User talk:Donald Albury
Warning about paying for editing or other actions on WikipediaThis user is not affiliated with any group or organization that charges a fee for any activity relating to Wikipedia. If you have seen an advertisement for, or received any king of message from, someone who claims that they can help you with any kind of issue with Wikipedia for a payment, it may be a scam. If any such advertisement or message refers to this user name, please mail me a report.
|This is a Wikipedia user discussion page.
This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Donald_Albury.
|To leave a message on this page, click here.
If you email me, be aware that even if I am actively editing, I cannot always access my email and it may be a day or two before you receive a reply.
*Post new messages to the bottom of my talk page.
Comments which fail to follow the rules above may be immediately deleted.
|--> Archive 14 - Archive 13 - Archive 12 - Archive 11 - Archive 10 -
Archive 9 - Archive 8 - Archive 7 - Archive 6 - Archive 5 - Archive 4 - Archive 3 - Archive 2 - Archive 1
|Licensing rights granted to Wikimedia Foundation|
|I grant non-exclusive permission for the Wikimedia Foundation Inc. to relicense my text and media contributions, including any images, audio clips, or video clips, under any copyleft license that it chooses, provided it maintains the free and open spirit of the GFDL. This permission acknowledges that future licensing needs of the Wikimedia projects may need adapting in unforeseen fashions to facilitate other uses, formats, and locations. It is given for as long as this banner remains.|
|This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics:
I represent the Dunedin History Museum and the city historian. The reference link(s) to the first land grant and the incorporation of the city is from an old incorrect city of Dunedin page. The dates 1852 and 1925 are incorrect for the first land grant and the founding of the city.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk • contribs) 15:10 4 August 2021 (UTC)
In fact that editor has repeatedly refused to advise me of what the problem is. I'm surprised to hear that editor is an experienced editor as I had not seen need to check. Right off attempting to inject FRINGE political bias and going on to repeatedly demand I debate positions I don't hold is strange for an experienced editor. I have said several times that we can remove and change any parts of my added text and asked how he wants to do that: He still refuses to reply instead insisting on these debates. Invasive Spices (talk) 31 January 2022 (UTC)
The Signpost: 8 May 2023
- News and notes: New legal "deVLOPments" in the EU
- In the media: Vivek's smelly socks, online safety, and politics
- Recent research: Gender, race and notability in deletion discussions
- Featured content: I wrote a poem for each article, I found rhymes for all the lists;
My first featured picture of this year now finally exists!
- Arbitration report: "World War II and the history of Jews in Poland" approaches conclusion
- News from the WMF: Planning together with the Wikimedia Foundation
Sorry to be a pain, but you seem to know about these things...Doesn't the Mary & George article qualify for deletion as unencyclopedic forward publicity per WP:NOT? Sweetpool50 (talk) 22:40, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- The article is decently sourced, mostly to sources that are generally accepted as reliable. I do question whether it yet meets the requirements of the general notability guideline. Personally, though, I am not willing to nominate it for deletion. Donald Albury 23:08, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks Donald Albury. I guess my real concern is about an encyclopedia's function and how it differs from a special-interest chat-mag. In my view, a mere intention to do whatever it is falls short of fulfilment and therefore encyclopedic itemisation. I remember back before Covid there was a plan to put on a play in the West End which was announced confidently in an article (I think it was The Watsons), but then the project sank from sight. However backed by journalistic chatter (=WP:RS), if something has yet to happen it's non-news and rumor. I was wondering whether that has been a matter of concern at admin level. Sweetpool50 (talk) 12:47, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
- The relevant policy is Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, which allows articles about notable events that are almost certain to take place, if supported by reliable sources. I strongly suspect that if someone took the article to AfD, the result would be "keep". Donald Albury 15:58, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 22 May 2023
- In the media: History, propaganda and censorship
- Arbitration report: Final decision in "World War II and the history of Jews in Poland"
- Featured content: A very musical week for featured articles
- Traffic report: Coronation, chatbot, celebs
I checked my original source and much to my surprise it seems that they restored it after having previously taken it down. Here is the link: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1972/05/13/the-conching-rooms Q1abus (talk) 00:07, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Is there a forum for editors?
Is there a forum for Wiki editors to discuss the work we do? Grt1718 (talk) 15:07, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Grt1718: There are very many places for discussion on Wikipedia. Discussions about how to improve an article normally take place on the talk page of that article, i.e., Talk:Micanopy, Florida. There are many WikiProjects covering various areas of interest. Wikipedia:WikiProject has some links to lists of WikiProjects that you can search. Some projects are inactive, however, or have a very low level of activity. Questions about how to do something in Wikipedia can go to the Wikipedia:Help Desk. Questions about policies and guidelines can go to the talk page for the policy or guideline, or the Noticeboard, if there is one, such as Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, where the reliability of sources is discussed. Note, however, that you should read the instructions at the top of a noticeboard before posting, as postings that do not follow the instructions may be treated roughly. Some noticeboards (the prime example being Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, which is for issues of editor conduct) are referred to as "drama boards" because of the length and intensity of some discussions (I personally do not look at that noticeboard unless I am specifically mentioned or invited into a discussion). Donald Albury 16:06, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Just a friendly heads-up in case you weren't already aware, since it's installed on your common.js: Careless use of ReferenceExpander has caused serious problems. It's currently at MFD, and a large cleanup project is underway to repair the citations damaged by the script. I and several other users have !voted that the script be deleted or disabled, and I wouldn't recommend using it at all unless you thoroughly check every reference it modifies against the previous revision. If you're interested in a more detailed explanation of the script's issues, Folly Mox has provided an excellent summary at the MFD. — SamX [talk · contribs] 04:56, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 5 June 2023
- News and notes: WMRU director forks new 'pedia, birds flap in top '22 piccy, WMF weighs in on Indian gov's map axe plea
- Featured content: Poetry under pressure
- Traffic report: Celebs, controversies and a chatbot in the public eye