User talk:Valereee: Difference between revisions
Tag: Reverted |
m Reverted edit by 146.199.206.18 (talk) to last version by Valereee |
||
| Line 141: | Line 141: | ||
:{{done}}, and you have a great weekend too! I shouldn't be editing, I should be out enjoying the beautiful weather we're having, but I got caught up in one of my typical editing frenzies at [[Jeanne Voltz]]. :D [[User:Valereee|Valereee]] ([[User talk:Valereee#top|talk]]) 17:31, 30 September 2023 (UTC) |
:{{done}}, and you have a great weekend too! I shouldn't be editing, I should be out enjoying the beautiful weather we're having, but I got caught up in one of my typical editing frenzies at [[Jeanne Voltz]]. :D [[User:Valereee|Valereee]] ([[User talk:Valereee#top|talk]]) 17:31, 30 September 2023 (UTC) |
||
== Fake LTA allegations as part of long-running hoax == |
|||
We've all done it. :D I have a tendency to be very kind and trusting to anyone who looks "new". I probably get suckered/trolled more often than I actually encourage a sincere new editor. [[User:Valereee|Valereee]] ([[User talk:Valereee|talk]]) 16:57, 30 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:This is quite interesting. Why would Zzuuzz, who has done nothing since early morning, block the IP for 5 years, 18 hours, and 54 minutes? I think the captain can see what is going to happen [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6YeaUBi6pQk]. I checked back on his contribs and soon came upon his edit summary ''once more, please ignore''. I didn't - I checked the diff and found this: |
|||
<font color="red">I would like to apologise to you, Anne, on behalf of the editors who are appalled at the way you have been treated. Your experience is far from unique. For example, looking at Zzuuzz's entirely unsourced allegations, tracking this back the origin seems to be that one editor consistently faked content and when another editor replaced it with the reliably sourced truth he began a campaign of nagging administrators to indefinitely protect articles and the Community to implement a ban. Of course he failed as regards the ban, and it might be instructive to examine why. [[Gregorian calendar]] currently claims:</font> |
|||
{{xt|In 1545, the Council of Trent authorised Pope Paul III to reform the calendar, requiring that the date of the vernal equinox be restored to that which it held at the time of the First Council of Nicaea in 325 and that an alteration to the calendar be designed to prevent future drift.}} |
|||
This wording appeared in the article on 28 March 2017, replacing the previous wording, which was: |
|||
{{xt|The Council of Trent approved a plan in 1563 for correcting the calendar errors, requiring that the date of the vernal equinox be restored to that which it held at the time of the First Council of Nicaea in 325 and that an alteration to the calendar be designed to prevent future drift.}} |
|||
Note the discrepancy in the year and that neither version is sourced. They are in fact fairy tales, as a reading of the canons of the Council of Trent will reveal. Another fact that the offending editor is determined to hide from the readers is that Greece never adopted the Gregorian calendar. A fully sourced edit explaining what Greece did adopt in 1923 [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adoption_of_the_Gregorian_calendar&diff=prev&oldid=873843683] was replaced by the fake claim that she adopted the Gregorian calendar backed by two sources which failed verification. Source 1 is the government law mandating the calendar change. Since it specifically states that Greece would NOT be adopting the Gregorian calendar there is no link to the actual text, although it is online. Source two is a memorandum by the astronomer who helped draft the law. He refers only to "The addition of 13 days to the civil calendar's date" - using that to claim the Gregorian calendar was adopted is synthesis. Out went the actual statement by the Archbishop of Athens also confirming Greece did not adopt the Gregorian calendar (Orthodox churches are banned from using it). |
|||
Impeccable sourcing was used in [[Julian calendar]] showing that Greece did not change to the Gregorian calendar [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Julian_calendar&diff=prev&oldid=815988281]. The information was again replaced by the fake claim that Greece adopted the Gregorian calendar. The source? A memorandum by an anonymous computer programmer in the U S Social Security Department who knows nothing of calendars (other than how to programme the date) and even less Greek. [[Special:Contributions/78.141.40.98|78.141.40.98]] ([[User talk:78.141.40.98|talk]]) 17:07, 21 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:<font color="green>So it looks like this is all an elaborate hoax to perpetuate the myth (which seems to have been running for 100 years) that Greece adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1923. You would think that people would have better things to do with their time but apparently not.</font> [[Special:Contributions/146.199.206.18|146.199.206.18]] ([[User talk:146.199.206.18|talk]]) 18:38, 30 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:213.123.216.179, blocked by Zzuuzz for five years (now ''there's'' a [[WP:INVOLVED]] block if ever I saw one) is no LTA, as the discussion at [[Wikipedia talk:Blocking policy#Blocking IPs per request of school administration?]] demonstrates. RoySmith doesn't want to get involved, but he's a legacy admin. You, on the other hand, have been described as "polite and welcoming." I've had many cordial interactions with Megalibrarygirl - she tried to sort out the mess [[User talk:Megalibrarygirl/Archives/2019/January#Your draft article, Draft:Revised Gregorian calendar]] and got Islamic calendar unprotected [[User talk:Megalibrarygirl/Archives/2018/December#Feliz Navidad]]. |
|||
:As part of the hoax, [[Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Vote (X) for Change]] was created and published illegally as it never underwent the mandatory vetting by an independent third party, and a fake review was posted at [[Wikipedia:Long-term abuse]]. Can you delete the review and G6 the attack page? [[Special:Contributions/146.199.206.18|146.199.206.18]] ([[User talk:146.199.206.18|talk]]) 12:51, 1 October 2023 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 13:33, 1 October 2023
Need help and don't know where to find it?
 | Scam Watch
Warning: There is an on-going scam targeting people who would like Wikipedia to have an article about them. See this scam warning for detailed information. No ethical Wikipedia editor or administrator will offer to create an article for money. If you've been scammed please send details to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org to help others who could be future victims of this scam. |
WikiCup 2023 September newsletter
The fourth round of the competition has finished, with anyone scoring less than 673 points being eliminated. It was a high scoring round with all but one of the contestants who progressed to the final having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were
Epicgenius, with 2173 points topping the scores, gained mainly from a featured article, 38 good articles and 9 DYKs. He was followed by
Sammi Brie, with 1575 points, gained mainly from a featured article, 28 good articles and 50 good article reviews. Close behind was
Thebiguglyalien, with 1535 points mainly gained from a featured article, 15 good articles, 26 good article reviews and lots of bonus points.
Between them during round 4, contestants achieved 12 featured articles, 3 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 126 good articles, 46 DYK entries, 14 ITN entries, 67 featured article candidate reviews and 147 good article reviews. Congratulations to our eight finalists and all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them and within 24 hours of the end of the final. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.
I will be standing down as a judge after the end of the contest. I think the Cup encourages productive editors to improve their contributions to Wikipedia and I hope that someone else will step up to take over the running of the Cup. Sturmvogel 66 (talk), and Cwmhiraeth (talk)
This week's article for improvement (week 39, 2023)
 vs graph for a moving particle under a non-uniform acceleration .
Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: Juice • Antebellum South Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 25 September 2023 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • |
|---|
Tech News: 2023-39
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- The Vector 2022 skin will now remember the pinned/unpinned status for the Table of Contents for all logged-out users. [1]
Changes later this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 26 September. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 27 September. It will be on all wikis from 28 September (calendar).
The ResourceLoader mediawiki.uimodules are now deprecated as part of the move to Vue.js and Codex. There is a guide for migrating from MediaWiki UI to Codex for any tools that use it. More details are available in the task and your questions are welcome there.- Gadget definitions will have a new "namespaces" option. The option takes a list of namespace IDs. Gadgets that use this option will only load on pages in the given namespaces.
Future changes
- New variables will be added to AbuseFilter:
global_account_groupsandglobal_account_editcount. They are available only when an account is being created. You can use them to prevent blocking automatic creation of accounts when users with many edits elsewhere visit your wiki for the first time. [2][3]
Meetings
- You can join the next meeting with the Wikipedia mobile apps teams. During the meeting, we will discuss the current features and future roadmap. The meeting will be on 27 October at 17:00 (UTC). See details and how to join.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
MediaWiki message delivery 16:49, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
AFJ edits
Thanks for the great edits and formatting. You've made the article look so much better. The first version, very close to what you saw, was rejected two days ago. Now it looks indisputable. Sam Perkins (talk) 11:57, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
- You're welcome, and thanks for creating this article! I have an interest in women in journalism, which is a subject we don't cover well. Valereee (talk) 12:20, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
I'm not sure if this matters, apologies if it's not a problem. Jjjjfghh (talk · contribs) looks to be new user Jjjjfghh2 (talk · contribs). User page states new account rules. I'm not too familiar with alt accounts. Is it correct that as long as it is declared and both accounts don't edit the same article, then it is OK? Thanks, Knitsey (talk) 14:04, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hey, @Knitsey! Yeah, it's a bit of an overreaction on their part to make a WP:fresh start after 135 edits and three complaints on their talk, but as long as they actually abandon the old account -- and as you say, don't edit the same articles or discussions -- it's fine. Valereee (talk) 14:29, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
- I thought it was OK with conditions. I appreciate you checking. Knitsey (talk) 14:30, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red October 2023
See also
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 10:54, 29 September 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Query
Hello, Valereee,
I see you are active right now on the project so I have a request. Could you review and, hopefully, delete Coca Vango? I handle a lot of PROD'd articles but I tagged this one so it is not appropriate for me to delete it and none of the other admins who regularly patrol Proposed Deletions seems to be active lately. Thanks for looking over this one.
Have a great weekend! Liz Read! Talk! 17:26, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
Done, and you have a great weekend too! I shouldn't be editing, I should be out enjoying the beautiful weather we're having, but I got caught up in one of my typical editing frenzies at Jeanne Voltz. :D Valereee (talk) 17:31, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
