User talk:1isall/Archive 3

Hi 1isall, have you considered requesting WP:Page mover right? I noticed you have made a dozen or so requests to RMTR and lots of experience with RMs. See WP:PMCRITERIA for criteria. Regards, CNC (talk) 20:03, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

Yes, page mover rights are something that has been on my mind. I've read the criteria and may consider trying to apply for the rights. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 20:08, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

Your welcome, while I haven't checked all your requests and RM participation/closes, for reference I had similar participation at RMTR as you when I applied, less at RM overall probably. CNC (talk) 20:10, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure if I meet all 4 criteria, so I'm considering a wait. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 20:21, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

Also, when did you start participating in RMs? Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 20:21, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

From November 2023 it seems, with <500 edits to RMs before getting PM. Looking back I really didn't have that much RM experience, but had started closing discussions by then. CNC (talk) 20:45, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

@1isall +1 I would also suggest that you should apply for page mover! You definitely have a lot of experience (more than I had when I got it), and I think you would do great at it =) – LuniZunie_(talk) 01:08, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

+1 Your contributions to RMs and RM/TR look good and I think you'll use this perm for good! HurricaneZeta^C 01:09, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Wow, thanks to both of you, I might actually consider attempting to apply for the right. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 01:13, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Maybe unorthodox to do but given I'm not the only one who thinks it, pinging @SilverLocust in case they want to have a look (regular PM granter who granted mine). CNC (talk) 11:20, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Yes, it would be good to check if I meet the criteria before filing the formal request. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 15:11, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Perm granted; formality skipped. ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 02:59, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Wow, this means so much. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 03:02, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

@1isall Congrats!!! – LuniZunie_(talk) 03:17, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Congratulations!! HurricaneZeta^C 03:21, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you all! I will make sure to read the criteria for moving pages without leaving redirects and for revocation. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 03:22, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

I'd appreciate it if you could explain your reasoning and how you weighed the inputs in this discussion (per WP:CONS, WP:RMCLOSE). --Joy (talk) 11:05, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

There was a support !vote immediately after the relist. I weighed both to determine that the consensus is "People's Liberation Army gets the most pageviews". Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 13:15, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, it appears that we both took action on Les Sucettes after seeing it at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests, and I performed the page swap process moments after you. It looks like I reversed your action accidentally. I will step aside and allow you to fix it up. Sorry about that. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:49, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Huh, weird. I'll go and redo the move. It's all good. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 13:51, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

1isall,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 16:25, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 16:25, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Same to you! Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 16:25, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Hey,

I've opened a discussion at Talk:Auschwitz concentration camp#Requested move 17 December 2025.

Although my suggestion wasn't accepted, I believe there's a consensus to move to "Auschwitz" (plus, as it's the WP:COMMONNAME as shown by ngrams).

Can you please take a look again? IdanST (talk) 18:46, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

I felt the arguments against that alternative proposal were pretty strong, which led me to that close. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 19:57, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello 1isall. I am requesting that you relist the RM at Yankees–Red Sox rivalry. With only two "support" votes, there is not a WP:QUORUM to take action. Further, there have been several discussions in the past (including a 2014 RM) in which the consensus has consistently been to not move the page. While consensus can change, especially over many years, I do not see a two-person discussion (which was not relisted even once), to be indicitive of changing consensus. Thank you. Frank Anchor 13:26, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

I assumed a silent consensus when closing the discussion, but I guess we should give it another week. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) . . (he/him) 13:47, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello 1isall. Can I ask on what basis you closed this RfC as no consensus?

Thanks, Katzrockso (talk) 03:16, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Did you not read my closing comment? Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) . . (he/him) 03:26, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Actually, I do want to try giving the discussion one last chance, so I'm overturning my closure. I'll also notify WikiProject Lists. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) . . (he/him) 03:43, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I was in the middle of typing a response to clarify these discussions aren't a mere vote and I am worried you didn't consider the strength of arguments & comportment with Wikipedia P&G guidelines when closing (which might not be obvious upon a quick read). Katzrockso (talk) 03:48, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

I am already aware that discussions are never just votes. I didn't realize there were comments after TarnishedPath's relist. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) . . (he/him) 03:53, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Would you mind helping me remove all the other {{old move}} tags from the other talk pages? Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) . . (he/him) 03:55, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed this comment. I will try to figure that out. Katzrockso (talk) 04:39, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm seeking assistance with a page move I cannot perform myself. I've submitted a formal Requested Move for the page Wintringham Specialist Aged Care, as the current title contains incorrect wording. The organisation's correct name is simply "Wintringham" according to all reliable sources, including the official website. If you have time, could you please review the pending request? Your help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! ~~~~ MrWintringham89 (talk) 02:33, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Do you happen to have a connection to the subject in any way? Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) . . (he/him) 02:44, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I am the Senior Communications Officer at Wintringham. The current page title was updated by my predecessor and it is incorrect. I have been asked by the Founder Bryan Lipmann and my manager to have the title updated to reflect the true name of the organisation as it is currently not reflective of what the organisation does. Thanks for your help. MrWintringham89 (talk) 02:57, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Please check other Wikipedia disambiguation pages. We never add "former". No reason to do it here. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:33, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

@Necrothesp There is no strict rule that allows or forbids using the word former. I couldn't find any mention of its usage on MOS:DAB. And besides, Gerard Martin (politician) is no longer in office (he hasn't been since 2011). Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 12:21, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Just because other disambiguation pages don't use it doesn't mean this one doesn't have to, either. That would be a little bureaucratic. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 12:23, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

If you still don't like the word, go ahead and remove it again (if you haven't already). But my point still stands. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 12:33, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

No, that would be consistent. Having a different style for each disambiguation page clearly makes no sense whatsoever. Many people listed on disambiguation pages aren't still doing the jobs they're known for (and many are dead!). -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:36, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Okay, you are right about that. I'll even give an example of that myself: Atsuko Tanaka, who is dead, but is still considered a Japanese voice actress (and the primary topic for that name). Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 13:41, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

For simple surname or given name indices, the standard header can be created by using {{subst:refer|type=surname}} or {{subst:refer|type=given-name}} as appropriate. Please note that per the documentation at Template:Annotated link, transclusions of it should be avoided on pages performing a disambiguation like function; they should be substituted instead. ~2026-80954-2 (talk) 21:22, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for this tip! I will keep it in mind for any given name and surname pages that I create in the future. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 21:39, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

While reviewing Vitality Level 5 articles, @AllyWithInfo found that the Chubbuck's article was moved to the current title. With how her article is currently structured around a third of the article is still dedicated to her biography outside of her suicide. Even if she's most known for killing herself live, I have doubts that Chubbuck is solely known for it. Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 03:43, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

You will probably need to start a new RM, or, get me to reopen the old one. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 04:23, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

Good day! IMHO, based on page views, I think that End of You (song) is the primary topic for End of You. Thoughts? --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:17, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello! You can start an RM at Talk:End of You (song). Make sure to follow WP:DPT and present a strong enough argument that the song is primary either by usage or significance. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 01:19, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey, this is just to let you know that your request for closure of the move request on COVID-19 pandemic in the Solomon Islands was done. -- Lenny Marks (talk) 22:29, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

I saw! I will grant the technical request that you submitted. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 22:29, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi there! It appears you reversed a move I performed when closing a requested move accidentally? - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 03:42, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

My apologies, I redid it. We ran into conflict again. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 03:43, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

I was just trying to write a closing comment until I realized you already closed the RM. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 03:44, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

I think maybe something happened, but you closed the El Chapo RM as a move, but you didn't actually move the page.  Bait30  ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 03:50, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

The page is move-protected, meaning that only administrators can move it. I submitted a technical request at WP:RMTR#Administrator needed. 1isall (talk | contribs) 12:17, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I saw an edit of yours on Template:IIHF World Ranking that, though it was done in good faith, left a few (tens of) pages with a broken transclusion. Many pages, at the time of writing this, had not yet been updated to use Template:IIHF Men's World Ranking, which left them without the ranking info. I have therefore undone your edit and added a deprecation notice to the template, while keeping its functionality for now. If you have time, please check Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:IIHF World Ranking, and update each page to use the new template name. Then, and only then (confirming that What Links Here is empty), edit Template:IIHF World Ranking to leave only the deprecation notice without any wiki tags (noinclude/onlyinclude).

Thank you!

PS:

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

SomeRailfan (talk) 22:37, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Oops. Yeah, that's my bad, since I am not that experience with templates. And I definitely would not qualify for the template editor right. 1isall (talk | contribs) 22:45, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

First time being whacked with a wet trout, too. I guess I deserve it. 1isall (talk | contribs) 22:46, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Don't take it too harshly! All is fine in the end. SomeRailfan (talk) 22:48, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm not, since it's meant to be lighthearted. Also, did you just change your signature? 1isall (talk | contribs) 22:49, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I added colour! SomeRailfan (talk) 22:52, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Sweet. It's what most of us do with our signatures, after all! 1isall (talk | contribs) 22:53, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

It's done, I've replaced them all (in the main namespace)! SomeRailfan (talk) 00:09, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Nice. Thanks again. 1isall (talk | contribs) 00:13, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for acting as closer in this discussion.

I ask that you reconsider the close, and move the page instead. All three editors involved in the discussion agree that Subdivisions of Turku is not the primary topic, and there is consensus to get rid of the current primary redirect. 162 etc. (talk) 01:09, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Changed result to moved. 1isall (talk | contribs) 01:19, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

@162 etc. Thanks for this, I was in a bit of a rush because I needed to go somewhere now. 1isall (talk | contribs) 01:24, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Note that I often make sure to analyze discussions as best as possible, but again, I was a little bit hasty. 1isall (talk | contribs) 01:26, 16 March 2026 (UTC)