User talk:Lightbreather/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

If interested

in doing some proof-reading, grammar, etc. on a new article, I would love to have your help on People v. Aguilar. Thanks, GregJackP Boomer! 05:51, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Actually, something else has come up - Ex parte Crow Dog is scheduled to appear on the Main Page as "Today's Featured Article" on October 8th. It has been extensively reviewed, and I'm going to go back over it again, but one can never be too safe. Could I impose on you to look at it before the Aguilar article? Thanks, GregJackP Boomer! 01:55, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations! If I get a chance, I'll look at it tomorrow. My son is recovering from surgery, so I'm going back and forth between my computer and him. Lightbreather (talk) 02:06, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Comment

Read more carefully, please. It's not an accusation, it's my observation that you may be an WP:SPA. You may wish to read the page referenced, for a clearer understanding of why I used the term 'advocacy'. You've shared your observations about other editors as well. I prefer such discussion be 'in public'/'on the record'. Further commentary on this matter on my talk page will be archived without response. Thanks. Anastrophe (talk) 16:46, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Condolences

Sorry to hear about your cockatiel. I had one of those once and he was really cool. I'm guessing yours had a happy life as your companion. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 00:42, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Mudwater. Lightbreather (talk) 00:51, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Woman mentor

Hello Lightbreather,

I saw your question at the Teahouse. I am a mentor but can't meet your needs since am a male and am already committed to a relationship with a protégé. I recommend that you ask SarahStierch. She is actively involved with recruiting and maintaining women editors, and addressing our problems with Systemic bias. Sarah travels a lot for the Wikimedia movement and is probably too busy to be a mentor. But she is a very perceptive person, and I would trust her recommendations.

If you have any specific questions that can be answered by a male, feel free to ask. I am on vacation right now, but return to a normal schedule next Monday. I am checking in when I have the chance. I wish you well. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:06, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Another name came to mind: a newer but very solid and helpful editor, Anne Delong. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:47, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again, Cullen. I truly appreciate the suggestions. Lightbreather (talk) 18:34, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Lightbreather. I also saw your question at the Teahouse. I have a background in science and programming and definitely qualify as mature. I am sometimes traveling, but I will be happy to help. Just ask me questions on my talk page. I can point you to a lot of explanation pages as well and help with finding references. What kind of editing are you interested in doing on Wikipedia? StarryGrandma (talk) 18:25, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

StarryGrandma! So glad to meet you! I came across you in the Teahouse some weeks ago, but it looked like you weren't taking new mentees, so I didn't bother you even though we have some things in common: grandchildren, programming - and star-gazing? I haven't settled on specific areas I'd like to work in. Some ideas: birds, programming (especially good ol' CoBOL), Central America (especially Nicaragua, where I do volunteer work), the Sonoran Desert, women in technology, and ??? I'd like to identify one or two areas with a real need and help there. Until recently, my only edits were a few additions to some Beatles album pages and a local politician's page.

I am a good writer and a good editor. In the last eight weeks I've been participating on a contentious article, so I've learned A LOT about WP style and policies in a short time, too, though I still have a lot to learn. Any guidance would be appreciated. Thanks for reaching out to me! Lightbreather (talk) 18:48, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

While you figure out what to work on one place to start would be the editing backlog at Wikipedia:Contribution Team/Backlogs, particularly the section labeled Style. There are thousands of articles in need of a good writer to look at them, so you can just pick some on topics you are interested in. Warning, this kind of thing can become addictive. I started out fixing references so that I could learn how they work before starting to work on articles, and I've been doing that ever since instead of working on articles. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:41, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Excellent suggestion. So, does this mean you're my mentor now? Gasp! It's funny - the one thing I've been allowed to get any real work done on is standardizing references in the Federal assault weapons ban article. (Still needs work, but I cleaned it up a lot using CS1 templates another editor suggested.) Here's my first idiot question: When using reflist on a talk page in multiple discussions, how do you keep the references from getting mingled upon Save?

It's easiest not to use reflist on a talk page. That's hard if you are posting a suggested change and would like to have it nicely formatted. But just list the references without the <ref></ref> bits. Notice that I've put nowiki .. /nowiki around the refs there so that they show and don't get turned into refs. That's the other way to do it. An example I just stuck in a comment is "Hess, Edward (2011). Growing an Entrepreneurial Business: Concepts & Cases. Stanford University Press. pp. 46–57. ISBN 978-0-8047-7141-2.". I keep lists of references in one of my sandboxes so that when I do work on articles I have them there. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:30, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)SG, she did a great job on the refs in the article - to the point that I asked her to look at an FA of mine that was about to go to the main page. Her editing skills are excellent. She just needs help with the politics and land mines. GregJackP Boomer! 01:53, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Congrats! You created your Teahouse profile

	Welcome to the Teahouse Badge
	Awarded to editors who have introduced themselves at the Wikipedia Teahouse. Guest editors with this badge show initiative and a great drive to learn how to edit Wikipedia. Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges
Welcome very welcome if you have questions,please feel free to drop me a line! Carliitaeliza TALK 13:28, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Lightbreather/Archive 2. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by ///EuroCarGT 23:38, 5 October 2013 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.

Help me, StarryGrandma. You're my only hope.

Dear StarryGrandma,

When I became an active editor in August, I reached out to another editor for help on a page where I felt bullied. Instead of helping me, this editor has been (IMO) misrepresenting me and shouting at me ever since. I have asked her to stop, but she won't. I need some guidance.

This discussion title was meant to be a funny reference to Star Wars, but I'm really anxious and desperate for help.

--Lightbreather (talk) 01:51, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

My advice under the circumstances is to ignore it. I know that seems hard to do when this discussion is still open, but its best not to keep responding to accusations like this and just keep on doing something else.

About editing Wikipedia in general: From what I have seen editing various articles, controversial articles can be tricky. Often the language has settled down over years of discussion into something editors on all sides can live with even though it may not read well, and any change makes people nervous. On most articles editors like to see another editor make all their changes at once, so the edit history is easy to follow -- one editor's complete additions followed by another editor's complete additions rather than a long list of small changes by one editor in page after page of history. But on controversial articles large changes make people nervous.

The few times I've done something major on an article I've put an item on the talk page first. On one article where the reference formats had gotten very confused, I said I was going to change to a more complicated (difficult to do) reference style if no one objected. (Normally an article is supposed to stay with the first reference style used.) Then I waited a few days to see if anyone cared. No one raised an objection, so I went ahead and did it. StarryGrandma (talk) 21:25, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

request prose review

Please review and fix "Fluorine". AP stylebook is fine.71.127.137.171 (talk) 14:55, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Don't know if anyone will come back to read this, but just in case... I looked at this article and my eyes rolled back in my head. Too much for me, but it looks like others stepped up to the task. Lightbreather (talk) 00:22, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

How to avoid being called an SPA

Hello Lightbreather,

I understand that you resent being called an SPA, but in all honesty, your editing behavior in recent months, namely the vast majority of your edits, fall into that category. Experienced editors who take a two minute glance at your edit history would readily draw that conclusion, based on your total focus of late on one article in a highly controversial topic area. My suggestion to you, then, is to branch out and work on improving a variety of articles having nothing to do with guns. If you do so constructively, no one will call you an SPA. I wish you well. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:38, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

ANI discussion

There was no consensus on ANI regarding a topic ban for you from Federal assault weapons ban (and I suppose other gun-related articles). I therefore closed the discussion, but would like to give you a piece of advice: that your edits are perceived as disruptive even by editors who opposed a topic ban is clear, and the very discussion of that topic ban should serve as a kind of warning. In fact, it is perfectly understandable if an admin blocks you for disruption citing the discussion as a final warning. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 17:39, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Female mentor

I say your talk about looking for a female mentor. I suggest you talk to User:GorillaWarfare - she may not be available to be a mentor but she does know lots of the girls and can help find a mentor and bring you into the girls world here. There is also User:Nikkimaria and User:WhatamIdoing who both are more then willing to help editors with most questions and are highly respected female editors here. -- Moxy (talk) 16:31, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Moxy, for the suggestions. Lightbreather (talk) 22:58, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

If you'd like to find women editors, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women's history is another place to look. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:22, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Ada Wikithon contribution

Hi there, Just FYI, we are wrapping up contributions from Tuesday's Ada Lovelace Day Wikithon. If you'd like to be counted as a contributor, you have until the end of today to make an edit to a relevant article. I saw you intended to work on Annie Easley. Even a minor edit would count. Thanks! Girona7 (talk) 14:43, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I did! My second granddaughter decided to start her journey to the outside world on Wed. She was born yesterday, but her big sister is staying here with me and keeping me very busy. I will try to do a little something today! Lightbreather (talk) 17:06, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Wow, congratulations! That is wonderful news. Happy birthday to her! And thanks again for contributing - very much appreciated :) Girona7 (talk) 01:06, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

About Federal Assault Weapons Ban

I agree with you that the article needs work. While I say to avoid it, I can offer some help. I went and did a little reading about the ban. Reading the article didn't answer a lot of the questions I had. If you like I can do a short review of the article for you. StarryGrandma (talk) 05:03, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

StarryGrandma, you are a peach. I hear you, and I have been working on other articles in addition to this one. I enjoy doing things like finding and fixing broken links, removing excessive and redundant links, simplifying language, standardizing citations, etc. I am keeping my eye on some non-related projects, but I want to contribute to the body of work on firearms laws, too. I'm just slowing it down a little. (I learned a lot in August: like trying to respond to a half-dozen opponents all-at-once is not only stressful, but unnecessary.)

Anyway, this article could use several peer reviews. The most recent was from 2007 and when I mentioned it another editor said a 6-year-old peer review "is as useful as tits on a boar." (Considering that some of the items in it are still an issue, I think it's still useful.) If you think you'd enjoy writing a review, I think you should. If you're doing it only to help me, think twice. I'll create a peer review thingy. I've thought about it before, but now I've figured out how to request one. (Sometimes I have a hard time finding templates.) Lightbreather (talk) 14:22, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Likewise, Please stop WP:PA and WP:WAR

Please stop attacking me and warring with me.

I made absolutely no uncivil comments about you in my edit summary at all, my comments were entirely about the content of your edit. As well, you used "you" language at me in an article discussion, which rather nullifies your complaint about me doing the same. And yes indeed I reverted your edits - which regrettably were contrary to the recommendation in the peer review ("The lead paragraph needs to mention that the Federal Assault Weapons Ban did not ban owning assault weapons in the United States[...]" - your edit's wording made it sound like owning was indeed banned by conflating possession with the material ban, even though only two sentences later the point the peer review spoke of is made clear), three times, which is within the bounds of the policy.

Please stop attacking me. Blunt is not uncivil. I resent these repeated attacks suggesting that I'm being uncivil, which feels like bullying. Perhaps you don't have a very thick skin; neither do I. But I accept that when discussing an article on a highly contentious political issue not everyone will raise their pinky as they sip their tea, and that impassioned words may pass. Turning every such occasion into an opportunity to expound on policies not directly relevant to the article only succeeds in pushing the discussion further away from its purpose. Our time is better spent improving the article. And on that note, I'm done discussing this matter. The last word is yours, if you must. Anastrophe (talk) 02:05, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

I only must if you misrepresent me, and you did - again. Up until the point when I asked you to drop the "you" statements, I'd used "your" once, to say, "I don't want to argue about my intentions or yours." By then you had already used "you" or "yours" four times, and two times sarcastically. ("That's why it's called, you know, 'a ban,'" and "You are not my mother.") Those were unnecessary. One of the other uses - "The changes you made did not improve the clarity of the lede at all." - was not civil (and untrue, IMO).

Also, re: the edit summary "the ban did not 'restrict' manufacture, it banned manufacture and transfer. conflating the possession restrictions to the manufacture and transfer ban is inappropriate." The first part is an untrue (or partially true) statement - but civil. The second part is uncivil. Lightbreather (talk) 03:39, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Despite the accusation in the last edit summary ("I have no idea why this links were intentionally broken by editor lightbreather, but I am repairing them."), the breaks were unintentional, which might have been guessed by noticing the last few edits were by mobile. To say they were intentionally broken was unnecessary. The breaks were a result of pastes during the drafting process that didn't go where I tried to put them. I caught one break and fixed it, but I obviously missed a couple. There was no intentional breaking - just simple mistakes. Lightbreather (talk) 13:53, 28 October 2013 (UTC)