User talk:Nemov/Archives/2024/May

RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins

Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

• Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
• Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
• Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
• Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
• Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
• Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
• Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
• Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Discussing sequel trilogy edits

I believe my edit in regards to inspiration for the sequel trilogy was valid. I make this point because while Rebels was not directly linked to it, it was most likely a source of inspiration for the makers of these films.

Also, the idea Disney had about a Rifts movie was one of the things that got the trilogy ball rolling and Jerry Bruckheimer's action films for its studios, which were greenlit due to this idea not working out and quite a few were inspired by the game, also served as development inspiration.

I made a similar point about the original trilogy with a prior edit I believe is a good edit. GoutComplex (talk) 15:33, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

This seems like a lot of original research to me. Nemov (talk) 15:37, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Oh, yeah. I forgot about the wording of the original research rules. You are actually correct. GoutComplex (talk) 15:47, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

May music

story · music · places

Today's story mentions a concert I loved to hear (DYK) and a piece I loved to sing in choir, 150 years old (OTD). -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:09, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Today's focus is Ethel Smyth (per the TPF), written by many, and I wonder if it could become GA if not FA even. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:07, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

29 May 1913: The Rite of Spring - today's story, actually something I saw at that place in a revival. - We had the infobox discussion 100 years after the premiere, often mentioned in the arbcase. - Today a user who returned after several years said that nothing changed. Would you agree? I wouldn't ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:43, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Baseball stadiums

Nearly a year ago, one editor went through every single MLB stadium article, whether they were multi-purpose or not, and changed the second sentence unilaterally to a sentence that no one ever says. So if you have a problem with someone making mass changes without consensus, your problem is with that editor. Fred Zepelin (talk) 23:44, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

By the way, telling me in the edit summary "you should get out more" is definitely a violation of WP:NPA. Please don't do that again. Thank you. Fred Zepelin (talk) 23:47, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

I went back 3+ years ago and it was called "home ballpark" at Truist Park.[1] Since I'm objecting to your change please restore it until you have consensus to do so. I can't speak on the other articles, but given your lack of attention to detail here there's probably other problems with those edits. Also, "you should get out more" is true since you're edit summary claims that ballpark "has never been uttered by anyone" which is frankly silly. That's not a personal attack, it's just the reality. Nemov (talk) 23:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

I din't say the word "ballpark" has never been uttered. I said "It is the ballpark of" has never been uttered. That was the change made by the editor who made the wholesale changes to every MLB stadium (except, apparently, Truist, fine, I'll take your word for it). If you don't think "you should get out more" isn't a personal attack, and would like to reiterate that to me, I'm happy to let an admin decide on the matter. Fred Zepelin (talk) 23:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

If you wish to waste more time, feel free. Nemov (talk) 23:54, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

And by the way, check this edit. That's the date that the editor I'm talking about went through every MLB stadium article and made the wholesale change. So again, please take it up with them. Fred Zepelin (talk) 23:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Nothing to take up, I've changed it back to "home ballpark" which is used in baseball frequently. Nemov (talk) 23:57, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Not as frequently as "home field". I opened a discussion on the talk page about it. Fred Zepelin (talk) 00:02, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

The edit you cite simply changed "home ballpark of..." to "ballpark of..." the home was not necessary as it was self explanatory. And there are plenty of sources of ballpark being used in this factor.. MLB even has a ballpark app. Saying "home field" is less preferable as a field is just part of a ballpark, which contains the stands and surroundings... I've heard more people refer to stadiums as a teams ballpark than "home field"... so if you've never heard that I don't know what to say. Spanneraol (talk) 03:06, 29 May 2024 (UTC)