User talk:Shalor (Wiki Ed)

Notice

Hi! As the notice says, I'm no longer working with Wiki Education. It's been wonderful working with them (love you guys!) and I hope that everyone can continue to support the organization going forward. COVID-19 has hit us all very, very heavily and this was not a decision that was made lightly by my former employers. Please take into account that there are far fewer workers with Wiki Education when posting to ENB or on a former colleague's talk page. I will still try to help out on a volunteer basis, under my main account (ReaderofthePack). I start a new job in a couple of weeks and I'm not going to be able to check Wikipedia during work hours, so my availability will be far decreased. I will occasionally check this page, but I will not be using this account anymore for obvious reasons. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:44, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Response with my main for additional ease of access! ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 16:46, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Long story short, this was due to a lack of funding. COVID-19 has caused many organizations that would otherwise have provided us with funding to be more conservative with how much they give out and to whom. Some of them assume that Wiki Education was a part of the WMF and as such, would be less likely to provide funding since they assumed that the organization would be adequately funded already. This was likely further exacerbated with COVID-19, although of course this isn't the only reason why. There should be more information coming out in the future from Wiki Education and/or the Signpost about this. I'll try to answer any questions as I can, but most of this should be directed at ENB. (On a side note, if anyone works for an organization that gives out funding, think Wiki Education!) ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 16:52, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	It has been an honour to work with you these past three years, and I'm so sad to see this end. Thanks for all the hard work, thanks for your amazing contribution, and thanks for your friendship and kindness. See you soon, on other pages and in other accounts. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:48, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ian (Wiki Ed) 3 27.34.105.177 (talk) 00:52, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ian (Wiki Ed) 27.34.105.177 (talk) 00:52, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

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) 02:53, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some baklava for you!

Hi Fatty1829. (talk) 21:30, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Catherine Breillat article

Greetings, Shalor. You may want to have a look at the Talk Page of the Catherine Breillat article. Cheers. -The Gnome (talk) 10:14, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@The Gnome: I don't work with Wiki Ed anymore - as far as the text goes, the content itself was originally posted by a student trying to improve the article. Unfortunately it ended up coming across like an essay because the student didn't know how to write in a way that didn't come across as SYNTH or OR. The portion I removed had some decent things in there and from what I could see of the paywalled sources, the student was summarizing the source - it was just in the wrong way. It was the type of thing that I figured could be helpful to someone with access to the sources or who wanted to take the content and use it as a jumping off point for a new section about the themes and so on in the director's work.

It was not meant to be interpreted as a discussion about the author. It was meant to be seen as "a student wrote this, it had issues but there are points in the material that could be useful for someone who has the ability to access the sourcing and familiarity with the director".

If you want to remove it, go for it. The student is long gone and there's already a section in the article that says the same things. I just wanted to clarify that this was not posted as discussion about the author, so it doesn't really violate the "not a discussion/forum" rule. I'll post this to the article's talk page as well. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:14, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. That is very constructive. -The Gnome (talk) 21:19, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]