User talk:EllsworthSK

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

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, EllsworthSK. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Slovakia[edit]

Hi,

I see you are quite active on the pages related to politics in Slovakia, such as the this one, on which you added a number of polls, and which I have just edited to make the tables sortable and, overall, cleaner.

Now, I have a question for you.

Lately on Wikipedia, I've been trying to rearrange the columns of such pages in an order that makes sense of each parties' policies. Typically, the left-right axis.

For instance, on the page on Slovenian polls, the left-right arrangement makes the table much easier to read, than arranged by their number of MPs, as is the custom on WP.

I come to you because Slovakia is a bit harder to decypher for me. The Magyar parties aren't so hard to classify, as both Most-Híd and SMK-MKP are members of the EPP. What makes me terribly confused is that SaS, which belongs to the "European Conservative and Reformists" group in Strasbourg, is also the only party in favor of gay marriage (except maybe PS now), which is a good indicator that it is not conservative. So how do Slovaks themselves put their parties on the spectrum?

I've made a table on how Slovak parties differ on multiple issues, but there are many question marks because I lack references. I let you edit or comment it as you wish. Kahlores (talk) 23:36, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi. SaS is a .... curious case. Best I could describe them is financially conservative, socially liberal. Or, mayhaps, just libertarian party. Left-right wing in Slovakia is very difficult to establish, it doesnt work on that axis over here. Left-wing party as SMER eg is conservative socially and it supported and voted for Constitutional amendement that constitutionally banned possibility of future gay marriages. EllsworthSK (talk) 23:41, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
What you say confirms SaS' article, which describes SaS as "liberal and libertarian", but how do Slovaks themselves (people, pundits, parties) view their own politcal axis? I suppose there is a "left-wing", a "liberal center", a "right-wing", etc., with nuances. In this case, is this arrangement correct?
Left-wing parties can be conservative, especially when their ideology is blended with nationalism, as is often the case among non-Western socialist parties. The Romanian PSD also promoted the exact same measure in Romania last year. Kahlores (talk) 19:55, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
Bump EllsworthSK. I made this table for you to judge. This would be helpful for the arrangement on Slovakia's opinion polling page. Kahlores (talk) 02:32, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Results tables[edit]

Hello EllsworthSK. Just a heads up that results tables shouldn't be put on separate templates – the results table on an article can be transcluded elsewhere if required using the #section-h function (see an example here), and templates are more susceptible to vandalism as they have few watchers. There's a big drive to delete these templates at the moment, so it's not a good idea to create any more! In the meantime, I've copies the Slovakian election results to the main article. Cheers, Number 57 21:22, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Slovak presidential election, 2014[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Slovak presidential election, 2014 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Hhkohh (talk) 11:02, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

You are, of course, absolutely right. Re: Arbcom letter and staff response[edit]

FWIW, it is also my view that failing to follow up was obviously boneheaded. I think you are right on every point in your response to me. I replied in that thread in the first place only because, considering the context, one or two persons pointedly complaining about the lack of response was probably enough and precisely because the continued responsiveness failures were such an obvious mistake there was a risk of an invective pile-on that wouldn't be productive. In spite of my comment's attempt to cool the discussion down a bit, I do share your befuddlement and find your response completely understandable.--Gmaxwell (talk) 21:52, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

@Gmaxwell: Thanks, I understood your point and will admit that my post was a snark. But a snark done out of frustration that is now falling into apathy level, thus my committment to not comment on this kerffufle anymore. Its difficult to be bothered, to see the clown car pathos that Katherine is head of. I thought that in my corporation I saw it all, and by god I saw some things. Christ, I once received a call from Partner asking about insurance policy that we have in transit, third countries and upon asking why he just non-chalantly told me that he just recieved news that our trucks have been ambushed by rebels in Angola and torched.
But I have not seen anywhere this level of utter incompetence. In any corporation I worked Katherine, Jan and Reystorm wouldnt have jobs anymore. And because I have no trust in them, thing they validated over and over again, I do have no expectations of them and their statement and yet I fear I will be disappointed anyway. They try to be corporate overlords of 5th largest world wide website and I wouldnt entrust them a falafel stand. And given that this is my thought process here, and my nature of being blunt, I should just stay away from comments. There is, of course, also issue of seniority that I do not have (while I have been here a long time, my edit count is not in veteran level category and last years I mostly just focused on Slovak politics, ignoring everything else) so best to leave this to admins and senior editors in good standing. EllsworthSK (talk) 22:17, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Precious[edit]

civic democracy

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

Thank you for quality articles around politics in Slovakia and elsewhere, such as Kurdish Supreme Committee and TOGETHER – Civic Democracy, for taking care of 2019 Slovak presidential election and 2019 European Parliament election in Slovakia, for beginning your career here with a bold logo in 2009, for "I wouldnt entrust them a falafel stand" and help with language, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2248 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:52, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

What to do against the bias?[edit]

Hi Ellsworth, thanks a lot for your support on the Talk:TERF page! Is it OK that I ask you for a bit of support or clarification? When I decided to finally create a Wikipedia account a few days ago, I was prepared for some difficult disputes, but the amount of bias I was met with is blowing my mind right now. Are there many parts of Wikipedia that are like this, or is this a rare extreme case? Either way, what's the best way to deal with the situation? I want to help as much as I can to eliminate political bias, but is there any hope when veteran editors and even administrators are being highly biased? If you have time to respond to me, thanks a lot in advance! Rhino (talk) 16:25, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

The rules of Wikipedia editing do not imply that truth will come out eventually, but only whatever passes for it for whoever has the energy to defend it.
This has lead Wikipedia to replicate many of the deplorable tendencies of political discourse. Activists take it upon themselves to edit the pages, and win over moderates.
Besides, in politics and other areas, public relations firms rewrite articles. You can look it up. They brag about having access to administrative functions.
Wiki-pedia will never be an 'encyclo', that is, a coherent cycle of learning content. One fact in one page may contradict facts in another.
As often, the pretense of objectivity is only a denial of subjectivity, that eventually becomes obvious. At least Everi pedia does not have that pretense.
Kahlores (talk) 21:13, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
There are parts of wikipedia which are subject to gatekeeping of small amount of editors. The more editors in one article, the less chance of that happening. Niche articles are, thus, biggest concern for it. The TERF stuff is about as niche as thing can get, unless you are member of particular community and like to spend a lot of time online, which is not generally the case for population at large. But in this case, I am yet not really concerned much with bias. For now. Its obvious, no question about that, but incorrect sourcing is sin 101 of wiki and the sourcing of that particular lead is just hilarious. Having junior editor doing that is fairly normal and generally once they become accustomed to rules, they tend to get better with editing but having someone with that massive edit count is unforgivable and pathetic because that person knows exactly what she is doing and I am not letting her go on that. Either she gets back to 101 of rules or she'll have to bring it to ANI. I can make my case there without issues. EllsworthSK (talk) 14:25, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
Thank you both. It's good to know I'm not losing my sanity. It's disappointing to see that senior editors are complicit in this, but maybe things will improve as time passes; the whole "TERF" topic has been getting more mainstream coverage lately, after British feminists who are critical of the state of transgender activism started organizing. Now there's also the curious case of Jessica Yaniv that's making the rounds in Canada. Here's to hoping that more editors gain interest in the topic. Rhino (talk) 20:59, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
I dont really follow news regarding these topics. Every time I try it seems that someone has taken too much cray cray pills. So I rather stick with reports from war zones and so. You know, nicer topics. I got to that article as I got to most - I randomly read wiki when I was bored, skipping from page to page, getting to somewhere completely unrelevant to where I started and somehow managed to get there. The minority thing then popped out and given that I know how lead should look like this was quite hilarious, especially when only source was Daily Dot opinion piece, source that is not generally considered reliable and its usage is discouraged. Now I wonder if I should go down this sad rabbit hole and see how butchered other articles in this topic are, and I am willing to bet that a lot, or just leave it because its being gatekept by people who apparently have lot of time to be on-wiki 24/7. Which is tiring when trying to present counter-argument, tiring given fact that they took WP:ABF as a rule and tiring because I simply dont have time to go through their innuendos and attempts to flame up discussion by bringing up Trump, guy I dont really give a shit about. EllsworthSK (talk) 08:57, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Rhino, Kahlores, and EllsworthSK, thank you for trying to improve Wikipedia. ThoughtIdRetired and Colin M have expressed similar concerns. I took this issue to the more general Wikipedia community for more opinions. Hopefully, more people take a look and comment. Halo Jerk1 (talk) 06:27, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

AfroCine: Join the Months of African Cinema this October![edit]

AfroCine - bare logo.png

Greetings!

After a successful first iteration of the “Months of African Cinema” last year, we are happy to announce that it will be happening again this year, starting from October 1! In the 2018 edition of the contest, about 600 Wikipedia articles were created in at least 8 languages. There were also contributions to Wikidata and Wikimedia commons, which brought the total number of wikimedia pages created during the contest to over 1,000.

The AfroCine Project welcomes you to October, the first out of the two months which have been dedicated to creating and improving content that centre around the cinema of Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora. Join us in this global edit-a-thon, by helping to create or expand articles which are connected to this scope. Also remember to list your name under the participants section.

On English Wikipedia, we would be recognizing participants in the following manner:

  • Overall winner (1st, 2nd, 3rd places)
  • Diversity winner
  • Gender-gap fillers
For further information about the contest, the recognition categories and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. See you around :).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:50, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Libya Wikiproject revamp[edit]

Hello, I am very knowledge able about the Middle East and MENA and its conflicts. I was very surprised to see that Wikiproject:Libya was not entirely as interactive and attractive as Wikiproject:Syria or Wikiproject:Israel and others for that matter. Please send me a message on your take or ideas on the matter, and if you want to join in. Max Pigeon (talk) 13:11, 5 October 2019 (UTC)