User talk:Coffeeandcrumbs/Archive 6
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Coffeeandcrumbs. 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 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Women in Red March 2023
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 12:52, 26 February 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red April 2023
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:51, 27 March 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Changing date format in citations
Hey there! I noticed you changed the date format in the citations on Milena Warthon using WP:MOSNUMscript. As someone who translates Wikipedia articles, I think it's best to leave citation dates in their YYYY-MM-DD format, which, when displayed to the reader, will translate into the correct date format. This is an acceptable use of style (see MOS:DATEUNIFY for access and archive dates). Please reconsider making these changes :]
(For example, 2023-04-03 will automatically display as 3 April 2023, or 3 abril 2023 on eswiki, but if it's written as "3 April 2023", I have to manually rewrite every single citation's date, which is incredibly tedious.) Wracking 💬 16:12, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Done. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 21:05, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, much appreciated :] Wracking 💬 21:45, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red May 2023
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:27, 27 April 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Hi, Coffeeandcrumbs! Excuse me for asking: but don't you work for Doronin, Aman, or Oko?
I ask because there was already a member who was actively editing Doronin's article (specifically whitewashing), but he worked for the company: and violated a rule WP:PAID. DrDavidLivesey (talk) 20:46, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Please assume good faith as I have with you. No, I have no conflict of interest to disclose. I have been editing Wikipedia for years on topics so varied that I can't name them all. But I see you are relatively new (less than 200 edits to your name) and seem to focus almost exclusively on this topic and related pages. Instead of coming to my talk page to accuse me, please respond to the post at Talk:Vladislav_Doronin#SYNTH_and_unreliable_source. Please explain why you are using unreliable sources and synthesis to imply things on a WP:BLP that are not stated even by the sources. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 13:53, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, Coffeeandcrumbs
- Thank you for responding. This is very important to me.
- Just some comments. Exactly because I assume good faith, I asked the question directly. Because some of your edits gave me the impression that only negative facts in Doronin's article were deleted.
- Also, I couldn't ignore the fact that you blame me (I hope I'm just wrong) without providing justification - that I'm accusing you, but I asked a question according to wiki rules about COI/PAID issues. (WP:PA: Accusing someone of making personal attacks without providing a justification for your accusation is also considered a form of personal attack.)
- Another issue: according to WP:PA comparing the number of edits each of us has can also be considered a form of personal attack (I hope you are not claiming your superiority) and thus it is a justification for any actions (including destructive actions and personal attack). But again: I hope I'm just wrong.
- And I don't really understand your statement that I'd better go answer your question, because it totally irrelevant to my question to you and looks like an indirect personal attack (see ad hoinem and WP:PA: Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack regardless of the manner in which it is done.)
- But I'm here to make Wikipedia a better place, and I assume good faith for any editor. DrDavidLivesey (talk) 23:52, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- I will not be responding further. Please take this to the talk page of the article in question. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 01:02, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red - June 2023
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 09:15, 28 May 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Main page history
It looks to me as if Wikipedia:Main Page history/2023 June 18 was the last written. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:29, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red July 2023
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:42, 27 June 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Your draft article, Draft:Naila Ayesh
Hello, Coffeeandcrumbs. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Naila Ayesh".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 22:16, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red 8th Anniversary
|
|
Women in Red 8th Anniversary |
| In July 2015 around 15.5% of the English Wikipedia's biographies were about women. As of July 2023, 19.61% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women. That's a lot of biographies created in the effort to close the gender gap. Happy 8th Anniversary! Join us for some virtual cake and add comments or memories and please keep on editing to close the gap! |
--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:00, 18 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Charles III requested move discussion
There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 07:19, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red August 2023
See also:
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 19:24, 28 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
September 2023 at Women In Red
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Victuallers (talk) 16:49, 25 August 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Precious anniversary
 | |
| Five years! |
|---|
Regarding our last topic: Main Page history resumed to be written by bot on 10 July, but I wonder about the missing ones. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:26, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Also, the bot stopped again after 11 Sep. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:27, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red October 2023
See also
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 10:51, 29 September 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
POTD
Hello, Need your assistance for my recent self-nomination of POTD. Guide me if i committed any mistake. Snehrashmi (talk) 03:35, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Snehrashmi, it looks like a great first draft for a POTD blurb. Just remember to make this edit to the local file description for the image. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 03:40, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- Ohh buddy, What a prompt response. Thank you. Snehrashmi (talk) 03:44, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
Women in Red - November 2023
See also Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 08:21, 26 October 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Women in Red December 2023
Tip of the month:
Other ways to participate:
|
--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:22, 27 November 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi Coffeeandcrumbs, please have a look at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement § Is this kind of rhetoric permitted on I/P talk pages?. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:36, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
ARBPIA CTOP notice
You have recently made edits related to the Arab–Israeli conflict. This is a standard message to inform you that the Arab–Israeli conflict is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Additionally, editors must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert on the same page within 24 hours for pages within this topic. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:28, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
Happy New Year, Coffeeandcrumbs!
Coffeeandcrumbs,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 20:23, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
"Zionist entity"
Hi,
Recently you said Despite the false claims by the Zionist entity...
. This isn't productive language, and you have previously been asked to not use it; as Rosguill eloquently said, terminology that is not used by neutral RS and which inherently expresses the views of one side of the conflict is a recipe for more fighting and less writing
.
Will you please replace it with more neutral language? BilledMammal (talk) 18:46, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that isn’t helping your argument and if you want to discuss Israel then say Israel. You can call it the occupying army or state or whatever where appropriate, as in "as the occupying power in Gaza …" but its name is Israel, ifs army’s name is the IDF, and so on. When you refer to it with pejorative name instead of its actual name you give people a reason to dismiss your point. And they will. If you are unable to not keep your feelings out of your argument then this likely isn’t going to be a topic where you’ll be able to continue editing. nableezy - 19:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- I was stopping by to say the same thing. Much as referring to Hamas as "the Antisemitic entity" wouldn't be great, using needlessly inflammatory language just makes the discussions more antagonistic than they need to be. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- I would never use the term in Wikivoice. I have not heard any argument that precludes me from using the term in talk pages. It is my personal opinion and it is also factually true. I see no reason to stop using it on the talk pages. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 23:48, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- The reason is that people are going to dismiss your viewpoint immediately when the see you using that term. Sure, Israel is factually Zionist and is also factually an entity. The type of entity is a state and its Zionism is yes a defining trait but also not useful for calling something by its name. You make your arguments easier to ignore when you do this. Any person reviewing the discussion is going to gloss over the rest of your comment once they see that, and they will ignore it as hopelessly biased. And if you think I’m saying this because I disagree with your view then review my editing history. Hell review my comment at a similar request back in October. I’m telling you these things not to stop you from being able to be a part of the consensus making process but rather to try to make it so that you remain a part of it and so that your view is taken more seriously. You can believe me or not, up to you, but I hope you consider it. nableezy - 00:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Being unnecessarily inflammatory contributes to the WP:BATTLEGROUND in the topic area. If that behavior continues you'll be topic banned. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:08, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- It is your opinion that it is "unnecessarily inflammatory". I believe it is necessary, and it serves a very good and useful purpose to creating a good encyclopedia. It conveys my point of view and avoids allowing the acceptance of settler-colonialism as the norm. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 02:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- I kinda wish you’d reply to me instead of SFR, I *think* I have a pretty solid record of not supporting settler colonialism, and I’m telling you truthfully that it isn’t helpful to use such terms in talk page discussions. I know for me when I feel like people who hold POVs that I disagree with and who would like to see me banned say Nableezy stop doing something my instinct is to push back. But I’m not one of those people to you, so I hope you’ll consider what I wrote. nableezy - 02:56, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Hello,
- I would advise you to stop doing unnecessary stuff that might get you topic banned for such trivial reasons. In the meantime, I would appreciate if you could help me improve Human rights violations against Palestinians by Israel, an article that I recently created. Thank you and regards,Crampcomes (talk) 18:35, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- It is your opinion that it is "unnecessarily inflammatory". I believe it is necessary, and it serves a very good and useful purpose to creating a good encyclopedia. It conveys my point of view and avoids allowing the acceptance of settler-colonialism as the norm. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 02:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- I would never use the term in Wikivoice. I have not heard any argument that precludes me from using the term in talk pages. It is my personal opinion and it is also factually true. I see no reason to stop using it on the talk pages. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 23:48, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Nomination of Igor Fruman for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Igor Fruman, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Igor Fruman until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Article on Calvin Cheng
I noticed you were involved in a discussion on Calvin Cheng 4 years ago. Unfortunately, it was never resolved. Would you be able to look at it again please? 218.212.161.224 (talk) 17:04, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
An edit summary of yours
Hey, I came across an edit summary of yours. While I consider your edit to be productive and good faith, I’m not sure that this is best practice in a contentious area.
Would you consider using a different phrasing in the future? FortunateSons (talk) 11:24, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- No, thank you. The edit summary was appropriate. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 12:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)