This isCaptainEek'stalk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text.Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome!Learn to edit;get help. Assume good faith Be polite andavoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seekdispute resolution if needed

Archives:1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18Auto-archiving period:30 days

Editor Feedback, Talk, and Sea Shanty Singing Area

All Hands on Deck! There's conversation to be had with other editors!

ساعدني في الاعداد المميز والدعم والتحسين وجعل سير العمل سهلا ودعم للترجمه السريعه والبرمجه المتطوره والتطوير --B03073557 (talk)01:00, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red|October 2025, Vol 11, Issue 10, Nos. 326, 327, 350, 351, 352 Recognized as themost active topic-based WikiProject by human changes. Online events: New:Alphabet run S & T|Women in STEM|Halloween Continuing, year-long initiatives:#1day1woman|Music Announcements: Sister wikiprojectWomen in Green October 2025Good Article Edit-a-thon focuses onWhat Women Do Tip of the Month: Notable does not always mean admirable; you don't have to like an article's subject to make the article a useful contribution to Wikipedia. Progress ("moving the needle"):Statistics available via various tools: previously,Humaniki tool; currently, QLever. Thank you if you contributed one or more of the 6,283 articles during this period: 19 May 2025: 20.114% of EN-WP biographies are about women (2,066,280; 415,618 women) 24 September 2025: 20.20% of EN-WP biographies are about women (2,088,533 biographies; 421,901 women) Other ways to participate: Becomea member. You can alwaysopt-out of notifications. Join the conversations onour talkpage. Help usplan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media:Instagram|Pinterest

--Rosiestep (talk)18:29, 29 September 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Hello, CaptainEek. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You canremove this notice at any time by removing the{{You've got mail}} or{{ygm}} template.

MŠLQr (talk)18:38, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and thanks for your recent participation in AfD. I would like to hear your thoughts about the process. Please checkthis survey if you are willing to respond.Czarking0 (talk)01:52, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested atWikipedia talk:Did you know on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list ofFeedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time byremoving your name.

(replacingYapperbot)SodiumBot (botop|talk)14:30, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I need to make an update to a page/content, how can we ensure the update will be accepted by the moderators. --Peteaquino (talk)03:47, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Peteaquino what page are you trying to update and why?CaptainEek^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓03:59, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I saw radalic was going to retire then I saw she was under arbitration. Would you mind filling me in on what is going on (neutrally please). I've never seen Radalic do anything bad so I'm just a little surprised.Urchincrawler (talk)17:27, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Urchincrawler You are welcome to read through (or search for Raladic on) the evidence page, the proposed decision, and the proposed decision talk page for more information.CaptainEek^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓17:30, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanksUrchincrawler (talk)18:24, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested atTalk:Java (programming language) on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list ofFeedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time byremoving your name.

(replacingYapperbot)SodiumBot (botop|talk)19:30, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2025).

Administrator changes

• Billinghurst
• Crisco 1492
• DarkFalls
• Spike Wilbury
• Valereee
• Ergo Sum

CheckUser changes

Vanamonde93

Arbitration

• Aftera motion, arbitration enforcement page protections no longer need to be logged in the AELOG. A bot now automatically posts protections atWP:AELOG/P. To facilitate this bot, protection summaries must include a link to the relevant CT page (e.g.[[WP:CT/BLP]]), and you will receive talk page reminders if you forget to specify the contentious topic but otherwise indicate it is an AE action.

Your feedback is requested atTalk:Operation Sonnenblume on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list ofFeedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time byremoving your name.

(replacingYapperbot)SodiumBot (botop|talk)03:31, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CaptainEek, asking here since the talk page for the case is very cluttered:

How would you feel aboutYour Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist is indefinitely topic banned from the topics of 1) transgender healthcare, broadly construed and 2) living or recently deceased people who are actually or allegedly associated with anti-transgender, gender-critical, anti-gender, or trans-exclusionary movements, all terms broadly construed per Tamzin? I think that'd recieve fairly broad support based on arb comments so far / was wondering if you could introduce it.

Additionally, a more overall question about the case, was the precedent inWP:ARBR&I discussed? In the case:

• The FoF on the locus wasthe dispute may be characterised as comprising: (i) consistent point-of-view pushing; (ii) persistent edit-warring; and (iii) incessant over-emphasis on certain controversial sources.
• An FoF on an editor wasIn essence, this editor has placed undue weight on selected research by A. R. Jensen to promote a point of view.
• There was also later an RFC upholding that racist-pseudoscience is FRINGE[1].

It seems a near carbon copy of the case, a small group of fringe pseudoscientists were repeatedly cited to push a FRINGE pov, so I'm wondering whether the arbs took it as precedent (funny enough, thepioneer fund andHuman Biodiversity Institute have quite a lot of membership crossover withSEGM and etc -J. Michael Bailey andThe Man Who Would Be Queen for example).

Also, regarding the dinosaur comment[2] - There are alternative and minority views in trans healthcare, and I've covered them. There's a split in the field between informed consent models and assessment based models, slightly in favor of the latter. There are strong MEDRS supporting both. The idea that trans healthcare should be banned, or that bans on conversion therapy are bad, are FRINGE as they get and completely unsupported by MEDRS. While I may have overused FRINGE in the Cheung et al discussion (though I think per the SEGM RFC it was explicitly community consensus), I still think the FoF should not call this[3] a MEDRS - as me and Colin and theleeky cauldron agree it's not a MEDRS, it was written by conversion therapy advocates, and says bans on conversion therapy are bad - a clearly FRINGE viewpoint.Best,Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk)18:28, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist I would support that. The trouble is we've proposed a number of alternatives and they've basically all failed. We're now perhaps a day from closing the case--I think the ship has sailed. My suggestion would be to come back when you can next appeal and suggest that your topic ban be reduced to that wording as its scope. Do I think you deserved a lesser sanction? Yes. Did the Committee as a whole? It seems not.

I hesitated to go too hard on the fringe angle, and I've clearly opened a can of worms by addressing it. We tried not to touch it much it lest we have to make the content decision of what is or isn't fringe in the topic area. You wanted us to examine your adversaries and declare that they were using and abusing fringe sources, and we pointedly didn't do that. Not everything is fringe. Science can suck (and be unworthy of inclusion) without being fringe.CaptainEek^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓19:16, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah gotcha, thanks! I'd asked since reading all the votes, it seemed there was broad support from the arbs for some lesser sanction than the full TBAN, but harder than the healthcare TBAN. I think the other sanction ideas partly failed because none included healthcare or tried to go in between the two main poles of support. If it's too late, c'est la vie, I've been busy with work and starting school again so barely able to edit.

I do want to note, that saying I used FRINGE incorrectly is taking a position that the sources in question weren't FRINGE / FRINGE didn't apply, in this case regarding a pro-conversion therapy non-MEDRS.

I did not want ARBCOM tomake the content decision of what is or isn't fringe in the topic area, just respect/not override the community's decision:

• The community found 5-1 (minus the meatpuppets) thatSEGM’s publications or views can not be used to contradict well sourced scientific information in other articles as per WP:FRINGE and WP:PSCI. Editors can remove or challenge the addition of any SEGM based evidence in a medical topic citing consensus both here and in the previous RfC.[4]
  • Even after this (and preceding RFCs), editors would repeatedly try and cite SEGM and say FRINGE doesn't apply - ignoring an RFC they didn't like is a conduct issue.
• A parallel RFC foundthe claim that transgender identities are themselves a mental illness, or are frequently caused by mental illness, is a fringe view[5]

To me, and I'm not completely unbiased given how it effects the sanctions, it feels like the decision/FoF ignored and overrode the community consensus on what is / isn't FRINGE. And honestly, I'm worried this will have a chilling effect - if an RFC says "SEGM is FRINGE, contesting sources based on such providence is encouraged", and ARBCOM says "contesting sources on such providence is misusing FRINGE", that leaves the topic area in a bind.Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk)20:16, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi any suggestions on how to edit stuff --LMFAO FR (talk)19:28, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that there would eventually be adead horse case at the U4C. They disposed of it as quickly as the ENWP ArbCom does. That filing unregistered editor had a concept ofmeatpuppetry that means two editors agreeing with each other and disagreeing with the complainer.Robert McClenon (talk)17:49, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How do I create a new Wikipedia page --1FatHiker (talk)18:32, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested atTalk:C data types on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list ofFeedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time byremoving your name.

(replacingYapperbot)SodiumBot (botop|talk)18:31, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]