User talk:RachelTensions

DYK for Seunghan

On 16 December 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Seunghan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Seunghan (pictured) was forced out of his band because of a cigarette and a kiss? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Seunghan. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Seunghan), 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.

—Ganesha811 (talk) 00:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 29,639 views (1,235.0 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of December 2024 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:27, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

New pages patrol January 2025 Backlog drive

January 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

"Edit War" on Cleavage Page

Hi Rachel

No there is no edit war. I attempted to remove rape myths and sexist stereotypes from a page which is harmful to women. A few people disagreed with this based on "weird titles" and reverted the article back. I am absolutely fine with people changing the formatting if need be, and altering the format of the titles - but reverting the whole article back seems excessive. Users have opted to include rape myths and sexist stereotyping, along with innapropriate language such as depicting what men like about women's breasts, that a woman's breasts can be "wet" to improve cleavage etc - which is highly inappropriate, especially if a child should access this page.

I attempted to revert less than 5 times and I will no longer attempt to edit the page as it is clear that people do not care about propagating rape myths and sexist stereotyping and they will happily put men's "opinions" about women's breasts with sources that are not peer-reviewed or backed up by scientific evidence...but apparently if I attempt to write a disclaimer that these "studies" should be considered as theoretical and not to be taken as fact - I am then reported for violation.

As such it is best at this time that I no longer edit this page and instead escalate the issue. I refuse to engage in any 'edit war'. It is pointless and will not help.

Thank you. Trj56msn (talk) 14:28, 18 December 2024 (UTC)