Abuse filter log for this page
This page documents a current or recent alien contact event. Details may change as the event progresses. Initial news reports may be unreliable. The last updates to this page may not reflect the most current information.

User talk:PaleoNeonate

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

adding link to Fine Tuned Universe[edit]

Hi PaleoNeonate,

Some time back, I added a URL to "External Links" on the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_universe

You declined it stating COI and "link farm" conflicts. I appreciate your reasons and made several edits to the URL site uftmachine.com to remove the COI issue.

Regarding the link farm problem, the proposed link is purely educational and allows the user to simulate tuning in 6 "fundamental constants" and learn about each one. Looking at other similar wiki pages (with External Links), some link to tutorials, others offer interactive screens to experiment with the related concepts. Bottom line, I do believe that the following should be included in "External Links" for Fine-tuned_universe;

For more insights, simulate up to six constants of nature uftmachine.com


Cheers, Al VideoCTO (talk) 23:29, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

@VideoCTO: sorry for the late response. I suggest to post your proposed link at Talk:Fine-tuned universe. Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 08:37, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi PaleoNeonate,
Thanks for your suggestions. I looked intro "Talk:Fine-tuned universe". Frankly I am not sure about the process. Do I post a suggested change on TALK and just wait for editors to vote? What is the process for the "editorial board" to decide? Thanks for helping me on this.
VideoCTO (talk) 15:05, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
User:VideoCTO and uftmachine.com spam. --Guy Macon (talk) 00:14, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the notice, I've also poked COIBot which report should help to determine if the domain needs blacklisting (unlikely if promotion stopped and was from a single account)... I'm currently much less active than usual so may temporarily miss various events (I rely on memory and my TODO list rather than on the watchlist at the moment). —PaleoNeonate – 04:32, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
Update: not worth blacklisting at this time. @VideoCTO: On the other hand, you risk eventually being blocked for disruptive editing or not being there to build the encyclopedia if insisting that it should be added against consensus. However, it is difficult to assess this if not posting at a public page such as the article's talk page (my previous suggestion). It does not help much to address specific editors (no editor has special privileges that can override consensus; although I am not an administrator, they too are normal editors except when uninvolved and acting by policy to effect a sanction). If blocked and creating another account to promote the same domain, this is where it risks being blacklisted. Let's see the result of the WP:ANI thread, I see that you also now know about the conflict of interest policy. As a software developer, I wouldn't edit Wikipedia myself about one of my employers (including previous), projects, or advertize one of my sites. Some articles exist about some open source popular software where I was one of the contributors or maintainer; I still try not to edit those, but may sometimes do so (minor uncontroversial facts supported by the primary project's source, or by a third party reliable source for anything else). As for general computer science articles where I have no conflict of interest but am knowledgeable, I still rarely edit them, because it feels like distasteful work rather than a hobby. I may as a casual reader if I see something worth correcting. —PaleoNeonate – 09:11, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-36[edit]

09:07, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Nations and intelligence[edit]

Over the past five days, both I and another editor have been challenging Grayfell's removal of sources from the Nations and intelligence article on that article's talk page, and he has not attempted to justify his removals there (which is especially ironic, considering his demand for a consensus before the material can be restored). The other editor who challenged the removals is not AndewNguyen, so there are technically three people opposing the removals if you include the editor who originally added it. If you are going to start removing this material yourself now, could you please participate in that discussion, and respond to our arguments that it should not be removed? 2600:1004:B10B:FE76:B9F5:AA42:968:5A0D (talk) 14:27, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Promotion of studies that ignore notable material such as the Flynn effect or the fact that IQ tests are subjective and will dramatically change for the same individual depending on their current health status are a long term issue on Wikipedia. Various sources are also not considered reputable for intelligence claims in relation to genetics. Primary papers and studies should also be avoided, as the encyclopedia should only summarize the current scientific consensus. If there's not enough talk page participation at the article's, I recommend opening a thread at the fringe theories noticeboard or at the reliable sources noticeboard. Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 23:20, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary[edit]

A year ago ...
Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
gnomish guidance
... you were recipient
no. 2019 of Precious,
a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:30, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda, already a year, it passed so quickly. —PaleoNeonate – 23:00, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019[edit]

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hello PaleoNeonate,


Instead of reaching a magic 300 as it once did last year, the backlog approaching 6,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.


A proposal is taking place here to confirm a nominated user as Coordinator of NPR.

This month's refresher course

Why I Hate Speedy Deleters, a 2008 essay by long since retired Ballonman, is still as valid today. Those of us who patrol large numbers of new pages can be forgiven for making the occasional mistake while others can learn from their 'beginner' errors. Worth reading.

Deletion tags

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon (you will need to have 'Nominated for deletion' enabled for this in your filters) may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders using Twinkle. They require your further verification.

Paid editing

Please be sure to look for the tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. WMF policy requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines' (SNG). Alternatives to deletion
  • Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves once more with notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
  • Blank-and-Redirect is a solution anchored in policy. Please consider this alternative before PRODing or CSD. Note however, that users will often revert or usurp redirects to re-create deleted articles. Do regularly patrol the redirects in the feed.
Not English
  • A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, and if they do have potential, tag as required, then move to draft. Modify the text of the template as appropriate before sending it.

Regular reviewers will appreciate the most recent enhancements to the New Pages Feed and features in the Curation tool, and there are still more to come. Due to the wealth of information now displayed by ORES, reviewers are strongly encouraged to use the system now rather than Twinkle; it will also correctly populate the logs.

Stub sorting, by SD0001: A new script is available for adding/removing stub tags. See User:SD0001/StubSorter.js, It features a simple HotCat-style dynamic search field. Many of the reviewers who are using it are finding it an improvement upon other available tools.

Assessment: The script at User:Evad37/rater makes the addition of Wikiproject templates extremely easy. New page creators rarely do this. Reviewers are not obliged to make these edits but they only take a few seconds. They can use the Curation message system to let the creator know what they have done.

DannyS712 bot III is now patrolling certain categories of uncontroversial redirects. Curious? Check out its patrol log.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)