User talk:Sekhet

Hi, welcome to the Nonbinary wiki!

This your talk page, where other users can talk to you. I hope that you will find this place welcoming and that you will decide to stay for a long, long time. To create a new page just enter its title in the following box and press the button: (Remember to check if the page already exists!)

If you have any doubts, just go to my talk page and ask, or go to the General discussion page, where you may get help from other users. Additionally, I invite you to join our Discord server, where we talk about nonbinary stuff and plan the development of the wiki!--Ondo (talk) 18:48, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
Hi! You are now an Autopatroller. From now on, all your edits will be automatically marked as patrolled. Thanks for your awesome contributions <3 --Ondo (talk) 11:04, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks! -Sekhet (talk) 15:54, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Reverted an edit
I reverted your edit to the Dyadism page. I don't think that redirect made sense as their is no content on the Sexes page for dyadism. If you were intending to move the Dyadism content, then just revert me back, but to me it seems to work quite well on the Intersex page as it is a specifically related to intersex people and not sex in general. Falkirks (talk) 15:00, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Uncommon identities
Hi! Just a small heads-up about your last edit in Fluidflux, when you added uncommon identity. Fluidflux is not considered uncommon because it had more than the 0.20% of respondents in the last Gender Census. You can read more about when to use this template here. Thanks! --Ondo (talk) 20:22, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay. Thanks for explaining where the cutoff really is for that. The "almost not used" label that was already on the fluidflux article made me think it also counted as "uncommon." Maybe we should word that differently? -Sekhet (talk) 15:09, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Perhaps. Any ideas? --Ondo (talk) 17:59, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 * How about the popularity rating is relabeled, so that identities of at least 0.20% popularity or higher are called "present," "extant," "attested," or something along those lines, whereas the label "almost not used" is reserved for identities that were less than 0.20% of the survey? -Sekhet (talk) 23:46, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 * You mean changing the scale to a binary (:P) option? That could be an option, why not. I will ask our users on discord to take a look at this conversation to get their opinions. --Ondo (talk) 16:26, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * A member of the Discord suggested to remove the label altogether and leave the percentage only. I like this, what do you think? --Ondo (talk) 17:12, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I like that, too. Just using the percentage sounds like a good solution. -Sekhet (talk) 03:31, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Done! --Ondo (talk) 18:31, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Page you might have archived
I don't know if Gender recognition in education in the United States ever had content or if it was just a redlink, but it isn't available on archive.org. So if you have a copy, it would be useful to recover that page. Falkirks (talk) 09:59, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi!
Just wanted to drop way to thank you and tell you that it's always nice when you come back to do some edits! Feel free to ask anything you might need, you can also join the Discord server if you want to meet the other two admins ("apprentice admin"). See you around! :) --Ondo (talk) 22:42, 9 November 2019 (UTC)