User talk:Chris troutman/Archive 14

This is a work of historical fiction published by Harper Legend about the Great Library of Alexandria and Hypatia that is relevant additional reading on the Hypatia page. How do you suggest that it be added appropriately? Would you like to do it? What about this addition is promotional? Written in the Ashes on Amazon I'm happy to adjust.^[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Svolkow (talk • contribs) 17:01, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

@Svolkow: Per WP:EL, the addition of external links is limited. Adding references only makes sense if one is adding an inline citation that supports content. Adding a general reference or something for further reading, while sometimes allowed, is discouraged because it often evinces the editor's desire to advertise works rather than improve Wikipedia. A work of historical fiction is almost never going to be a valid source. That this edit comes from a new editor like you, who seems to be making repeated conflict-of-interest edits at Brian Keating, is questionable. I don't assume good faith. Rather, I'm interested in chasing off bad faith editors. If you want to improve Wikipedia, learn how to edit and then help cleanup our articles without sources. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:15, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

I have no idea if I'm using this correctly... This was just regarding my attempt to edit the Saint Dominic page. I was trying to create a hyperlink with Bishop Foulques's wiki page, but was unsuccessful in my endeavour. That's it. Thanks in advance. DopeState (talk) 18:33, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

@DopeState: Yes, I did it for you. Take a look at that code and read Help:Link#Piped link to understand how to make that work. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:44, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Many thanks for your stalking yesterday. ——SerialNumber54129 15:35, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

And apologies that I didn't say so at the time; it was well-honed stuff! ——SerialNumber54129 15:36, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

@Serial Number 54129: Thanks so much! Your talk page has long been a good watering hole to find activity and that is because hard-working Wikipedians like you are out there engaging with new editors and getting the job done. If a guy like me can take cheap shots from the peanut gallery and handle some of the traffic you generate, so much the better. I very much appreciate the recognition. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:08, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about counties. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:History of the Communist Party of China. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 30, August – Septmeber 2018

• Library Card translation
• Spotlight: 1Lib1Ref spreads to the Southern Hemisphere and beyond
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi. I know Wikipedia operates on the consensus of the editors, but they should really operate on what the subject of the articles believe. The LDS Church is the true Church of God, and "Mormon cinema" should be changed back to "LDS cinema", because the Lord has asked us to stop referring to Latter-day Saints as "Mormons". God comes first, not the consensus of the operators. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobThomas15 (talk • contribs) 20:45, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

@RobThomas15: Jesus said you should "Render unto Caesar..." Wikipedia is not the domain of a particular nation, faith group, linguistic group, or political alignment. We try to cooperatively write a free encyclopedia and to do that, we operate based upon rules like WP:COMMONNAME and WP:CONSENSUS. These are non-negotiable. Without these rules, we would become fractured and the encyclopedia would not survive. Have faith, instead, that if you were persuasive you could change consensus. More importantly, do not worry what non-believers think. Chris Troutman (talk) 02:41, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

In response to objections, I struck the two year moratorium thing at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(people)#RfC:_Amendment_for_BIO_to_address_systemic_bias_in_the_base_of_sources. I'm notifying everybody who !voted. Jytdog (talk) 14:31, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Please allow me to create this article about Nissan Terrano which is completely different as Nissan Pathfinder and currently is on third generation like is previewed on some Nissan countries websites: https://www.nissan.in/vehicles/new/terrano.html ; https://www.nissan.ru/vehicles/new-vehicles/terrano.html & other Nissan websites as it has a main article at german wikipedia: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Terrano and "Nissan Terrano II" has the article about the 2nd generation Nissan Terrano produced from 1996-2010 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rejs12345 (talk • contribs) 13:42, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

@Rejs12345: No. The subject isn't notable. Let me know when The New York Times writes about it. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:23, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

@Chris troutman: - I have created a special article about the first generation Nissan Terrano: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft/Nissan_Terrano_I which I would like from other Wikipedia users to give information and contribute to improve and expand it. Generally, the Nissan Terrano article should be available as an independent article because now it has two main articles, Nissan Terrano I (or Nissan Terrano WD21) and Nissan Terrano II — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rejs12345 (talk • contribs) 13:31, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

@Rejs12345: Post your request for help at WP:RB. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:50, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

...thanks! --Edcolins (talk) 19:00, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Just FYI. I plan to redact your bus comment in the October 28 issue of Signpost. In general, blaming a group of people for blaming another person is, well, not helpful for Wikipedia's future. Carping about other people, as an wp:Attack page, sends a message: beware that judgey website. The bus comment is termed "inappropriate" these days. But I'm not blaming you. The Signpost has limited oversight to review editorial judgment. The proper venue is wp:ANI to address extreme concerns with user behavior, and list diff-links there as detailed evidence. If you wish to reword the section yourself, please feel free, before I move to redact the comments. Thanks. -Wikid77 (talk) 12:55, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

@Wikid77: I caution you against changing any comment of mine per WP:REFACTOR. If you don't like what I've said, please take it up with Bri or address my comments at a drama board of your choice. I think how the WMF generally, and Jimbo specifically, behaved in this matter is deplorable. Leaders underwrite honest mistakes and I don't see any evidence that Bradv misapplied our notability criteria. I have assigned blame. You don't have any business silencing opinions you don't like, unless you can make a case that I've violated WP:NPA. Chris Troutman (talk) 14:19, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Wikid77, I don't think you ought to refactor any Signpost comments. Especially ones clarifying a contributor's intent in a published piece. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:37, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

I have changed the appearance of my signature. Barbara ✐✉ 10:55, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Just an FYI they're a global LTA (see JaySmith2018) Praxidicae (talk) 00:01, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

@Praxidicae: I don't see clear evidence of that but you're welcome to initiate an SPI. They're definitely a sock of someone. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:11, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Praxidicae, please explain yourself. Chris, I appreciate it, and I agree on the last part you said. Drmies (talk) 00:13, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Take a peek at the deleted contribs of CrazyDai$y, IslandSunset and I can give you about 50 non-enwiki accounts. CU won't turn up jack right now because I'm 99.9% sure they're on a proxy. Praxidicae (talk) 00:20, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Small chance it's a joe-job but it's evident to anyone that looks that it's an LTA, so does it matter the master? Praxidicae (talk) 00:22, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

I can't see deleted contributions. Small-time editors like me are expected to make a compelling case about socking accusations. If I can't make a case, I'm not filing SPI. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:38, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Was only making the comment because you'd left a message on their tp or maybe it was an eS. Praxidicae (talk) 12:49, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

@Praxidicae: Turns out you were right. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:48, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Praxidicae may be right in the socking accusation, but that's unrelated to "proxy"--I've seen no evidence of that (granted I'm not a specialist), and a dozen of their accounts did all come from the same (non-proxy) IP. So CU would have helped there, but those socks are all blocked already. Chris, you are right: for the average user it is hard to make these cases, and they have to be built on the behavioral evidence that still shows up, visible to non-admin eyes. However, Praxidicae, I do have another question for you--what does this person want? They're obviously obsessive, but is it just this bullshit about this hoaxy actor article? Thanks, and thanks for sniffing them out. Drmies (talk) 16:19, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Drmies He's actually a really strange LTA, he first started promoting himself under Jay Trafford Mark Smith I think it was and now he's developed about 300000 personalities, he's become an actress, a singer, an artist, an athlete...seems like he's got many a personality, he's mostly been off en-wiki this year up until now (just hitting other english projects and some non-english) and he's amassed roughly ~700 xwiki socks in the last 2 years. tl;dr he likes to make up hoaxy bullshit about himself. Praxidicae (talk) 16:24, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

OK--that jives with what I say among some of the puppets, and it jives with what I think is the schizoid personality of some of our well-known socks. Alright, thanks again; I appreciate it. Drmies (talk) 16:25, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

He also likes to vandalize BLPs (like the death date LTA, which I suspect is many LTAs). He actually does this on Twitter too, tweets out those hoaxy stupid articles that xyz died and it spreads like wildfire. Praxidicae (talk) 16:27, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2018).

Administrator changes Sir Sputnik Kudpung • Liz • Lourdes Everyking • Jackmcbarn Interface administrator changes Dinoguy1000

CheckUser changes AGK • Ivanvector • Stwalkerster • TonyBallioni Oversight changes Amorymeltzer • Oshwah • TonyBallioni • Vanamonde93 Keilana

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment determined that non-administrators will not be able to request interface admin access.
• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the Mediation Committee should be closed and marked as historical.
• A village pump discussion has been ongoing about whether the proposed deletion policy (PROD) should be clarified or amended.
• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether pending changes protection should be applied automatically to today's featured article (TFA) in order to mitigate a recent trend of severe image vandalism.

Technical news

• Partial blocks is now available for testing on the Test Wikipedia. The new functionality allows you to block users from editing specific pages. Bugs may exist and can be reported on the local talk page or on Meta. A discussion regarding deployment to English Wikipedia will be started by community liaisons sometime in the near future.
• A user script is now available to quickly review unblock requests.
• The 2019 Community Wishlist Survey is now accepting new proposals until November 11, 2018. The results of this survey will determine what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year. Voting on the proposals will take place from November 16 to November 30, 2018. Specifically, there is a proposal category for admins and stewards that may be of interest.

Arbitration

• Eligible editors will be invited to nominate themselves as candidates in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 4 until November 13. Voting will begin on November 19 and last until December 2.
• The Arbitration Committee's email address has changed to arbcom-enwikimedia.org. Other email lists, such as functionaries-en and clerks-l, remain unchanged.

I apparently went brain dead there for a second, thanks. Been up too long, should get some sleep. Thanks! zchrykng (talk) 18:16, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

hi Chris troutman hows life.. im sorry if i did some edits which is against wiki policy but i dont remember that i made any edits this month maybe its just a miss clickBdmmdb (talk) 14:43, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

As you may have noticed, an editor has reported you at the usual place. As they haven't courtesy notified you, I'm doing it now. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:59, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

This monthly newsletter showcases the Wikipedia Education Program. It focuses on sharing: your ideas, stories, success and challenges. You can see past editions here. You can also volunteer to help publish the newsletter. Join the team! Finally, don't forget to subscribe!

Please allow me to create this article about Nissan Terrano: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nissan_Terrano and not to be redirected to Nissan Pathfinder: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nissan_Pathfinder as this is about the Nissan Terrano SUV which is on third generation and is different from Nissan Pathfinder — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rejs12345 (talk • contribs) 10:09, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Really would like your insights at User talk:Qui1che#Gauge interest in pursuing dispute resolution re the Geobox river / Infobox River Tfd and merge process. --papageno (talk) 00:44, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Chris, just checking in. Our next scheduled publication date for The Signpost is December 2 – actually just before midnight Saturday in the U.S. Will you be around on Saturday, or maybe sooner if we call it "cooked enough"? ☆ Bri (talk) 01:55, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Bri: I will plan to be available around that time period to publish. I'm not as active on Wikipedia recently, but I intend to continue publishing. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:16, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Great! Maybe Friday afternoon, it looks like it is wrapping up. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:48, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

I think we are ready. Please do the necessary but remember the following sections are written but will not be included:

• Wikiproject report
• From the editors (plural)
• Humour0 (with trailing zero)

Cheers ☆ Bri (talk) 21:54, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2018).

Administrator changes

Al Ameer son • Randykitty • Spartaz

Boson • Daniel J. Leivick • Efe • Esanchez7587 • Fred Bauder • Garzo • Martijn Hoekstra • Orangemike

Interface administrator changes

Deryck Chan

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, the Mediation Committee is now closed and will no longer be accepting case requests.
• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether members of the Bot Approvals Group should satisfy activity requirements in order to remain in that role.
• A request for comment is in progress regarding whether to change the administrator inactivity policy, such that administrators "who have made no logged administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped". Currently, the policy states that administrators "who have made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped".
• A proposal has been made to temporarily restrict editing of the Main Page to interface administrators in order to mitigate the impact of compromised accounts.

Technical news

• Administrators and bureaucrats can no longer unblock themselves unless they placed the block initially. This change has been implemented globally. See also this ongoing village pump discussion (permalink).
• To complement the aforementioned change, blocked administrators will soon have the ability to block the administrator that placed their block to mitigate the possibility of a compromised administrator account blocking all other active administrators.
• Since deployment of Partial blocks on Test Wikipedia, several bugs were identified. Most of them are now fixed. Administrators are encouraged to test the new deployment and report new bugs on Phabricator or leave feedback on the Project's talk page. You can request administrator access on the Test Wiki here.

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 3 December 2018. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Miscellaneous

• In late November, an attacker compromised multiple accounts, including at least four administrator accounts, and used them to vandalize Wikipedia. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. Sharing the same password across multiple websites makes your account vulnerable, especially if your password was used on a website that suffered a data breach. As these incidents have shown, these concerns are not pure fantasies.
• Wikipedia policy requires administrators to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.

Obituaries

• Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (Raymond Arritt) passed away on 14 November 2018. Boris joined Wikipedia as Raymond arritt on 8 May 2006 and was an administrator from 30 July 2007 to 2 June 2008.

Guild of Copy Editors December 2018 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the December 2018 GOCE newsletter. Here is what's been happening since the August edition. Thanks to everyone who participated in the August blitz (results), which focused on Requests and the oldest backlog month. Of the twenty editors who signed up, eleven editors recorded 37 copy edits. For the September drive (results), of the twenty-three people who signed up, nineteen editors completed 294 copy edits. Our October blitz (results) focused on Requests, geography, and food and drink articles. Of the fourteen people who signed up, eleven recorded a total of 57 copy edits. For the November drive (results), twenty-two people signed up, and eighteen editors recorded 273 copy edits. This helped to bring the backlog to a six-month low of 825 articles. The December blitz will run for one week, from 16 to 22 December. Sign up now! Elections: Nominations for the Guild's coordinators for the first half of 2019 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! 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, Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Tdslk. >>> Sign up for the December blitz! <<< >>> Participate in the Coordinator elections! <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

I am a user of both English as well as Malayalam wikipedia. I am currently involved in creating the main page of the signpost. When I check the page wikipedia:Signpost in malayalam wikipedia, I was able to find that it was that page which was used by mediawiki message delivery inorder to put the latest updates of the signpost. What I need is to change that location to its discussion page so that each individual issue can be seen in a single page as done in the case of Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost.Adithyak1997 (talk) 14:44, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

@Adithyak1997: The global distribution list is at meta:Global message delivery/Targets/Signpost. You can see near the top The Signpost is currently delivered to Wikipedia:Signpost [at] ml.wikipedia.org; you can change that to send the new issues to the talk page, instead. Chris Troutman (talk) 11:46, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello Chris troutman,

Reviewer of the Year

This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to Onel5969. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554 reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285 edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.

Thanks are also extended for their work to JTtheOG (15,059 reviews), Boleyn (12,760 reviews), Cwmhiraeth (9,001 reviews), Semmendinger (8,440 reviews), PRehse (8,092 reviews), Arthistorian1977 (5,306 reviews), Abishe (4,153 reviews), Barkeep49 (4,016 reviews), and Elmidae (3,615 reviews).
Cwmhiraeth, Semmendinger, Barkeep49, and Elmidae have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only seven months, while Boleyn, with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.

See also the list of top 100 reviewers.

Less good news, and an appeal for some help

The backlog is now approaching 5,000, and still rising. There are around 640 holders of the NPR flag, most of whom appear to be inactive. The 10% of the reviewers who do 90% of the work could do with some support especially as some of them are now taking a well deserved break.

Really good news - NPR wins the Community Wishlist Survey 2019

At #1 position, the Community Wishlist poll closed on 3 December with a resounding success for NPP, reminding the WMF and the volunteer communities just how critical NPP is to maintaining a clean encyclopedia and the need for improved tools to do it. A big 'thank you' to everyone who supported the NPP proposals. See the results.

Training video

Due to a number of changes having been made to the feed since this three-minute video was created, we have been asked by the WMF for feedback on the video with a view to getting it brought up to date to reflect the new features of the system. Please leave your comments here, particularly mentioning how helpful you find it for new reviewers.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Just a heads-up, we will be striving to publish issue 13 on Sunday evening or Monday morning (United States). If you are able, I'd appreciate your publishing help once again. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:21, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Just noticed you already stated your availability, so thanks, and no need to reply here. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:22, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 31, October – Novemeber 2018

• OAWiki
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Please go ahead and publish. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:03, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks again for your support, Chris ☆ Bri (talk) 20:13, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 00:30, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

CAPTAIN RAJU(T) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Our dinner visitors have just left and thanks for the greetings! Same to you, of course. Activist (talk) 22:08, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Our dinner visitors have just left and thanks for the greetings! Likewise to you, of course. Activist (talk) 22:10, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Facto Post – Issue 19 – 27 December 2018 The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page. To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer. Back numbers are here. Learning from Zotero Zotero is free software for reference management by the Center for History and New Media: see Wikipedia:Citing sources with Zotero. It is also an active user community, and has broad-based language support. Besides the handiness of Zotero's warehousing of personal citation collections, the Zotero translator underlies the citoid service, at work behind the VisualEditor. Metadata from Wikidata can be imported into Zotero; and in the other direction the zotkat tool from the University of Mannheim allows Zotero bibliographies to be exported to Wikidata, by item creation. With an extra feature to add statements, that route could lead to much development of the focus list (P5008) tagging on Wikidata, by WikiProjects. There is also a large-scale encyclopedic dimension here. The construction of Zotero translators is one facet of Web scraping that has a strong community and open source basis. In that it resembles the less formal mix'n'match import community, and growing networks around other approaches that can integrate datasets into Wikidata, such as the use of OpenRefine. Looking ahead, the thirtieth birthday of the World Wide Web falls in 2019, and yet the ambition to make webpages routinely readable by machines can still seem an ever-retreating mirage. Wikidata should not only be helping Wikimedia integrate its projects, an ongoing process represented by Structured Data on Commons and lexemes. It should also be acting as a catalyst to bring scraping in from the cold, with institutional strengths as well as resourceful code. Links Zotero Comes to Google Docs, Zotero blogpost by Dan Stillman, 19 October 2018. Category:Wikipedians who use Zotero T115158 Write a Zotero translator and document process for creating new Zotero translator and getting it live in production, long Phabricator thread 2015–17. Zotero Translators, documentation from zotero.org. Home page on GitHub for Zotero translator Javascript Example translator, for Wikisource. m:Structured Data on Commons/Newsletter/2018-12-07 Diversitech, the latest ContentMine grant application to the Wikimedia Foundation, is in its community review stage until January 2. If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:08, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Chris troutman,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010 ^{Merry Christmas / Happy New Year} 00:22, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

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

Hello and Happy New Year!

Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup, the competition begins today. If you have already joined, your submission page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and we will set up your submissions page. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2019, and which you have nominated this year, is eligible for points in the competition, the judges will be checking! Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:14, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Quick facts

Close

Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy 2019 -

begin it with music and memories

Thank you for your help last year, and your good wishes! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:45, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Please check out "Happy" once more, for a smile, and sharing (a Nobel Peace Prize), and resolutions. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:17, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2018).

Administrator changes Galobtter Orangemike BorgQueen • Davidruben • Ocee • Revolving Bugbear • Theda • There'sNoTime • Timc • Tijuana Brass • Tristessa de St Ange Bureaucrat changes Addshore

CheckUser changes Joe Roe • SilkTork Euryalus • Newyorkbrad • There'sNoTime Oversight changes AGK • Joe Roe • SilkTork Euryalus • Newyorkbrad • There'sNoTime

Guideline and policy news

• There are a number of new or changed speedy deletion criteria, each previously part of WP:CSD#G6:

1. G14 (new): Disambiguation pages that disambiguate only zero or one existing pages are now covered under the new G14 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-disambig}}; the text is unchanged and candidates may be found in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unnecessary disambiguation pages.
2. R4 (new): Redirects in the file namespace (and no file links) that have the same name as a file or redirect at Commons are now covered under the new R4 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-redircom}}; the text is unchanged.
3. G13 (expanded): Userspace drafts containing only the default Article Wizard text are now covered under G13 along with other drafts (discussion). Such blank drafts are now eligible after six months rather than one year, and taggers continue to use {{db-blankdraft}}.

• The Wikimedia Foundation now requires all interface administrators to enable two-factor authentication.
• Members of the Bot Approvals Group (BAG) are now subject to an activity requirement. After two years without any bot-related activity (e.g. operating a bot, posting on a bot-related talk page), BAG members will be retired from BAG following a one-week notice.

Technical news

• Starting on December 13, the Wikimedia Foundation security team implemented new password policy and requirements. Privileged accounts (administrators, bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, interface administrators, bots, edit filter managers/helpers, template editors, et al.) must have a password at least 10 characters in length. All accounts must have a password:

1. At least 8 characters in length
2. Not in the 100,000 most popular passwords (defined by the Password Blacklist library)
3. Different from their username

User accounts not meeting these requirements will be prompted to update their password accordingly. More information is available on MediaWiki.org.

• Blocked administrators may now block the administrator that blocked them. This was done to mitigate the possibility that a compromised administrator account would block all other active administrators, complementing the removal of the ability to unblock oneself outside of self-imposed blocks. A request for comment is currently in progress to determine whether the blocking policy should be updated regarding this change.
• {{Copyvio-revdel}} now has a link to open the history with the RevDel checkboxes already filled in.

Arbitration

• Following the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: AGK, Courcelles, GorillaWarfare, Joe Roe, Mkdw, SilkTork.

Miscellaneous

• Accounts continue to be compromised on a regular basis. Evidence shows this is entirely due to the accounts having the same password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately.
• Around 22% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 20% in June 2018. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless of whether you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020!

Hello Chris troutman, 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. Happy editing, Adityavagarwal (talk) 22:45, 13 January 2019 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Hi Chris, just letting you know I resent some of the mass messages since I noticed that about 200 of them failed (not your fault, this is a known issue phab:T139380 that doesn't show up as an error for the sender). I temporarily added the targets which failed to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe/resend, and copied/pasted the message content from one that did get delivered. Cheers, - Evad37 [talk] 07:39, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors 2018 Annual Report Our 2018 Annual Report is now ready for review. Highlights: Overview of Backlog-reduction progress; Summary of Drives, Blitzes, and the Requests page; Membership news and results of elections; Annual leaderboard; Plans for 2019. – Your project coordinators: Miniapolis, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Reidgreg and Tdslk. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:30, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2019).

Administrator changes

Enterprisey • JJMC89

BorgQueen

Harro5 • Jenks24 • Graft • R. Baley

Interface administrator changes

Enterprisey

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is currently open to reevaluate the activity requirements for administrators.
• Administrators who are blocked have the technical ability to block the administrator who blocked their own account. A recent request for comment has amended the blocking policy to clarify that this ability should only be used in exceptional circumstances, such as account compromises, where there is a clear and immediate need.
• A request for comment closed with a consensus in favor of deprecating The Sun as a permissible reference, and creating an edit filter to warn users who attempt to cite it.

Technical news

• A discussion regarding an overhaul of the format and appearance of Wikipedia:Requests for page protection is in progress (permalink). The proposed changes will make it easier to create requests for those who are not using Twinkle. The workflow for administrators at this venue will largely be unchanged. Additionally, there are plans to archive requests similar to how it is done at WP:PERM, where historical records are kept so that prior requests can more easily be searched for.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2019 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2019, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2019, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• A new IRC bot is available that allows you to subscribe to notifications when specific filters are tripped. This requires that your IRC handle be identified.

You're right that User:Wikilrcs/Brouillon doesn't exist, but fr:User:Wikilrcs/Brouillon does. Brouillon is the fr: version of sandbox. Cabayi (talk) 19:48, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

@Cabayi: Thanks for letting me know. Is it possible to move the page (rather than copy+paste) from fr-wiki to here? Chris Troutman (talk) 19:56, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

I've never heard of it being used, but there is a user group, WP:Importers, held by just 2 people. Cabayi (talk) 21:44, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Chris, just checking on your availability on 27-28th for Signpost. I heard your request last month to mark finished items more clearly. Is it OK if we both agree that if an item is marked "done" at WP: NEWSROOM, then it shall be included? Sometimes the articles don't get fully checked off at the in-article templates. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:09, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

@Bri: Yes, I'll be available. I prefer our team dots every i and crosses every t. That's why all those checks on both the draft articles and in the table exist. Please enforce them, for your own good if not for mine. Chris Troutman (talk) 01:02, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Just a heads up, Anthony22 resumed editing on 1 Feb after a 7-month hiatus. I see no improvement, which I believe effectively puts us back at this point. ―Mandruss ☎ 04:16, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

@Mandruss: I'm watching this issue. The last time I tried to run someone off Wikipedia, I got forced into self-imposed exile. I need to see outrageous conduct in order to move against anyone, now, which is a shame. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:06, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

My feelings are similar. If the community is unwilling to do anything about an editor like this, that's on them, and he can do as much damage as he wants provided he doesn't do it to an article that currently has my attention. And even there I'm limited by 3RR, as I can't correct more than three of his blundering edits in any 24-hour period. If you decided to pursue admin action, I'd like to be there to add my strong support, but I don't know how you could let me know without violating WP:CANVASS. I generally don't watch ANI. ―Mandruss ☎ 03:28, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@Mandruss: I feel bad for our hard-working editors who wrote that content, only to see it mangled by this wordsmith, re-writing our consensus view as if he's the senior editor of The New York Times. That's why I reverted the changes. I don't have an obsessive need to defend Wikipedia so much as I hate seeing our good work defaced. But yeah, the community let me know more than once that they don't want me engaging editors, so I won't until I feel like I have solid ground beneath me. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:59, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 32, January – February 2019

• #1Lib1Ref
• New and expanded partners
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks for correcting my comment about User:Bruce Mouser in the Deceased Wikipedians section; it was a typing error-thank you-RFD (talk) 16:20, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Re: the non-notable entries at the US Army DSC page; there is a similar situation at the US Air Force Cross page as well. - wolf 12:12, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

@Thewolfchild: Per WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS, do you suggest I should pick more fights or do you think no one should have to follow rules if somewhere else the rules are being ignored? Chris Troutman (talk) 14:06, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

This was just a friendly 'heads up'. I agree with your edits on the DSC page, hence the reason that I basically made the same edits to the AFC page. Depending on how (and if) anyone reacts to my edits, some might think I'm "picking a fight" as well, but I like to think of them as bold edits, supported by P&G. Should it come it come to it though, I'm sure a centralized RfC, to cover all pages with similar lists, will have a consensus in our favour as well. Literally tens of thousands of these medals have been awarded, we can't list all of them. Cheers - wolf 14:30, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

@Thewolfchild: I apologize. I was wrong to snap at you. Chris Troutman (talk) 14:48, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Meh, no biggie. I didn't take it as snapping, just confusion because my first post wasn't clear enough. Hopefully we're on the same page now. Cheers - wolf 15:39, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2019).

Administrator changes Evad37 There'sNoTime Alex Shih • Brian • Mushroom • Nakon • Oscarthecat • PeruvianLlama • Ragib • Reaper Eternal • Rossami • Tom Interface administrator changes Evad37 • Galobtter Ritchie333

CheckUser changes There'sNoTime Keegan • Ks0stm Oversight changes There'sNoTime Ks0stm • Sphilbrick

Guideline and policy news

• The RfC on administrator activity requirements failed to reach consensus for any proposal.
• Following discussions at the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and Wikipedia talk:Administrators, an earlier change to the restoration of adminship policy was reverted. If requested, bureaucrats will not restore administrator permissions removed due to inactivity if there have been five years without a logged administrator action; this "five year rule" does not apply to permissions removed voluntarily.

Technical news

• A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
  • paid-en-wpwikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
  • checkuser-en-wpwikipedia.org has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2019 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Base, Einsbor, Jon Kolbert, Schniggendiller, and Wim b.

Please tone down your language. Comments such as "...you need to just keeping rowing on your small task on the team and leave it to more-informed editors to fix the issue", "...your minority opinion has left you dis-attached from objective reality. I hope that you follow-through on your rant and become disassociated with The Signpost and perhaps WIkipedia, as a whole" and referring to fellow editors as "braying sheeple" are uncivil and inappropriate. I'm sure that it's frustrating to endure this level of pushback, especially from folks who are unwilling or unequipped to help publish the Signpost, but you need to find a more civil way to voice your opinion. –dlthewave ☎ 16:14, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[

@Dlthewave: I disagree. A small but vocal minority (in response to some inelegant words from people nit-picky about grammar with a bent toward awkward humor) alleges something on the scale of a hate crime occurred. The former group alleging hate speech, spurred mostly by political beliefs, has attacked editors like Barbara Page, Bri, and Kudpung as if Wikipedia needs to scalp the offending Signpost editors in order to punish thoughtcrime. The latter group of Signpost editors involved (volunteers, all) offered apologies and backed away from the issue only to be followed by more angry rhetoric from the former group. I, however, don't think we need to scalp volunteers providing a community service for their mistake when no malice or ill-will was observed. Had the angry crowd discontinued their assault, I'd've left it alone as I had nothing to do with the essay at hand. But I will not remain silent while innocent but mistaken editors are hounded by fellow editors under the influence of ideological blood lust. The president of my fan club stalks my talk page and will take me back to ANI when he finds evidence enough to block me for thirty days. I'm just recently coming off an unplanned break from Wikipedia after my last visit to the drama board. I feel I've been measured in my effort to restrain the worst instincts of our chattering class, though I imagine the angry editors will accept nothing less than Stalinist show trials and consignments to the gulag. I will not oblige. Certainly, as a free market guy I encourage the consumer to stop reading words that they don't like, especially when those words were provided as a service to help this community find its voice. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:00, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

@Dlthewave: Chris. Come on. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 01:00, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

My suggestion would be to think about what you're doing that would get you blocked for 30 days if someone took it to ANI and stop doing that thing. –dlthewave ☎ 01:22, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Aurora, Illinois shooting. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello Chris troutman,

News

• The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the {{rough translation}} tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.

Discussions of interest

• Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
• {{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
• A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
• There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.

Reminders

• NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.

NPP Tools Report

• Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
• copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
• The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

May I ask you to close the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom? As publisher, you are the obvious person to close it. I'll make some comments over there in a while, but I'm chomping at the bit and think that some "approval from the top" is necessary for me to talk to potential contributors. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 20:37, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

@Smallbones:  Done Welcome to the team. Assuming you turned in your direct deposit form when you onboarded at The Signpost you'll be receiving your salary for this job fortnightly. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:43, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

I have closed your AN3 report as "no violation"; more to the point, had I been online at midnight last night I would have blocked you for violating the three revert rule : , , , - WP:BLANKING says specifically': "Note: Restoring talk page notices, even if they should not be removed, is not a listed exception to the three-revert rule." Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:49, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: Yup, that was my fault. I thought it was a listed exception but I can see it's not. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:18, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Okay, no worries. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:21, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors March 2019 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the March newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since December 2018. All being well, we're planning to issue these quarterly in 2019, balancing the need to communicate widely with the avoidance of filling up talk pages. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. January Drive: Thanks to everyone for the splendid work in January's Backlog Elimination Drive. We removed copyedit tags from all of the articles tagged in our original target months of June, July and August 2018, and by 24 January we ran out of articles. After adding September, we finished the month with 8 target articles remaining and 842 left in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 48 requests for copyedit in January. Of the 31 people who signed up for this drive, 24 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the February Blitz. Of the 15 people who signed up, 13 copyedited at least one article. Participants claimed 32 copyedits, including 15 requests. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: As of 23:39, 18 March 2019 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have completed 108 requests since 1 January and the backlog stands at 851 articles. March Drive: The month-long March drive is now underway; the target months are October and November 2018. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the backlog. Sign up here! Election reminder: It may only be March but don't forget our mid-year Election of Coordinators opens for nominations on 1 June. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Reidgreg and Tdslk. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

I edited a fight result for Jason Von Flue in which he introduced the Von Flue choke to MMA, and it was reverted due to Sherdog's result being input incorrectly. When a "reliable source" is incorrect, why won't Wikipedia choose to be accurate and use the correct result?

Here is another source (besides the video) in which it is called a Von Flue choke: https://mmabouts.fandom.com/wiki/Jason_Von_Flue_vs._Nick_Gilardi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:83:8000:7100:5456:7268:4956:9C3E (talk) 17:27, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

But mmabouts.fandom.com isn't a reliable source, per WP:SPS, so you can't use it. To your question "why won't Wikipedia choose to be accurate and use the correct result?" I reply that Wikipedia does not care about what's true. This is an important, though widely unknown, rule here. For example, I was once editing an article about a person I knew and the article mentioned her daughter. She insisted that her daughter was born on a Tuesday but the Los Angeles Times said it was Wednesday. Maybe she was "correct" (like that matters) but she had no secondary source proof. (We don't allow people to upload birth certificates and such.) The reason why is, what if she said her daughter was born yesterday, or 200 years ago, or was never born? I, as an editor, don't know what really happened and it's not my right as an encyclopedist to determine the truth. I collate what the sources say, even if those sources might be wrong because I have no business performing my own research. Ultimately, if you're interested in the article saying what's true beyond what reliable sources say, then you show contempt for the encyclopedia preferring your own narrative of what you think is true. I would not arrogantly assert that the sky is blue or water is wet without having a source because in humbly doing my duty I show what the sources say, casting aside my own preferences and beliefs. This mode of thinking is difficult for many that don't regularly edit here but our rules are in place to protect the greater reliability of the project. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:57, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Hmmm... Interesting. I honestly didn't realize Wikipedia wasn't interested in truth. Thanks for the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:83:8000:7100:5456:7268:4956:9c3e (talk) 18:16, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Reductio ad absurdum (a common problem not helped by essay titles like Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth, in my view). More accurately, Wikipedia cares about truth and gets its truth only from reliable sources. ―Mandruss ☎ 22:55, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

@Mandruss: I suspect the IP is correct about the Von Flue choke. My point is that our adherence to sources is more important than propounding what actually happened, because the process is the most effective method we have to stop the RIGHTGREATWRONGS movement. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:06, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

@Mandruss: Point 1: What do you do when the reliable sources become unreliable? In this particular case, Sherdog's Fight Finder (considered the reliable source to go to according to WP:MMA) has become less reliable. Although I have no way to prove this, of course, I was actually the person who entered the Von Flue vs. Gilardi result as an arm-triangle choke on the Fight Finder. I no longer have admin access, so I am unable to fix my mistake--though in my defense nobody knew what a Von Flue choke was back then. (Even Sherdog himself no longer has admin access to sherdog.com). Unfortunately, fight results have become less reliable on Sherdog under the new owners. For example, Naoki Inoue's latest fight (vs. Sean Santella) is not on there (but thankfully is updated here on Wikipedia). Past mistakes on the Fight Finder never get fixed. There are inaccuracies and omissions on Sherdog, and especially when it comes to older fights/events, it is often difficult to find other sources which list the results correctly in order to cite for changes here on Wikipedia.

Point 2: In regards to this specific fight, I posted a video source as evidence, and Chris Troutman reverted the change and (rather dismissively) wrote "what you think you saw on the video is original research and not allowed; what the reliable source says, even if wrong, is what we go with per WP:TRUTH". Firstly, I found the idea that Wikipedia would willingly choose to be wrong kind of crazy. Secondly, if you show that video to 1,000 BJJ black belts, I would wager a bet that all 1,000 of them would call it either a Von Flue choke (more specific) or shoulder choke (more general). It's not what I "think" I saw; it's just what it is. Like how when you close your hand into a fist and land it on someone's face, it's called a punch. It's irrefutable. So I guess the question is: When is a video (especially when cited) NOT a reliable source? Anyone who watches it can see the truth, and yet it was reverted to a wrong result because of a mistaken entry on another web site. 2601:83:8000:7100:CC48:1DDA:6607:6D41 (talk) 16:06, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

In your point about Sherdog, we've received these complaints before and perhaps the issue needs to be re-litigated at WikiProject MMA. Most of MMA media isn't seen as legitimate by the wider world. We're lucky to trust Sherdog, let alone the other smaller commentators like Luke Thomas on the subject. To your other point, all editors are considered to be dilettantes. Our editors include an actual lawyer and and actual historian but neither of them get to use their own research or analysis here because all Wikipedians are equal and not endowed with privileged access to controlling articles. As for me, I don't know a Von Flue choke from a D'Arce choke and I can't be trusted to make that call. We rely upon sources, right or wrong. Contribute what you think you know to journalism and academia, rather than complain here about your preferred narratives. Chris Troutman (talk) 14:16, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of political parties in Cuba. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Dear all. Recently, FR30799386 (talk) was blocked for sock puppetry. Among their projects were a number of user scripts that they left behind. I (DannyS712) have copied the scripts, and have taken over maintaining them. You currently import one or more of FR30799386's scripts, and I thought that you might want to import a maintained version. Links to each script are provided below.

• User:DannyS712/communicator
• User:DannyS712/copyvio-check
• User:DannyS712/Undo
• User:DannyS712/Quick-undo
• User:DannyS712/Readonly
• User:DannyS712/Redirectify
• User:DannyS712/Section-strike

If you have any questions, please reach out and talk to me. --DannyS712 (talk) 03:57, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

April 2019, Volume 5, Issue 4, Numbers 107, 108, 114, 115, 116, 117 Hello and welcome to the April events of Women in Red! Please join us for these virtual events: New topics: Gender studies / United Nations / Dance Geofocus: Portuguese-speakers Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Other ways you can participate: Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred Subscription options: Opt-in (EN-WP) / Opt-in (international) / Unsubscribe

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:33, 22 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of surviving Messerschmitt Bf 109s. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

After I fixed glaring grammatical errors like "The expression was coined in 19th century", you turned up and put them all right back in the article. Is it that you don't know or understand basic English grammar, or that you just don't believe correct grammar is necessary in encyclopaedia articles? 146.90.125.54 (talk) 23:54, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

You removed cited content from mk.ru and zimamagazine.com, so I'm not buying your grammar explanation. If you have an issue with those sources, you're welcome to explain. edit-warring over it is not helping. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:09, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Still unclear as to whether you comprehend basic grammar rules or just don't care about them. And how about WP:NOTVAND - is it that you are unaware of it or just believe you can follow your own rules? 146.90.125.54 (talk) 00:24, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

IP, see WP:NOTBATTLEGROUND and WP:CIVIL. As Chris has explained, your edits removed cited content and replaced it with unsourced content, a violation of our policies concerning verifiability of content. Ungrammatical content is a far lesser concern here than the introduction of unsourced, unverifiable and potentially false information. You can either address your own violations of our policies and comply with them, or not edit at all, but stop attacking other editors for enforcing those policies. General Ization ^Talk 00:30, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

" your edits removed cited content and replaced it with unsourced content" that is a lie. Why lie? 146.90.125.54 (talk) 00:37, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Study this edit very carefully. Then explain to me how that is a "lie." General Ization ^Talk 00:40, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Won't be back for a while; now blocked for 3 months. General Ization ^Talk 00:45, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

If you don't mind me asking, but how is it that I leave a comment on Howcheng's talk page and you respond in short order. I did not flag you, so am I or Howcheng on your watch list? Or is there a latest posts page. Just curious. And I responded to your comment but shame on me I was not very attentive and did not flag you currently. Apologies.Oldperson (talk) 21:53, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Oldperson It'll be a watchlist item. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:13, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

@Oldperson: TRM (noted above) is correct. I stalk talk pages, Howcheng's among them. I knew Howcheng and many others back when I lived in Los Angeles. Usually, editors don't mind if others (like TRM has) chime in on other talk pages. My watchlist shows me what's going on, which is how I engage on wiki. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:59, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Yonaguni Monument. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Apply for Education Greenhouse Are you passionate about open education? Do you have an idea to apply Wikimedia projects to an education initiative but don’t know where to start? Join the the Wikimedia & Education Greenhouse! It is an immersive co-learning experience that lasts 9 months and will equip you with the skills, knowledge and support you need to bring your ideas to life. You can apply as a team or as an individual, by May 12th. Find out more Education Greenhouse. For more information reachout to mguadalupewikimedia.org

—MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:16, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Republic of China (1912–1949). Legobot (talk) 04:23, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).

Administrator changes Reaper Eternal • ThaddeusB Bogdangiusca • Christopher Parham • Necrothesp • Schneelocke • Siroxo • Sarah Mentifisto → Lofty abyss Interface administrator changes Mr. Stradivarius

Bureaucrat changes DeltaQuad Kingturtle

Technical news

• In Special:Preferences under "Appearance" → "Advanced options", there is now an option to show a confirmation prompt when clicking on a rollback link.
• The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Please see meta:Community health initiative/User reporting system consultation 2019 to provide your input on this idea.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee clarified that the General 1RR prohibition for Palestine-Israel articles may only be enforced on pages with the {{ARBPIA 1RR editnotice}} edit notice.

Miscellaneous

• Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
• As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Slatersteven (talk) 07:11, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

I have closed this thread as "socks blocked, no further action". However, this comment was not particularly helpful or constructive; I don't enjoy editors being disruptive at all, I find them to be a pain in the neck myself. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:35, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: It's a fair criticism and I take your rebuke to heart. Most editors don't like my tone. As I mentioned to Bbb23, I have to get vandals to quit as I can't just block them. I suffer because of Wikipedia's foolish insistence on AGF and NPA in the face of ne'er-do-wells. But you're right and I'm probably not cut out for Wikipedia under our current rules of engagement. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:01, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Well, there's a new one for me. Why use the Undo process to make a substantive improvement in response to my request to do so? What you did was acknowledge the deficiency tagged by me by positively (and properly) fixing the deficient text. The edit by you had nothing to do with performance of an Undo. I am not inclined to accept this was simply a button-press error as your edit summary openly displays your mindset. Let's not have this repeated, please. sirlanz Sirlanz 01:54, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

@Sirlanz: why would I be concerned about what you are "not inclined to accept"? Chris Troutman (talk) 02:16, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/China and Chinese-related articles. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Regarding your thank-you note... It was interesting to unravel how many dedicated editors seemed to be working on the Peels and their projects. - Wacomshera (talk) 03:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Gospel of Peter. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

I hope you are not one sided .--Chianti (talk) 19:51, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@Chianti: And you imply what? That I'm a Nazi sympathizer? My suggestion to you, other than calming down, is that per WP:BRD when you boldly edit and are reverted, you should discuss until there's consensus. We often return to status quo ante while the issue is discussed. Further, you have added this bit of information despite two different editors (neither of which was me) reverting you. I'm only hoping good faith editors would avoid edit warring. Perhaps I was wrong and you're not a good faith editor, after all. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:00, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Solomon's Pools. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

@Theklan: I read your piece about how unfair Commons is. I hope my stalkers read it, too. Chris Troutman (talk) 02:14, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! It's being hard, but I think my two cents are there! -Theklan (talk) 21:09, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names). Legobot (talk) 04:24, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

The second round of the 2019 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to scored 32 points to advance into round 3. Our top four scorers in round 2 all scored over 400 points and were:

• Cas Liber (1210), our winner in 2016, with two featured articles and three DYKs. He also made good use of the bonus points available, more than doubling his score by choosing appropriate articles to work on.
• Kosack (750), last year's runner up, with an FA, a GA, two FLs, and five DYKs.
• Adam Cuerden (480), a WikiCup veteran, with 16 featured pictures, mostly restorations.
• Zwerg Nase (461), a seasoned competitor, with a FA, a GA and an ITN item.

Other notable performances were put in by Barkeep49 with six GAs, Ceranthor, Lee Vilenski, and Canada Hky, each with seven GARs, and MPJ-DK with a seven item GT.

So far contestants have achieved nine featured articles between them and a splendid 80 good articles. Commendably, 227 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2019 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. The judges are pleased with the thorough GARs that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:45, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics at 14:03, 2 May 2019 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future newsletters, please remove your name from the mailing list.

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Populism. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).

Administrator changes HickoryOughtShirt?4 • RexxS Necrothesp Bratsche • Kyle Barbour • Kzollman • Madman Interface administrator changes Pharos

Bureaucrat changes Primefac CheckUser changes Reaper Eternal

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment concluded that creating pages in the portal namespace should be restricted to autoconfirmed users.
• Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Technical news

• XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.

Arbitration

• In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
• Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.

Miscellaneous

• A request for comment is currently open to amend the community sanctions procedure to exclude non XfD or CSD deletions.
• A proposal to remove pre-2009 indefinite IP blocks is currently open for discussion.

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is 128.77.80.116 editing/deleting with strong POV. Jayjg ^(talk) 13:07, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Qizilbash. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for catching that. — Marchjuly (talk) 20:49, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Cossack Hetmanate. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

In this RfC, your sole response was "Neither per Ad Orientem. This editing violates NPOV." However, Ad Orientem expressed clear support for using the term "hawk", something which you then proceeded to edit-war out of the article despite overwhelming support for its inclusion. Would you mind clarifying your vote in that RfC and whether you actually agree with Ad Orientam's rationale? Snooganssnoogans (talk) 16:40, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

@Snooganssnoogans: I get the sense you're a partisan, so there's little point in discussing this with you. I will point out that your self-congratulatory edit summary: "by my count, there are 7 votes in favor of "widely described" versus one editor who claimed that sticking to multiple RS is a NPOV vio" seems to plead for reversion. The RfC is still open. Further, you cannot claim that I "proceeded to edit-war" when I made one reversion. Prior to that, I hadn't edited that article since early April. I don't feel I need to clarify anything else. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:49, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Please stop harassing me about the content I am working on. I don't know you and don't care for your input when you are blatantly rude. If I need/want help I will seek it out. I try my best to make good edits, articles, or content that abides by Wikipedia policies. This is something I do in my spare time. I do not spend all day on here like other people. You want to constantly criticize me. You act as if you own this website. I don't care. Go bother someone else. Just leave me alone. SneaselxLv94 04:21, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

I was wondering, but given Hancock's crediting him for inspiration for Fingerprints of the Gods (see Flem-Ath's talk page). [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=rP4lCwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Beyond+the+Robot:+The+Life+and+Work+of+Colin+Wilson&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjd7qKJq6riAhUdRBUIHfsQCcQQuwUILTAA#v=onepage&q=Flem-ath&f=false this} book by Gary Lachman and some Kirkus reviews, I think he passes our criteria. Plus some Skeptic Magazine stuff I need to acquire. His work seems seminal. Of course at the moment there's not enough in the article. Doug Weller talk 14:57, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: I posit that if an editor places themselves at the service of our notability guideline and essays, the deletionist view is the correct one. To that end, I'm seeing neither GNG nor NAUTHOR, let alone ANYBIO. I appreciate your comment and will wait a bit to see if the article starts to demonstrate the subject's claim of notability. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

I think the sources I found can show that he passes "The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors." We'll see. Right now I'm more concerned about the BLP violations made by Flem-Ath's comments. Doug Weller talk 16:13, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 33, March – April 2019

• #1Lib1Ref
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:41, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Republic of China (1912–1949). Legobot (talk) 04:24, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Farang Rak Tham. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Scripture_alone_the_source_of_authority that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:25, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

@Farang Rak Tham: First, you might consider not leaving a templated message saying you've removed my comment if you're not going to do so (per WP:REFACTOR). Second, editors are expected to know policies and guidelines. That's not controversial. I didn't even point to WP:CIR. Finally, If we keep allowing editors to do whatever the hell they want, we'll only get more of the same. To protect this project, I have rebuked an editor for their poor decision-making. You're welcome. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:53, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Casualties of the Iraq War. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

I agree with you. I thought that by giving links the page would be more authentic. But you wrote that we aren't here to advertise Zakir Naik. Yes, of course. but we aren't here to criticize him as well. Zakir Naik's page looks like 'anti-Zakir Naik page'. This should be fixed. The page has a negative notion from the beginning to the end. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The revealer (talk • contribs) 10:13, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

@The revealer: Wikipedia seeks to be neutral, so we can address where you think the article isn't fair to the subject. Please start a conversation on that article's talk page to discuss it. Adding YouTube links to Zakir's videos does not solve your problem. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:53, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. But why did you delete my edit on the heading 'Bibliography' and the section 'Lectures'? There are other wikipedia pages which have this kind of headings and sections (e.g. Jonathan A. C. Brown). — Preceding unsigned comment added by The revealer (talk • contribs) 07:59, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

@The revealer: Your whataboutism regarding Jonathan A. C. Brown is an invalid argument. We seek to improve Wikipedia, not reduce our quality to the lowest common denominator. Further, you added links to videos in violation of WP:ELNO, which I stated in my edit summary for that edit. I recommend you address your concerns on the article's talk page as I do not agree with your approach. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:27, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:10, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Santa Claus. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Optional_RfA_candidate_poll#Shut this down?. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:37, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

The WikiCup is over for another year! Our Champion this year is Courcelles (submissions), who over the course of the competition has amassed 147 GAs, 111 GARs, 9 DYKs, 4 FLs and 1 ITN. Our finalists were as follows:

1. Courcelles (submissions)
2. Kosack (submissions)
3. Kees08 (submissions)
4. SounderBruce (submissions)
5. Cas Liber (submissions)
6. Nova Crystallis (submissions)
7. Iazyges (submissions)
8. Ceranthor (submissions)

All those who reached the final win awards, and awards will also be going to the following participants:

• Cas Liber (submissions) wins the FA prize, for three featured articles in round 2.
• Courcelles (submissions) wins the GA prize, for 92 good articles in round 3.
• Kosack (submissions) wins the FL prize, for five featured lists overall.
• Cartoon network freak (submissions) wins the topic prize, for 30 articles in good topics overall.
• Usernameunique (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 24 did you know articles in round 3.
• Zanhe (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 17 in the news articles overall.
• Aoba47 (submissions) wins the GAR prize, for 43 good article reviews in round 1.

Awards will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved much this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2019 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email) and Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs · email).

And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2. With 56 contestants qualifying, each group in Round 2 contains seven contestants, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for Round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

• L293D, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with ten good articles on submarines for a total of 357 points.
• Adam Cuerden, a WikiCup veteran, came next with 274 points, mostly from eight featured pictures, restorations of artwork.
• MPJ-DK, a wrestling enthusiast, was in third place with 263 points, garnered from a featured list, five good articles, two DYKs and four GARs.
• Usernameunique came next at 243, with a featured article and a good article, both on ancient helmets.
• Squeamish Ossifrage was in joint fifth place with 224 points, mostly garnered from bringing the 1937 Fox vault fire to featured article status.
• Ed! was also on 224, with an amazing number of good article reviews (56 actually).

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews on 143 good articles, one hundred more than the number of good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Well done all!

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk).

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).

Administrator changes

Andonic • Consumed Crustacean • Enigmaman • Euryalus • EWS23 • HereToHelp • Nv8200pa • Peripitus • StringTheory11 • Vejvančický

CheckUser changes

Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC seeks to clarify whether WP:OUTING should include information on just the English Wikipedia or any Wikimedia project.
• An RfC on WT:RfA concluded that Requests for adminship and bureaucratship are discussions seeking to build consensus.
• An RfC proposal to make the templates for discussion (TfD) process more like the requested moves (RM) process, i.e. "as a clearinghouse of template discussions", was closed as successful.

Technical news

• The CSD feature of Twinkle now allows admins to notify page creators of deletion if the page had not been tagged. The default behavior matches that of tagging notifications, and replaces the ability to open the user talk page upon deletion. You can customize which criteria receive notifications in your Twinkle preferences: look for Notify page creator when deleting under these criteria.
• Twinkle's d-batch (batch delete) feature now supports deleting subpages (and related redirects and talk pages) of each page. The pages will be listed first but use with caution! The und-batch (batch undelete) option can now also restore talk pages.

Miscellaneous

• The previously discussed unblocking of IP addresses indefinitely-blocked before 2009 was approved and has taken place.
• The 2019 talk pages consultation produced a report for Phase 1 and has entered Phase 2.

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Richat Structure. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

ICHTHUS

June 2019

The Top 6 Articles

By Stalinsunnykvj

The sad news was the 2019 Sri Lanka Easter bombings. The Top 6 most popular articles about People in WikiProject Christianity were:

1. Louis XIV of France – a monarch of the House of Bourbon who reigned as King of France. He did say, "Every time I appoint someone to a vacant position, I make a hundred unhappy and one ungrateful."
2. Mary, Queen of Scots – arrested for Reigning While Catholic (RWC), Mary was found guilty of plotting to assassinate Elizabeth I of England in 1586, and was beheaded the following year.
3. Elizabeth I of England – The Virgin Queen, Elizabeth was the last of the five monarchs of the House of Tudor who ushered in the Elizabethan Era, reversed re-establishment of Roman Catholicism by her half-sister.
4. Henry VIII of England – King of England, He was an accomplished musician, author, and poet; his known piece of music is "Pastime with Good Company". He is often reputed to have written "Greensleeves" but probably did not. He had six marriages.
5. Martin Luther King Jr. –
   " There are three urgent and indeed great problems that we face not only in the United States of America but all over the world today. That is the problem of racism, the problem of poverty and the problem of war."
6. Billy Ray Cyrus – Having released 12 studio albums and 44 singles since 1992, he is best known for his number one single "Achy Breaky Heart", which became the first single ever to achieve triple Platinum status in Australia.

Did You Know?

Nominated by Stalinsunnykvj

... that the first attempt to build the Holy Trinity Cathedral of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra resulted in the demolition of the nearly completed structure?

Featured article

Nominated by Stalinsunnykvj

Saint Fin Barre's Cathedral, Cork, Ireland

Saint Fin Barre's Cathedral is a Gothic Revival three-spire cathedral in the city of Cork, Ireland. It belongs to the Church of Ireland and was completed in 1879. The cathedral is located on the south side of the River Lee, on ground that has been a place of worship since the 7th century, and is dedicated to Finbarr of Cork, patron saint of the city. It was once in the Diocese of Cork; it is now one of the three cathedrals in the Church of Ireland Diocese of Cork, Cloyne and Ross, in the ecclesiastical province of Dublin. Christian use of the site dates back to a 7th-century AD monastery, which according to legend was founded by Finbarr of Cork. The entrances contain the figures of over a dozen biblical figures, capped by a tympanum showing a Resurrection scene. (more...)

Help wanted

We're looking for writers to contribute to Ichthus. Do you have a project that you'd like to highlight? An issue that you'd like to bring to light? Post your inquiries or submission here.

WikiProject Christianity

---

---

Ichthus is published by WikiProject Christianity • Get answers to questions about Christianity here
Discuss any of the above stories here • For submissions contact the Newsroom • Unsubscribe here
Delivered: 09:50, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Sent by DannyS712 (talk) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 09:50, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors June 2019 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the June newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since March 2019. You can unsubscribe from our mailings at any time; see below. Election time: Nomination of candidates in our mid-year Election of Coordinators opened on 1 June, and voting will take place from 16 June. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. June Blitz: Our June blitz will soon be upon us; it will begin at 00:01 on 16 June (UTC) and will close at 23:59 on 22 June (UTC). The themes are "nature and the environment" and all requests. March Drive: Thanks to everyone for their work in March's Backlog Elimination Drive. We removed copyedit tags from 182 of the articles tagged in our original target months October and November 2018, and the month finished with 64 target articles remaining from November and 811 in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 22 requests for copyedit in March; the month ended with 34 requests pending. Of the 32 people who signed up for this drive, 24 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. April Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the April Blitz; the blitz ran from 14 to 20 April (UTC) inclusive and the themes were Sports and Entertainment. Of the 15 people who signed up, 13 copyedited at least one article. Participants claimed 60 copyedits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: As of 04:36, 3 June 2019 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have completed 267 requests since 1 January. The backlog of tagged articles stands at 605 articles. May Drive: During the May Backlog Elimination Drive, Guild copy-editors removed copyedit tags from 191 of the 192 articles tagged in our original target months of November and December 2018, and January 2019 was added on 22 May. We finished the month with 81 target articles remaining and a record low of 598 articles in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 24 requests for copyedit during the May drive, and the month ended with 35 requests pending. Of the 26 people who signed up for this drive, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Reidgreg and Tdslk. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

I always reply to editors like you that revert things because it just shows the clueless and lack of ability on show here. Just so we are clear, I didn't add anything that was not already in the article. But as you never read the article, you just don't know. People like you are the bane of this site. Rather than be shown up that you're wrong you'd rather have shite than readable good articles — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.167.128 (talk) 09:03, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Presidency of Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

See Talk:Robert_Rogers_(British_Army_officer)#Munterloney - please add any reply there. Alekksandr (talk) 21:42, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Just curious, why are your two entries for Ziggy 2milli's SPI separate? Falaluna (talk) 18:53, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

@Falaluna: Because, in haste to stop your editing collective, I used Twinkle which creates separate entries for each editor reported. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:56, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

He's questioning why you didn't put them all in one entry, but listed them separately, not why the reports were filed at all. 172.56.3.51 (talk) 20:34, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Exactly. Twinkle makes separate entries, not combined entries. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:56, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of airliner shootdown incidents. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello! I provided sources as you requested for my infobox updates at Talk:Chemonics#Infobox. If my proposal looks good and you approve of the sources, can you update the article? I work with the strategic communications team at Chemonics, so I suggest edits where I have a financial conflict of interest instead of making direct edits to Wikipedia articles. If you have any other feedback, I'm happy to discuss! LW at Chemonics (talk) 14:09, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

@LW at Chemonics:  Done Sorry; I had seen your ping before but just lost track. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:46, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! I will be back shortly with Chemonics' current logo. LW at Chemonics (talk) 18:28, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks for your help and assistance-RFD (talk) 15:13, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Australia. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello Chris troutman,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important.

QUALITY of REVIEWING

Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR.

Backlog

The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever.

Move to draft

NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations.

Notifying users

Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging.

PERM

Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway.

Other news

School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.

Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.

---

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

sent by ZLEA (talk) 00:48, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).

Administrator changes

28bytes • Ad Orientem • Ansh666 • Beeblebrox • Boing! said Zebedee • BU Rob13 • Dennis Brown • Deor • DoRD • Floquenbeam¹ • Flyguy649 • Fram² • Gadfium • GB fan • Jonathunder • Kusma • Lectonar • Moink • MSGJ • Nick • Od Mishehu • Rama • Spartaz • Syrthiss • TheDJ • WJBscribe

¹Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

²Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment seeking to alleviate pressures on the request an account (ACC) process proposes either raising the account creation limit for extended confirmed editors or granting the account creator permission on request to new ACC tool users.

• In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.

• The scope of CSD criterion G8 has been tightened such that the only redirects that it now applies to are those which target non-existent pages.
• The scope of CSD criterion G14 has been expanded slightly to include orphan "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects that target pages that are not disambiguation pages or pages that perform a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists).
• A request for comment seeks to determine whether Wikipedia:Office actions should be a policy page or an information page.

Technical news

• The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.

Miscellaneous

• In February 2019, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) changed its office actions policy to include temporary and project-specific bans. The WMF exercised this new ability for the first time on the English Wikipedia on 10 June 2019 to temporarily ban and desysop Fram. This action has resulted in significant community discussion, a request for arbitration (permalink), and, either directly or indirectly, the resignations of numerous administrators and functionaries. The WMF Board of Trustees is aware of the situation, and discussions continue on a statement and a way forward. The Arbitration Committee has sent an open letter to the WMF Board.

Why not help me rather than threaten me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.27.150.168 (talk) 18:35, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

I've been watching your squabble with BD2412 on Talk:Corporation. You're not making a convincing case. While you might be right, you make a lot of assertions, some facts, some synthesis of what you think sources say. You come across as a crank to me. If you could calm down and limit your frustration to what some website says, perhaps we could address this reasonably. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:52, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Please explain why you accused my of crap and deleted my request for comment. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.27.150.168 (talk) 19:35, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia tries to keep conversations where they belong, per WP:TALK. That helps us make progress. What you're doing is repeatedly asking for editors to help you at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment‎, which is only meant for discussion on the RfC process in vioation of WP:NOTAFORUM. Had you read the instructions I gave you, you could have requested an RfC. As I've pointed out, your hostile method of communication has limited the number of regular editors who would pitch in and help you. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:03, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

The third round of the 2019 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round needed to score at least 68 points, which is substantially lower than last year's 227 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with 500 points derived mainly from a featured article and two GAs on natural history topics
• Adam Cuerden, with 480 points, a tally built on 16 featured pictures, the result of meticulous restoration work
• SounderBruce, a finalist in the last two years, with 306 points from a variety of submissions, mostly related to sport or the State of Washington
• Usernameunique, with 305 points derived from a featured article and two GAs on archaeology and related topics

Contestants managed 4 (5) featured articles, 4 featured lists, 18 featured pictures, 29 good articles, 50 DYK entries, 9 ITN entries, and 39 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them, and it is imperative to claim them in the correct round; one FA claim had to be rejected because it was incorrectly submitted (claimed in Round 3 when it qualified for Round 2), so be warned! When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Populism. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Recusancy. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 34, May – June 2019

• Partnerships
• #1Lib1Ref
• Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
• Global branches update
• Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:20, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Constantinople. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/News and notes says "No more Wikimedia grants for travel..." and then says "the WMF representative announced that the rapid grant process for proposals of up to US$2,000 would no longer sponsor travel support...". Does this imply that the only grants are the rapid grants? Are they really not giving any grants for Travel, or just no rapid grants for travel? I would like the report to make this clear. Thanks! --Guy Macon (talk) 15:48, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

To editors Smallbones and Bluerasberry: Please advise on this content issue. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:54, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Acknowledged, let me look now... Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:58, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

I'll wait. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:00, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

@Chris troutman and Guy Macon: The only "travel grants" are and have been for some time through the rapid grants process. There are other WMF processes for funding travel. "Travel scholarships" are a separate process, not classified to be grants, where the WMF makes a pool of funding available for travel to a particular event which they choose. Also, Wikimedia chapters can have project or annual plan grants which fund travel as part of a more broad plan.

What is ending here is the ability of an individual to apply for personal funding to attend an event, like a conference.

The text of the article clarifies that the change is to rapid grants. I think the title may be unclear. Also regarding India - programs in India can be funded but not to the chapter or through the chapter.

If anyone wants to propose another title which is more clear then I am ready to defer. I will think about this a bit more... Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:07, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

"Wikimedia grants less accessible for travel, equipment, meetups, and India" is more correct and I changed it to that. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:08, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

I'll agree with that. It was implied all along since the announcement quoted was for rapid grants. Please go ahead. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 16:13, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry and Smallbones: Thanks so much for the quick fix! I'll continue publishing. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:15, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Chris - It's great for everybody that the publication process was so smooth. if there's anything I can do for the process, please let me know. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 16:32, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

...at TropicAces Talk page. No stridency is intended in any of my scholastic edit. See that message. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:246:c700:2db2:8fd:2600:814e:293 (talk • contribs) 12:43, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

new user... my page was deleted by this guy... please check.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahulact (talk • contribs) 17:37, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

plese ckeck my page,..User talk:QueerEcofeminist deleted my page..without any valid reason — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahulact (talk • contribs) 17:39, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

he didnt deleted the pic i requested to delete.. but he deleted my page.. please look into it..something wrong going on...— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahulact (talk • contribs) 17:47, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi There I have a few questions regarding how to upload. I am fairly new to this and ask that you have patience with me, so with that now I will ask my stupid question lol "how do I upload to Wikipedia and create a page with pictures and articles? Merge8productions (talk) 20:10, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 04:25, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Central Europe. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

I would love to take a crack at a ribbon for the signpost barnstar. The project's page is very minimalist (I like that btw!), so I'd be kind of lacking for color ideas. Will take me about a week to put a set of 3 together. Will (talk) 13:56, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

@Chris troutman: I've got a rough draft if you want to take a look at it. The overall background color is pantone's "old paper". Felt appropriate. The three Ribbons as requested! All done as svg so I can easily make changes and scale. I can also port this into a BoNM style medal if you would like (you can see my Quebec one on the same page). If you wanted to add levels to the award (similar to the devices on the service awards), it would be trivial to adjust the number of signpost icons on the ribbon and create 0/1/2/3/4 versions. what you think? Will (talk) 17:11, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

@Wegates: Thanks for your submission. I like your design and would not want the BoNM style. Please clarify your idea about levels. Unlike WP:MILHIST, The Signpost hasn't adopted higher levels of the award. Very few editors have received this barnstar more than once. Was the idea to add more pointer signs on the post or to add more posts? Chris Troutman (talk) 00:39, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

@Chris troutman: The idea would be to add additional signposts. However, if a second is that rare (never mind 3rd or 4th) then I would say there's no real point to doing it. And certainly I can always come back later and set it up if you find a need for it. I can also adjust the design of the icon in general to add more pointers, I went with two as it felt it looked cleaner...but the customer is always right ;) Will (talk) 11:14, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

@Wegates: No, I like what you've done. We don't need either more posts or more signs, for my opinion. Please post your entry to WP:RB and I'll mark you the winner. Which barnstar did you want as payment? Chris Troutman (talk) 12:19, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

@Chris troutman: I've put it up on WP:RB, and I would like the graphic designer's please. Thanks Will (talk) 14:22, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

You wrote:
"Please do not leave messages on another editor's user page."(1)
I am not sure what you are referring to, Chris. Could you explain? Please reply at my talk page, as I would like to track our discussion there. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 23:56, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Timelines of Chinese history. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation! I think I just became the 100th member of the Society. Cheers --Edcolins (talk) 19:48, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

@Edcolins: Glad to hear it. That's an outcome I doubt you imagined when you started on this project in mid-March 2004. Chris Troutman (talk) 14:59, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Indeed! Thanks again. --Edcolins (talk) 18:27, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:U.S. state. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Century. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Quick facts Six years! ...

Precious

Six years!

Close

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:16, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:International Brigades. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about rivers. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Hey If I want to remove something from a wiikipedia page which is protected then what is the best way to remove it semervinx (talk) 11:40, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

@Semervinx: Same process. Leave a note on the talk page explaining what you want removed and why. WP:EDITREQ goes into more detail about it. Chris Troutman (talk) 13:20, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

You are right wikipedia dosen't care about emotions but its policy also says those images should be added if they serve some purpose those images serve no major educational purpose and they are too many which does violate the policy

And by the way that images hurt the image of wikipedia and discourage some users so I think the article will be just fine without the images semervinx (talk) 19:45, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

@Semervinx: I can understand your frustration. It's best to realize that Wikipedia reflects the consensus of its editors and that the readers of Wikipedia are far more cosmopolitan and secular than you realize. While I am sorry that the content involved offends you, it does not offend either the majority of our editors or our readers, especially the ones that send in donations. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:57, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

I know that but this page may be read by many Readers around the world and many of those will have some emotions and will offend thousands

So I just want to make this site more good for humans who have some emotions

If it really is a educational and neutral site then I think those content must be allowed which is really necessary

But I try my best to remove this by legal way which follow wikipedia policy bcz wikipedia will understand only that semervinx (talk) 20:38, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

And Yeah it does offend majority of readers as Islam as the second biggest religion in the world.

Many readers will be muslims if you take it by statistics and it will somehow make bad and negitive impression on thousands and become an obstactle in the path of information and goals of wikipedia so it does hurt wikipedia but still it dosen't see it semervinx (talk) 20:45, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not support your viewpoint. What I'm telling you is that, of the editors here, not enough think that we need to censor articles so as to not offend religious sensibilities. Please ask your fellow Muslim editors about it. I promise you there's nothing you can do to change the content on Everybody Draw Mohammed Day, as offensive as that may be to you. Wikipedia makes $35 million in profit annually. They don't care if people in your part of the world are upset. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:51, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sturmabteilung. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Singapore. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

The policies of US states are highly appreciateale but ignoring the current issues with regard to Humanity Rights and violations around the world.... M I Anjum Thaheem chairman international liasion committee LHCBA for Environmental (talk) 21:57, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:History of Christianity. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi greetings, thank you for sending greeting messages on the behalf of Birthday committee. Now there is a script to help the process -- User:SD0001/BDCS. Feel free to try it. If you have any suggestions please post it at SD0001's talk page. Thank you.--PATH SLOPU 13:31, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Manzanar. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:70th anniversary of the People's Republic of China. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello mr Troutman,

Is there a reason as to why my page has been reviewed Jay heisenburg 1 (talk) 10:09, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

@Jay heisenburg 1: We patrol all new pages to ensure they don't violate Wikipedia policy. Chris Troutman (talk) 10:14, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Have I violated anything code or am I good? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jay heisenburg 1 (talk • contribs) 10:16, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

You're fine. Chris Troutman (talk) 10:19, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Right-wing populism. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:India. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

The Wrong Michael T. Scott was listed as recipient. You failed to research properly. The General Order was originally attached which should have made in confirmed. I expect a change and apology since I am the rightful recipient. Mtsflorida (talk) 22:32, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@Mtsflorida: Two years ago I reverted your edit which added a non-notable person to that list, which is against our need to only list other articles of notable subjects. "The General Order was originally attached" You added no citation. Further, I see that yesterday you added the same unsuitable content and now someone else reverted you. The lesson here is that you're not going to get your way. "I expect a change and apology" Nope. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:14, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Chris [sorry that I originally posted this in the wrong place!], not sure whether this is the best way to contact you, although under 'pinging' it is given as one of the ways. I was disappointed by your message. Firstly, because Robinvp11 ‎was the first one to conduct discussion/argument by edit summary - I was just replying to him. Secondly, I have already continued the discussion on Robinvp11's talk page. Thirdly, what is this 'we' business? I didn't say anything about other editors, just Robinvp11. By saying 'we', you are automatically allying with him, which doesn't suggest fairness or impartiality. You are also, in effect, accusing me of saying I know better than all editors, which is daft - of course I don't, and nor would I claim to. Fourthly, there are several weaknesses in his version of the article, which weaken it - not least, by omitting an important quote from the writer he mentions, Walker, which alters Walker's intended meaning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanrhobson (talk • contribs) 09:39, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

@Alanrhobson: I'm not making excuses about Robinvp11's edit summaries; that was bad form on their part. I'm glad you are in contact with Robinvp11 but there might be other interested audiences at that article that could chime in, rather than stalkers of Robinvp11's talk page. My reference to "we" was not meant to connote that I agree with Robinvp11 on the merits; Wikipedia as a community rejected the input of experts a decade ago. The few academics that edit here do so knowing that they have to win over those of us that aren't educated. I imagine that you are probably right about Theophilus Hastings, 7th Earl of Huntingdon. My interest is in calmly explaining that Wikipedia eschews appeals to authority (as Wikipedia is an adhocracy) and discussion should work out the content issue. No one has any personal grudge against you and, while reversions may feel like a slight, they aren't meant to be. Chris Troutman (talk) 14:41, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Chris - thanks for your helpful reply and clarifications. I will switch the discussion to the public talk page for the article, as you suggest. I have also signed my piece on the public talk page, as you further suggest. Robinvp11 has not yet replied. If he doesn't, I shall probably appeal to third party arbitration. Can I request you to be the administrator who arbitrates, or is the choice of administrator a random process? Also, in my third party appeal, may I quote your helpful comment about 'bad form' ('an experienced administrator agreed it was 'bad form' ') or would the repeating o part of a private message be poor protocol? I would appreciate your guidance on these points Alanrhobson (talk) 16:00, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

@Alanrhobson: Just a small nitpick: I'm not an administrator, which is a formal, elected role here on Wikipedia. Also, please avoid assuming Robinvp11's gender. Many Wikipedians either prefer anonymity or do not identify here with a specific gender. It is common here to use singular they. If you decide to go to WP:3O, I would defer to the editors who frequent that board; hopefully that won't be necessary. As this is a content issue, I would post a note about your talk page discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History (though that WikiProject is largely moribund). All contributions, including comments, are captured in every page's history tab and you can cite those edits wherever you choose and without any permission, as all contributions are released CC-BY-SA. While you can cite my opinion, you are on firmer ground pointing to WP:SUMMARYNO about that conduct. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:59, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Chris - thanks for your last, and the useful reminder about use of gender, which stood me in good stead shortly afterwards. I wanted to ask you now about something that has bothered me for a while, and as you are an experienced editor you may be able to throw some light on it for me. On https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_IMDb, it says that whilst citing many categories of IMDb as a source on Wikipedia is 'inappropriate' (e.g. Trivia items), using the cast lists for released films is 'disputed' - i.e. some administrators and editors think it's okay, whereas others don't. Now, I am puzzled at the stance of those who don't, because the cast lists are accepted as a reliable source by many people and organisations - e.g. the BBC quiz show 'Pointless', where thousands of pounds of prize money are at stake, accepts it as reliable. However, my main point is this: given that it is 'disputed', rather than 'inappropriate', why do some editors think it's okay to go round deleting other editors' references to IMDb cast lists? It hasn't happened to me for ages, but only because I am wary of using IMDb cast lists as a source. It happens to others, though, including one I have just come across. Why do those editors think it is okay to do this, given it is a disputed area, not a cut-and-dried one? I would appreciate your thoughts. Best, Alan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanrhobson (talk • contribs) 15:03, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

@Alanrhobson: Before addressing substance, please be sure you sign your talk page comments by ending with four tildes. Simply putting your name after comments does not link to your talk page, which is required. For the substance, while WP:CITEIMDB says it's in dispute, that's not been my experience. IMDb isn't a reliable source because it's crowdsourced. People in that industry add content with even less verifiability that we have here. WP:RS/IMDB is clearer in prohibiting its usage. You can find inclusionists that will glom onto any website as a source. I've found that if it's content worth having here, you can find a reliable source to support it. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:36, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islands. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2019 Hong Kong protests. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Thanks for the help but im still a newbie and don't know how to put your username but still thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Besjan Behrami 2005 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Polish–Ukrainian War. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

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) 21:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2019 Hong Kong protests. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Puddleglum2.0 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Puddleglum2.0 ^{Have a talk?} 20:58, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

OK, after three honest attempts, I give up. However I fail to understand why NMiTE is considered insignificant when it is a groundbreaking higher education institution which has been eleven years in the making and now has 40 staff, £25M in government and private funding, three buildings and has had a huge inauguration ceremony in Hereford Cathedral. It has attracted attention from national press, specialist engineering press, The Royal Academy of Engineering and professional engineering bodies (of course they don't write archival publications about it, but nor do they about the University of Cambridge!). I even wrote - as a volunteer - a history of the first ten years (about to be published - got an ISBN but not on the newsstands yet). Anyway - it's clearly not worth more of my time, but I would like to see an entry before I die (and I'm 76). Peter Goodhew — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodhew (talk • contribs) 09:13, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

@Goodhew: I noticed that you registered your account long ago, so I'm not sure why you haven't read our notability criteria after they've been pointed out to you. All the things you listed about NMiTE: its staff, its funding, its buildings; none of those things matter, at all. Wikipedia has never come to a consensus about organizations' notability based upon membership, revenue, market share, etc. even those are seen as common sense measures by those who don't edit Wikipedia. Please read our criteria and spare yourself heartache. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:26, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2019 Hong Kong protests. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 2 December 2019 (UTC)