal, Iskandar323, Levivich, Makeandtoss, Nableezy, Nishidani, and Selfstudier are indefinitely topic banned from the Palestine-Israel conflict, broadly construed. These restrictions may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Zero0000 is warned for their behavior in the Palestine-Israel topic area, which falls short of the conduct expected of an administrator.
  • Should the Arbitration Committee receive a complaint at WP:ARCA about AndreJustAndre, within 12 months of the conclusion of this case, AndreJustAndre may be banned from the English Wikipedia by motion.
  • WP:Contentious topics/Arab–Israeli conflict#Word limits (discretionary) and WP:Contentious topics/Arab–Israeli conflict#Word limits (1,000 words) are both modified to add as a new second sentence to each: Citations and quotations (whether from sources, Wikipedia articles, Wikipedia discussions, or elsewhere) do not count toward the word limit.
  • Any AE report is limited to a max of two parties: the party being reported, and the filer. If additional editors are to be reported, separate AE reports must be opened for each. AE admins may waive this rule if the particular issue warrants doing so.
  • The community is encouraged to run a Request for Comment aimed at better addressing or preventing POV forks, after appropriate workshopping.
  • The Committee recognizes that working at AE can be a thankless and demanding task, especially in the busy PIA topic area. We thus extend our appreciation to the many administrators who have volunteered their time to help out at AE.
  • Editors are reminded that outside actors have a vested interest in this topic area, and might engage in behaviors such as doxxing in an attempt to influence content and editors. The digital security resources page contains information that may help.
  • Within this topic area, the balanced editing restriction is added as one of the sanctions that may be imposed by an individual administrator or rough consensus of admins at AE.
Details of the balanced editing restriction
  • In a given 30-day period, a user under this restriction is limited to making no more than one-third of their edits in the Article, Talk, Draft, and Draft talk namespaces to pages that are subject to the extended-confirmed restriction under Arab–Israeli conflict contentious topic procedures.
    • This will be determined by an edit filter that tracks edits to pages in these namespaces that are extended confirmed protected, or are talk pages of such pages, and are tagged with templates to be designated by the arbitration clerks. Admins are encouraged to apply these templates when protecting a page, and the clerks may use scripts or bots to add these templates to pages where the protection has been correctly logged, and may make any necessary changes in the technical implementation of this remedy in the future.
    • Making an edit in excess of this restriction, as determined at the time the edit is made, should be treated as if it were a topic ban violation. Admins should note that a restricted user effectively cannot violate the terms of this and above clauses until at least 30 days after the sanction has been imposed.
  • They are topic banned from the Arab–Israeli conflict, broadly construed, in all namespaces other than these four (except for their own userspace and user talkspace).
  • This sanction is not subject to the normal standards of evidence for disruptive editing; it simply requires a finding that it would be a net positive for the project were the user to lower their activity in the topic area, particularly where an editor has repeatedly engaged in conflict but is not being intentionally or egregiously disruptive.
  • Any admin finding a user in violation of this restriction may, at their discretion, impose other contentious topic sanctions.
  • If a sockpuppet investigations clerk or member of the CheckUser team feels that third-party input is not helpful at an investigation, they are encouraged to use their existing authority to ask users to stop posting to that investigation or to SPI as a whole. In addition to clerks and members of the CheckUser team, patrolling administrators may remove or collapse contributions that impede the efficient resolution of investigations without warning.

For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 23:58, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5 closed

Officer commanding

What do you think about a redirect instead of outright deleting it? Bearian (talk) 04:12, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Sure, that would work as well. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 04:35, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Black Hawk Down (film)

I'm curious why you protected this page for a year when it was only vandalized twice recently, the second time twelve days after the first. A year is a long while, so I wanted to hear your perspective for why you semi-protected it for that long. Fathoms Below (talk) 21:44, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Only twice recently, but it'd been having on-and-off issues for months before that from unconstructive IP edits so as I recall I went for a longer option to address both concerns. You're welcome to reduce it if you prefer (or suggest an alternate duration and I can do it). ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 21:57, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
Since the last edits go back to August, I would have done pending personally since there isn't much activity going on there. Plus it gives extra eyes and people can easily revert it once its in the pending changes queue. Fathoms Below (talk) 22:02, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
I'll reduce the duration and switch it over to pending. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 22:04, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
Now I'm confused -- I'm showing it's only protected for a month, not a year? ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!
Ah I thought it was protected until February 2026, looks like I scanned over the page history too quickly. You could apply pending changes for a year, or apply semi-protection for a couple weeks, though personally I'd prefer the former. But it's well within your discretion to protect it however you see fit. Fathoms Below (talk) 22:11, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
Yeah OK that makes sense, I was like "it's been a couple of weeks since I looked at it but I don't remember it being *that* long...". With only a month (significantly less now), to me it'd make the most sense to just leave it as is then and let it expire naturally in a couple weeks and reassess afterwards, I think, but I'm also personally not a huge fan of pending changes as it's always felt clunky to me. But if you want to modify it to PC you'll find no objections from me. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 22:38, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Quick question

Hey. Just wanted to ask how you put the talk page post banner (the text that appears while writing a post) there. Also, thank you for your service. I admire your bravery. (3OpenEyes' communication receptacle) | (PS: Have a good day) (acer was here) 15:28, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Those are called editnotices, you can read about them and set one up here: Wikipedia:Editnotice. The top part of the page explains how they work, the Creating editnotices part is where you actually make them. Appreciate the kind words. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 20:35, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Thanks. (3OpenEyes' communication receptacle) | (PS: Have a good day) (acer was here) 22:56, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

February 19: WikiWednesday Salon

February 19: WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce
Prime Produce on W 54th St

WikiWednesday is back! You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our WikiWednesday Salon at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan, with an online-based participation option also available. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome!

All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Photography Policy.

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) 01:46, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Page protection

Hello Swatjester,

Thanks for responding to the RFPP request (not placed by me). Unfortunately, Atelier Sophie 2: The Alchemist of the Mysterious Dream will require longer than one week's protection. There is a LTA account who targets the Atelier series. The page was locked for a year before (see logs), and it'll need another year minimum (note that it sprang back to life literally the same day it expired). I expect 1 week will just see said account return immediately. SnowFire (talk) 05:55, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

Let's see what happens, if they come back immediately I'll put a much longer protection term on it. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 20:14, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 226, February 2025

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 12:09, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

TWL to the rescue

You will find this source:

Wilson, Charles Reagan, and David Wharton. 2015. “Death Your Way: Reflections of a Southern Undertaker.” Southern Quarterly 53 (1): 242–60.

in Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library. I suggest reading it if you've got 10 minutes or so. The funeral industry is a different world in some respects. You will find that not only does it say that he rejected farming as a career, but also that it mentions taking care of "the poor" at least seven times, and that it says that taking care of people when they need help and don't have money translates directly into local political support. At one point, he says that he could call the widows whose husbands he'd buried and get re-elected by them no matter what Haley Barbour (the then-governor and a powerful person in the Republican party) said about him.

I'm curious why Steve Holland (politician) has attracted so much attention for (only) the last couple of months. He's a retired state politician with dementia. What's going on? WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:35, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Appreciated thanks. I suspect the reason his page is finding more attention recently is due to the whole "Gulf of America" portion (In 2012, Holland submitted a Bill to the Mississippi Legislature to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico—for all official uses within the state—to the "Gulf of America" -- not actually because Holland's 2012 bill is relevant, but likely because it's coming up in other searches for Gulf of America. (That's how I came across the page, for instance). ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 06:44, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
That makes sense. Now I wonder how many other politicians have suggested it in the past. The idea presumably didn't come out of nowhere. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:22, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Gaza war RfC disruption

At what point is it evident enough for it to go to AE for potential topic bans (under either WP:ARBPIA or WP:ARBAP2)? -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 23:55, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

@Berchanhimez: I think this crosses that line. IMO. Though it's more nuanced as they're on the same side as the person who launched the RFC but not the initiator themselves. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 23:59, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
I've thought so too... but like you say that comment pretty much confirms it. While I sympathize with people who feel strongly one way or another, this whole situation (from the initial RfC, in my opinion) is full of people trying to use Wikipedia to "fix" what they see as improper US support for example. But to be quite honest, I'm not sure I'm willing to deal with the AE procedures to report it... -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 00:17, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
"Fix"ing, plus the combo of trying to fight a specific national battle through the venue of an general infobox field procedure that's applicable to multiple other active conflicts, is a bad recipe IMO. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 03:09, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Yep. I agree. I wish there was a better way to deal with disruption than the bureaucracy that is AE - though I do understand why it exists and why it's set up the way it is. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 03:30, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

I see you found the ANI I started. Cinderella157 (talk) 09:52, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes, though I suppose it looks like it's likely to stall out now that the RFC is withdrawn. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 09:17, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

February 2025

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Gary Gordon, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history, as well as helping prevent edit conflicts. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it.

The Show preview button is right next to the Publish changes button and below the edit summary field.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you.  Sumanuil. (talk to me) 03:06, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Sumanuil: -- please do not issue inappropriate warning templates in the future. The edit summary made it very clear that I was using JWB, and your advice about the preview button is bizarre and inappropriate. Thanks. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 03:43, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
You "corrected" a file name. What other warning was I supposed to give? Does JWB not give you a chance to check? Sumanuil. (talk to me) 03:45, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
A non-templates one? Floquenbeam (talk) 03:49, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
lol. Should have previewed. Floquenbeam (talk) 03:49, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
You could have just as easily given none at all, and simply corrected the error instead of reverting multiple other errors back into the article and then templating me about it with the wrong template. A preview button would not have caught what happened here, me simply missing one edit in a list of nearly 300 pages I was fixing. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 03:52, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Alternatively, if the edit summary was actually used, I would've noticed that the file name was broken after the change too. Or, you know, rather than reverting completely, just fix the file name and leave the other changes. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 03:55, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

If anyone wants to go back and check my work over the past 300-ish edits, please be my guest. The dataset I used to fill JWB was a Wikipedia search for "Fort Liberty" in the main and Template spaces only (289 results), from which I manually checked each page as I went through to weed out the following sets of false positives:

  • BLP articles in the People from Fort Liberty, North Carolina category (currently undergoing a separate move discussion)
  • Instances where the prior text read to the effect of "Fort Liberty (formerly Fort Bragg)" where I'd have to remove the subsequent modifier
  • File names
  • A small number of instances referring to the couple of temporary Revolutionary era forts named Fort Liberty (unrelated)
  • Valid instances referring to the 2-year period in which the current installation was actually named Fort Liberty.

It was a bit of a pain in the ass to do it all, and I don't typically do large semi-automated edits, which is why I'm a bit more irritated than usual about eating a warning for missing an instance/getting a false positive through. It is of course on me to be accurate, but a small amount of mistakes is something I'd just expect as part of the day-to-day business of Wikipedia. We should just fix them rather than make a fuss. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 04:04, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Chengdu J-10C

My bad, I did not include a reliable source of how many Chengdu J-10cs Egypt has because it is disclosed by the government, my mistake. But Egypt does have some Chengdu J-10s. NewRepublicofEgypt (talk) 00:20, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Minor barnstar
Thanks for your minor edit cleaning up the Pace count beads article. That article is high on my list for things I'd like to improve, and appreciate others taking an interest. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 01:54, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Capitalization of military terms

Hi,

Back in July of 2024 a lot of military articles were moved to lowercase versions. I have a similar interest in military equipment and so I know why you also understand the issues with those moves. Would you be willing to start another RM for these articles?

Recently, a couple of other articles were moved to the lowercase versions of the titles (Tri-State tornado outbreak > 1925 Tri-State tornado outbreak > Tri-State tornado outbreak > 1925 tri-state tornado outbreak; Tri-State Tornado > 1925 Tri-State tornado > Great Tri-State tornado > 1925 tri-state tornado) A lot of these moves were made after very premature closes which is similar to the ones made to military equipment. I don't understand the grunge on capitalization on articles that some editors have but it has clearly been causing damage to the titles of articles. I'd like to hear your thoughts. CutlassCiera 15:13, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

I don't have a desire to get back into that discussion. My blood pressure is already too high as it is, and the lower-capitalization proponents on this project are fanatical, tireless, and completely clueless and oblivious to how actual usage works in the real world. For example, practically all of their responses for why military equipment should be decapitalized come from 1950's era stylizations prior to the standardization of nomenclature under the current systems .... but they don't want to hear about that, they just see ngrams go brrr. As such, I've got no interest arguing with a brick wall. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 23:17, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
Yep. Things like RS and academic standards mean nothing to the lower-case proponents. I've been involved in a couple of those discussions, and it's the height of pointlessness. That it does nothing to further Wikipedia's credibility means nothing when compared to the all-holy MoS. Intothatdarkness 17:28, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Wed March 12: Wiki Gala NYC

March 12: Wiki Gala @ Prime Produce
Wiki-fashion show, Singapore

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community and visitors from the global Wikimedia Foundation for our Wiki Gala at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan. All are welcome!

This is a sequel to the March 2024 Wiki Gala at Prime Produce, the March 2023 Grand Central Salon and the March 2022 Wiki-Tent Brunch.

The event will feature thematic video art installations and our traditional Wiki-fashion show, for which you are encouraged to dress in your finest Wikimedia clothing and accessories (bags, buttons, even books), or clothing connected to the topics you edit on wiki projects.

All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Photography Policy.

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) 19:18, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 227, March 2025

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 11:11, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Thu March 27: Editing the Open Data Garden @ Prime Produce

March 27: Editing the Open Data Garden @ Prime Produce
Editing the Open Data Garden event graphic created by Farming Concrete

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for an urban gardening-themed edit-a-thon at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan. This event will be hosted in collaboration with Farming Concrete in celebration of Open Data Week in New York City. All are welcome, new and experienced!

All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct and Photography Policy.

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) 03:15, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

R37M missiles operational history

Am I able to add the claims of the long range victory if I mention nothing about where it is supposed to have happened? The long range engagements are quite well sourced, including from the prestigious RUSI think tank and many western news outlets. It's also the top hit on google AI. Liger404 (talk) 08:10, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

No. By consensus, you are not allowed to edit on this topic until your account is extended confirmed, regardless of the details of the content; this is not a question of sourcing or anything personal to you but a policy position that the community has agreed upon based on widespread disruption from non-ECR editors in this space. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 14:35, 29 March 2025 (UTC)
My intent was to avoid it becoming a Ukraine war topic and remain a technical discussion of the R37. Something along the lines of "The R37 has reportedly being deployed in long range air to air engagements by the Mig31 and SU57. RUSI claims that the weapon is employed at extreme ranges. Some reports claim the weapon has been employed beyond 200km however exact engagement ranges remain unconfirmed. Liger404 (talk) 00:25, 30 March 2025 (UTC)
Right, but simply omitting mentioning that this deployment was in Ukraine doesn't make it any less the case. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 02:16, 30 March 2025 (UTC)
That seems more strict than I believed the ban was tbh, but it's not easy to tell. The ban list was super long. Are you willing to write a section on it if a put a request through then? Or do you not find the sourcing acceptable? Liger404 (talk) 21:35, 30 March 2025 (UTC)
Me personally no, but that's because I need to try and stay as uninvolved with the article's core content to be able to effectively do my responsibilities as an admin. The sanction does allow you to make an edit request on the talk page asking for someone to do it though. I was going to suggest looking at Wikipedia:Edit_requests#Making_requests which has all the info you'll need for how to format that -- but actually you have a bit of a rare scenario where none of the templates there actually specifically do what you need, because the page is not actually *technically* protected. So instead you should just go to the R-37 talk page and start a new section there called "edit request (date)" and post the suggested language there. It might take a while but eventually someone will pick it up. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 22:33, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

WikiNYC April 11: Foundation and Friends' Free Culture Friday

April 11: Free Culture Friday

You are invited to Foundation and Friends' Free Culture Friday at Prime Produce on Friday, April 11. This event will feature a reception with Wikimedia Foundation staff in the afternoon, followed by a more informal salon, hackathon, and game night, utilizing Prime Produce's vast collection of board games. This replaces WikiWednesday Salon this month. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome!

  • Friday, April 11, 2025
  • 1:30 pm – 3:00 pm (Wikimedia Foundation staff + community meet-and-greet)
  • 3:00 pm – 7:00 pm (Open salon, hacking, and board games)
    Prime Produce, 424 W 54th St

All attendees at Wikimedia NYC events are subject to the Wikimedia NYC Code of Conduct and Photography Policy.

(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) 13:31, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 228, April 2025

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 14:40, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Cognitive warfare

I saw your comments to the editor who is expanding this (translating some relevant content from zh wiki). I'd be happy to help, as that editor is a student translating this for my class. But your earlier comments where rather vague. I recommend being specific - telling them which passages are not neutral, or poorly referenced, etc. Piotrus at Hanyang| reply here 05:20, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

AGM-11 hellfire

GBU-11 is a that is the glide bomb not a missile

GBU-11 incident happened accidentally rather than by being planned or arranged.


It is like saying that F-22 raptor is not a fighter aircraft but a bomber aircraft because it is not represent the primary way of using this aircraft. It is like f-22 shot down balloon. Primohare (talk) 09:02, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

And we don't describe the F-22 as an anti-balloon fighter despite it having downed several intentionally. This is not a difficult concept. Regardless of your desire to call it out in the info box, the information does not belong there. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 14:43, 24 April 2025 (UTC) ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 14:43, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

303d MI Bn History Book

For over 2 years I worked to compile the history of the 303d MI Bn. I tried editing their wiki page, but was told citation needed. I would like to send someone the history book who can then use it to edit the 303d page. Please msg me at rdwiltzius/........../gmail 2600:100C:B04B:CE0E:64BF:7509:ADB8:93B5 (talk) 18:02, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

NYC: May 7 WikiWed + May 10 WikiCurious

May 7: WikiWednesday Salon @ Prime Produce

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our WikiWednesday Salon at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan. This month's WikiWednesday will be focused on digital safety for editors. Guest digital security trainers will join us to lead this session. All are welcome!

Please bring a laptop or the editing device of your choosing for hands-on training that will guide you through steps to take to make yourself safer online. While there will also be an online participation option, the meeting will not be recorded.

Meeting info:

May 10: Wikicurious – Amplifying Media Art with Rhizome

You are also invited to join the Wikimedia NYC Community and Rhizome for a community memory-focused edit-a-thon in the Financial District. All Wikipedia and Wikidata enthusiasts are welcome, new and experienced!

Please RSVP on Rhizome's event page to gain entry to the venue.

Meeting info:

All attendees at Wikimedia NYC events are subject to the Wikimedia NYC Code of Conduct and Photography Policy.

(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) 16:12, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Want clarification

You said “There is already an active RM discussion on this topic” when that is not the case when you closed my talk discussion. The RM discussion is about renaming to 2025 India-Pakistan Conflict not Indo-Pakistani War of 2025. Could you clarify how this RM discussion is the exact same? Opama420 (talk) 05:25, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Per WP:RM A page should not be moved and a new move discussion should not be opened when there is already an open move request on a talk page. Instead, please participate in the open discussion. A single RM can support multiple potential moves, but our policy does not allow for multiple simultaneous move discussions.⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 05:27, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 229, May 2025

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

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) 11:06, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Appeal

Arbitration enforcement action appeal by TPGOK

Procedural notes: Per the rules governing arbitration enforcement appeals, a "clear and substantial consensus of uninvolved administrators" is required to overturn an arbitration enforcement action.

To help determine any such consensus, involved editors may make brief statements in separate sections but should not edit the section for discussion among uninvolved editors. Editors are normally considered involved if they are in a current dispute with the sanctioning or sanctioned editor, or have taken part in disputes (if any) related to the contested enforcement action. Administrators having taken administrative actions are not normally considered involved for this reason alone (see WP:UNINVOLVED).

Appealing user
TPGOK (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) – ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 17:39, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Sanction being appealed
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TPGOK?markasread=336420945&markasreadwiki=enwiki#c-Abecedare-20250510153100-TPGOK-20250510152900
Administrator imposing the sanction
Swatjester (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
Notification of that administrator
The appealing editor is asked to notify the administrator who made the enforcement action of this appeal, and then to replace this text with a diff of that notification. The appeal may not be processed otherwise. If a block is appealed, the editor moving the appeal to this board should make the notification.

Statement by TPGOK

I already explained that the sources given in the article for not reflect what is written in the INFOBOX. 

 The sources clearly do not support the claims written in the infobox.

Statement by Swatjester

Statement by (involved editor 1)

Statement by (involved editor 2)

Discussion among uninvolved editors about the appeal by TPGOK

Statements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator.
Administrators may remove or shorten noncompliant statements. Disruptive contributions may result in blocks.

Statement by (uninvolved editor 1)

Statement by (uninvolved editor 2)

Result of the appeal by TPGOK

This section is to be edited only by uninvolved administrators. Comments by others will be moved to the sections above.

https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/india-pakistan-attack-kashmir-tourists-intl-hnk Cnn only says "Pakistan and India claimed". They also believe in the 125 fighter jet dogfight, which hasn't been proven by anything. TPGOK (talk) 15:52, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

 Not done -- the reason for your topic ban was not anything to do with sourcing. The reason for your topic ban was your behavior in interacting with other editors in a civil and respectful manner, failure to comply with our policies and guidelines, and the final straw being a uncivil response to a good-faith warning asking you to correct your behavior. As such, we are removing you from this dispute to protect the editing experience for others, and you are no longer welcome to edit in this topic space. As your appeal does not indicate you even understand the wrongness of your behavior, it is denied. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 17:39, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Swatjester/archive28&oldid=1290349952"