This is an archive of past discussions with User:Bruxton. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
On 3 May 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jozef Israëls Monument, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a monument to honor the Jewish artist Jozef Israëls was destroyed during World War II, but the pieces were saved and it was restored and unveiled in 1946? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jozef Israëls Monument. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Jozef Israëls Monument), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
I am happily editing. After the concerts 6/7 May, there were 5 (!) articles about recently died persons I felt needed better coverage, and 2 of them are on the Main page right now, and a third nominated for GA. I hope you are also happy editing! To have a piece on the Main page while singing it was a nice specialty of that memorable weekend, but I was so busy all day that I didn't even see it. 33 people came to listen on my invitation, and among the guests of the event were 6 with WP articles. One couple received a new award a few days later, and I found that just per looking for sources on Google ;) - and it's still not in their article (but Abel). Off to planning the next concert (for that group), because the conductor said "After the concert is before the concert." - The review of the last is per subscription only and in German but the picture is free. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:10, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giantology until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
The gutting of the article and the cutting of the sources (e.g., whole book, 1868 that deals with the subject by name) tells you a lot.[1][2][3][4][5][6] I did what I could; I am topic banned from AFD discussions; so I have nothing to say there. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎)19:33, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
^Ammi, Ken (10 June 2019). What Does the Bible Say About Giants and Nephilim?: A Styled Giantology and Nephilology. Independently Published. ISBN9781073098132.
Thank you for the message 7&6=thirteen. I had to study your user page to learn how to ping you! I want to say, I have worked with you before on a few items and I have seen your name at DYK. I appreciate you. Unfortunately there is a takeover goin on: you can read below about a similar article I started which was well sourced before the fringe editors removed most of it. The article makes little sense now and it will be their next deletion target. They have been deleting entire sections to favor their narrative and they quickly have me at 3rr. The events of the past few two days have discouraged me so I will go away for a while. I just wanted to acknowledge your message on the way out. Bruxton (talk) 20:35, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
It is not worth much. 'Butters no parsnips.' But I feel your pain and sympathize. Sorry but stopping any of this is above my pay grade. 7&6=thirteen (☎)23:04, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
@7&6=thirteen: Your citation #1 is a glossy magazine about Atlantis, telepathy and UFOs.[1] #3 is a book by a pseudoscientist Frank Joseph, who also happens to be a convicted child molester and literal Nazi. Are these the kind of sources you think we should be using to claim, in Wikipedia's voice, that giants are real? – Joe (talk) 04:38, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
I am not going to debate this. Frank Joseph is who he is.
Wood has a whole book on this subject dating back to 1866. And he is no Nazi. WP:Verifiability, not WP:Truth.
I suppose it's likely that Edward J. Wood died before Nazism ever existed. Can you tell me anything else at all about him? – Joe (talk) 14:19, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Disappointing, as is your withdrawal of the nomination for no good reason that I can see. I think the article is a good one and a useful addition to Wikipedia. Doug Wellertalk14:21, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: I think the opposite; I withdrew because of the last comment by Joe Roe at the nomination and the threat of an AfD on that article at fringe. An AfD will stop the nomination and cause more consternation for all involved. Thank you for your edits and measured tone. But not for the heading you posted above saying that I showed a lack of good faith. Bruxton (talk) 14:33, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
I'm sorry you experienced my actions as an attack. My only concern is that we don't give undue prominence to pseudoscience, especially on the main page. Through long experience I've learned that the DYK project's lets say inconsistent approach to quality control is a major weak spot in this regard; hence the reminder that reviewers and DYK admins need to actually check the sources in nominations. – Joe (talk) 07:54, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
@Joe Roe: In my short time on the project I have been amazed by the cooperation of editors. I think the project is so impressive and that is why I spend many hours working behind the scenes at DYK, NPP and pending changes. The DYK admins are terrific communicators, almost never forcing any changes without communicating. I have been spoiled by working in that collegial environment. In this case, a small group of editors came from a message board and have taken over the articles. I am sorry that the historical news stories have been erased, but I have learned that I have to move on when this happens. Bruxton (talk) 14:08, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
@BruxtonIndeed we do cooperate. It's absolutely appropriate that fringe articles be discussed by editors experienced in the area. Such noticeboards are there to help people with a common interest to cooperate. I'm not accusing you of advocating fringe, but I have seen DYK misused, if only occasionally. Doug Wellertalk14:21, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
I appreciate you @Doug Weller:. I have found that many of these boards feel like they WP:OWN areas of the project. I love writing articles about every subject which interests me so I come across many groups. In DYK I have promoted almost 700 hooks: multiple editors must approve and review them before they get to the main page. None of that can happen without multiple talk page discussions. When I was rather new working there I questioned a hook, and the right hook was promoted through discussion. The groups from the message board are much different. It feels like, "move over because you don't know what you are doing." I have now spent days on this subject and I see that my contributions are needed in other areas, so I have to let it go. I did like your article that was posted at fringe. Carry on! Bruxton (talk) 14:44, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
