User talk:Darkfrog24/Archives/2020

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Welcome

Hello, and welcome to Simple English Wikipedia. I see that you've come over from enwiki. We do a few things differently here. Here are a few links to help you learn about these:

There is much to do here. So we are always happy to see new editors. But in view of your block over at enwiki, you should also be aware of WP:ONESTRIKE. Desertborn (talk) 20:08, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Desertborn: Is this a carbon copy boiler plate that's sent to all blocked-on-enwiki editors? Because if it isn't, then tell me now. I feel like Jean Val Jean at the beginning of Les Mis.
If you're going to hold the fact that someone's blocked on the English Wikipedia against him or her, then it matters whether and to what extent that block is merited. You should look into the whole story but I find this uninvolved editor summed it up reasonably well, and briefly [1].
My best guess is that the original topic ban was for participating in long arguments about style and I was punished for what side I was on, basically, what this admin says [2]. "Conduct not content" is a great idea; we should stop not doing it. The problem was, when I asked why I was being punished, the enforcing admin said, "Because of X and Y and because you're a liar." I've never told a deliberate lie in my adult life, so that last bit's not something I'm willing to tolerate. I thought the admin had just made an honest mistake, just been too busy to check the links before issuing the sanction, so I showed him the sources I copied. I expected him to say, "Oh! Guess you're not a liar then. But I still do have those other concerns." Instead, he took offense, accused me of "relitigating," and sent me off to be blocked.
So tell me a few things about the Simple English Wikipedia, Desertborn: If someone calls me a liar, am I allowed to say "I am not a liar; here are links to two of the many sources I copied verbatim"? If it is against the rules here, tell me now. If, when a Simple English Wikipedia admin says, "Water is not wet; you made that up to hurt people," I am expected to stand there, take it, and pretend that both my black eye and the bruises on their knuckles are my fault, then tell me now. If telling an admin "It seems as if you have made an understandable mistake about process; here is a link to the rule in question and a copy of an email from this Wikipedia's ArbCom that says yes I am allowed to do X" is considered abuse that must be punished, tell me now.
For example, you just brought up the fact that I'm blocked, and I just defended myself. If that sort of thing is "troublemaking" around here, tell me now. Darkfrog24 (talk) 00:06, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I just read the page in your link, Desertborn, and it sounds like Simple English Wikipedia's policy is that any admin can block any editor who's blocked anywhere else at any time for any reason or no reason, even if they do absolutely nothing wrong here. Is that correct? Darkfrog24 (talk) 05:30, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, that is not correct. It's one-strike, not zero-strike. I'll talk to you on IRC. Vermont (talk) 11:23, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I worry that any difference of opinion on what counts as a strike could have very negative consequences for me. Darkfrog24 (talk) 11:33, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, my message wasn't a boiler plate. I was just being friendly and pointing out a few links I thought might help. I'm sorry if you felt you were being attacked. That was certainly not my intention. Desertborn (talk) 13:12, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Very nice to know that was your intention. One of those times when it doesn't come through in the text. But yes, from what I read of that policy and old convos, it looks like "anyone who feels like it can block you at any time for no new reason." Darkfrog24 (talk) 15:29, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it is supposed to work that way. The person is only blocked if they do something wrong here, and usually the same wrong thing as the other wiki. And usually the editor still is warned. It is just that if they do the same thing they got the block for an another wiki, they don't get the full 4 warnings. Consider an example. If "WikiEditorA" is vandalising enwiki, they will likely be warned about 4 times before being blocked. Then if that same WikiEditorA comes over here and starts to vandalise here, do we then need to also warn them 4 times before an admin blocks them? No, because the pattern of behaviour is clear and WikiEditorA has already been well warned plenty on the matter over at enwiki. That's the reason for the policy, if I understand correctly. And that very situation happens all the time here, which is why it was needed. Of course we would likely still warn WikiEditorA once here before an admin blocks them. I'm sorry that my mention of the policy made you concerned. Please don't take it as a warning or anything like that. I just thought you may find it a good policy to be aware of given your block. I know for myself, its nice to know what things to be careful of. So it came from that perspective. We always appreciate new editors joining us here. And just as a side note, I'm not an admin, in case you were wondering. Desertborn (talk) 17:57, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you're trying to be nice. However, because of the extreme ambiguity of the situation at the English Wikipedia, I have pretty deep concerns. I will think on them for now. Darkfrog24 (talk) 19:43, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi @Desertborn: I saw this discussion thread 3 weeks ago when I posted at the bottom of this page on a different topic. At the time I was too busy to butt in, but in hindsite, and seeing that Darkfrog24 has curtailed activity here, I made the time today to post the following TLDR:
I met Darkfrog24 at wikinews a couple of years ago. wikinews is even smaller than Simple and you get to know those who are active pretty quickly. I don't know what happened at enwiki, but blocking someone such as Darkfrog24 seems like a mistake to me. I think I can understand why 1Strike would make any good faith editor who was blocked at enwiki very very nervous about getting involved at Simple. You say those who are hit with a 1Strike block are informed, but within the last 24 hours I saw a registered user getting "silently" blocked by an admin. I am not criticizing this admin. I bet it is not easy to be the only admin around during a long period, it must be hard to do and follow all the rules at the same time, we are all human. But, where does that leave the blocked user?
..and Giving an example of blocking a vandal when taking to someone like Darkfrog24 is probably going to make them even more nervous. It implies that they vandalized enwiki, which I am 100% sure they did not! Am I making sense? Ottawahitech (talk) 02:33, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Vandalism was one of the things they didn't try to pretend I did, actually, but it's very kind of you to say, Ottawa. As you can see, though, my conversation with Desert was months ago, and things have been proceeding here without incidence since. I made one proposal on the WT:MoS around here, and I'm waiting a week or two before going to look to see how people react to it, but other than that it's been working down the "in need of copyediting" backlog and the occasional new content related to my Wikinews work. So far so good. Darkfrog24 (talk) 03:01, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe Desertborn was pretending. In my experience this user is straightforward, honest and friendly. As far as trying to get discussion going on a talkpage at Simple, I was doing exactly that just minutes ago, but apparently the practice here is to post everything at Wikipedia:Simple talk :-) Ottawahitech (talk) 04:20, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The "they" in my previous comment did not include Desertborn. Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:31, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(This is not a rhetorical question.) Could you tell me what you're talking about, please? As you can see, the conversation above ended three months ago, so I'm not sure what you're looking at. Darkfrog24 (talk)

welcome

Hi Darkfrog24/Archives/2020

Glad to see you here. I liked what you did on Wikinews. I know you have a talent of writing clearly and simply and hope others appreciate you too. Ottawahitech (talk) 21:14, 17 February 2020 (UTC) How very kind of you, Ottawahitech. I was glad to see your name in the page history since you don't spend much time at Wikinews any more. I look forward to further collaboration here. Alas that Simple English is not my first language. Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:11, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting

That is actually quite interesting. I never knew that. IWI (chat) 15:45, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I took a course on invertebrates a few years ago. I tried to find the information in my textbook so I could add it to the article, but it turns out it was something the professor said out loud. Alas, my memory is not a professionally published source, so I had to stick to what was in the Nature letter.
But yes, the hypothetical ancestral arthropod had ten or twelve pairs of appendages; some grew into antennae, some into jaws (and not always just one set), and some into legs in various lobsters, crabs, horseshoe crabs, insects, centipedes, and millipedes. That's why some arthropods have two antennae and some have four. It's neat.
Also, crabs evolved four separate times. Turns out it's just a highly desirable niche. Darkfrog24 (talk) 15:55, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Crazy how evolution can do so many different things with the same parts. Thank you for your edits anyway, they are very helpful. IWI (chat) 16:01, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I should probably stop writing about sea urchins soon; it's making me hungry! Darkfrog24 (talk) 16:01, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No never stop! It's always great to get an editor with a specialist subject like this. Hope you stay. IWI (chat) 16:03, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Long story, but I'm something of a captive audience these days. Simple English is not my first language (highfallutin' English is), but the appeal here is mainly that on the English Wikipedia it often seems that almost everything worth writing about has already been written. If Simple needs more people, that could be a good angle for recruitment. Simple could also get some cross-action from Wikinews by adding the Wikinews covered this tag to relevant articles and then posting on the Wikinews article's collaboration page about it. Right now, Wikinews has articles up about stars, crime and obituaries. Darkfrog24 (talk) 16:09, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We are very short on editors. Editing on enwiki often feels almost futile as nobody cares about your opinion of high profile articles. You are unlikely to have a personal effect on consensus. Everything is already written on the enwiki, but here there are large gaps. That's why I have mostly quit the enwiki now to be here "full" time. Theres a lot of terrible admins on the enwiki but here every one of them are great. There is no room for bad admins on this wiki. IWI (chat) 16:13, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Wikinews is a small community too... I'll believe the "no bad admins" when I see it. Assume good faith, but acknowledge that everyone is human and has an ego and imperfections. Darkfrog24 (talk) 21:04, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We only have around ten and I have never seen one step out of line. Enwiki has hundreds and many step out of line because of how many there are. It would be easy to notice a terrible admin on here and a desysop would be swift. We all know each other on here; no-one is off the grid so to speak. IWI (chat) 21:07, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The downside of having few admins on Wikinews is I know everyone and when an admin says "XYZ," I can go, "Wait a minute. I know that particular guy doesn't know about XYZ. Yeah, gonna disregard that one," and they don't like that. The downside of a smaller community is that if there's a dispute on Wikipedia you can call for an RfC and get lots of people who don't have social connections to any of the involved parties to comment on it. I recently tried to use Wikinews' formal dispute resolution system and turns out it hadn't been in use in years and didn't work any more. Darkfrog24 (talk) 19:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Still a little confused. IWI and I are mostly agreeing with each other here, and the only things I said about en-wiki in this thread was that it feels like almost all the writing's already been covered and that their community is big enough to make uninvolved parties easy to find, both good things. Is something else going on that I should know about? Are there issues with my contribs that you want to discuss? Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:43, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Macdonald-ross: Regardless of the enwiki block, Darkfrog has been a valuable contributor to our project recently. I think this is worth pointing out. I was giving him an idea of the differences between here and enwiki. IWI (chat) 14:57, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Keep up the good work! I thank you for expanding such recent event articles such as COVID-19 pandemic and the Floyd protests. Some recent articles here to get out of date but thanks to you some of these articles are getting the update edits they need to be accurate. Keep it up! --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 02:39, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I love barnstars! Thanks. Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:40, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wanted pages

I don't think you need to keep referencing the 2007 conversation. Everyone knows articles get removed from there when they are created. I mean you can continue to if you want to. I just thought I would let you know you don't have to be stressed about it ;) -Djsasso (talk) 16:18, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

These are very stressful times, Djaasso. Thanks for going that extra mile. It's also for my own reference, though. If I ever need to list how many requested articles I started, it would be good to have a nice, descriptive change summary. Darkfrog24 (talk) 16:21, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Big Reference Weekend 2020

The Citation Barnstar The Citation Barnstar
Thank you for taking part in the Big Reference Weekend 2020. As a team, we helped make 177 pages better! Every change helps, big or small. Well done! Yottie =talk= 09:58, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya

Per request made by @Naleksuh: on IRC, here I am and I have eaten the pizza. Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:09, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Keep up the good work! I see you writing so many new articles each day, and their quality blows me away. You seem to recognize that we are not enwiki. Cheers! ~Prahlad balaji (t / c) 18:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

School bullying

Thanks a lot for doing this. I made a lot of contributions to the Columbine article on enwiki and am glad that you have removed this common misconception from the encyclopedia. People just make up a narrative of excuses so that they can blame anyone but the murderers themselves (Marilyn Manson, bullying, doom etc.). IWI (chat) 22:24, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ImprovedWikiImprovment: It was not exactly my pleasure but rather an oddly dark satisfaction, like an iced espresso that has just a small bit less sugar than it would truly need... The idea that it's bullied kids who shoot up schools 1) blames the victims (you only got shot because you're a bully) and 2) tells kids the bullying is justified (That kid you've been bullying? They deserve it because they're a dangerous criminal who'll shoot you. Might as well get 'em while you can!)
That being said, did you ever read the Jodi Picould fictional book Nineteen Minutes? It's a work of research-fiction about a bullied kid who shoots up a school and it was fascinating, misconceptions be darned. Darkfrog24 (talk) 22:37, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No I haven't read that book. The only book I've read in relation to this was Dave Cullen's Columbine, which was specifically about the events that led to the tragedy. By no means were they bullied, in fact they were closer to being bullies. I will have to pick up that book from Amazon; sounds like an interesting read. The phenomenon of school shootings in the US is almost entirely because of media coverage on these events, coupled with availability of guns from what I gather. IWI (chat) 22:59, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I won't spoil the cool bit for you, then.
I've read two of Picoult's books now and they were both well researched and very good. Even though her basic premise, "It's the bullied kid who shoots up the school," is wrong, it was still engaging. The audiobook version is good. Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:09, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless it still sounds interesting. I will give the book you mentioned a read. Yeah, this misconception actually stems from falsified beliefs about Columbine, especially related to the so-called "Trench coat Mafia", who were a group of unpopular kids at the school. The two murderers weren't even part of this group, but they did wear trenchcoats. IWI (chat) 13:38, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say hi!

Hiya. Noticed you started creating other sites that are part of the Big Heritage Weekend. Thank you for starting them, especially those that don't normally get much attention. I look forward to reading more articles that you start. They're very easy to read, which is what Simple Wiki is for. =) — Infogapp1 (talk) 21:11, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Other sites"? Other than what?
Thanks for the compliment. I used to work for a company that made edutainment materials for kids K-12 and Wikinews also targets educated English-as-a-subsequent-language readers. If you like stuff I wrote, I just finished writing articles for each froggie in Nyctimystes and am about to move on to Ranoidea. Darkfrog24 (talk) 21:23, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I meant most of the focus so far have been towards the UK historical sites, so it's great to see the list being expanded in other regions too. Awesome, will take a look. — Infogapp1 (talk) 11:10, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oooooh, okay. I actually haven't seen anyone else's BW contribs. Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:44, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Original Barnstar
Thank you for taking part in the Big World Heritage Weekend 2020! Collectively, we made 376 changes and created 56 new articles about World Heritage Sites! Whether big or small, every change you made helps make the Simple English Wikipedia a better source of information. Well done. Yottie =talk= 12:52, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Original Barnstar
Thank you for contributing to the Big World Heritage Weekend Darkfrog! We have made great improvements to this area as a result. :) IWI (chat) 17:23, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Patroller

Hi Darkfrog. Have you considered requesting the patroller right at WP:RFP? You make a large number of good articles, none of which need patrolling. I think perhaps you could be eligible to be granted it at this point, and would mean we don't have to mark all of your pages as patrolled. Thanks, --IWI (talk) 01:29, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've been thinking I'd ask when I hit 200 articles, but I guess now is as good a time as any. Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:30, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@ImprovedWikiImprovment: She's up. 168 articles is near the elegant rectangle ratio. Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:48, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Special Barnstar
Thank you for taking part in the Big Cleanup Weekend 2020! We made 409 changes and helped fix many problems on articles in category:Wikipedia maintenance. Well done! Yottie =talk= 10:58, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The COVID-19 Barnstar
Long overdue but this barnstar will find a user who has helped and expand COVID-19 related articles and the pandemic article itself. Thank you for expanding the coverage and knowledge in a simple fashion to this Wikipedia and for your updates to these articles! --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 14:48, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thanks. TBH I was taking a break from COVID stuff because of activism fatigue. But thanks so much. I love barnstars! Darkfrog24 (talk) 15:21, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mountain Sweet Honey

Do you think this article is notable? Should we start an RfD? Doesn't seem to meet out guidelines. --IWI (talk) 15:18, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm placing the tag as we speak. Google News/Archive/Books turned up nothing. Darkfrog24 (talk) 15:22, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yep agreed. I voted on the discussion. --IWI (talk) 15:27, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Page Views template

Sorry, I don't know how to fix that. Darkfrog24 (talk) 00:36, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays!

Merry Christmas Darkfrog24/Archives

Hi Darkfrog24/Archives, I wish you and your family a very
Merry Christmas (if you celebrate it)/holiday season
and a very happy and healthy New Year,
Thank you for all your contributions to the Simple English Wikipedia :),
   --IWI (talk) 21:55, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aw, thanks! You too, IWI! Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:20, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Darkfrog24/Archives/2020&oldid=7594094"