/Oct}}
Index of archives |
Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by MiszaBot III. |
ArbCom 2022-23
Probably getting ahead of myself, but your talk page showed up at the top of my watchlist with "ArbCom" as the section title, and it spurred me to comment (As I get older, I find I need to comment as soon as I realize I want to, as I'm increasingly likely to forget about all about it in a few minutes....). Many of us pestered you to run in 2019, even though you didn't really want to. I can't recall if I ever thanked you properly for that, but it was a selfless thing for you to do, and it improved the committee a lot the last 2 years. While I hope you'll run again, I have a feeling you're kind of done, and just want to say ... in a less presumptuous way than this probably sounds ... well, you have my permission. I want you to run again, but I promise not to hassle you about it anymore. Thanks so much for doing this for so long, and for carrying much more than your fair share of the burden around here. (And if I'm wrong and you're not burned out, then I'll be even more grateful in 2023.) --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:29, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
- But you do not have my permission. Back to work and no more of this foolish talk. EEng 04:19, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Belated thank you
I very much appreciate your kind nod in my July RfA. I will make every effort not to disappoint. If I can be of service or am otherwise blind to some concern, I invite you to contact me. Thanks again. BusterD (talk) 17:28, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks very much, and best of luck as an admin. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:04, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Critic
Hello. Need your advice as a specialist. A journalistic investigation was released about the huge amount of real estate in one of the persons. There is no confirmation of this official information. This person claimed that this was not her property. The source in which the journalistic investigation was published is not authoritative, but the information from this journalistic investigation was literally reprinted by several well-known and authoritative publications. Just reprinted it, without analyzing this information and evaluating it. Can we add this information by referring to these authoritative publications? Thanks! 2A00:1FA1:3DB:6D53:E9F2:CFE2:DDB7:8185 (talk) 14:03, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for the question. I am not sure I understand all of it completely, but I think I have figured out the basic question. The first issue is whether the mere fact that someone owns some real estate is important enough to mention in an article at all. Assuming it is, based on what you have told me, I would be comfortable reporting the information based on the sources you have described, if there were no genuine dispute that it is the person's property. If the person is disputing it, then the choices are either to leave out the information, or to include it but to report that it was stated in the specific source. As in "XYZ publication reported that the property belonged to Mr. Jones [citations], but Mr. Jones denied it [citations]." Which of these is a better solution will depend on the facts of the specific situation; it's hard to give a general answer without more details.
- Now I have a question back to you: how do we know that the "well-known and authoritative publications" merely "reprinted [the non-authoritative source's information], without analyzing this information and evaluating it"? Every source occasionally cuts corners or makes mistakes, but if a publication routinely reprints unverified information without analyzing and evaluating it, I'm not sure why it would be considered "well-known and authoritative" ... so conversely, if several sources reprinted the information, it suggests that they must have checked it out before reporting it, even if they didn't say so. On the other hand, it's certainly possible that they didn't ... as with so many other things, the devil is in the details. I hope this helps, although I haven't given you a definitive answer, and I don't know that anyone else could, either. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:04, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
September 29: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon + Annual Members' Meeting NYC
September 29, 7pm: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon + Annual Members' Meeting NYC | |
---|---|
You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-8pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop. To join the meeting from your computer or smartphone, just visit this link. More information about how to connect is available on the meetup page. We look forward to seeing local Wikimedians, but would also like to invite folks from the greater New York metropolitan area (and beyond!) who might not typically be able to join us in person! If there's a project you'd like to share or a question you'd like answered, just let us know by adding it to the agenda or the talk page.
|
Upcoming events:
- Prospect Park photo contest, ongoing
- Latinx Art Wikipedia Edit-a-thon, October 6
- Wiki-Pavilion Picnic NYC in Prospect Park (with WikiProject Craft + WikiConference North America), October 10
(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 04:40, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Sunday: Wiki-Pavilion Picnic NYC (part of WikiConference NA, Oct 8-10)
Sunday October 10, 12-5pm: Wiki-Pavilion Picnic NYC (part of WikiConference North America 2021, Oct 8-10) | |
---|---|
You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for a planned socially-distanced Wiknic ("the picnic anyone can edit") in Brooklyn's Prospect Park, being held at the historic Concert Grove Pavilion to coincide with WikiConference North America 2021, which will run virtually from Friday to Sunday. For this occasion, and to allow more space as desired, we have individually packed lunches provided by the chapter, and attendees are encouraged to RSVP at Eventbrite and give sandwich/entree orders.
|
(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 17:21, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Technical problems
Hi, Brad. I am having some technical problems. I can't see/find my edit tools on the edit screen, and I can't get my notifications (when I click on the bell, my screen creates a staticky pattern), among other things. Do you know how I can get help? Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:04, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- WP:VPT is the place for that. If you post there, say what happens when you visit Special:Notifications. They would want to know your browser and version and what you're running it on. Johnuniq (talk) 09:04, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Ssilvers: I think the above is the best advice. Hope you're able to straighten it out quickly. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:07, 8 October 2021 (UTC)