User talk:YorkshireLad/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. 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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Welcome
|
August 2019
Hi, I am Acumen32 (talk) 18:22, 12 August 2019 (UTC) . The user who edited indirect taxes on August 12, 2019. I am not very proficient using talk pages, so excuse me if I wrote in the wrong place or using wrong format. Now regarding the article that I had edited, it was an unbiased fact that applies to all the countries which levy indirect taxes. The burden of taxes is shifted from businessmen, when they raise prices. At the end it is transferred to end consumer. As it is in indirect form, it is distributed in the end consumer indiscriminately. This has a negative impact on poor households which cannot even pay direct taxes, which are living hand to mouth. But they do have to end up paying indirect taxes. This is a major flaw of indirect tax which cannot be neglected. These are all facts. I would like to know how you view this as being biased. Looking forward to your reply and also tell me proper way of replying on talk pages.
- Hiya! I'll start by saying I'm pretty new here too (in terms of edits if not time since I made the account), and thanks for your message. You're in the right place, but I've just moved the post lower down the page so it doesn't appear with the welcome message above.
- I'll admit, it was borderline, and looking back I might have been a bit hasty removing it instead of just leaving you a message or something. I can tell you why I thought it was not Neutral Point of View at the time: the combination of phrasing like "But it's major flaw", and the fact that it was unsourced (i.e. no citations). I think possibly more relevant is the fact that even if NPOV, I'd argue it's Original Research—everything you said seems to be true, but content needs to be verifiable before it can be added to Wikipedia, and that's especially important for contentious/political things where someone could dispute it. (Even then, ideally everything that's not completely obvious should have a citation—for instance, on the page on the United Kingdom, the fact "The United Kingdom consists of four constituent countries: England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland" has a citation, even though it's unlikely to be contested.)
- Anyway, if you wanted to add the content back but with citations from reliable sources for people who make those points, I suspect nobody would revert it. Alternatively, perhaps add the material to the article's talk page and see what other people think? YorkshireLad (talk) 21:49, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
- Reply from Acumen32 (talk) 10:41, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
- Your idea of adding to the talk page instead of directly adding to the article is great, I think it would be better to go with that. Plus to make my argument more persuasive, I would add the link to this article https://www.citylab.com/life/2015/01/how-local-sales-taxes-target-the-poor-and-widen-the-income-gap/384643/
- , but before that would have to do even more research, so would do it after my exams ending on 19th because I don't even know how they make headings in wikipedia, so first I would have to read up on all that before doing my research. Thanks for your guidance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acumen32 (talk • contribs) 10:39, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
- No worries. You might like to look at the tutorial (specifically, the formatting page tells you how to add headings). Good luck with your exams! YorkshireLad (talk) 15:02, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Milton Keynes Dons F.C., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Callum Reilly (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
Message from 100.16.173.157
I think you sent the wrong person a message about a recent edit.
- Hello! I've moved your message down the page, I hope that's okay. Just a note: you should sign comments on talk pages by typing four tildes so it's obvious who's sending them (I also forget sometimes…).
- I suspect you didn't make the edit to the page "Suicide watch" that I reverted (some time ago now!). You can see your IP address's recent contributions by clicking the link in the heading for this section, though, and you'll see the edit I reverted there. (Apologies for not having indicated the page on your talk page; I normally do in the template I posted.
- If it wasn't you, it must have been someone else who shares your IP address (which can happen for a whole host of reasons, such as editing from a mobile, being on a school/university/work network, etc.). There's not a lot I (or Wikipedia) can do about that, unfortunately; if someone needs to message someone editing from your IP address that's the only way to get through to them. If you find that irrelevant messages like that annoy you, though, you can create an account—see WP:ACCOUNT for more details. YorkshireLad (talk) 15:05, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
October 2019
I want to replace George W. Hill with George Roy Hill on George Roy Hill's wikipedia pageSteelehill12 (talk) 16:32, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Steelehill12: Hi! I've moved your message further down the page to keep things in order, hope that's okay. I don't know either George Hill, I'm sorry to say, so I'll have to take your word for it that the current picture is wrong. In which case, it's fine to change it, but the edit you made deleted the entire infobox with GRH's biographical details, which is why I reverted it. To make the change you wanted to make, you should simply replace the text "George Roy Hill (1970).jpg" in the current version of the article with the name of the file you want to add instead, which is "George Roy Hill.jpg" (without the quotes), and likewise change the caption. That will preserve all the other information, like his dates of birth/death. YorkshireLad (talk) 16:38, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Steelehill12: Hi again, I've properly sussed out the situation now. It seems various people have tried to remove that image, and then various other people have put it back. I've changed the image out for the one you uploaded, as you attempted. I hope that's okay, and thank you very much for providing the image.
- By the way, I'm guessing from your username and the fact that you took the photo that you're related to George Roy Hill? If so, and you want to edit the page further, do have a look at Wikipedia's guidelines on conflict of interest, just to make sure you've made any necessary disclosures. YorkshireLad (talk) 17:46, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Clarendon Shopping Centre
Good work on Clarendon Shopping Centre. I just promoted it to GA. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:16, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you, and thanks for letting me know! You've made my evening. YorkshireLad (talk) 22:26, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
October 2019 GOCE blitz bling
|
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar | |
| This barnstar is awarded to YorkshireLad for copy edits totaling over 4,000 words (including rollover words) during the GOCE October 2019 Copy Editing Blitz. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 11:06, 22 October 2019 (UTC) |
Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:19, 23 October 2019 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).
Sorry about the rollback
I apologize to you for the inadvertent rollback on your AIV edit! Larry Hockett (Talk) 22:38, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Hi! Thanks; honestly, I hadn't noticed but I might have been mildly confused if I had! YorkshireLad (talk) 22:40, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
A goat for you!
.jpg)
for ninja-ing me on the SPI page
Jdcomix (talk) 23:07, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Haha, thanks! First time I've been compared to a ninja, I'm not really stealthy enough… YorkshireLad (talk) 23:11, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Your thread has been archived
|
Hi YorkshireLad! You created a thread called Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|
DYK for Clarendon Shopping Centre
On 18 November 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Clarendon Shopping Centre, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that A. N. Wilson described Oxford's Clarendon Shopping Centre when it opened as "the most grotesquely horrible building I have ever seen"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Clarendon Shopping Centre. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Clarendon Shopping Centre), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Zooming by
|
Zooming by |
| Just zooming by your userpage! ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 15:07, 18 November 2019 (UTC) |
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 |
Some baklava for you!
|
Hello Yorkshire Lad,
I could not find the "Add Topic" button despite a word search. I intend fully to comply with your requirements. I had not thought about it, but you are correct about the conflict of interest. I will make no further changes without getting it to you first for judgment and advice. My intention is to develop an external citation source, update the page with pictures, and then I will pass these onto you for adjudication. thank-you Julian Julian Spencer-Churchill (talk) 22:52, 23 November 2019 (UTC) |
- @Julian Spencer-Churchill: Thanks for the baklava! You certainly don't have to put things to me personally for approval, I should say: I have no more authority here than anyone else. The best thing to do is to comment on the talk page of the article in question (you should see a talk link at the top of the page), and then anyone who looks at that (or anyone "watching" the article) can see your suggestions. That said, I'm more than happy to try to help, so you are very welcome to come back to me if you like (I should see anything you put here—and you put this message in exactly the right place, don't worry! But if you come back and this section is gone, it's been automatically archived, so just start a new section like you did today).
- If you have pictures you'd like to share, by the way, the guidelines are somewhat looser for those (essentially because otherwise it would be almost impossible to obtain pictures of a lot of things). You can find out more about that on the guidance page for image uploads; the main requirements are permission from the copyright-holder, and willingness of that person to license the photo under an appropriate licence that allows general re-use. YorkshireLad (talk) 10:51, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
Can you please vet my new entry
Hello Yorkshire lad,
we spoke in Nov 2019.
I have a new entry I would like to add to the wikipedia entry "Talk:Jack Churchill (1880–1947)". It is posted on the talk page at the moment, and entitled: "Genetic Evidence of John Churchill's Paternity."
Because I have a conflict of interest, I am seeking you out to confirm if it conforms with the standards of wikipedia.
thank-you,
Julian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julian Spencer-Churchill (talk • contribs) 18:45, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Julian Spencer-Churchill: Hi Julian, apologies that this has taken so long (doctoral studies and other real-life things got in the way!). That looks really interesting; what you'd need to be able to add it to Wikipedia, is an external source for it. If it's original research you've done, it might be worth having a look at WP:OR. Of course, there is nothing stopping you adding it to the page—Wikipedia is, after all, "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit"! But if someone found it and deduced that it was original research, it might be removed.
- Of course, the other thing you can do is place it on a website of your own; Google Sites is a good option for that, in my opinion, since it's completely free to use. YorkshireLad (talk) 14:09, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
SPI
I deleted Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/2600:387:A:5:0:0:0:AC, but blocked the IP. Someone editing from their cell phone vs. their university isn't really socking, but they were continuing to be disruptive, so blocked. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:56, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks! Sorry about that… I did wonder when I was submitting it if it counted as sockpuppetry, but WP:BOLD and all that. :-) YorkshireLad (talk) 00:59, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- No need to apologize. SPIs filed under IP names are just my personal pet peeve (we'll never keep track of them and 99% of the time no one sees it until it is too late... plus most of the time it's just a dynamic IP.) But from a practical standpoint, AIV is usually quicker... I just saw an IP SPI on the IRC feed and swooped in to close it :P TonyBallioni (talk) 01:07, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
Edits on Young blood transfusion
Got your message. The edit was factual. You reverted a factual edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.6.209.89 (talk) 11:34, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
- @210.6.209.89: The information that you removed that I reverted seems to be backed up by the Scientific American source. (That there was no control is confirmed by the link therin to the clinical trial page on ClinicalTrials.gov [1]; admittedly this wasn't on the page as a source, but I've added it now.) The information you added wasn't backed up by a reliable source, but did contain a link to ambrosiaplasma.com, which made me suspect you were using Wikipedia for promotional purposes: this is not allowed. In addition, if you do have a connection to Ambrosia, you should explicitly disclose it when editing, though you are strongly discouraged from editing pages you have such a connection to in the first place. YorkshireLad (talk) 11:55, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
- You are incorrect. There was no placebo, but there was a control group. I am going to continue editing the page to correct the information in it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.6.209.89 (talk) 04:27, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
- The source from ClinicalTrials.gov (with information provided by Ambrosia!) says that the method used was "Single Group Assignment", which the website's glossary describes as "A type of intervention model describing a clinical trial in which all participants receive the same intervention/treatment." YorkshireLad (talk) 09:21, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
- You are incorrect. There was no placebo, but there was a control group. I am going to continue editing the page to correct the information in it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.6.209.89 (talk) 04:27, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
- The information you quote doesn't mention the word control at all. You are misinterpreting the description you quote. The study had a control. There are numerous articles on the internet describing that Ambrosia's clinical trial had a control. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.6.209.89 (talk) 07:12, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
- "There are numerous articles on the internet describing that Ambrosia's clinical trial had a control." If you can link to one—by which I mean a reliable, independent source—then I would happily add it. I did try searching on Google for "Ambrosia clinical trial control", and I indeed found numerous articles, but only ones that state that the trial did not have a control, e.g.:
- Quartz: "The results are extremely preliminary; they not published in a peer-reviewed, and there was no control study." [2]
- The Guardian: "The scientific community has rolled its eyes at the “trial” element of Ambrosia. There is no control group" [3]
- "There are numerous articles on the internet describing that Ambrosia's clinical trial had a control." If you can link to one—by which I mean a reliable, independent source—then I would happily add it. I did try searching on Google for "Ambrosia clinical trial control", and I indeed found numerous articles, but only ones that state that the trial did not have a control, e.g.:
- However, I did find an article in Science (arguably one of the two most prestigious journals in existence) [4], which says "With physiological measurements taken before and after treatment, each person will serve as their own control, [the study's investigator] explains." I don't really want, at this point, to get into a discussion about how scientifically valid this is, but I have therefore changed the relevant statement to read "there was no control group" (emphasis added), which is a claim that can be verified repeatedly. YorkshireLad (talk) 09:08, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Salvagable or WP:PROD it? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:21, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hmmmm. There's no evidence that it meets WP:GNG, you're right, but it does seem to meet WP:NTV (simply by virtue of being a British TV programme). Perhaps worth waiting for the outcome of the AfD on Essex Wives before PRODding? YorkshireLad (talk) 09:24, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Requested Edits
I have added 16 requested edits to the young blood transfusion talk page. Would you please make these edits, or respond on the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.6.209.89 (talk) 07:14, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
- I see other editors have already replied to these requested edits, and I don't have anything more to add. I will keep an eye on the talk page. YorkshireLad (talk) 09:16, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
- I appreciate that you are trying to address the requested edits. There is still an issue. The study had a control arm. I would be happy to explain the difference between a control, control arm, and placebo. If you would like, please respond on my talk page or the young blood transfusion talk page.210.6.209.89 (talk) 09:46, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Talk:Young blood transfusion. YorkshireLad (talk) 10:58, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
- I appreciate that you are trying to address the requested edits. There is still an issue. The study had a control arm. I would be happy to explain the difference between a control, control arm, and placebo. If you would like, please respond on my talk page or the young blood transfusion talk page.210.6.209.89 (talk) 09:46, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
- Would it be alright if I deleted this section and the "Edits on Young blood transfusion section" from your talk page? We've moved our discussion to the young blood transfusion talk page. Please respond on my talk page. 210.6.209.89 (talk) 14:32, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry, but please leave it here—both to preserve the beginning of this conversation for anyone who links back from the article talk page (I linked here from there for a reason) and because I have an automated archiving script set up (so this will eventually be removed and moved to the archive, when the script determines my page is "overfull"). Thanks. YorkshireLad (talk) 14:49, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
- Ok. I appreciate your effort and that you care about getting things right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.6.209.89 (talk) 14:52, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Usernames
I nearly picked Durham Lad all those years ago. I'm not from the City. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 18:20, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
- Haha, nice! Mine was originally "Yorkshire Gold", named after the tea, but I realised it might look like a WP:PROMONAME so I requested a change. I am from Yorkshire, though, even if I don't work for the tea company. YorkshireLad (talk) 18:23, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Your thread has been archived
|
|
Hi YorkshireLad! You created a thread called Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|
Your thread has been archived
|
|
Hi YorkshireLad! You created a thread called Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|
DYK for Pride in STEM
On 14 March 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pride in STEM, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Pride in STEM wants to "queer up science spaces and science up queer spaces"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pride in STEM. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Pride in STEM), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:01, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
Message added User:Sparkle1. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
DYK for 500 Queer Scientists
On 22 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 500 Queer Scientists, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that 500 Queer Scientists are informally partnered with 500 Women Scientists? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/500 Queer Scientists. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 500 Queer Scientists), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Vanamonde (Talk) 12:03, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Your editorial redactions
You made a wholesale editorial redaction of all materials added, including those materials which have external (i.e., non-wiki) sources which comply with wiki policies (e.g., Stanford University, Time Magazine, American Society for Apheresis, and U.S. FDA).
Please re-instate the materials which actually meet wiki specifications. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaPortola (talk • contribs) 20:10, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- LaPortola: Nope, not me! This is the change I made, which just removed three citations and added two tags (as I indicated on your user talk page); I suggest you take up the issue with Natureium, who removed the rest of your edit. Better yet, post on the article talk page, where other editors can weigh in. YorkshireLad ✿ (talk) 20:58, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
DYK for Suzette Davenport
On 7 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Suzette Davenport, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that British police officer Suzette Davenport was responsible for crime in Staffordshire and intelligence in the West Midlands? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Suzette Davenport. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Suzette Davenport), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Gatoclass (talk) 00:04, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
Renaissance Workshop Company
At the end, everything about the Renaissance Workshop Company has been removed in favour of the Early Music Shop in Saltaire. As usual.
Fortunately, the truth will keep being the truth independently what is stated in the wikipedia.
Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.34.79.85 (talk) 10:33, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
- Hi. I did change my suggestion on the Articles for Deletion page so that the article was "Draftified": i.e., converted into a page with the prefix "Draft" so it could continue being worked on. Alas it was to no avail; I'm sorry it didn't work out better.
- I can't access deleted pages as a non-admin, but admins can; if you'd like a copy of the content so you can keep working on it, and maybe submit it to be recreated as an article, you may be able to get it by leaving a message on the talk page of the administrator who closed the AfD (their user name will be linked after the bit that says "The result was delete"). You'd probably need to create an account before you did that though, because if they agreed they'd want to restore it to your "user space", which only registered users have (for instance, my user space is anything with a prefix "User:YorkshireLad/", like User:YorkshireLad/sandbox). YorkshireLad ✿ (talk) 10:55, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
JWB
You are correct it does not present a warning, I apparently did not always pay attention either, sorry about that and thank you for the heads up, I'll have to add some logic to not add a second identical parameter. MPJ-DK (talk) 18:00, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
- MPJ-DK, No worries at all; I find going through that category oddly relaxing so it gave me something to do! YorkshireLad ✿ (talk) 18:03, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| Thank you for correcting the syntax on my reports. I am not the most experienced in that regard but am learning and as such greatly appreciate the gesture. Xeed.rice (talk) 10:58, 23 May 2020 (UTC) |
- @Xeed.rice: You're very welcome! (If you're interested, because I forgot to explain: the reason why a problem on that page triggers problems on so many others is that a lot of pages "transclude" WP:AIV—that is, they essentially treat it as a template, and include its contents wholesale, automatically updating as people add reports to the page. That means that a duplicate template argument (which was the error being generated by that particular syntax) is detected by the software on all those other pages too.) YorkshireLad ✿ (talk) 11:04, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
Thank you!
Hi YorkshireLad, thank you for the knowledge about how pings work. It makes sense that it'd be tied to a signature; let's see if I can get it this time: @YorkshireLad:! In the special case you mentioned of going back to make a correction and needing to re-add one's signature to allow the pings to work... does that mean you'd need to delete the first signature (i.e. type over it) when making a minor correction or would you simply sign separately for a second time?
Cheers, MitzvahCode (talk) 20:20, 28 May 2020 (UTC)MitzvahCode
- MitzvahCode, Hi! So there are some more details on Template:Ping, but my understanding is that you'd need to add a completely new line in that case for it to work—that is, write something like
Ping didn't work; pinging {{u|MitzvahCode}} again properly. ~~~~- which renders as
Ping didn't work; pinging MitzvahCode again properly. YorkshireLad ✿ (talk) 12:34, 12 March 2045 (UTC)
- This message seems to have been the right syntax to ping me, but I can't tell because any post on someone's user talk page notifies them, whether there's a link to a user name or not. (Incidentally, do you know about User:Enterprisey/reply-link? It's a script that adds a "reply" link on many pages; it (usually) automatically adds the ping to the person you're replying to and a signature, though you do need to check it's worked with the "Preview" button it gives you. It's what I used for this message, for instance.) YorkshireLad ✿ (talk) 12:48, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
The Signpost: 28 June 2020
- News and notes: Progress at Wikipedia Library and Wikijournal of Medicine
- Community view: Community open letter on renaming
- Gallery: After the killing of George Floyd
- In the media: Part collaboration and part combat
- Discussion report: Community reacts to WMF rebranding proposals
- Featured content: Sports are returning, with a rainbow
- Arbitration report: Anti-harassment RfC and a checkuser revocation
- Traffic report: The pandemic, alleged murder, a massacre, and other deaths
- News from the WMF: We stand for racial justice
- Recent research: Wikipedia and COVID-19; automated Wikipedia-based fact-checking
- Humour: Cherchez une femme
- On the bright side: For what are you grateful this month?
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Black Lives Matter
A barnstar for you!
|
The No Spam Barnstar |
| nah i wont stop soz :D SmallishBeans (talk) 10:46, 13 July 2020 (UTC) |
- Never mind, looks like someone's stopped you. YorkshireLad ✿ (talk) 10:53, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Your thread has been archived
|
|
Hi YorkshireLad! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse,
|