User talk:Blue-Sonnet

Welcome!

Hello, Blue-Sonnet, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 19:35, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Does atrazine feminise male frogs?

I see you deleted this entry in the article on fish physiology and made the claim it had been "widely debunked as unreliable". It seems there is currently an odious little war concerning the truth of this matter between neutrally funded scientists and scientists funded by chemical industry interests. For now, I have undone your deletion. Have you, yourself, a conflict of interest in this area? If so, you should not directly edit articles on this matter, but you should declare your conflict and express any concerns you have on the article talk pages. If you don't have any affiliation with the chemical industry yourself, can you find reliable sources supporting your position, preferably secondary sources, which are not compromised by their manner of funding? – Epipelagic (talk) 02:48, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Part of the reason was due to lack of replicability by anyone else (industry funded or otherwise, since the author won't release that info), but also because it's an article on fish physiology, and the study was on frogs? Pretty sure frogs aren't fish... Sorry, I wasn't aware citations were needed if removing something, I'll try to find some (as an aside, Miles Power on YouTube is a chemist, he's done a really good video on the subject). Also no COI here, my job is totally unrelated so it's strange you thought that was a factor? (Edit - I realise this may be controversial so I added a topic to the talk page in lieu of further edits, since there wasn't one already #TotallyNotAShill :) ) Blue-Sonnet (talk) 11:12, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Hello, Blue-Sonnet,

While I appreciate you sharing your opinion, you might consider gaining more experience editing articles before offering your thoughts on whether or not other editors should be sanctioned. You have only made 108 edits so even though you created your account years ago, you haven't done much editing lately except to ANI. I've seen many enthusiastic, inexperienced editors get in over their heads by diving into administrative areas when they actually aren't that familiar with the many Wikipedia policies and guidelines.

Noticeboards can be a harsh place, not just for editors who are being reported by sometimes for discussion participants and I would rather not see you get yourself into trouble. Editors who participate almost exclusively in noticeboard discussions can be seen as "dramamongers", here for the conflicts and disputes instead of contributing to the encyclopedia. I'm not saying that you can not participate at ANI, just that it would be wise for you to balance out your participation there with some regular editing like copy editing, anti-vandal work, draft creation or finding sources for articles. Thank you for your contributions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:29, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, that makes sense - thank you for the advice! Blue-Sonnet (talk) 02:32, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hello Blue-Sonnet! The thread you created at the Teahouse, ANI Discussions, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 06:26, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hello Blue-Sonnet! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Copy editing question, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:54, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For your lovely behavior and helpful messages at this user's talk page and a general pattern of a welcoming and collegial attitude, even towards potentially hostile editors. Keep up the good work! LaughingManiac (talk) 06:38, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LaughingManiac Thank you so much for this, it's really kind and cheered me up too!

I commented a couple of times on ANI & started to weigh in on situations that I had no experience of & Liz kindly gave me a heads-up on that. Someone else suggested that I could maybe reach out to people to offer help or advice on their Talk pages instead.

Since I'm pretty inexperienced with editing I've not been touching any situations where there's apparent malice, nor if it's really complicated & I'll cause trouble for others. Otherwise, if there's a competent editor who does really good work but it's getting genuinely frustrated, I think it's a good idea to reach out and acknowledge how they feel - I can do that at least!

Admins have to deal with so much stuff on here, so if there's a chance to keep someone who genuinely cares about their work from ruining their account, then I'd like to try 🙂

That said, I don't want to become a nuisance so if you or anyone else feels I'm getting too involved in something, need feedback or am otherwise out of line please let me know ASAP! I don't want it to look like I'm yeeting myself all over the place with a hero complex trying to save everyone 😁 Blue-Sonnet (talk) 16:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite welcome! I'll be sure to let you know if I have any feedback ^^ LaughingManiac (talk) 16:55, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your post on my talk

You were right to point this out, actually - I suppose what they've been posting on their talk page isn't terribly urgent, but it's not a block appeal either, so I've revoked their talk page access. Cheers. -- asilvering (talk) 19:50, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering Thank you so much for letting me know! I wasn't sure if they posted that before or after their block and had a bit of a panic over mentioning it 😅

I've got a feeling we'll see then again soon, they're pretty persistent... Blue-Sonnet (talk) 19:54, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hello Blue-Sonnet! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Using "whilst" in articles, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:21, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zhu Wen

Hi so I went to the global account logs to try and see if our friend Correction 1000 edited any other Wikipedia's. I found that he also tried to edit the Zhu Wen page on Chinese wikipedia and also got into a dispute there too. However, he did post a long expiation of why he was making the edit which kinda made more sense then what he was posting here. Per usual it was a really long paragraph but I copied the most useful part of it here: "Also, just because someone put it on first does not mean he is correct. You can compare the portrait of Emperor Shun with the previous portrait that was not Zhu Wen's but had Zhu Wen's name written next to it. They are exactly the same. Now someone has used computer software to modify the portrait of Emperor Shun to change his identity." Yedaman54 (talk) 06:26, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now i'm unconvinced of his claims of intentional manipulation but his claims of mistaken identity may be valid. Yedaman54 (talk) 06:29, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]