User talk:Omegatron
| Wikipedia:Babel | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
| Search user languages |
|
This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot. Any sections older than 30 days will be automatically moved to this month's archive. Other months can be accessed from my list of archives. |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
"60 Hz" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect 60 Hz. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 21#60 Hz until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 14:37, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Um, really?
You reinstated:
- Wordpress
- Typepad
- Patheos
- Econlog
- The Volokh Conspiracy
- Medium
- LessWrong
These are not reliable sources. Most of them are self-published, and all were primary for the material they support. The reason this article has been a redirect for four years is because there is no discussion of this concept in the academic economic press. You're doing a great job of showing that this coverage still does not exist. Guy (help! - typo?) 23:29, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, they absolutely are reliable sources. See WP:SELFSOURCE and WP:RSOPINION and WP:BLPSELFPUB.
- That a source is "from a blog domain" or "a Libertarian think tank" does not justify removal. You may certainly make the argument that those references don't demonstrate notability (which I would disagree with), but they are still reliable sources for the facts they reference. I don't know where your vendetta against this article came from, but your repeated blanking of it while I'm editing it is causing me a lot of distress, so I'm logging off for a while. :( — Omegatron (talk) 00:21, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Nomination for deletion of Template:Deuterium
Template:Deuterium has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. User:GKFXtalk 22:18, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Tritium
Template:Tritium has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. User:GKFXtalk 22:19, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
December 2021
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in COVID-19, broadly construed. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.