Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2019-08-30/Discussion report

Today, Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2019-08-30/Discussion report is a topic that has captured the attention of millions of people around the world. With its relevance in the social, political, cultural and economic spheres, Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2019-08-30/Discussion report has become a constant presence in our lives. Whether through technological advances, changes in government policies, or simply its impact on the way we interact with each other, Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2019-08-30/Discussion report continues to be a topic of interest and debate. In this article, we will explore the impact and importance of Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2019-08-30/Discussion report in today's society, and how its influence has shaped our present and future.

← Back to Discussion report

Discuss this story

@Pythoncoder: - nice summary, it might be worth noting that the partial/local ban consultation is specifically intended to start sometime shortly after the 7th September (when ARBCOM rules on the FRAM case)? Nosebagbear (talk) 23:51, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

• I hope they add my proposed question about the issue of private accusations, evidence, and adjudications interfering with the ability to learn the standards to which editors are expected to adhere, and with the checks and balances against retaliatory and abusive accusations. I got it in well under the deadline. I am also not very happy about referring to "the Office Actions policy" as if it had ever gone though the policy process, which it has not. I guess they thought "formerly proposed" had too many negative connotations? EllenCT (talk) 02:26, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Office Actions is still marked as a global policy; thus, the WMF's characterization in the quoted portion is accurate. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 03:03, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
    • The 2006-2016 policy was announced, discussed, approved and adopted. The 2017 and 2019 edits were not. EllenCT (talk) 08:24, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
• I would appreciate a link to discussion leading to the use of "AD" to denote years, instead of "CE" which seems to be preferred by non-Christians, for whom it is not "the year of their Lord." Edison (talk) 21:01, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

  Whichever way you look at it though, Edison, it still won't change the fact that international counting of the Common Era coincides with the creation of Christianity. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:12, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

  (edit conflict) Talk:AD 1/Archive 1#What should the articles from 1 to 100 be moved to?. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:12, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

  • It is surprising that Wikipedia's position is that Jesus of Nazareth is the Lord, so we have to use BC/AD ("Before Christ"/"Year of the Lord" rather than BCE/CE. I hope someone gives me a nudge on my talk page when this comes up again. Edison (talk) 10:19, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
    • Wikipedia's position is that it should name things in the way they are usually named in reputable sources. (And as an atheist, I don't like the assumption that I'm living in a "Christian Era". I'd probably dislike it even more if I followed some other religion.) Maproom (talk) 20:23, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
      • @Maproom: That's not what the acronym stands for... --Yair rand (talk) 23:38, 11 September 2019 (UTC)