User talk:Liz/Archive 28
This is an archive of past discussions about User:Liz. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | → | Archive 35 |
Administrators' newsletter – November 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
- An RfC was closed with the consensus that the resysop criteria should be made stricter.
- The follow-up RfC to develop that change is now open at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2019 Resysop Criteria (2).
- A related RfC is seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure.
- Eligible editors may now nominate themselves as candidates for the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections. The self-nomination period will close November 12, with voting running from November 19 through December 2.
Lmatt
Hello Liz,
I noticed that you informed Lmatt that a category they had created was up for speedy deletion. I have blocked this editor several times and since being unblocked, they have gone on a spree of Hotcat editing. There is a discussion on my talk page about this matter. I am rarely involved in category discussions and have no experience with Hotcat. Would you be willing to look into these recent edits and express your opinion? Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:12, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
- Cullen, I'll visit your talk page when I get back to my computer tonight. It's not unusual for relatively new editors to go overboard creating categories. It's a problem when it interferes with the existing category structure which, after 18 years, is pretty set at this point. Liz Read! Talk! 02:45, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
- They registered in 2005 and have edited heavily although sporadically since 2011, logging close to 10,000 edits. I had warned them to steer clear of controversial editing at the time of their last block. Since their block expired about a week ago, they have made roughly 750 edits. Most were to controversial categories, but others were to highly controversial topics such as transgender and TERF issues, assault rifles, serial rape, prostitution and pornography. I am very concerned about this editor but want other administrators to take a close look, because the editor has criticized me forcefully several times, accusing me of bias. I do not consider myself involved because all of my interactions with this editor have been as an administrator. But I want to be cautious. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:27, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process
Hello!
The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.
Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.
The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.
Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:44, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
A barnstart for you!
The Teamwork Barnstar | ||
For your help cleaning up the fallout from the Portal:Contents move. Wug·a·po·des 06:43, 14 November 2019 (UTC) |
- You'd be the third half of the half barnstar I gave El C and JJMC89. Since 3 halves is improper I hope you don't mind a teamwork barnstar. Wug·a·po·des 06:43, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
- Not at all! Liz Read! Talk! 16:18, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi, have moved this article back to mainspace because it passes WP:GNG and was approved by an admin (David Gerard) who unsalted the title, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 19:51, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
- Okay, Atlantic306. I was just fixing the broken redirects. Liz Read! Talk! 20:44, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
Speedy Deletion of East Bengal the Real Power
Hi, The article East Bengal the Real Power was an informative article about the very first fan group in Indian football and only showed how the fan culture grew in India through the various activities of the fan group. The article was not at all promotional and I strongly disagree to the deletion. Kindly restore and suggest if anything should be changed in order for it to be more neutral and informative. Regards, --SabyaC (talk) 09:08, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
- It is very unusual that a fan group would receive enough mainstream media coverage to be seen as notable enough for their own article. This article had already been deleted twice and if I didn't delete it, another admin would have. Liz Read! Talk! 17:01, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
- This was an article about the very first fan group in Indian football. It was only informative and not at all promotional. There are articles about revolutionary fan groups like UltrAslan, West Block Blues. This article too was of similar kind and also with proper references and citations included. Please suggest how to create this article so that it is not taken down. --SabyaC (talk) 18:39, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
Please
Liz, as time permits, would you look back to the publication history of the Jeff Vintar article, who is much more accomplished than the stub leads one to believer? It appears that at times the article has had much more content, and oddly, the additions and deletions in the edit history appear with strikethroughs, and so the material is not easily viewable. IMDB indicates further productivity, including as a producer. A deleted, referenced source (which cites an earlier version of Wikipedia!) indicates substantial further creative work, and collaborative associations. It would be nice, for the sake of the article, its subject, and the quality of the encyclopedia, if the reliable of this deleted information could be reclaimed (with sourcing). Cheers. 2601:246:C700:9B0:989C:8C2B:3054:F2E2 (talk) 05:30, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
- The reason the edits are stricken is because (a) they were promotional but primarily (b) they were copy-pasted from a copyrighted website. We can't restore or publish copyrighted information on Wikipedia. So it will stay gone. If you want to write about the subject of the article, do it in your own words, neutrally, and that will have a better chance of surviving the cuts. Elizium23 (talk) 05:44, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
I'm guessing this one may also be similar to the ones already been deleted by the administrators due to similar IP addresses editing and the amount of bytes added to the page. Iggy (Swan) (What I've been doing to maintain Wikipedia) 18:52, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know, Iggy. It was the exact same offensive content, over and over again. I've rev-deleted it. Much appreciated. Liz Read! Talk! 20:42, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Re: Speedy Deletion of Category:Reader's Digest compilation albums
Liz, nice to meet you. I'm fairly new to Wikipedia, at least the editing part, and am not entirely sure how this works. I got your message today about the deletion. I appreciate the email. If I understand correctly, a Category must be empty for 7 days or more. I created this Category less than half a week ago, four days at most, and there was an album listed in the category. One of several I had intended to submit over time. The album I included first in this Category was "Her Greatest Hits and Finest Performances" by Anne Murray. I went to her discography page to check this album after receiving your notice and the link to this album has been removed. I have not received any notification about the status of the album's article. This is not the first time an article of mine has been removed without me being notified. I complained about this one other time and was told by someone from Wikipedia that I was mistaken, that none of my submissions had been deleted. I don't think so. If that were the case, I would be able to find these articles. If I can't find them, where are they if not deleted or removed. I put several hours into creating this particular article as it was a three disc box set. If it's being removed, I would like, at the very least, for the person who removed it to provide me with an explanation. That's just common courtesy and the decent thing to do. Regarding the removed articles; Maybe I made a mistake and they should be removed. I get that. Maybe I can fix the articles and they can stay up. This would be my preference. If someone would explain to me why my articles are deleted, at the very least, I would learn what not to do in the future. I don't create any articles for profit. I'm retired with time on my hands. I actually enjoy creating them and feel like I'm making a contribution and giving back as I use Wikipedia quite a bit myself. I'm frustrated and disappointed that anyone's hard work, not just mine, would be summarily destroyed without a how-do-you-do. Thanks for reading this.HowlinMadMan (talk) 00:43, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- Hello, HowlinMadMan,
- First, I regularly tag empty categories. After categories are tagged as empty, they sit in Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion for 7 days. If, after 7 days, the categories are still empty, they are deleted. If during that 7 days someone assigns an appropriate page to the category, the tag is removed and it is not deleted. This happens all of the time because categories are often created before someone has figured out which articles to put in them. I'm sorry if the message you received from Twinkle implied that this is a "speedy deletion" because, unless something has gone wrong, empty categories are never immediately deleted after being tagged. There is this 7 day waiting period. But the 7 days can only start after the category has been tagged so that is done first.
- Second, unlike categories that have been deleted through a Categories for discussion decision, categories that are deleted for being empty can always be recreated should they be needed. So, even if you created an empty category that was deleted after 7 days, you can always recreate it when you have a use for it.
- Finally, your bigger question is what happened to the articles you assigned to the category that were reassigned and removed. We don't have static lists of category contents, they are dynamic, and the only way to discover this is to check the articles that you believe were originally in the category and see which editor reassigned them. If they reassigned one article, it is likely they reassigned others. Once you know who did the reassignment, there needs to be a discussion about this. There can be valid reasons for reassigning pages if there is an existing category that is a better fit and typically other editors are not told about editing changes, that is why we use Watchlists so you can keep an eye on articles and pages that you have been working on, to see when changes have been made.
- If it is a matter of articles that have been deleted, and you do not remember what the article or category titles were, as an admin, I can look at your deleted contributions and figure out what they were and, from there, we can go to the pages and find out why they were deleted. Some deletions, like for empty categories, can be undone very simply, for pages that have had a deletion discussion, it can take a deletion review to undelete a page. Let me know if I can help with this. Liz Read! Talk! 04:57, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, but I think I'm done with it. It's too much work and raises my blood pressure too high to continue. I just went to my watchlist and read about all the cover art images that are up for deletion and it's discouraging. For each image, it means an article has already been removed. I thought I was doing something others would find useful. Because I went looking for these albums and couldn't find reliable sources to fill my needs, I thought I would put them there for the next person. I'm not spending that much time just so someone who thinks the article isn't "notable" enough can wipe out all my hard work with a click of a mouse button. I've submitted a lot of articles over the past few months and I felt each one deserved a page. I'm sure you hear that all the time and I'm not fooling myself into thinking I'm always right. I would expect to have to redo some articles but I can't because they're simple not there any more. Something you might want to propose to your fellow administrators is to critique an article and give the submitter a chance to correct it. That one thing would reduce the frustration levels immensely. To be fair, that has happened once or twice for one of my articles, but not for the majority. It would also make contributors feel like they're getting some small level of respect. I'm sure that's already been considered and discarded because it just makes too much sense to do that. "Notability" is a tricky thing. Nobody's going to the library and digging up book references or dusting off the microfiche unless they get paid to do that. For a lot of articles there will never be enough sources on the web. Especially older items. In my case, music. I think some Wikipedia administrators get hung up on the "notability" factor too much and I'm sure nearly 100% of them will tell me I don't know diddly squat. One already has and maybe they were right. The readers, such as myself, lose out because of this strict adherence policy. Again, I can play Devil's advocate and say policies are necessary. They can also put you in a strangle hold. Things I/we want to read about is not always on Wikipedia because there are not enough sources to get them there. I can read all I ever want to know about Taylor Swift, but I can't find out much about someone who might have only put out a couple of albums in the 70s and didn't quite make the top 10 or maybe was just a one hit wonder. Maybe it's just me, but I find that person much more interesting than the latest boy band or the next Britney Spears. If you're not careful, "notability" can turn into "popularity" real quick, or at least give that impression. Sorry for the ramble and it's not necessary to tell me I should write a blog. One of your fellow admins already did that. Thanks and have a good day. HowlinMadMan (talk) 18:58, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 36
Books & Bytes
Issue 36, September – October 2019
- #1Lib1Ref January 2020
- #1Lib1Ref 2019 stories and learnings
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!
Hello,
Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.
I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!
From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.
If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.
Thank you!
--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
editToken
Hello Liz,
Your script User:Liz/spihelper.js is no longer functional because it attempts to get an editToken
from mw.user.tokens
. The script should instead get a csrfToken
. editToken
s were removed from mw.user.tokens
on October 3, 2019 at Phabricator during this edit as they were redundant to csrfToken
s.– BrandonXLF (talk) 00:06, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Wavelet Packet Filter Banks (November 28)
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Wavelet Packet Filter Banks and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Wavelet Packet Filter Banks, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
- If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Hello, Liz!
Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Onel5969 TT me 21:05, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
|
Hi Liz. I noticed you deleted The Los Angeles Daily Journal under G8 as "Redirect to a deleted or nonexistent page". When I linked to that page here, I remember The Los Angeles Daily Journal being an article. Would you provide more information about the page's deletion? What was it a redirect to? Was it converted to a redirect recently? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 11:11, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
- Here are related pages you deleted around that time:
- I think The Los Angeles Daily Journal must have been a redirect to San Francisco Daily Journal – San Francisco Legal News, which was deleted as an expired prod. Also pinging deleting admin Muboshgu (talk · contribs). Would you restore these pages and redirect them to parent company Daily Journal Corporation instead? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 11:16, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
- Cunard, done. One talk page had no edits to restore. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:30, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
The Signpost: 29 November 2019
- From the editor: Put on your birthday best
- News and notes: How soon for the next million articles?
- In the media: You say you want a revolution
- On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?
- Arbitration report: Two requests for arbitration cases
- Traffic report: The queen and the princess meet the king and the joker
- Technology report: Reference things, sister things, stranger things
- Gallery: Winter and holidays
- Recent research: Bot census; discussions differ on Spanish and English Wikipedia; how nature's seasons affect pageviews
- Essay: Adminitis
- From the archives: WikiProject Spam, revisited
Administrators' newsletter – December 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).
- EvergreenFir • ToBeFree
- Akhilleus • Athaenara • John Vandenberg • Melchoir • MichaelQSchmidt • NeilN • Youngamerican • 😂
Interface administrator changes
- An RfC on the administrator resysop criteria was closed. 18 proposals have been summarised with a variety of supported and opposed statements. The inactivity grace period within which a new request for adminship is not required has been reduced from three years to two. Additionally, Bureaucrats are permitted to use their discretion when returning administrator rights.
- Following a proposal, the edit filter mailing list has been opened up to users with the Edit Filter Helper right.
- Wikimedia projects can set a default block length for users via MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry. A new page, MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry-ip, allows the setting of a different default block length for IP editors. Neither is currently used. (T219126)
- Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 2 December 2018 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.
- The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF
will no longer use partial or temporary Office Action bans... until and unless community consensus that they are of value or Board directive
.
- The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF
GOCE December 2019 Newsletter
Guild of Copy Editors December 2019 Newsletter
Hello and welcome to the December 2019 GOCE newsletter, an update of Guild happenings since the September edition. Our Annual Report should be ready in late January. Election time: Nominations for the election of a new tranche of Guild coordinators to serve for the first half of 2020 will be open from 1 to 15 December. Voting will then take place and the election will close on 31 December at 23:59 UTC. Positions for Guild coordinators, who perform the important behind-the-scenes tasks that keep our project running smoothly, are open to all Wikipedians in good standing. We welcome self-nominations so please consider nominating yourself if you've ever thought about helping out; it's your Guild and it doesn't run itself! September Drive: Of the thirty-two editors who signed up, twenty-three editors copy edited at least one article; they completed 39 requests and removed 138 articles from the backlog, bringing the backlog to a low of 519 articles. October Blitz: This event ran from 13 to 19 October, with themes of science, technology and transport articles tagged for copy edit, and Requests. Sixteen editors helped remove 29 articles from the backlog and completed 23 requests. November Drive: Of the twenty-eight editors who signed up for this event, twenty editors completed at least one copy edit; they completed 29 requests and removed 133 articles from the backlog. Our December Blitz will run from 15 to 21 December. Sign up now! Progress report: From September to November 2019, GOCE copy editors processed 154 requests. Over the same period, the backlog of articles tagged for copy editing was reduced by 41% to an all-time low of 479 articles. Request archiving: The archiving of completed requests has now been automated. Thanks to Zhuyifei1999 and Bobbychan193, YiFeiBot is now archiving the Requests page. Archiving occurs around 24 hours after a user's signature and one of the templates {{Done}}, {{Withdrawn}} or {{Declined}} are placed below the request. The bot uses the Guild's standard "purpose codes" to determine the way it should archive each request so it's important to use the correct codes and templates. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators; Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Miniapolis, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
|
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:05, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
Criteria for speedy deletion C1
Hi, I see my nomination of Category:Palacký University Rector elections was incorrect. The reason was that I checked the criteria in Template:Db-catempty (Template:Db-c1) rather than the main guidance.
What do you think of the following update to the template?
Replace "as a category that is empty, is not currently in a deletion discussion (or was emptied outside of that process), and is not a category redirect, a disambiguation category, a featured topics category, or a project category that by its nature becomes empty on occasion." with "as a category that is empty, is not currently under discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion (or other such discussions), and is not a disambiguation category, category redirect, featured topics category, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion." Reason: to bring current wording into line with Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Categories. The current wording suggests that being in a "Categories for Renaming" discussion would not make a category ineligible for C1 deletion. TSventon (talk) 00:07, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- If a category is being discussed for deletion, merging or renaming, it is not deleted as an empty category. After the decision has been made, it can be tagged for deletion if it is still empty. This has just been common practice. Alternatively, you could go to the rename nominator and ask them to withdraw their speedy rename request.
- Bottom line is that empty categories are an extremely low priority for deletion considerations. They can always be recreated if needed, unlike categories deleted through CFD discussions. They are not an urgent issue like copyright, vandalism or BLP violations. Wait until the speedy rename discussion is over or withdrawn and then tag it again if the category is still empty.
- Often categories that are tagged as empty are not empty after a few days and we remove the tag. Happens all the time. If you look at my CSD log, you'll see plenty of blue links for categories that had been CSD C1 tagged that later turned out not to be empty any more so they were untagged & not deleted. Liz Read! Talk! 01:07, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Hi, I want your opinion on the wording of the Template:Db-catempty, not the deletion policy, but perhaps I did not make that clear in my post.
- The deletion policy excludes categories "currently under discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion (or other such discussions)", whereas the wording in Template:Db-catempty is "currently in a deletion discussion (or was emptied outside of that process)".
- I think that the difference in wording is unhelpful (and that it confused me in this case) so I have produced a request for an update to the wording of the template (my final paragraph above). The template is protected, so I can't boldly update it. Please could you have a look at my final paragraph above and let me know if you disagree with any of my new wording. TSventon (talk) 11:08, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for reinstating the speedy deletion nomination. I have just submitted a request to change the wording of the Template:Db-catempty to bring it into line with the guidance. TSventon (talk) 12:46, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
I'm really lazy, and I don't want to try to figure out what the contents of that page were. Could you please restore it and just move its contents to Category:Fandom (website)? –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 06:02, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Draft : Zendyll Production
Hi Liz, I noticed that you deleted my draft article for Zendyll Production due to G11 Unambiguous advertising or promotion. While I agree that this article wasn't ready for the mainspace, I intended to improve and fix the problems. I would really appreciate if you could reinstate the article to draft space as I've spent over 30 hours researching on the company. Thank you. :)--Chlchqy (talk) 09:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
73.101.113.182
Could you please handle user:73.101.113.182 ASAP. CLCStudent (talk) 02:15, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Peace Dove
Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension. Happy Holidays to you and yours. ―Buster7 ☎ 00:33, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Could you help Tashi?
Hi Liz. I saw you're an ArbCom clerk. User:Tashi is trying to appeal his ArbCom block but he has problems contacting ArbCom as his emails are not getting through. Here is the link to what he wrote. Would you be able to guide him through the appeal process? Thanks Liz :) starship.paint (talk) 08:52, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
- Hello, Starship.paint,
- <arbcom-en@wikimedia.org> is the correct email address to use so I don't know why their emails are not getting through. According to a message you left on their user talk page, they previously emailed the committee successfully. Tashi is not restricted from email use so they can also follow instructions at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee#Contacting the Committee and email the committee directly from their user page, User:Arbitration Committee.
- Emailing the committee directly is the way to reach the committee so my only thought is that Tashi could use an alternative email address if their primary one doesn't seem to be working. I will cross-post this to their Polish user page. Liz Read! Talk! 15:55, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
- Liz, your help is greatly appreciated. Thank you! :) starship.paint (talk) 01:06, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted article
Hi. East Bengal the Real Power this article was deleted last month. Is it possible to get a copy of the article, so that I can modify it and make it suitable to re-publish? S A H A 09:59, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Cheers
Merry Merry!
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020! | |
Hello Liz, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Happy Holidays
Thank you for continuing to make Wikipedia the greatest project in the world. I hope you have an excellent holiday season. Lightburst (talk) 23:36, 21 December 2019 (UTC) |
Merry Christmas
Merry Christmas Liz | |
Hi Liz, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas |
Backatcha
Have a WikiChristmas and a PediaNewYear | |
Consider this a very slow motion snowball fight. And thanks for support comments. Be well. Keep well. Have a lovely Christmas. SilkTork (talk) 12:51, 23 December 2019 (UTC) |
Happy Holidays
Happy Holidays! |
--Cameron11598 (Talk) 21:19, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
Good luck
Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune.
このミラPはLizたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます!
フレフレ、みんなの未来!/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE!
ミラP 02:28, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
Joyous Season
I wish that you may have a very Happy Holiday! Whether you celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Hogmanay, Festivus or your hemisphere's Solstice, this is a special time of year for almost everyone! May the New Year provide you joy and fulfillment! Thanks for everything you do here. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 10:37, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Coffee/Holidays}} to your fellow editors' talk pages.
offensive lang in edit summary
Hi. Where would I report offensive language in an edit summary. See this edit. Thanks. Onel5969 TT me 15:06, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
- Hello, onel5969,
- Any admin can take care of this kind of thing. It's better to contact an admin directly rather than posting this to a noticeboard, as long as the admin is currently active. Thanks for alerting me. Liz Read! Talk! 15:14, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks, that's what I thought, just wanted to make sure. Onel5969 TT me 15:16, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Self-promotion
Hi. Since you responded so quickly last time, thought I might try you again. Please take a look at User:Elisabete A Silva. Haven't really dealt much with self-promotion, and don't know where the line is between simply telling others about yourself, and self-promotion is. What do you feel about this user page? Onel5969 TT me 15:52, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
- Hello, onel5969,
- Yes, that is bad! But this situation usually happens because new editors misunderstand the purpose of a user page and think it is for their personal biography. It is inappropriate but understandable given how other websites work. Since this editor is currently active, I posted a notice on her user talk page and will delete the page in a bit. It is not urgent and she might like to remove the material herself. Again, thanks for letting me know. Liz Read! Talk! 16:01, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
- No worries. I also left her message on her talk page, as she was making some problematic edits. Hopefully, she'll reach out if she has any questions. Onel5969 TT me 16:03, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
- It looks like Fastily has now deleted this page. Liz Read! Talk! 21:06, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, I saw that. Funny thing is, that with her citation count, she might pass notability criteria for her own article. Onel5969 TT me 21:19, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
- It looks like Fastily has now deleted this page. Liz Read! Talk! 21:06, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
- No worries. I also left her message on her talk page, as she was making some problematic edits. Hopefully, she'll reach out if she has any questions. Onel5969 TT me 16:03, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 December 2019
- From the editors: Caught with their hands in the cookie jar, again
- News and notes: What's up (and down) with administrators, articles and languages
- In the media: "The fulfillment of the dream of humanity" or a nightmare of PR whitewashing on behalf of one-percenters?
- Discussion report: December discussions around the wiki
- Arbitration report: Announcement of 2020 Arbitration Committee
- Traffic report: Queens and aliens, exactly alike, once upon a December
- Technology report: User scripts and more
- Gallery: Holiday wishes
- Recent research: Acoustics and Wikipedia; Wiki Workshop 2019 summary
- From the archives: The 2002 Spanish fork and ads revisited (re-revisited?)
- On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?
- WikiProject report: Wikiproject Tree of Life: A Wikiproject report
Maharshi Santsewi Paramhans CSD tag removal
Hello Liz, this is Utopes, the editor who placed a speedy deletion tag on Maharshi Santsewi Paramhans. Currently, this is a redirect that does not have a valid target, as the location that this redirect points is an article that does not exist. The article that used to be in this position had been draftified to allow time for the article to incubate. My question to you is: why was the CSD tag removed? I labeled the redirect as WP:G8, as a page dependent on a nonexistent page or deleted page. You stated in the edit summary that the criteria was not valid. Could you elaborate? Thanks, Utopes (talk) 20:38, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
- Hello, Utopes,
- When I removed the tag 6 1/2 hours ago, the target article existed. Bbb23 deleted Maharshi Santsevi Paramhans less than 2 hours ago. So, now that Maharshi Santsewi Paramhans is a broken redirect, I will delete it. Liz Read! Talk! 21:04, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you! Sorry for the misunderstanding. when I tagged the article, the target of the redirect had been moved to draft space, and the redirect was broken. However, before it could be deleted, it appears the author of the original article copied and pasted the contents into mainspace, which is where it existed when you came across the redirect. So, to summarize, it appears that we both were right. When I tagged the article, the redirect was broken. However, it remained undeleted when the target was re-created by the author, and you justly removed the tag, as there WAS in fact a target. However, that target was then deleted when I looked at my CSD log and wondered why 2 out of the 3 redirects I tagged for the same reason were deleted (which struck me as odd, as 2 of the redirects were deleted in time, but the one in question wasn't). Anyway, thanks for reading my re-hash of events. Hopefully everything worked out. Cheers, Utopes (talk) 21:11, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
- I appreciate you for bringing it to my attention, Utopes. The page needed to be deleted now. I patrol Anomie3 bot's report of broken redirects, usually daily, so the page would have been deleted some time today by a bot or admin. The bot does a good job detecting broken redirects but it only updates its report about every 7 or 8 hours. Editors like you often respond faster. Have a good weekend! Liz Read! Talk! 21:20, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you! Sorry for the misunderstanding. when I tagged the article, the target of the redirect had been moved to draft space, and the redirect was broken. However, before it could be deleted, it appears the author of the original article copied and pasted the contents into mainspace, which is where it existed when you came across the redirect. So, to summarize, it appears that we both were right. When I tagged the article, the redirect was broken. However, it remained undeleted when the target was re-created by the author, and you justly removed the tag, as there WAS in fact a target. However, that target was then deleted when I looked at my CSD log and wondered why 2 out of the 3 redirects I tagged for the same reason were deleted (which struck me as odd, as 2 of the redirects were deleted in time, but the one in question wasn't). Anyway, thanks for reading my re-hash of events. Hopefully everything worked out. Cheers, Utopes (talk) 21:11, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
Matt Campbell (darts player)
Hi, I'm sorry about the AFD nomination earlier, i didn't think it had any references etc, and I couldn't find a "reliable" subject to nominate it for deletion. (I've never used that feature before). I didn't realise I had requested it as an attack page. As I say I didn't know which subjects to put it under. Really sorry about that. L1amw90 (talk) 23:46, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
- No apology necessary, L1amw90. If you edit, you make occasional mistakes. I know I do! Have a great new year! Liz Read! Talk! 03:19, 1 January 2020 (UTC)