User talk:Aroundthewayboy

Hi, welcome to the Sex work task force, it will be good to have some new blood participating.

On a separate note regarding your recent edit on Procuring (prostitution), the normal procedure for citing journal articles is to use a DOI number (which gets processed into a link when the ref is published) rather than a url. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with using the url, but you might find your edit gets reverted by others who think a url to a journal is the end of the world.

Cheers --John B123 (talk) 18:43, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,thanks! I thought I was being useful tracking down an actual copy of the article oops. Well, I'll add the doi, and then there will be both! Aroundthewayboy (talk) 19:25, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thanks for your comments! I agree with you. On another point, I'm sure you know this but there are five million plus pages on Wikipedia. When I come across editors who are generally just interested in Wikpedia as a battleground, I just unwatch the page and move on to something more productive. Just some friendly advice. It's a time sink to indulge them.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:01, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks. Yeah, I got caught up in a "debate" with a really toxic editor. Time to disengage! Aroundthewayboy (talk) 17:45, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this, I want to make sure you understand what a primary source is. See WP:Primary sources.

If you reply, please reply here on your talk page instead of at mine. No need to WP:Ping me. I'll check back. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 07:08, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, thanks, but could you clarify what you're suggesting? I think that page is unfortunately not very helpful, since it suggests that an academic source could be either primary or secondary, depending on the context. To me, the three academic articles in that gender binary section seem more like secondary sources in this context, but I'm definitely open to other interpretations! Aroundthewayboy (talk) 14:14, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I asked because the "One study" text is supported by a primary source. I don't understand how the WP:Primary sources policy isn't very helpful. The link I pointed to goes over what primary, secondary and tertiary sources are. Do you find WP:SCHOLARSHIP more helpful?

Anyway, I agree that the tag isn't needed just to address that one piece in the section. The last piece in the section is, after all, supported by this review. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 07:04, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you're suggesting putting up a primary source tag, I would support that. I removed the tag because I thought it was originally motivated by since-deleted content, but maybe you're right that it's still applicable. I do think that whole section is borderline original research and definitely not NPOV. At the very least it could be more balanced since it is ignoring all the research that does not take that perspective. Aroundthewayboy (talk) 14:14, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Greetings

Please do have a look at article Draft:Avret Pazary. If you feel interested pl. do support in expansion of the same. Thanks Bookku (talk) 05:37, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikimedia LGBTQ+ User Group is holding online working days in May. As a member of WikiProject LGBT studies, editing on LGBTQ+ issues or if you identify as part of the LGBTQ+ community, come help us set goals, develop our organisation and structures, consider how to respond to issues faced by Queer editors, and plan for the next 12 months.

We will be meeting online for 3 half-days, 14–16 May at 1400–1730 UTC. While our working language is English, we are looking to accommodate users who would prefer to participate in other languages, including translation facilities.

More information, and registration details, at QW2021.--Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group 02:35, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ATWB, In case you'd not come across it before, I thought I'd message to ask whether there are any wikipedia articles that you'd be interested in creating/updating/overhauling and submitting for external, academic peer review.

The WikiJournal of Science (www.wikijsci.org) couples the rigour of academic peer review with the extreme reach of the encyclopedia. For existing Wikipedia articles, it's a great way to get additional feedback from external experts. Peer-reviewed articles are dual-published both as standard academic PDFs, as well as having changes integrated back into Wikipedia. This improves the scientific accuracy of the encyclopedia, and rewards authors with citable, indexed publications. It also provides much greater reach than is normally achieved through traditional scholarly publishing.

Note that we have to publish under real names, so if you don't want your real name associated to your username, you may have to choose a topic that your username has not previously edited.

Anyway, let me know whether you'd be interested in putting an article through academic peer review (either solo, or with a team of coauthors).

All the best, Thomas T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 05:30, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

DanCherek (talk) 16:54, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Have a great day. Aroundthewayboy (talk) 19:25, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]