User talk:Redrose64/unclassified 35

Template:Editnotices/Page/The Folk of the Faraway Tree has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:47, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Template:Editnotices/Page/The Magic Faraway Tree (novel) has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:51, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

I really thought your account was hacked, hence the WP:AIV report. It turned out the "user gone rogue" was @TattooedLeprechaun:, who has been blanking talk pages; you were reverting their edits. Really should have looked before I lept. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 14:51, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

@Mvcg66b3r: I suggest that you look at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#TattooedLeprechaun, which is what I was acting upon in my capacity as an administrator. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 15:04, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

The Space-Time Telegraph Volume III, Issue III — December 2025 Brought to you by the editors of WikiProject Doctor Who Help! We've been robbed... of a new Doctor Who Christmas special this year :( 2025... I Let You Go *vworp vworp, vworp vworp* The Space-Time Telepgraph is back again with our final issue of the year. With 13-episodes of Who-related content broadcast in 2025, it marked the biggest year in the Whoniverse since 2017! Take a quick read below for all the Wikipedia-related (and non-Wikipedia-related) Doctor Who news that you missed, and everything you have to look forward to. Happy New Year! 🥳🎉 Would you like a jelly baby Good or Featured article? It's been several months since the last newsletter, and a number of new GAs have been added to the quality content list. In total we have promoted nearly 50 Good Articles this year, on top of one Featured Article, making this the year with the largest amount of promoted Doctor Who-related content in Wikipedia history (Beating our previous record of 2012's 36 by a significant margin). Congratulations to all of our editors who have contributed to quality content this year, and we hope to see the number of quality articles under our project grow as time goes on. Intelligence Bulletin from the Subwave Network A five-part miniseries and spin-off of Doctor Who, The War Between the Land and the Sea concluded airing this month on BBC One. The series will release on Disney+ next year. The conclusion of that series on Disney+ will officially mark the end of the co-production deal between the Beeb and the Mouse House that was first announced in 2022. While Doctor Who has been confirmed to continue with a 2026 Christmas Special written by Russell T Davies, its status in international markets has yet to be announced. CBeebies has also found an animation partner for a 52-part animated spin-off set to begin production next year and air across two series from 2027–2029. The War Between will also receive a DVD and Blu-ray release on 27 February. A physical release of the soundtrack album for that series from Lorne Balfe will precede it on 30 January; however, it is already available on digital platforms. On 12 December, the long-awaited and long-requested tenth series soundtrack from Murray Gold was published. Season 21 will receive a "Collection" release on 16 March, featuring a remastered episodes with new special features. Additionally a plethora of new audio and print stories are due for publication in early 2026. Their songs have ended... but their stories never end 🌹 Since the previous issue was published, a number of people related to the Whoniverse have sadly passed away and some who passed away before the previous issue only had their deaths announced recently: 2019 19 April - Roger Minnis, 75, actor (Spearhead from Space, Doctor Who and the Silurians, The Ambassadors of Death, The Claws of Axos) 2020 19 April - Bernard Barnsley, 86 or 87, actor (The Ark, Doctor Who and the Silurians, The Time Monster) 11 September - Neil Sweetmore, 86, dresser (Warriors of the Deep) 2021 5 December - Peggy Sirr, 92, actress (Marco Polo) 2022 21 January - Terence Lodge, 85, actor (The Macra Terror, Carnival of Monsters, Planet of the Spiders) 9 May - Christopher Denham, 83, actor (The Savages) 1 June - Vaughan Collins, 74, actor (The Awakening) 17 November - Desmond McCarthy, production assistant (The Moonbase) Their songs have ended... but their stories never end 🌹 (continued) 2023 30 August - Jenny Doe, 76, director's assistant (Shada) and production associate (Terror of the Vervoids) 2024 10 March - Conrad Monk, 87, actor (The Daleks' Master Plan) 25 July - Brian White, cameraman (regular from 1960s onwards, work includes the Dalek POV at the end of The Daleks - "The Dead Planet") 2025 27 March - Ray Lavender, 85, actor (The Androids of Tara, The Horns of Nimon, The Leisure Hive, Snakedance) 5 April - Peter Noel Cook, 97, actor (The Ambassadors of Death) (death only announced in November) 17 May - Gawn Grainger, 87, actor (The Mark of the Rani) 14 June - Joanna Bacon, 72, actress (The Havoc of Empires, The Man at the End of the Garden) (death only announced in July) 6 July - Ralph Wilton, 86, production assistant (Shada), production manager (Arc of Infinity), and lighting crew (The Crusade) 4 August - Richard Ireson, 78, actor (The Mind Robber, The Krotons) 5 August - Stanley McGeagh, 88, actor (Colony in Space, The Sea Devils) 6 August - Christopher H. Bidmead, 84, script editor (Season 18) and writer (Logopolis, Castrovalva, Frontios) 9 August - Ray Brooks, 86, actor (Daleks' Invasion Earth 2150 A.D., The Trouble with Drax) 10 August - Biddy Baxter, 92, producer of Blue Peter (see connection to Doctor Who on the TARDIS Wiki) 23 August - Dave Taylor, 60 or 61, comic book artist (Terrorformer) 3 September - Derek Chafer, 90, actor (The Time Meddler, The Myth Makers, The Invasion, and many more (see TARDIS Wiki for details)) 6 October - John Woodvine, 96, actor (The Armageddon Factor, The Galileo Trap, The Satanic Mill) 13 October - Tony Caunter, 88, actor (The Crusade, Colony in Space, Enlightenment) 14 October - Gregg Palmer, 84, actor (The Tenth Planet, The War Games) 25 October - Nabil Shaban, 72, actor (Vengeance on Varos, Mindwarp, Mission to Magnus, Antidote to Oblivion, Sil and the Devil Seeds of Arodor) Tony Adams, 84, actor (The Green Death) 5 November - Pauline Collins, 85, actress (The Faceless Ones, "Tooth and Claw") November - Steven Ismay, 76[a], actor (The Daemons, Day of the Daleks, The Sea Devils, and many more (see TARDIS Wiki for details)) 19 December - Amanda Brotchie, director ("Lux", "The Well") Notes [a] The reported birth date doesn't match any birth record so the accuracy of this age is uncertain. Contributors: Pokelego999 (talk) Spectritus (talk) TheDoctorWho (talk) If you wish to contribute to future editions of the newsletter, leave a message on the WikiProject talk page or reach out to one of the current contributors listed above. If you do not wish to receive future editions of the Space-Time Telegraph, please remove your name from our our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:37, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Hello Redrose64: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a great New Year! Cheers, Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 11:30, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year snowman}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

Thank you, Iggy the Swan! --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 12:12, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Redrose64,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 14:31, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

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

Abishe (talk) 14:31, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, Abishe! --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 12:13, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Template:The Faraway Tree editnotice has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:28, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

The navbox in the body of the article only shows the Berwickshire Railway information.

Can you please add the inforormation to that navbox that will also show the preceding and following stations on the main line of the North British Railway

Heald Green (talk) 23:43, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

@Heald Green: Ayton station is a settlement in Canada, and has nothing about railways. It's also a location that I know nothing about. There are also no clues in your editing history. Please provide the exact page name in the form of a Wikilink. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 00:22, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. The railway station to which I made reference to was the one in Scotland, situated on the main line of the North British Railway near to Reston. It opened on 22 June 1846 and closed on 8 Feb 1962. Heald Green (talk) 06:53, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

But what is the exact name of the article? Reston is a disambiguation page. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 09:18, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

The name of the Wikipedia article about this railway station in Scotland is Ayton railway station. Heald Green (talk) 10:15, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

OK,  Done, see here. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 23:19, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi RedRose; Your strong statement on the Trump Talk page today about the RfC I think can be corrected by a simple rewrite into 4 options. Something like this to replace that RfC which is not being received very well:

There appear to be four options for dealing with bulking down the currently overlong and sprawling article for the Trump biography.

Option 1. Full deletion of the "Political practice and rhetoric" subheading as being fully redundant with the sibling Wikipedia articles for Political positions of Donald Trump, Rhetoric of Donald Trump, and Trumpism. There appears to be no reason to reduplicated the same material in full on all of these sibling pages at the same time. Fully delete it as it is already being maintained in full on three other Wikipedia sibling articles.

Option 2. A sharp condense and trim of the entire "Political practice and rhetoric" subheading could reduce it down to 10% or 20% of its current size (60Kb) by noting that it is a duplication of material which already exists on the Trump sibling articles for Political positions of Donald Trump, Rhetoric of Donald Trump, and Trumpism. No need to reduplicate prose which already is fully maintained in current sibling Wikipedia articles.

Option 3. The prose in that section should be kept without changes to the 345Kb size of the current article, and the article and section should be allowed to continue to expand and grow. Computer memory is cheap and there is no priority which requires editors to absolutely follow WP:TOOBIG and WP:TLDR Wikipedia policy statements.

Option 4. A page split of the "Political practice and rhetoric" section into a standalone Wikipedia article would bring the article down to under 300Kb for the first time over the last five year period as a residual option.

It seems that replacing the current RfC with something like this one would cover all of the options (with your clean-ups added as needed), and take care of the 'bad RfC' comments presently being placed on the Talk page there. It might need sysops to do this since I do not know how to remove someone else's RfC after it is activated and then assert this one as its replacement; even though it seems to address the issue you raise. Can you help out on this. ErnestKrause (talk) 21:11, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

For an article like that, a WP:BOLD split would be ultra-controversial, so any split proposals must be discussed. It's just that WP:RFC is the wrong process. Therefore, I didn't close the discussion, instead I merely removed the {{rfc}} tag (which is all that is required to get Legobot to remove the entry from listings like WP:RFC/POL) and left an explanatory comment. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:23, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

With the RfC delisted, then it appears to be the same as the previous discussion on that page titled: "Split "Political practice and rhetoric" to a new article?" The RfC just opened by Space4Time appears to have been filed for the purpose of countervailing that previous discussion for "Split...", but using an RfC template instead of regular 'discussion' to gain what looks like an unfair advantage over the edits of Riposte97. (By unfair, I mean that an RfC announcement attracts many more participants from Wikipedia as a whole, rather than just the occasional visitors to the Trump Talk page alone.) If you could somehow merge these discussions together into one RfC at least somewhat resembling the Option1-to-Option4 version I've presented above, then it would seem to address all of these issues all at once without the need for tracking 4 isolated discussions on the Trump Talk page all at once, which is nearly impossible to do for the average reader of the Trump Talk page. ErnestKrause (talk) 21:59, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

The proper way of publicising a split discussion is to use a suitable template at an appropriate point in the article. Several are available, they include: {{split}}; {{split portions}}; {{section move from}}; and {{split section}}. In this way, the page will be categorised as a split proposal, and various noticeboards will be notified similarly. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:42, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Its all good I think if Riposte97, the RfC author, were to rewrite that RfC as a straight deletion RfC rather than an article split discussion. In defense of his view, it appears that he states that the subheading under discussion ("Political practice and rhetoric") is a full copy of material that already exists on 3 other Trump sibling articles including Trumpism and others. Can he place a new RfC as a discussion of the deletion or straight archival of that subheading instead of proposing it as a split? It seems that Space4Time is getting a big boost for his recently placed countervailing RfC which is receiving disproportionate attention in comparison to the lack of attention which Riposte97 is getting for his viewpoint, which is still being supported in the other Trump Talk page threads already in progress for several weeks. Can he do a RfC to discuss the full deletion of that section on "Political practice and rhetoric" as redundant to the 3 other full copies of it currently being maintained in sibling Trump articles already on Wikipedia at the same time? ErnestKrause (talk) 23:24, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Discuss first: RfC is an instrument of last resort, not something to jump straight into. Make sure that all of WP:RFCST is observed, including the portions concerning WP:RFCBEFORE, WP:RFCNOT and WP:RFCBRIEF. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:54, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

My edit there did what you suggested with the templates, but now Space4Time is switching the Talk page links to other threads there different than the one which Riposte97 started; is he supposed to do this? On behalf of Riposte97, he did follow your advice for opening Talk page discussion before trying to start his RfC, but his process was disrupted when Space4Time decided to open his own countervailing RfC for his own purposes. Now Riposte97's comments are left scattered over different threads on the Trump Talk page, and Space4Time seems to be fragmenting the links for his own purposes. Can you repair this since both Riposte97 and Bill Williams have spent a good deal of time to make their case and they have been supported by multiple editors. ErnestKrause (talk) 19:40, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Quick facts

story · music · places

Close

300 years ago, a Bach cantata was born: happy new year! - Thank you cleaning up greetings! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:06, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Ooops, sorry; I was listening to some Strauss earlier - quite by chance, and not because I watched 2001 twice last week. --Redrose64 🦌 (talk) 20:15, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

thank you! - inviting you to check out "my" story (fun listen today, musical entertainment full of surprises), music (and memory), and places (pictured by me: the latest uploads) any day! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:49, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

20 January is the 100th birthday of David Tudor (see my story) and the 300th birthday of Bach's cantata Meine Seufzer, meine Tränen, BWV 13, if we go by date instead of occasion as he would have thought, so see my story for last Sunday, and celebrate ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:35, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

I am from supaul . And u make a category (Category: Railway stations in supaul district) and (Category: Railway stations in Samastipur district) in which u added supaul railway station in Samastipur but it should be in supaul please fix it please Tejas101099993 (talk) 08:55, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

@Tejas101099993: I created Category:Railway stations in Supaul district way back in March 2017, along with a bunch of others, but not Category:Railway stations in Samastipur district - that already existed at the time, being created in September 2015 by Nocowardsoulismine (talk · contribs). I have never edited that category. Of the seven articles presently in it, I have only edited three - Khudiram Bose Pusa railway station, Mohiuddinnagar railway station and Shahpur Patori railway station; I edited each of them once, in order to replace {{India-railstation-stub}} with {{Bihar-railstation-stub}} (example). None of those edits would have put the articles into Category:Railway stations in Samastipur district. I have certainly never edited Supaul railway station which was added to the category in September 2025 with this edit by Dl2000 (talk · contribs). Why are you blaming me? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:50, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

@Tejas101099993: I fixed the categories by making appropriate changes to Supaul railway station. Agreed, the station should have been in the Supaul district category, while Samastipur is a railway division, not a district. Hope these changes help. See Wikipedia:Categorization for full details on how categories work in WP. Dl2000 (talk) 23:35, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

@redrose64 i am not blaming you i am just saying to fix it. Thanks for fixing it Tejas101099993 (talk) 05:44, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

can u improve it? Tejas101099993 (talk) 06:04, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

@Tejas101099993: Regarding your phrase i am just saying to fix it - that reads like a direct order. Wikipedia does not work that way. In any case, did you read the comment by Dl2000 above, and have you inspected either Supaul railway station, Category:Railway stations in Supaul district or Category:Railway stations in Samastipur district at any point since that post was made? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:58, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

sorry, My English isn't too much good Tejas101099993 (talk) 01:59, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Template:Airports in the Middle East has been listed for discussion, which may result in the template being merged or deleted by consensus. You are invited to comment on the proposed action at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. TimeEngineer (talk) 11:00, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

@TimeEngineer: You're only supposed to notify the creator and the major contributors. This is not a major contribution. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:32, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi Redrose64, how does MOS:SPECIFICLINK apply at ? The guideline doesn't say anything about piping as far as I can see. Robby.is.on (talk) 22:37, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, further down the same page: MOS:LINKINNAME and also tangentially MOS:NOPIPE. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:04, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

I don't see how those apply, either, I'm afraid. In our case, the ", Edinburgh" bit is not part of the name of the place but for disambiguation. Robby.is.on (talk) 23:11, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

@Robby.is.on: also MOS:GEOLINK. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:07, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Again, it says nothing against piping the way I did it. What GEOLINK doesn't allow is if I had linked "Edinburgh". Robby.is.on (talk) 14:10, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

I changed Maria Brontë to redirect to the notable mother of the Brontë sisters, but I see that you reverted the change, pointing at a deletion discussion for her child. This doesn't make sense to me. The AfD determined that the child isn't notable, but we do have a page for her mother, who had the same name. Are you arguing that the non-notable child is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the name Maria Brontë? pburka (talk) 23:06, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

@Pburka: The AfD for Maria Brontë was closed as redirect to Brontë family#Children; this was done by Timotheus Canens (talk · contribs) at 12:57, 7 August 2025 (UTC). I'm not claiming she's notable. I'm saying that for almost fifteen years (i.e. since the creation of the page at 13:44, 25 September 2010 until the AfD was closed), the page Maria BrontëMaria Brontë was about the eldest child of Patrick Brontë, and not about his wife. I'm also saying that it's not acceptable to repurpose that page name without discussion, even if the mother is more notable than the daughter. If you disagree with that outcome, you have three options: (i) file a WP:DRV; (ii) file a WP:RFD; (iii) leave it be. If you choose (ii), you will need to also file a RfD for Maria BronteMaria Bronte, otherwise we will have two redirects (differing only in a diaresis) with different targets. What you cannot do is unilaterally alter the outcome of the AfD without discussion. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:30, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Of course I can act unilaterally! That's what WP:BOLD demands. Now that it's been opposed, I'm discussing it. DRV doesn't make sense, but I'll happily take it to RFD. pburka (talk) 23:36, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Done: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 February 17#Maria Brontë. Thanks for pointing out the AfD. pburka (talk) 23:48, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know - what guidance says not to archive the closed requests? Katzrockso (talk) 12:49, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

@Katzrockso: If you open up any section, such as the Requested moves section, it says "*** PLEASE don't archive old discussions yourself! Let a bot do it. Archiving the done close requests triggers the bot to do other essential things. ***". Also, you sent the thread to archive 37, whilst the current one is archive 42. In general, OneClickArchiver (which is buggy) must not be used on any page set up for automatic archiving by bot. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:07, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

I don't see that notice anywhere, but thanks for letting me know. Katzrockso (talk) 22:18, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Did you click the "[edit]" link for the Requested moves section? You will see this:

== Requested moves ==
<!--
Please place entries ordered by the date the proposal was initiated (oldest at top)

Please ensure you add the {{initiated|*date here*|type=rm|done=}} template when placing a request here

*** PLEASE don't archive old discussions yourself!  Let a bot do it.  Archiving the done close requests triggers the bot to do other essential things. ***
Place new requests below this line using a level 3 heading -->

--Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:18, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Regarding this: I have no idea how that happened. Since I'm the third editor to introduce the exact words at the same location, I wonder if there's a bug somewhere. I had a quick look at that sentence (including the signature) and I don't see anything obvious. M.Bitton (talk) 00:05, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

@M.Bitton: I don't understand why it happened either, which is why I sent it to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Rogue nowiki tags repeatedly added where they are unnecessary.

I have removed the less-than and greater-than from your section heading: please don't use a <nowiki> without closing it, especially not in a section heading - it will cause this page to become corrupt the next time that somebody adds a <nowiki>...</nowiki> pair later on. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:51, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

For the bot to archive, the template needs updating doesn't it? It's not showing as done as is only =y, not =yes. So it's needs to incorrectly appear as "done" in order to archive. You happy to sort out? CNC (talk) 22:59, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

@CommunityNotesContributor: Fixed, but I don't see why you were unable to do that. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:04, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I was able to incorrectly update as done, but chose not to. CNC (talk) 23:08, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

If you want to add a note that the request was not done and is not going to be done, use a template like {{not done}}, {{partially done}} etc. The |done=yes does two things: first, it alters the coloured "Initiated" text to black "Done"; second, it signals that the request requires no further action and may be archived. Archiving occurs when ClueBot III next passes by, which is rarely immediate. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:17, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Right, sorry it's just my objection inability to mark something as done when it's not. It's more of an issue with the template that was recently changed more than anything I guess. CNC (talk) 23:24, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

i saw you got rid of the rfc thing I made because I didnt make it right do you know how to make it sorry. AlbanyParkChicago (talk) 13:30, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@AlbanyParkChicago: I have already directed you to WP:RFCST, also please write in normal English, not in txtspk. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:49, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

oh im sorry I didnt know. AlbanyParkChicago (talk) 19:27, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

is a consequence of WP:BANREVERTs. You may wish to review the block log and/or user page of the editor being reverted next time. Izno (talk) 23:14, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

You may wish to note the block in your edit summary next time that you make a second revert. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:56, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Standard rollback does not allow for edit summaries, and any other avenue of reverting will take some extensive time given that this user makes a hundred or more edits before being caught, sometimes in the span of mere hours. I have other things to do with my life, even if it means I need to let another editor know what's going on with a talk page note. Izno (talk) 03:36, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Have you considered User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/massRollback? That allows for custom edit summaries, see for example these edits. I should perhaps have included a link to the WP:ANI thread, but that didn't exist at the time that I began preparing for a mass rollback. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:44, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Just wanted to bring to your attention that I had added the link as a newcomer's task and the link was suggested by whatever program or WP thingy suggests it and it was not a link to an incorrect article.

I am now in two minds about the newcomer task related to links even when the suggest link is clearly nor wrong or inaccurate. I think some clarity could benefit us both. Yardahallen (talk) 19:45, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

@Yardahallen: My edit was to delink Holdenhurst in the phrase to the east side of Holdenhurst Road in Bournemouth, but whilst the article Holdenhurst exists, it's not relevant here - it doesn't help readers to understand the location of the railway. See WP:CONTEXT, the part about "Relevant connections to the subject of another article that help readers understand the article more fully". In the context of the phrase to the east side of Holdenhurst Road in Bournemouth, "Holdenhurst" goes with the word "Road" that follows it; a valid link would have been "to the east side of Holdenhurst Road in Bournemouth", but that article does not exist and isn't likely to be created. So it's best to leave it unlinked.

As for the newcomer tasks, particularly add links, in the past I have come across many cases where the link added was unhelpful or even just plain wrong. Please note that scripts are not 100% guaranteed correct, and as with any other edit, should be checked for validity before saving. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:39, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page LB&SCR E2 class, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 22:20, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

@Redrose64

I do get rather disheartened with Wiki, when I do all the work putting stuff together, and then someone breezes along and changes stuff, esp when there was nothing wrong in the first place. Still doing my best to make things consistent - are you thinking of changing the 400 or so other pages?

I've tried various ways to present station honours, never seem to suit everyone. I use double colon and a space, as it gives a minor separation between groups of awards. As with 1 Bronze medal award in 1990, and then three in 2004.

Martin Ojsyork (talk) 19:12, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

@Ojsyork: By doing so, you are causing accessibility problems in at least three ways:

1. Leaving blank lines - in any kind of list - violates WP:LISTGAP
2. Switching between asterisks and colons at the outermost level goes against WP:COLAS
3. Using colons is a misuse of definition list markup. We tolerate this in discussions, but should really not be doing it in articles. I should really have altered all of the list markup to use asterisks exclusively, in order to produce a consistent unordered list.

I have been fixing list issues such as this for many years now. I am also pretty sure that I have explained this to you in the past, although perhaps not on this page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:35, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

@Redrose64

We have never discussed gaps. We have discussed breaks and ubls

The major difficulty is there are so many rules, and counter rules, that normal folks can't possibly hope to complete a page without getting stuff wrong (or perceived that is wrong). I have absolutely no interest in learning it all. Takes me all my time to create pages.

But I take your points on board.

However, I can't help thinking that the use of "asterisk colon" causes even more problem than a consistent pair of colons??

So - what if we lost the bullet point completely

And just used fewer Colons??

I've just amended Portaferry for you to evaluate, and discuss..

Martin Ojsyork (talk) 21:15, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Portaferry is now worse. What you have given it is six discrete paragraphs each naming a medal or other honour. In between these paragraphs, and after the last one, are six incomplete definition lists. They're incomplete because while there are several description entries, there are no term entries. This is improper use of a definition list, which as I pointed out above, is tolerated in discussions pages (because we've been doing it for well over twenty years) but is not acceptable in articles.

Look at it this way. If you are providing information that is to be presented as a list, you meed to mark it up as a list - and not just any list but a valid one that does not violate accessibility guidelines. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:13, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Above you said not to leave blank lines.

You said not to mix up asterisks and colons.

and I looked at the definition list criteria.

Unless you're wrapped up in all this nonsense, there is no way of understanding what the heck it all means!

I don't get how making it simpler is incorrect. (and don't try to explain)

I've put it back to how you left it. Ojsyork (talk) 23:57, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Here's Portaferry Lifeboat Station as I found it:

*[[RNLI Bronze Medal]]
::John Desmond Rogers, Helm – 1983

*The Thanks of the Institution inscribed on Vellum
::William Ellison, crew member – 1983
::Francis Rogers, crew member – 1983

::Simon Rogers, Helm – 2006

*The Walter and Elizabeth Groombridge Award 2006<br/>{{small|(for the outstanding inshore lifeboat rescue of the year)}}
::Simon Rogers, Helm – 2006
::Sinead Breen – 2006
::Philip Sands-Robinson – 2006
::Andrew Edwards – 2006

*A Collective Letter of Thanks signed by the Chairman of the Institution
::Portaferry Lifeboat Station – 2005

::Portaferry Lifeboat Station – 2006

*[[Order of the British Empire|Member, Order of the British Empire (MBE)]]
::Eveleigh Finola Margaret Brownlow – 2014QBH<ref name="BrownlowEFM">{{cite web |title=Ordinary Members of the Civil Division of the said Most Excellent Order of the British Empire |url=https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/60895/supplement/b17 |publisher=London Gazette |access-date=14 October 2024}}</ref>

*[[British Empire Medal]]
::Patricia Mary Browne, chair, Portaferry Fundraising Branch – 2022QBH<ref name="BrownePM">{{cite web |title=British Empire Medal |url=https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/63714/supplement/B30 |publisher=London Gazette |access-date=14 October 2024}}</ref>

There are seven blank lines; each of these terminates the present list and starts a new one. So the first thing to do is eliminate those blank lines. Next, there are eleven cases where the leftmost character on a line is different from the leftmost character on the previous line - six where a colon has an asterisk above it, and five where an asterisk has a colon above it. Each of those also terminates the present list and starts a new one. So the next thing to do is: on each line that begins with two colons, replace the first colon with an asterisk, so that the leftmost character is consistent all the way down. Ideally, we would replace the second colon as well, but that's less important.

Finally: accessibility is not "nonsense". We have a not-insignificant number of partially-sighted readers, and quite a few who have no sight at all. They use screen reader software such as JAWS or NonVisual Desktop Access, which when encountering a list, will announce it in the best way it can - with the article as I found it they will hear something like "List of one item. First item. RNLI Bronze Medal. Link. End of list. List of one item. First item. List of one item. First item. John Desmond Rogers, Helm – 1983. End of list. End of list. List of one item. First item. The Thanks of the Institution inscribed on Vellum." and so on. All those "End of list. List of one item. First item." are clearly undesirable: it would be far better for them to hear "Next item". The readers may wish to skip past all that to something comprehensible. We must consider those people. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:38, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

@Redrose64

Just to be clear.

I have every respect for folks using Screen Readers, and will do what I can to make things acceptable. I do not think it is nonsense.

I was trying to point out that for folks other than those who are wrapped up in understanding code - the instructions regarding 'definition lists' make absolutely no sense. I have no idea what it all means. That is the nonsense bit.

Martin Ojsyork (talk) 18:58, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

@Redrose64

I wanted to say, first, there is really no intention to wind you up. I didn't just undo what you did, I came to ask.

However, there is no point you pointing folks at a load of rules that make no sense. BUT - I do get the point that a screen reader will start and stop unneccessarily.

So I've learned how to try out Windows narrator, and I have a bit more understanding.

I will implement your changes as I progress updates of the lifeboat pages... UNLESS - there is a better solution?

I have tried out a glossary list, and a template-structured description list, but this doesn't seem to improve things.

Martin Ojsyork (talk) 21:31, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Consider it this way. You have a number of medals, awards and other honours. For each of these, you have a number of recipients of that honour. These should be organised in some coherent manner such that they not only look right to a sighted person, they also sound right to a blind person. HTML offers us a number of ways to group content: among other things, there are: paragraphs; preformatted text; quotations; lists and so on. Tnree types of list are provided:

• the ordered list, for use when the order of presentation is significant - such as the various steps that you take when making a cake
• the unordered list, for use when the order of presentation is not significant - such as the ingredients used to make a cake
• the definition list (also known as the description list or association list) is similar to the unordered list (although it may be ordered, e.g. alphabetically) but for each entry (the term) you also have an associated definition or description. See for example Glossary of rail transport terms which is mostly definition lists, one list for each alphabetical heading.

The above is formatted as an unordered list. Returning to your honours, we're not defining anything, nor is the order critical - so an unordered list is most appropriate. The recipients can also be organised as a list, and again I would say that an unordered list is most appropriate. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:09, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2026 March 26 § Pre-1800 introductions on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:17, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

I am a first cousin of that member, who is now in a very serious health position at an elderly age. When I visited him at the nursing home, he asked if I would make an amendment to his personal Wikipedia page, using the wording suggested by him, which I did, using his HP Pavilion desktop computer. He gave me his password to enable this to happen. I note that that requested change has been reverted and I ask that it be reinstated. He will not be returning to Wikipedia again.

Heald Green (talk) 11:20, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

@Heald Green: I am sorry to hear about your cousin; but I must inform you that sharing passwords is forbidden. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:30, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

I think that in this very instance, noting the medical circumstances that ensue, he was just endeavouring to leave a final message on his personal page. He had been a Wikipedia member for quite a number of years and thought the action taken was the best way to leave a final message to those who knew of him. I now hope that the nursing home in which he now resides will ensure that he has the best of care. His property is currently on the market and the sale proceeds will ensure that the monthly costs of the nursing home will no longer be a source of worry to him. i am of a similar age range to him.

I have all his railway ephermia and find this to be most inteesting and a new source of hobby interest for me. I have now been given his HP Pavilion Desktop computer and a computer engineer has given it a full updating service. I have bought a large AOC monitor, togerher with a new digital keyboard and mouse.

Heald Green (talk) 14:01, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Re:this since it's apparently not common knowledge, the visual editor (which the TA had been using) automatically applies whitespace padding to infoboxes so that parameter values are aligned. If you've been reverting other constructive changes over this non-visible adjustment, now you know that it's not vandalism. ᴸᵃᶠᶠʸTaffer💬(they/she) 22:36, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, correction: evidently it removes said whitespace padding. Either way, not a change that affects anything visible. ᴸᵃᶠᶠʸTaffer💬(they/she) 22:40, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Visual Editor is buggy, and has been since it was introduced some fifteen years ago. It's still in beta. The people who wrote it won't take the time to clear up a whole heap of longstanding issues. I won't use it, and I encourage others not to either. But as with any other assisted edit, you are responsible for all changes made when you go for Publish changes, whether you intended to make them or not. This is why we provide the Show preview and Show changes features. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:53, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Of course. Since I'm here, is there some policy prohibiting the cosmetic edits that things such as VisEd will incidentally make while submitting constructive edits? Closest I was able to find was something like WP:COSMETICREVERT, which discourages such reverts. ᴸᵃᶠᶠʸTaffer💬(they/she) 23:06, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I saw that you changed the capitalization of the navbox "Apple Inc. suppliers" to "Apple Inc. Suppliers" and was trying to understand why the first "S" should be capitalized. I couldn't figure it out based on Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Capital_letters#Headings, headers, and captions. Is there a different page I should be referring to on this or am I simply misunderstanding the concept? Thanks. Ash.tahno (talk) 13:57, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

@Ash.tahno: You refer, presumably, to this edit. Please observe the edit summary: it reads "fix v-t-e links". These may be found at the top left of the navbox, and in the page as it was before my edit, these links were not reaching the correct page. The |name= parameter must match the template's name exactly, with no variation of capitalisation. The template is Template:Apple Inc. Suppliers, with a capital S. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:13, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Oh, that makes sense! My bad, I see what I got confused by now. Thank you, Ash.tahno (talk) 14:20, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I apologize to bother, but would you please be able to take another look at my template edit request on {{Multiple image}}? There has not been any movement on it in over a week, and the template remains semi-broken for dark mode.

You had asked me to make my changes to the styles.css sandbox, but I had already done so prior, and even provided several examples in the testcases. I had provided the inline diff on the talk page as not everything within the sandbox needs to/should be imported, but are necessary for displaying the changes in testcases as the default style sheet and the sandbox one conflict in application when both are used.

Please let me know if there is something else I can clarify. Thank you for your time. ~ oklopfer (💬) 18:01, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Isaiahrichmon367 reported by User:Danners430 (Result: Pblocked). Thank you. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 07:20, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the link to Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Section headings (necessary point 7) in your edit summary here. In the almost 15 years I've been on this site I've never encountered that issue. I was looking for an explanation for the strange behavior, but couldn't find one; this explains it. I'll keep it in mind for next time. Renerpho (talk) 13:28, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi@Redrose64

As someone who seems to have a grasp of whats right and wrong, please can you take a look at the recent citation tag added to ..., and advise please

• Southwold Lifeboat Station
• South Broads Lifeboat Station

Martin Ojsyork (talk) 21:06, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

@Ojsyork: Have you tried leaving a question on the talk pages for the articles, or asking BlackJack directly, on their talk page? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Believe it or not, it has happened. First scheduled passenger train on EWRL was indeed a GWR train that terminated at Euston because Paddington was closed for engineering during the 2024/2025 Xmas break. I will try to find the citation. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:25, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

see

• https://railnews.mobi/news/2026/02/19-intercity-express-returns-to-east.html
• https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn7r1e44z10o

Not good enough for citations but still available for Google news search. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:43, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi

The users refuse the consider the source's content. AS said the same and is not under paywall. What is the solution? Football Wikiproject? Panam2014 (talk) 10:45, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

@Panam2014: WT:FOOTY first off, and if they can't help, try WP:RSN. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:20, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

You probably wrote this in good faith, but I am not sure you read the full talk section before posting, because you may unwittingly just have encouraged the RfC starter to keep on his interminable griping that will lead nowhere.

Could I ask you that if you truly want to help the RfC starter to move on to more fruitful endeavours, you end the RfC and close the discussion as a relatively uninvolved editor?

Cheers CapnZapp (talk) 12:46, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Re Talk:British Rail Class 175#Where they are - I'm tempted to close the discussion per NOTFORUM, especially after the original comment was edited earlier... would this be appropriate? Danners430 _{tweaks made} 12:07, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

When viewed on the app using a tablet or smartphone, the Class 168 page shows the three words (Adtranz, Bombardier and Transportation) on three lines. This implies that there was one or three manufacturers; the comma (or other separator) after Adtranz makes it clear that it's two. Experts like us know that, but many viewers won't. I agree the default in lists is for no separators; I only add these when specifically needed, like here. I'll add a different separator into this page. Please don't delete it again; a reasonable compromise. Romiley401 (talk) 12:33, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

@Romiley401: See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists#List styles: no terminal punctuation is used with sentence fragments. If there is an issue with how the {{ubl}} template displays the list items, it would surely be better to make a fix in one place - the template itself - rather than in each one of the 677,000+ pages that transclude the template. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:23, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Typo, sorry. Kristi 銀 speak 00:15, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

I am attempting to work on the backlog Category:Talk pages with comments before the first section and I am confused as to why you are opposing my attempts to fix the pages like Talk:?egota the three ways I have found in the case of pages like that is to either remove the comment, add a heading, or remove the signature. What would you prefer we do in this case? There is nothing explicitly stating that there can't be a section header. And that feels like one of the ways with the least friction. Alternately could probably be made a template itself, but the signature still triggers it. LakesideMiners^{Come Talk To Me!} 03:54, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

@LakesideMiners: Please leave them alone. The format was carefully worked out over several years, beginning in 2017 or perhaps earlier. The post is there to explain the existence of the redirect and why it has the banners that are present. Since it directly concerns those banners it belongs with them; since the post contains non-banner text, it must be signed. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:29, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Can you point me to that then? Because I can't find anything saying there can't be a header. LakesideMiners^{Come Talk To Me!} 14:41, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Can you please point to that? Because I can't find anything about it anywhere aside from you saying it's so. LakesideMiners^{Come Talk To Me!} 14:45, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

For many years (ten? twelve? more?) I've been coming across problems caused by Legobot, trying to explain them and attempting to fix them, all without changing the bot's source code (mainly because I can't write in PHP). When I hit upon a fix that works consistently, I stick with it. At some point, somebody said that I needed to put a note after the {{G8-exempt}} tag to explain its presence, otherwise it would get deleted anyway. I don't always document my workings-out on-wiki, but you might try looking through the archives of User talk:Legobot and User talk:Legoktm. Occasionally somebody comes along and decides that it should be done differently; when the problems then recur, I kinda get annoyed. So, WP:AINTBROKE applies. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:52, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Ain't broke also says "On the other hand, if something is slightly broken in a way that you care about, and fixing it improves the encyclopedia a little, then feel free to fix it." What exactly is my adding headers breaking? The redirect works just fine even after having added a header. I can't find anything by searching your name in the archives of those pages. LakesideMiners^{Come Talk To Me!} 17:01, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes, the redirect works just fine - but that's not the point. It's other things that are happening - or not happening - around it, and people trying to delete a page because they don't understand what it's for. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:26, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

And how does adding a heading cause people to want to delete a page? LakesideMiners^{Come Talk To Me!} 13:34, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Look, it's been done, and I'm trying to prevent it happening again. Now, returning to your original post, where you wrote There is nothing explicitly stating that there can't be a section header. - I'm going to turn that around. Where is it explicitly stated that every signed post must be beneath a section heading? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:19, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Category:Talk_pages_with_comments_before_the_first_section

As said by the category, the lack of them can cause issues.

I still want an answer as to how someone will magically decide to do something else because of a section header. LakesideMiners^{Come Talk To Me!} 21:54, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Because people won't read, or perhaps not understand, what's being explained to them. Also, category pages are not policies. I see that there are 0 pages in that category; why is this one a massive problem compared to the others? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:40, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

It's not that it's a problem compared to others, it's that you seem to have a problem with this one in particular so Iv stopped work on it until I can understand. LakesideMiners^{Come Talk To Me!} 12:40, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Redrose64, You reverted my edit of Gypsy Lane railway station which added a northyorks stub template saying it is not in northyorks, however the article states it "serves the suburb of Nunthorpe, Redcar and Cleveland in North Yorkshire, England" which is why I placed the template on the article. I have been working through the english train station stubs to make sure they show up under the county categories but will leave it up to you to decide if this should have a county-struct-stub template and if so which one. Waacstats (talk) 17:24, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

The station is in Redcar and Cleveland; Nunthorpe is in the Borough of Middlesbrough. The boundary between them runs to the south-west of the railway, and parallel to it. Neither of these unitary authorities falls within North Yorkshire (district). When I created Template:NorthYorkshire-railstation-stub and the associated Category:North Yorkshire railway station stubs last November (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/2025/September#Yorkshire and the Humber railway station sub-stub), I carefully went through all stations south of the Tees to determine whether they were correctly assigned or not. Stations falling within the several unitary authorities that at one time constituted Cleveland (county) were given {{NorthEastEngland-railstation-stub}} instead of {{NorthYorkshire-railstation-stub}}. Categories such as Category:Railway stations in Middlesbrough, Category:Railway stations in North Yorkshire and Category:Railway stations in Redcar and Cleveland were verified at the same time. There is a chance that somebody else has been along and altered some of them in the five months since then. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:07, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi

Lots of sources used for Casio V.P.A.M. calculators are unreliable like forums. What is the solution? Panam2014 (talk) 00:18, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

First, try to find some reliable sources as replacements. You should also take it to the talk page of the article. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:15, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

I have corrected some sources. Also if a replacement is not found, should we remove some informations? Also could you made a general checking? Panam2014 (talk) 09:47, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Can you sense check what I just posted to ~2026-20374-51 (talk · contribs) at Talk:Glossary of United Kingdom railway terms? I think the temporary account because new user Robloxroutemaster (talk · contribs), but then used the temporary account and logged in account to post and then answer him/herself which is of course sockpuppetry. By this point in the discussion they were staring to sound a bit desperate. I don't want to go full SPI at this point hence asking for your insight and a more experienced editor and admin. Thanks. 10mmsocket (talk) 20:16, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes, Robloxroutemaster was created just five minutes before their first post to Talk:Glossary of United Kingdom railway terms, and twenty minutes before their first edit to the article. They've shown no interest at all in any other pages. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:03, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

So shenaningans or not? Given the way they answered themselves I suspect it is. 10mmsocket (talk) 21:15, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Do you want to have a guiding word, or maybe ask an uninvolved admin to do so? 10mmsocket (talk) 21:16, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Somebody else I think. Maybe HJ Mitchell (talk · contribs), who has plenty of experience. Or Thryduulf (talk · contribs). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:02, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

The account and the TA have 24 edits between them and judging from the Roblox reference we're dealing with someone quite young. And of course railways are a popular subject for people on the spectrum. If they're not causing any real harm, it might be more productive to overlook technical violations of policy (but obviously work on the assumption that the TA and the account as the same person). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:22, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

I appreciate you taking the time to look into this. We shall keep a watching eye. 10mmsocket (talk) 20:03, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Responding to the allegations made against my account, my account name is influenced by the YouTube channel of which I also know, not precicely influenced by the gaming platform itself. The TA also, I am unsure as to its location, and it is certainly not owned by me. Regarding the fact that my account was made 5 minutes before the edits made, this is simply for the fact that I had been to the page numerous times before, and kept meaning to add terms, knowing a few and coming from the railway (or having railway relation) myself. I can conferm that I am complying with the Sockpuppetry rule, and that the TA and I are in no way affiliated other than the conversation mentioned on the talk page. Robloxroutemaster (talk) 17:05, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Regarding this earlier comment, I correct a typing error which I made, where the word know in the sentence "my account name is influenced by the YouTube channel of which I also know" is supposed to be "own" Robloxroutemaster (talk) 17:43, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Hey, I see you seem to be around. Could you (or whoever sees this) undelete the 2005 edit at Special:Undelete/U.S. Internal Revenue Service for me please? See the relevant logs; I normally used to undelete redirects like that after history merges but obviously forgot to in this case. If you could get to my speedy deletion request at US Internal Revenue Service/temp (if no-one gets there first), that'd be great too. Thanks and trust you're well. Graham87 (talk) 14:26, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

OK,  Done --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:00, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day, Redrose64, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! ☘︎☘︎☘︎ALEXHammeke (talk | guestbook | sandbox) 06:25, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:06, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day! Hi Redrose64! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 14:08, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:10, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting this . Since you seem to know a lot more about this than I do, I've got a few questions:

1. Does this mean I never have to add protection templates on template pages with the Documentation template?
2. Do all templates have the Documentation template?
3. Thought it's possible to untick the box, this is done by default with Twinkle. Should we request that Twinkle be modified to not add protection templates in the template namespace? Or maybe only when the Documentation template is found on the page?

Hoping you can answer some or all of these. Toadspike [Talk] 23:24, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

@Toadspike: (1) yes, and the same applies if the template has {{Collapsible option}} but not {{Documentation}} (there may be others that also automatically add a prot icon, but I'm not aware of them); (2) no, see e.g. Template:Paris Metro Line 17 navbox; (3) I would say so, but it should be only when neither the Documentation template nor the Collapsible option template are found on the page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:21, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks for the explanation! Toadspike [Talk] 14:56, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

@Toadspike: {{Redirect category shell}} also detects prot levels and adds an icon. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:36, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Woah, that's cool! I'll add it to the existing Twinkle request. Toadspike [Talk] 07:43, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

I realize this is somewhat OT, but I saw your handle on the page in question so I thought I would ask...

Is this request posted to the correct page? Or is there some other "infoboxes needed" page I should be posting to?

I tried doing it in my sandbox, but every edit breaks the template so I gave up.

Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:40, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

It's as good a place as any (I take it that {{Infobox electronic component}}, as used at 555 timer IC and Operational amplifier, is unsuitable). You could also try dropping notes at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Electronics and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Technology directing people to your request. Templates such as {{fyi}} and {{subst:please see}} are available for this. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:52, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:27, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I apologize if my failure to close the DRN after launching the RFC caused confusion. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:02, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

It did seem that a WP:OTHERPARENT situation was going on, what with the ongoing and lengthy WikiProject Musicians thread as well. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:28, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

I wasn't familiar with the Musicians discussion at the time. I see that the Evanescence dispute is an occurrence of the larger conflict. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:58, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Since the issue is common to bands in general, there are two ways to address it. The first is to address it at the band level, which may mean a discussion followed by an RFC for each band. The second would be an MOS page specifying the preferred style of timeline, which might require an RFC to select the preferred style overall. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:58, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Are we in agreement that we will let the Evanescence RFC run for 30 days and then close it? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:58, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

I just wondered, would you be prepared to nominate me for adminship at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/May 2026/Candidates/G-13114? I've just been thinking of someone to ask. I'll totally understand if you decline. G-13114 (talk) 00:32, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Does a self-nom not count then? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:19, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

It does, but I've been told it would carry more weight if someone else nominated me as well. Anyway, only do it if you want to. I wasn't sure who to ask tbh. G-13114 (talk) 16:03, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Ah, I've found WP:ADESELF. But I don't nominate/co-nominate admin candidates, sorry. I think I explained this to somebody else some years ago, and there was also User talk:Redrose64/unclassified 33#My RFA. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:29, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Never mind then. G-13114 (talk) 19:11, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Well... I voted. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:45, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for showing me the parts I missed in WP:Signatures! It turns out that skimming through pages is not the best way to learn information that is the most accurate. I often do this. Maybe I should stop skimming...

TheEpicEgg56 09:49, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, but it was a month ago. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:01, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Heyo. Thanks for calling out my error with the RFC at Infobox settlement. Sorry for not following the proper format. Was genuinely trying to do it the right way but obviously missed a few steps. Can you glance at it now and let me know if I need to fix anything else? Much appreciated! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 06:10, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

You didn't need to remove the table, the main thing is that the initial statement - defined as everything from the {{rfc}} tag (exclusive) to the next valid timestamp (inclusive) - cannot contain tables or complex formatting. The new timestamp precedes the point where the table had been. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:08, 21 May 2026 (UTC)