Jump to content

User talk:Rhododendrites

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Accedie (talk | contribs) at 23:00, 14 November 2023 (→A kitten for you!: new WikiLove message). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This is the talk page for User:Rhododendrites.

Music

Been thinking recently about how much Wikipedia does act as a social network, and how valuable that can be. Articles aren't social media, of course, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and a community, and healthy volunteer communities need to foster forms of communication that aren't strictly "talking shop". In that spirit, how about some music talk. Might just be me sharing, but who knows.

What I'm listening to

Occasionally sharing songs/albums that I find myself listening to repeatedly. Starting this at the end of 2022, so here's what I've been listening to this year. And yeah, it's all over the place.

December 2022

  • The Window of Appearances (Act 1 Scene 3) from Akhenaten (spotify is a little closer to what I heard, but it's also on youtube - Seeing Akhenaten at the Metropolitan Opera was one of my most memorable experiences this year. I knew almost nothing about it, haven't seen an opera since seeing one against my will as a child, but it just looked like such an unusual spectacle. Not only was the set and production outstanding, but I found myself listening to the music repeatedly ever since. This track is when Akhenaten sings for the first time. He's just been crowned pharaoh and makes his "appearance". Without expectations, his voice was immediately striking. I wasn't prepared for a countertenor (Anthony Ross Costanzo in this case) in that role (i.e. much higher than I would've thought). I don't have the classical vocabulary to talk about it properly, but the way the repetitive nature of the music shifts and intensifies from minor changes, with other voices coming in, was really powerful and shifted my undestanding of what I was getting into.
  • Cool by Uffie (spotify youtube) - Great pop song, with pacing and infectious bass line that's just, well, really cool.
  • Sunglasses At Night by Corey Hart (spotify youtube) - Heard the synth line sampled in another song and it drove me nuts I couldn't remember what it was from. Finally tracked it down and relearned how much this track slaps. Started a trend in my house of trying to turn random "a" sounds scratchy and loud.
  • I've Seen Footage by Death Grips (spotify youtube) - Not going to be for everyone, but weird, hard, noisy, danceable hip hop scratches an itch.
  • Is There a Ghost by Band of Horses (spotify youtube) - Band of Horses' Everything All the Time was one of my favorite albums about 15 years ago, and I realized I hadn't paid much attention to them since. Decided to see what they've been up to and was happy I did. Solid indie rock, maybe with some southern influence, that's catchy as hell.
  • Pecking Order by Too Many Zooz (spotify youtube) - They call themselves "brass house", seemingly structuring their brass jazz like house music, and it works for me. This song isn't actually a big stand-out, but I had trouble choosing one.
  • Pineapple Suite by Cristobal Tapia de Veer (from The White Lotus) (spotify youtube) - I was just really impressed by the soundtrack of White Lotus and wound up listening to it when the show was done.
  • Hairy Candy by Tobacco (spotify youtube) - Tobacco's the guy from Black Moth Super Rainbow, and this sounds, well, exactly like BMSR. Fuzzy, psychedelic electronica with repetitive lyrics that function like another instrument.
  • Miss You by Oliver Tree (spotify youtube) - I've had about enough of the musician-as-meme/clickbait schtick, and find Tree a bit whiny, but this song is just really catchy.
  • Blazing Arrow by Blackalicious (spotify youtube) - Blackalicious's Gift of Gab was just really really good at coming up with complex rhymes that wind up as an impressive song rather than a gimmick. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:50, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

  • Blade Runner 2049 by Synthwave Goose (spotify) - I've added a lot of Synthwave Goose tracks to my background/working playlists recently. It is what it says on the tin, basically: synthwave done pretty well.
  • Fantasy Trash Wave by Tobacco (spotify) - Didn't realize I listed a Tobacco track above, but oh well. A bit muddier and darker than BMSR, I'd say, but similar sound.
  • Rita Lee by Os Mutantes (spotify) - Rita Lee died recently, and I found myself on an Os Mutantes kick. I listened to them a lot 2005-2007, but not much since then, so it was good to go back through the catalog on Spotify.
  • Top Top by Os Mutantes (spotify) - Rita Lee isn't actually on the song named after her, so how about one of my favorite Mutantes tracks, too.
  • Mustn't Hurry by Fever Ray (spotify) - Had the chance to see Fever Ray at Terminal 5 recently, and this was the track that I loved when I heard it live but hadn't paid much attention to on the album. Fever Ray's second album has a lot of loud, bouncy, vaguely punk electropop that drew my attention, but this is a great slow build.
  • Sliver by Nirvana (spotify) - Not my favorite song, but there are a bunch of "deep cut" Nirvana tracks that I realized I never looked up to see what the lyrics are and the chorus to this one is .... "grandma take me home"!!
  • Prisencolinensinainciusol by Adriano Celentano (spotify) - Yes, I was reminded of this by an episode of Ted Lasso during it's [horribly disappointing] final season (alright). I'd heard it before as kind of a novelty and learned in the show that it's actually kind of a banger (alright).
  • Badala Zamana by Zohra (spotify) - Found this one from a spotify station starting with Prisencolinensinainciusol, and just found it really light and fun.
  • Miss You by Oliver Tree (spotify) - I find that Oliver Tree's musical-personal-as-living-meme schtick comes off as desperate more than funny, and it distracts from the fact that he really can write an extremely catchy whiny pop song.
  • We Have Explosive by Future Sound of London (spotify) - Loud, mid-90s techno anyone? Anyone? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 17:15, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What I should be listening to (and what you're listening to)

Open to anyone.

Your Thoughts...

We have discussed the possibility of expanding THIS... I am seriously considering the creation of a full genre article comparable to stuff like Swedish death metal or West Coast hip hop etc. It would essentially be the narrative of the Don't Think I've Forgotten film in expanded form with robust links and independent sources. I am confident that text and sources for such an article will come together rather easily from our existing artist articles plus Cambodian Rocks and related items on Cambodian history and the war. The problem is I cannot think of a GOOD TITLE!
Cambodian rock might be pretty good but the era of interest will be 1959-1975 and current Cambodian music will be excluded. Cambodian psychedelic rock might also be good because it's a label that is often used by modern fans like Dengue Fever (band) but it implies that psychedelic was the only genre practiced in that scene. Something like 1960-70s rock in Cambodia might be too long and unwieldy for WP:NAMINGCRITERIA. Any thoughts? ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 18:59, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've found myself thinking about this a few times now. The best I've come up with so far is "Music of/in/during pre-Khmer Rouge Cambodia", with honorable mentions for "Music of Sihanouk Era Cambodia and the Khmer Republic", "Music of Cambodia, 1960-1975", "Mid-20th century music in Cambodia" and the like. It seems hard to draw a clear line -- musically or politically. I haven't read anything that does much to contrast music under Sihanouk vs. the Khmer Republic. That is, I've read plenty about how Sihanouk fostered music/culture, but not much about what changed between 1970-75. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 19:21, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging Wikirictor, who wrote most of History of Cambodia, and WilliamThweatt, who has provided some useful insight about related topics in the past. @Wikirictor, since I don't know if you know the context here, we've been working on 1960s-70s Cambodian pop/rock music articles like Sinn Sisamouth, Yol Aularong, Pen Ran, Baksey Cham Krong, Meas Samon, Ros Serey Sothea, etc. (and my gateway to the music, Cambodian Rocks). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 19:29, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In the near future I'm ready to write a first draft of such an article on the scene/genre, but I'll take any ideas on what to call the dang thing. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 20:19, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the ping. As I've noted before, I don't have much time to dedicate to WP these days, so I won't say much. However, I will say that both by its title and in its content, such an article should make it clear that this was (to use Doomsdayer's terms) one specific scene in Cambodian popular music of the era. The "rock" music has been brought to the attention of the Western world in recent times and that may make it seem like it was something more than it really was. But rock music wasn't the only kind of pop music in Cambodia during that era, nor was it likely even the most popular. Among Khmer, Sisamouth and SereiSothea for example, are more well-known for slow ballads like this and this or their myriad rom vong and rom kbach songs. These types of songs were (and are) way more popular among all Cambodian demographic groups than any of the psychedelic or "garage band" type music, which although popular among college and international students at the time for its "western" sound, was/is viewed as not much more than a novelty by most Cambodians. On top of that, in addition to pop music, there were other genres including court music, traditional and folk music that also prospered during this era. And...I've rambled on more than I intended. Suffice to say that the title and the article should put the CambodiaRocks-type music in the proper Cambodian context (i.e. not at all representative of all Cambodian popular music of the time) in addition to noting its new-found, and rather incongruous, popularity among westerners.--William Thweatt TalkContribs 07:19, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the helpful reminder, William. Documentaries like Don't Think I've Forgotten and the selection of music that's been imported to the US have definitely shaped my understanding such that I may be of the impression that it was more popular than it was, but I've listened to enough e.g. Sinn Sisamouth and Ros Serey Sothea that I know it's not all western-influenced rock/pop/garage/psych. I don't know specifically what Doomsdayer's article plan is, but I would assume incorporate material about all sorts of pop music if doing an article on that era. Perhaps that just gets too much overlap with the existing article, and perhaps we would run into trouble with two people who don't read Khmer searching for sources on the elements of Khmer music that haven't become popular in the west (I say popular, but it's even more of a niche here :) ). So maybe the most succinct title/scope (which doesn't read as very succinct, but oh well) might be "Rock music of pre-Khmer Rouge Cambodia". — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:47, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
William's thoughts indicate why Music of Cambodia should remain the primary article in this area. Unfortunately that article has been in need of expansion for years, and international WP users do not have the expertise, and anyone who does have the expertise is probably not able to use international WP. In the history of the Sinn Sisamouth talk page you can see people popping up occasionally who really are Cambodian (as in an old dispute over how to spell his name), but otherwise we have a bunch of articles written by Americans with material that Americans know about. .......................... It's surely not perfect but the scene/genre has gained international notice that may very well transcend Cambodia itself. Or in other words, Klezmer is enjoyed and talked about worldwide by people who know little about its European Jewish originators and may not have to. "1960s-70s Cambodian Rock" (or whatever title) could survive WP's notability requirements thanks to its international recognition. Any article here must avoid implying that it represents ALL Cambodian popular music, which hopefully can be done with sensitive writing. I envision a tight genre-specific article; consider the article for Jazz fusion which does not imply that it's the only kind of jazz. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 15:08, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New exercise regimen while staying indoors during the pandemic

I'll just leave this here... — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:37, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Outstanding!!! Video now shared with dog owners I know. --cart-Talk 15:52, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ADL, COI, and The Forward

I posted a link to this section at WP:COIN#Article in the Forward to avoid belaboring something that's more or less resolved there, for better or worse.

Here's the TL;DR version of what I said in response to an inquiry about the ADL case:
So much of the difficulty of editing Wikipedia as an organization or otherwise with a COI is how few bright lines rules there are, and how many shades of skepticism there are among the community such that a range of outcomes are possible for any given situation. That's true of a lot of Wikipedia, but seems particularly pronounced with COI issues. The reception ADL received in the noticeboard thread was IMO harsher than necessary, given they expressed interest in learning the rules, responded to criticism, and seemed to agree to just about everything we asked of them, stopping short of a self-imposed ban on ever adding ADL sources to articles. But while I think that should've led to a second chance, the result of the thread (to the extent there is a result, except to say that I was in the minority and ADL has stopped its editing project) is also unsurprising because -- and it's hard to overstate this -- first impressions are extremely important. If they hadn't edited the ADL article, hadn't only been adding ADL sources, and hadn't created weight problems (in other words, if they started with the guidelines that they've now agreed to), I doubt we would be here. But organizations and people with a COI do not get the same leeway to make mistakes that ordinary volunteers do, and there's a good reason for that. Any organization interested to edit Wikipedia really needs to do a lot of homework about Wikipedia policies and conventions beforehand, err on the side of transparency, and ask questions if they're not sure about something.

In general, I thought the article was a more or less fair summary of something that was likely frustrating for all involved. Hopefully others do, as well. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:58, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To add something I've said in several places at this point (as have others, probably more eloquently than me): if we're going to have vague COI rules in order to allow more room for case-by-case judgment, taking a hardline approach which operates as though the rules are not vague and which leaves no room for making mistakes ultimately discourages transparency and makes volunteers' jobs harder in the long run. Editing with a conflict of interest is never ideal, but it's going to happen, and doesn't always harm the project, so we might as well try to be more consistent with how we deal with it. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Green iguana
An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Panorama of a green iguana (06643p).jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 21:34, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Essays, guidelines, etc

I think you've made some good points there, and can't help but wonder if it is not well past time we had a systemic review of the whole tree of designations like this. One thought that came to me is to deprecate the "guideline" designation entirely, and instead make all instructional pages "information pages" which to me seem to be essentially the same thing, but without the baggage of having to get them formally approved as such. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:49, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Beeblebrox: You mean deprecate the guideline designation as it applies to instructional pages, or everywhere? Would notability become an information page or would it be promoted to a policy? I haven't done a full review, and don't know of one. Part of the confusion is the dual meaning of "levels of consensus/support" and "principles vs. practices" (or something like that) as well as the differently functioning content vs. behavioral vs. administrative/procedural pages. I started to type out about five different version of "if I were to start from scratch I'd...", scrapping each one. Will have to give it more thought. Maybe an audit would be helpful for a big picture. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:10, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, any such review would need to be very carefully planned out, what I mentioned here was just the first idea to pop into my mind. With the ArbCom workload being what it is I'm not currently in the "big policy RFC" business for at leat another year. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:29, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can't blame you. The gig economy of the Big Policy RfC Business pays much less than the lucrative long-term contracts in the Arbitrating Business. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:36, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Involuntary hospitalization of Joyce Patricia Brown

The article Involuntary hospitalization of Joyce Patricia Brown you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Involuntary hospitalization of Joyce Patricia Brown and Talk:Involuntary hospitalization of Joyce Patricia Brown/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Freedom4U -- Freedom4U (talk) 20:40, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for BRAAAM

The Content Creativity Barnstar
Thank you for the most interesting article. I can't stop playing the sound file. Bruxton (talk) 18:40, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rhododendrites,

This is to let you know that File:Rooftop farm at the Essex (65787p).jpg, a featured picture you uploaded, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for April 20, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-04-20. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 21:21, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rows of planters at a roof garden at Essex Crossing, New York City

Urban agriculture, urban farming, or urban gardening is the practice of cultivating, processing, and distributing food in or around urban areas. Urban agriculture can reflect varying levels of economic and social development. It may be a social movement for sustainable communities, where organic growers, "foodies", and "locavores" form social networks founded on a shared ethos of nature and community holism. For others, food security, nutrition, and income generation are key motivations for the practice. In both scenarios, more direct access to fresh vegetables, fruits, and meat products through urban agriculture can improve food security and food safety. This photograph depicts urban agriculture in the form of a roof garden at Essex Crossing in Manhattan, New York City. Among the plants grown are tomatoes, chili peppers, lettuce, herbs, carrots and beetroots.

Photograph credit: Rhododendrites

Recently featured:

DYK for BRAAAM

On 11 April 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article BRAAAM, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that there is a name – BRAAAM – for the loud – BRAAAM – low horn sound (featured) – BRAAAM – made popular by action film trailers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/BRAAAM. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, BRAAAM), 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:02, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hook update
Your hook reached 26,076 views (1,086.5 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of April 2023 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:27, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am excited to see how this hook does. Bruxton (talk) 00:11, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bruxton: Looks like it was altered a few hours ago to be a bit drier in presentation. A bummer, but oh well. If only there were a way to break pageviews into 12-hour periods. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:05, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The way the DYK viewcount is calculated means that this is probably close to the number it received in its twelve hours – an hourly viewcount that I think beats any other audio-clip lead I've come across! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 07:16, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The highest hourly viewcount of DYK this month so far. Congratulations. BorgQueen (talk) 08:07, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Because I'm waiting a word count expansion

Just for clarity, I know the rest of my statement was loaded with a bunch of canadian humor, but I wanted you to know my AGF link was a sincere attempt from me to highlight there were no ill intentions from you in what you did, I just didn't want to assume your intentions. I also don't think that lack of action (aka reverting) is agreeing with something, more just it's likely better of left than reverted. Either way, just wanted to make it clear I wasn't trying to go at you for your action there. -- Amanda (she/her) 01:09, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's odd to explicitly undercut a reference to AGF, then insist it was just a sincere AGF, but I don't intend to belabor the point. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 11:39, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If it helps any, I do apologize, and I have retracted the original language. -- Amanda (she/her) 12:01, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thumbs up icon Thanks. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 12:06, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to start a conversation here, away from Jimbo's talk page, principally because your talk page doesn't attract as much traffic and I've got more chance of the discussion remaining on a sensible tangent.

The problem, as I see it, is that Jimbo is the only Wikipedian who is famous for editing Wikipedia by the general public. Sure, other famous people contribute to Wikimedia projects; Allan Warren's freely-licensed photos adorn numerous articles, including FAs. But nobody else has such a longstanding reputation that is primarily based on Wikipedia, and that means, as you suggested, every single action that Jimbo takes has, at a guess, 100 or so people looking at it ready to criticise or pick holes in it. Combined with his lack of time to address issues, this leads to an effective "hit and run" style of management whenever he states any sort of opinion on an article or project governance. And that leads to an insane amount of verbiage and discussion by everyone who does have the time - I can't remember how long that discussion was about Jimbo's move of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, but it seemed to go on for days.

I've heard it said that people are afraid to take administrative action against Jimbo, especially blocking him. But I don't think Jimbo has done anything block worthy; if people think he has, then they should be able to start a thread proposing sanctions on ANI, consensus will form, and action will be taken. I can't see it happening myself. Also, some of the editors who don't think Jimbo should have admin rights or disapprove of his actions are not cranks or trolls, but sitting Arbitrators. For better or worse, we elect those people to be the ultimate body that decides conduct on Wikipedia, and so we have to listen to them.

I haven't really got a good answer to this other than to suggest to Jimbo that he's simply too famous to edit Wikipedia, and attempts to do so will always be counter-productive, and that resigning any advanced tools would be a magnanimous move towards that, though I also see your point that doing right now may be sub-optimal and invite drama in the future. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:58, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ritchie333: your talk page doesn't attract as much traffic Whaaaaat? :) Yes, good call.
an effective "hit and run" style of management - The tricky thing is, he's not exactly a manager. A manager can hire, fire, set the rules, and enforce them. Jimmy doesn't really do any of that, and I don't know that he would be able to if he tried, outside of obvious circumstances. The things he gets in trouble for are relatively normal, everyday things that any volunteer can do (which isn't to say should do :) ). The impact comes not from what he did but from who he is, as you say. An alternative to telling him he's too famous to edit Wikipedia is for us to directly address his missteps, provide advice, and try not to create a circus anytime he does anything outside of Jimbotalk. Probably not realistic, though.
Overall, I think it's a Good Thing™ for the project that there's someone with a lot of soft power who's on the right side of issues like paid editing. I like that he's willing to take someone to task when he thinks they're compromising its integrity, and willing to advocate against promotional editing. I just think he should ping a couple people off-wiki first to, you know, avoid acting on a scam or doing so in a way that does more harm than good. He may be a busy guy, but it doesn't take keeping up with the minute developments of everything on-wiki; it just takes talking to someone who does. Any admin, regardless of their available time, can attest to how quickly things can spiral if they're made a bad call just before going to bed, starting work, going on vacation, etc.
afraid to take administrative action against Jimbo I believe this might be true for the sorta-kinda "insiders" who know they'll have to work with Jimmy, the WMF, or the board. Maybe some old-timers, too, who were around for Ye Olde Userbox War. These days, however, it sure feels to me that there are more people quite eager to take some action against Jimmy (or other insiders). His actions just never rise to that level. Some bad calls, but nothing that would get anyone else sanctioned. He gets in trouble in a way that's similar to how another board member might get in trouble, or the way we would tut-tut an arbcom member if they made such a mistake because it means more coming from them.
You might be right. It might be better if he didn't get involved in on-wiki specifics and reserved his power for talking about broader issues. It would probably make for better PR, but it also feels rather un-Wikipedia to be motivated by "better PR". Maybe that's the old Wikipedia, though, before it was, well, actually important. *shrug* — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:28, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
You helped wikipedia so much. Thank you! Thehistorianisaac (talk) 05:10, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Effective writing

Regarding this comment: personally I think the editorial's structure diminishes its effectiveness, but the author disagrees, and I'm pretty sure others also disagree. There'd be no point though in having a parallel article covering the same material: it would be redundant, somewhat similar to a newspaper publishing both a reporter's original draft and the copy edited version. The regular contributors to the Signpost generally defer to what the authors prefer regarding writing structure and wording, and I understand why (it's not like there are a plethora of contributors to write about the areas usually covered by the Signpost). isaacl (talk) 01:10, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Isaacl: I agree that it could be awkward, but it could also be framed as two takes on the same issue. I feel like I've seen that in the Signpost before. I don't think it's like the rough draft and edited version; more like two people focusing on entirely different parts of an event. Another approach could just be SB writes about the paid editing part of the story and someone else writes about ... the rest of it. But yes, as I said in my first comment there, I suspect there's a way to edit SB's version to be more acceptable to all (perhaps not those who want to totally exonerate Jimbo or those who would love to drag him over the coals, but meh). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:18, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think the key is that there needs to be different takes for different articles to work. When the disagreements are with organization, style, and so forth, different articles would just be rewritten versions of the same facts. The author doesn't want to separate out the different aspects of the story, so that's not an available option (and it would amount to a complete overhaul of the piece). isaacl (talk) 02:15, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Bazzini

The article Bazzini you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bazzini for comments about the article, and Talk:Bazzini/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 06:41, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editor of the Week

Editor of the Week
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

Rhododendrites edits an exceptionally wide variety of topic areas (example:here) both in WP content (62000 edits) and at Commons (78000 edits), many attaining deserved Featured Article and Picture recognition. This editor has a history of helping at the reference desk, inputs dialogue at various noticeboards with thorough, logical, courteous and civil comments, and is dedicated to improving the neutrality & integrity of Wikipedia. Also, they have improved many "List" articles (see:List of hip hop musicians) and is a recent event coordinator at Wikimedia New York City.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week: 

{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}
Rhododendrites
 
Editor of the Week
for the week beginning May 7, 2023
:Rhododendrites edits an exceptionally wide variety of topic areas (example:here) both in WP content (62000 edits) and at Commons (78000 edits), many attaining deserved Featured Article and Picture recognition. This editor has a history of helping at the reference desk, inputs dialogue at various noticeboards with thorough, logical, courteous and civil comments, and is dedicated to improving the neutrality & integrity of Wikipedia. Also, they have improved many "List" articles (see:List of hip hop musicians) and is a recent event coordinator at Wikimedia New York City.
Recognized for
improving Wikipedia
Notable works
List of hip hop musicians
Submit a nomination

Thanks again for your efforts! ―Buster7 ☎ 12:52, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, Buster7! I should say that while there are a bunch of GAs (top of my user page) and a lot of FPs on Commons, I haven't worked on any FAs and haven't been to the refdesk in a few years. :) It's interesting... I guess I haven't thought of myself as someone who likes lists. I've created a few (one FL) and watch the lists delsort, but it's mainly that I try to clean them up sometimes (especially a maybe 5 or 6 years ago). That's what happened with the list of hip hop musicians. It's not that I'm a huge hip hop fan, but the list was in terrible shape, with people constantly adding themselves, so I cleaned it up and sort of adopted it (and a bunch of others). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 13:04, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies for misconstruing your editing history. When vetting a nomination I use [[1]] to gather information. The hip hop list is the top edited page among other list articles. I guess I just mistakenly assumed you searched out lists to improve them...My bad. I can make changes if you like. ―Buster7 ☎ 13:40, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Made some changes. ―Buster7 ☎ 14:39, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Redhead
An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Redhead in Central Park (15503).jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 10:41, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Pale Male

On 24 May 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Pale Male, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:44, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mobushgu: Don't know how much it matters, but I wasn't the one that updated the article -- I just added a bunch of citations. An IP added the news about Pale Male. It's worth mentioning, in the spirit of WP:ERRORS, that not a lot of the "serious birders" that I know give much stock to the argument that this was indeed the original Pale Male. It would certainly be odd for the local hawk celebrity to not only be the longest-living red-tailed hawk ever, but also pulling it off in a place known for being perilous to raptors (mainly due to rat poison). That said, plenty of sourcing is treating the bird as though it's the same one. Figured I'd mention it, though. :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:59, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Muboshgu: Fixing ping, sorry. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:59, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [reply]
Well, you added the citations and the item wouldn't have been posted without that effort. I say you deserve some credit. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:06, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wade Goodwyn

Originally deleted the NY Times citation because a subscription is required to read and verify the citation. How does one verify the subject is mentioned? Thanks PhillyHarold (talk) 14:56, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, Wade is mentioned in the very last sentence of the Duke article. PhillyHarold (talk) 14:58, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PhillyHarold: Thanks. Per WP:V and WP:RS accessibility/being behind a paywall is irrelevant to the source's reliability. We should use the best quality source available, even if it's an undigitized book only accessible through a physical visit to a library. For something like the NYT, though, you can always use WP:RX, where someone will be willing to send it to you. In fact, if you send me an email I'd be glad to attach it. All that said, thanks for clarifying that he's mentioned in the Duke article. Seems like a good idea to retain both. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:03, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't disagree that it's good to keep both and that we should always use the best quality sources. A genuine thank you for the additional information regarding sources as I continue to learn more about editing. I have no doubt that all NYT sources are excellent and relevant, as I was a digital subscriber many years ago. My question relates to how does the average user verify a source if they can't get behind a paywall? I know we're always supposed to assume good faith, but a library trip to verify a book seems a bit sketchy, as a less scrupulous editor could claim an undigitized source says whatever they want. Just my two cents. Thanks again for the help and information. PhillyHarold (talk) 16:09, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
how does the average user verify a source if they can't get behind a paywall - For better or worse, that's not a requirement. What we need is for it to be verifiable if someone were to check that source, not whether they can check that source. Most of the highest quality sources aren't immediately accessible by an average user (books, journal articles, etc.). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:54, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

6666666

Well congrats! This proves that you are just as certifiable as the rest of us! And I thought that I was nerdy when I saw that one article had a totally needless fair use image and another one had a really crappy image. So I spent some quality camera time with my old LP collection and made new Commons:Categories for these two rather uninteresting and rarely viewed subjects. (No, I don't stalk your edits, and I rarely visit Twitter now, but when TFG gets indicted you have to take a look at what the site makes of it. ;-) Just in time for your announcement there.) cart-Talk 21:28, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And I thought that I was nerdy - No argument from me. :) Nice job illustrating cataloging systems there! Regarding SatanCon, I was more excited than I'd like to admit when I realized the milestone was coming and found a fitting topic. Woke up early (before my alarm, even), and wound up refreshing {{numberofarticles}} for ... a while, before publishing. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:53, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Bazzini

On 13 June 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bazzini, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Bazzini, established in 1886, is the oldest nut company in the United States? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bazzini. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Bazzini), 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.

-- RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's a nice surprise. Thanks for nominating, Onegreatjoke. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 03:22, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: usernames in signatures

Whatever became of the RfC you initiated? As someone who uses an abbreviated signature myself about which nobody ever complained in 15 years, i would still support it. ◅ Sebastian 07:25, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SebastianHelm: - Don't think anything else came of it. There was a finding of no consensus for the proposals, for better or worse. Don't think I've brought it up since then, and continue to hear occasional confusion from newbies when the person they're trying to contact is a totally different name from the one they see on a talk page. Meh. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 13:52, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
*Sigh* – i guess that comes with Wikipedia being established now. It was more rewarding for me back in the day when one had a reasonable chance of changing things that hurt newbies. What keeps your spirits up? ◅ Sebastian 16:49, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SebastianHelm: We're definitely on a long trajectory towards quality and experience and away from quantity and ease of editing. Wikipedia's serious business now, haven't you heard? :) What keeps my spirits up? There's still a ton of amazing work being done. Most of the new user interaction I've had over the past many years has been off-wiki. We ran an edit-a-thon to improve climate change-related content here in NYC a couple weeks ago which went well. New users removing spam, adding citations, fixing mistakes, etc. People just need more support these days than perhaps they used to, but there are more people interested than ever. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, I haven't heard. I thought all was fine when the WP:DENY of ‘Wikipedia:Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense’ was DENYed in 2007. But seriously, you're raising an interesting point when you write that you get a lot of satisfaction from off-wiki interaction. Yes, that's something i miss since i moved away from the US. I had thought with WP being a role model for online cooperation there would remain enough to keep the spirit up, but i was mistaken. Interesting that you write “People just need more support these days”. What kind of support is more needed now? ◅ Sebastian 03:04, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Physical Documents

Your help was much appreciated a few weeks ago, and I hope you won't mind a question. I have hard copies of two articles from the 1980's that appeared in papers that are now defunct. The original author provided these, and I'd like to know if I can reference these. If so, how? Much thanks in advance! PhillyHarold (talk) 21:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PhillyHarold: Yes, newspapers are usually going to be considered reliable, and whether they're digitized doesn't affect that. You can just use a template like {{cite news}} and fill in as many fields as you can. FYI The Wikipedia Library has resources that may help if you really want to find a digitized version (I have access to Newspapers.com through them, for example). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:52, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Rhododendrites: A huge thank you my friend. PhillyHarold (talk) 15:05, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Involuntary hospitalization of Joyce Patricia Brown

The article Involuntary hospitalization of Joyce Patricia Brown you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Involuntary hospitalization of Joyce Patricia Brown for comments about the article, and Talk:Involuntary hospitalization of Joyce Patricia Brown/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Freedom4U -- Freedom4U (talk) 12:40, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Beginning of pregnancy controversy

I am not "edit warring." I've undone edits performed on a faulty basis. You need to read more closely the explanations for the edits. 1) Your edit removed content other than that you object to and 2) The objections has been addressed and no loner applies.

"However, some methods might have a secondary effect of preventing implantation, thus allowing the embryo to die.[31] Those who define pregnancy from fertilization subsequently may conclude that the agents should be considered abortifacients.[32]"

SOURCE 31: Rebecca Peck; Walter Rella; Julio Tudela; Justo Aznar; Bruno Mozzanega (February 2016). "Does levonorgestrel emergency contraceptive have a post-fertilization effect? A review of its mechanism of action". Linacre Q. 83 (1).
SOURCE 32: DeSanctis, Alexandra (November 4, 2016). "Yes, Some Contraceptives Are Abortifacients". nationalreview.com. National Review.

The objection was to the first statement not having a proper source, and both statements were deleted based on the (correct) sourcing of the second source when the proper edit would have been to add a tag saying that the first statement required a source. Therefore I reverted and added the tag. Subsequently, the tag was replaced with a proper source. SalClements (talk) 16:01, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oops - I was leaving a message on your talk page while you were writing this. I'll watch for a reply there, but the actual issue at hand is better discussed on the article talk page. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:05, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy toto discuss this on the article talk page but I don't understand why i shouldn't just undo your revert given that your justification was, "National Review is not a reliable source for medical information" but as you can see, the medical claim has a medical source and the Nat Rev source was concerning what "Those who define pregnancy from fertilization subsequently may conclude," which does not need a medical source. SalClements (talk) 16:20, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PS: You wrote, "The burden is on those who want to change the status quo to use the talk page (Talk:Beginning of pregnancy controversy) to find consensus for a change once it's disputed." So, shouldn't that mean that Avatar317 is the one with the burden, rather than me? My main issue with what avatar has been doing with his edits is that he removed the portion of the article which has been there at least since 2019 (I didn't go back farther) because he said it's in need of a source. My reversing his edits has been about preventing that removal SalClements (talk) 17:07, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Beginning_of_pregnancy_controversy#mechanism_of_action SalClements (talk) 18:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for following up. I'll take a look at this a bit later. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 19:08, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of most visited websites

Hi, if you have a look at Similarweb's site, they explain the creative process by which they produce their data. Unless they are trying to make a simple process look more complicated, it sounds as though they've put a huge amount of effort into this. Their EULA also specifically forbids the use of their data. So there is no doubt whatsoever that Wikipedia's article is a copyvio. They are probably tolerating this because they know better than anyone that we have huge traffic, and are raising their profile enormously. I suspect this is a bit of a wrong situation here. Elemimele (talk) 09:17, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Banks

Hello there I moved the reference to the Invisible Ships Myth to the Legacy section of the Joseph Banks article because it's too tangential for the short, factual account of the Endeavour voyage. I also slightly changed the wording because the linked article says that Banks'account might be the basis for the myth (it actually contradicts the myth). By the way, I had never heard of the myth before and I found the article fascinating. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 23:16, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense to me, Aemilius Adolphin. Thanks for the heads up! — Rhododendrites talk \\ 00:11, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Killing of Daunte Wright

The article Killing of Daunte Wright you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Killing of Daunte Wright for comments about the article, and Talk:Killing of Daunte Wright/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Mujinga -- Mujinga (talk) 15:03, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

Precious
Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:33, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Invisible ships

On 12 September 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Invisible ships, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that invisible ships are a myth? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Invisible ships. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Invisible ships), 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hook update
Your hook reached 11,784 views (925.4 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of September 2023 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:30, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

nice 〜 Festucalex • talk 03:59, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rhododendrites,

This is to let you know that File:Yellow-bellied sapsucker_in_CP_(40484).jpg, a featured picture you uploaded, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for October 3, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-10-03. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you!  — Amakuru (talk) 10:22, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yellow-bellied sapsucker

The yellow-bellied sapsucker (Sphyrapicus varius) is a medium-sized woodpecker which is found across Canada, eastern Alaska and the northeastern United States. These birds winter in the eastern United States, West Indies and Central America. They have also been found as a very rare vagrant in Ireland and Great Britain. The yellow-bellied sapsucker has a length of around 20 centimetres and an average weight of around 50 grams, with a wingspan that ranges from 34 to 40 centimetres. The forehead is coloured bright red in the male (and very occasionally yellow), and a lighter shade of red in the female. This male was photographed in Central Park, New York City, United States.

Photograph credit: Rhododendrites

A barnstar for you!

The Photographer's Barnstar
Thanks for your contributions to wikicommons, from a copyeditor Nitaverna (talk) 18:32, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rhododendrites,

This is to let you know that File:Field sparrow_in_CP_(41484)_(cropped).jpg, a featured picture you uploaded, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for November 8, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-11-08. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you!  — Amakuru (talk) 13:02, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Field sparrow

The field sparrow (Spizella pusilla) is a small sparrow in the family Passerellidae. It is distributed across eastern Canada and the eastern United States, with northern populations migrating southwards to southern United States and north-eastern Mexico in the fall. The bird is about 140 mm long with a mass of about 12.5 g. Its head is grey with a rust-coloured crown, white eye-ring and pink bill. The upper parts are brown streaked with black and buff, the breast is buff, the belly is white and the tail is forked. There are two different colour morphs, one being greyer and the other more rufous. This field sparrow was photographed in Central Park, New York City.

Photograph credit: Rhododendrites

Recently featured:

Notice of noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Sorry for the hassle, this is about the RfA of 0xDeadbeef. Fermiboson (talk) 08:36, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2023 November newsletter

The WikiCup is a marathon rather than a sprint and all those reaching the final round have been involved in the competition for the last ten months, improving Wikipedia vastly during the process. After all this hard work, Delaware BeanieFan11 has emerged as the 2023 winner and the WikiCup Champion. The finalists this year were:-

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the competition, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.

  • Unlimitedlead wins the featured article prize, for 7 FAs in total including 3 in round 2.
  • MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured list prize, for 5 FLs in total.
  • England Lee Vilenski wins the featured topic prize, for a 6-article featured topic in round 4.
  • MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured picture prize, for 6 FPs in total.
  • Delaware BeanieFan11 wins the good article prize, for 75 GAs in total, including 61 in the final round.
  • New York (state) Epicgenius wins the good topic prize, for a 41-article good topic in the final round.
  • Berkelland LunaEatsTuna wins the GA reviewer prize, for 70 GA reviews in round 1.
  • MyCatIsAChonk wins the FA reviewer prize, for 66 FA reviews in the final round.
  • New York (state) Epicgenius wins the DYK prize, for 49 did you know articles in total.
  • Ukraine Muboshgu wins the ITN prize, for 46 in the news articles in total.

The WikiCup has run every year since 2007. With the 2023 contest now concluded, I will be standing down as a judge due to real life commitments, so I hope that another editor will take over running the competition. Please get in touch if you are interested. Next year's competition will hopefully begin on 1 January 2024. You are invited to sign up to participate in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors. It only remains to congratulate our worthy winners once again and thank all participants for their involvement! (If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.) Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 November 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nov 15: WikiWednesday Salon + Wikimedia NYC Executive Director job

November 15: WikiWednesday @ Prime Produce

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly WikiWednesday Salon at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan, with an online-based participation option also available. No experience of anything at all is required. All are welcome!

All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct. In addition, to participate in person, you should be vaccinated and be sure to respect others' personal space, and we may limit overall attendance size if appropriate.

Meeting info:

Wikimedia New York City Executive Director job listing

Wikimedia NYC, the 501(c)(3) non-profit supporting Wikipedia and related projects in the metro area, is hiring our founding Executive Director, apply here.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:23, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM: October 2023



Headlines
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Feedback request: Language and linguistics request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Harka (Maghreb) on a "Language and linguistics" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:32, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rhododendrites,

This is to let you know that File:Male northern cardinal in Central Park (52612).jpg and File:Northern cardinal female in CP (02035).jpg, a pair of featured pictures you uploaded, have been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for November 21, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-11-21. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you!  — Amakuru (talk) 12:05, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Red bird sitting on tree branch
    Male
  • Reddish olive bird sitting on tree branch
    Female

The northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis) is a bird in the genus Cardinalis. It can be found in southeastern Canada, the United States, Mexico, Belize, and Guatemala, and as an introduced species in a few locations such as Bermuda and Hawaii. Its habitat includes woodlands, gardens, shrublands, and wetlands. The northern cardinal is a mid-sized perching songbird with a body length of 21–23 cm (8.3–9.1 in) and a crest on the top of the head. It is mainly granivorous, but also feeds on insects and fruit. The male behaves territorially, marking out his territory with song. During courtship, the male feeds seed to the female beak-to-beak. A clutch of three to four eggs is laid, and two to four clutches are produced each year. These photos of a male and female northern cardinal, which show their sexual dimorphism, were photographed in Central Park, New York City, United States.

Photograph credit: Rhododendrites

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:05, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:United States presidential eligibility legislation on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:31, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Such a pleasure to meet you at Wikiconference North America! Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the future of Wikipedia... and covering my dinner ^_^ Really looking forward to seeing you at more conferences/gatherings/Future Audiences community calls!

Accedietalk to me 23:00, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rhododendrites&oldid=1185158021"