User talk:September 1988

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Happy Birthday[change source]

Yellowjacket[change source]

Hi, Angela. This article needs some simplifying and copy editing. Here are some notes:

complex words/phrases: predatory, mistaken, lance, barb, throughout

The second sentence says "In other English-speaking countries". Other than what?

"known simply as wasps" - better to say that they're called wasps

They are located throughout" - located is used for things that are stationary, not usually when talking about the areas an animal is native to. A better way to say this is to say that they are "native to" the places, with a link to Native (ecology).

--Auntof6 (talk) 06:50, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Cow killer[change source]

Angela, please simplify more when you adapt articles from enwiki. In this article, you not only left some complex words, you also changed the meaning in one place. The enwiki article says "Over 400 species occur in the North American southwest". You said "They are especially found in the North American Southwest." Those don't mean the same thing.

The enwiki article says "Mutillidae can be found worldwide". You said that they're native to planet Earth. If a species lives all over the world, you don't use the phrase "native to".

The complex words you used were: resemble, dense, scarlet, queens (in this sense), drones (in this sense)

Are you using any kind of readability checker? I'd like you to start using one to help you with this. Let me know if you need help finding one. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:49, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Two articles userfied[change source]

Hi, Angela. I just userfied two articles you created because they weren't simple enough.

User:September 1988/Executive Order 13769

complex words/phrases: admitted, suspend/suspended, resumed, indefinitely, directs, exceptions, exempted, dual nationals, pending, litigation, detained, revoked

Also, what does the term "on condition" mean?

I changed suspend to stop, admitted to let, directs to tells, revoked to taken away and detained to held. I'm looking for the meaning of on condition. Angela Maureen (talk) 05:35, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
The term on condition means "provided that" or "with the promise that".
Then I don't think it makes sense as used in the article. You might want to look at the actual text of the order to see what it says. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
I linked dual nationals using nationality. I also changed exceptions to exclusions. Angela Maureen (talk) 22:35, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
When you change "indefinitely resumed" to "for the time being stopped", you have to change the word order: "stopped" s/b before "for the time being".
You changed "exceptions" to "exclusions": exclusions isn't simple, either. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I removed exclusions; I also put stopped before for the time being.

I removed on condition due to it not making sense. Angela Maureen (talk) 07:14, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

User:September 1988/Executive order (United States)

complex words/phrases: issued, full force of law, overturned, lack

other notes: article doesn't say what an EO is, just that it's issued by a POTUS

--Auntof6 (talk) 03:01, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I changed it so that the article now says what an executive order is. Angela Maureen (talk) 17:12, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
That's good, but complex terms remain. Also, I missed one because it was originally misspelled: statute. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:22, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
I changed overturned to reversed. Angela Maureen (talk) 22:44, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
"Issued" still remains. Also, "force of law" is still complex, even without "full". --Auntof6 (talk) 06:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Are these articles ready for mainspace? Angela Maureen (talk) 11:07, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

I removed force of law from this article. Angela Maureen (talk) 07:01, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

User blocked[change source]

I have blocked the IP user who was attacking your user page. Wikipedia editors do not have to put up with abuse from others. Keep up your good work. --Peterdownunder (talk) 23:31, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Your only warning to user 68.149.125.146[change source]

Angela, I don't think an only warning was called for here. The user used rude language, but it wasn't bad enough for an only warning. There's a difference between what this user said and the way our recent homophobic editors have been talking about physical violence. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:46, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Your qd request on Eric Lindros[change source]

Hi, Angela. I declined the qd request on this page because it did have a claim of notability. With sportspeople, just the fact that they played in certain leagues makes them notable. (Note that it's the league, not the team.) If this is the only indication of notability for someone, you have to make sure that a team they played for was in a qualifying league at the time he/she played for them. That's because teams can change leagues, so a team that's in a qualifying league today might not have been when a player played for them, or vice versa. This makes it tricky to determine notability for sportspeople. Fortunately, there's usually something else to support notability so we don't have to research all of that. You might like to look at en:WP:NSPORT, which has more info on this. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:42, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Warnings[change source]

Angela, please look at User talk:Alex the wikiguy. User Crasstun had left level-1 and level-2 warnings on the page on June 6. Then on June 13 you started over with level-1 again. Why? You should have continued with level-3 instead. It's only with IP editors that we have to start the warning levels over after some time passes. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:42, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

I apologize for that. I'm gonna be more careful in the future with warnings. Angela Maureen (talk) 09:50, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
No problem. He ended up with a full set of warnings anyway, and is now blocked. --Auntof6 (talk) 10:00, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Your comments at Simple talk[change source]

Angela, I want to explain why I removed the section you wrote at Simple talk about our homophobic vandal(s). I'm going to be very careful with what I say, for reasons I will explain. I've been deleting the user pages of those vandals because they left inappropriate personal information on them. Note that I am not saying what the information was, and I am not saying what kind of information it was. Certain types of personal information are not allowed to be posted or even mentioned. We just refer to it as "inappropriate personal information" so that there is no direct clue as to what it was. I removed your comments because they revealed that information. I would explain more if we were talking in private, but that's all I can say in public. If you discuss the information that was left, please do not be any more specific than I am being in this message. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 10:07, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Auntof6, I promise to be more careful when I use Simple Talk. I ain't intentionally revealing the information. I'll never do that ever again. Angela Maureen (talk) 10:12, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Auntof6, I do not believe that putting one's birthday on their user page is "inappropriate personal information." You are allowed to share that kind of information about yourself on your user page. If the person is a minor, we would discourage them from putting that out there, but there is nothing in policy that bans you from putting your birthday on your user page. Only (talk) 12:59, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
It's not the birthdate per se, but what it tells you. If a minor posted their birthdate (including the year), that would identify them as a minor. My understanding is that identifying onesself as a minor is not allowed. I was trying to keep this hypothetical, but you're making that hard. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:49, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
We discourage them from sharing that information, but it is not necessarily against policy for them to post their birthday. Usually we only start to worry when it's someone under 13 (which this user wasn't). If I am wrong, please show me where in policy it says "minors cannot identify themselves as minors" or "minors cannot post revealing information about themselves." I don't know why you think we need to keep this "hypothetical"; we're not revealing what the exact information was by saying they posted their birthday. Only (talk) 18:33, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Articles on history of pizza and sushi[change source]

Angela, I userfied these articles because they weren't simplified enough from the enwiki articles. I'm also not sure they're needed, because Pizza and Sushi each have history sections. Please simplify these more and make sure each article is significant enough to justify separate articles. If not, you could add to the existing articles. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:47, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

This is embarrassing! I have five articles on which I've gotta work. I wouldn't knowingly put complex words or terms in articles. Angela Maureen (talk) 20:54, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
That's a concern of mine when I look at your articles. If you don't knowingly include complex words, that implies that you don't know how to tell what words are complex. What can I do to help you figure that out yourself instead of relying on someone to tell you which words are complex? The info I've given you in the past about that doesn't seem to have helped. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:07, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Mail[change source]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, September 1988. Check your email – you've got mail!
You can take off this notice at any time by getting rid of the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

eurodyne (talk) 01:45, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Suggestion[change source]

Since you're talking again about becoming an admin, I thought I'd mention something. It may not be a good idea to use words like gonna, gotta, ain't, wanna, etc. Those are not standard English words. Many people whose English is not good won't understand them, and it would be important for people to understand you if you become an admin. It would be good if you use standard English. Just thought I'd mention it. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:16, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Sushi and History of sushi[change source]

Angela, you need to reconcile your new article History of sushi with the history section in the main Sushi article. There is different information in the two places. I don't think we need to have all the information in both places, so I suggest doing one of the following:

  • Combine the contents of the separate history article into the history section of Sushi. Then either redirect the history article or, preferably, delete it.
  • Combine the content of Sushi#History into the history article. Then put a {{main}} template at Sushi#History.

I'd prefer to see the information in the main article instead of a separate one, because there is relatively little in total, but that's just one person's opinion.

The same issues exist with the pizza article you're working on, so I'll wait until you know how you want to resolve this before I look at that one any more. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:00, 11 July 2017 (UTC)