User talk:Ahecht

• User talk:Ahechtbot redirects here. User:Ahechtbot is a legitimate alternative bot account of Ahecht. Please use this page for all discussion of that bot account.
• User talk:Ahect redirects here. User:Ahect is a doppelgänger account, so if you see that user mentioned, it's probably a misspelling of User:Ahecht.

File:Church of light.jpg

A Featured Picture you co-nominated File:Church of light.jpg is now nominated for delisting because of excessive photo manipulation (FP criterion #8). You can see the delist nomination at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Aurora over Víkurkirkja church. Bammesk (talk) 18:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

D'oh! --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 22:59, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

@ 87.116.162.27 (talk) 05:10, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Elections: Candidate instructions

Administrator Elections | Instructions for candidates

Thank you for choosing to run in the October 2024 administrator elections. This bulletin contains some important information about the next stages of the election process.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• October 15–21: SecurePoll setup phase
• October 22–24: Discussion phase
• October 25–31: SecurePoll voting phase
• November 1–?: Scrutineering phase

We are currently in the SecurePoll setup phase. Your candidate subpage will remain closed to questions and discussion. However, this is an excellent opportunity for you to recruit nominators (if you want them) and have them place their nomination statements, and a good time for you to answer the standard three questions, if you have not done so already. We recommend you spend the SecurePoll setup phase from October 15–21 getting your candidate page polished and ready for the next phase.

The discussion phase will take place from October 22–24. Your candidate subpage will open to the public and they will be permitted to discuss you and ask you formal questions, in the same style as a request for adminship (RfA). Please make sure you are around on those dates to answer the formal questions in a timely manner.

On October 25, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. Anyone can see who has voted, but not who they voted for. You are permitted and encouraged to vote in the election, including voting for yourself. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see your tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RfA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, you must have received at least 70% support, calculated as support ÷ (support + oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("'crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation as a candidate, and best of luck.

You're receiving this message because you are a candidate in the October 2024 administrator elections.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Our Admin Election Test

Hello there. As we're preparing to move from one stage to the next, this is just a quick note from one member of the test group to another, wishing you well in the process of this new alternative to RfA. It seems that there are more of us in this group than some in the community anticipated, so i hope that doesn't make the experience any the worse for all of us. Whatever our individual results, i thank you, along with the rest, for stepping up and testing this process; happy days, ~ Lindsay^Hello 07:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

@LindsayH Thanks, and good luck! --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 12:35, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Elections: Discussion phase

Administrator Elections | Discussion phase

The discussion phase of the October 2024 administrator elections is officially open. As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• October 22–24 - Discussion phase
• October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
• November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

During October 22–24, we will be in the discussion phase. The candidate subpages will open to questions and comments from everyone, in the same style as a request for adminship. You may discuss the candidates at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Discussion phase.

On October 25, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrator Elections: Voting phase

Administrator Elections | Voting phase

The voting phase of the October 2024 administrator elections has started and continues until 23:59 31st October 2024 UTC. You can participate in the voting phase at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Voting phase.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

• October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
• November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies for a vote will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Template:POTD/2024-11-07

Hello, please request a deletion of the template or move it to another date (round-robin it) because the image used, File:Narva asv2022-04 img09 Castle.jpg, is to not be used on the main page due to it being largely unsourced. Please see WP:POTD/Unused for more information on it. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 04:10, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

@Cowboygilbert I had improved the sourcing on the article a bit, but if you feel it's insufficient I could rewrite the blurb to be about Narva instead. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

@Ahecht, I can still see unsourced paragraphs. I don’t think Narva would be a good fit for the image as it’s not describing it’s direct characteristics or about the castle but about the city in which it’s in. If the photo was a cityscape of Narva than it would make sense as Narva would be it’s direct article. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 20:38, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

@Cowboygilbert  Done --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 02:29, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

La discursivos estan leídas e imprimidas 37.29.128.208 (talk) 18:13, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

What is the story with Template:RfA/selfsubst/sandbox?

{{RfA/selfsubst/sandbox}} is a sandbox page with no parent page. It has no transclusions or incoming links. It ends up in reports because of both of these conditions. What is the reason that it exists? – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:05, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

@Jonesey95 I sort of went down a rabbit hole after I discovered that the instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Nominate were incorrect for self-nominations (when you get to step 5 there is text about disclosing paid editing, and if you interpret "delete the acceptance line" as "leave the acceptance parameter blank", the paid editing statement won't appear on the saved page either). Similarly, for non-self-nominations, the candidate would only see the text about disclosing paid editing if they delete the empty acceptance parameter instead of leaving it blank or adding an acceptance statement.

I started a draft of a fix for these problems at Template:RfA/sandbox and Template:RfA/readyToSubmit/sandbox, but realized that since we have two separate boxes for self-noms and third-party noms, there could be separate preload templates as well, so I drafted up Template:RfA/selfsubst/sandbox as a version of Template:RfA/subst to be preloaded for self-nominations (putting it in the sandbox since it was calling another sandbox template). Given that this was right before the admin elections, I decided to put finishing this work and opening a discussion on hold until the election discussions were settled. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 13:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

You might want to move it to your User space. It is at risk of being speedy-deleted (G8, I think) while you're asleep, and then you'll have to go to the trouble of getting it undeleted. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:43, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

@Jonesey95  Done, thanks. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:57, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Congratulations

Here's your shirt

On your election as a new admin! Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Enjoy the shirt, and the mop ... where's the mop? Oh well, someone else will probably find it for you. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:09, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

New Admin Bâtonnets

I may not be able to offer you the baton, but I hope you can savour these bâtonnets as you study all the new admin buttons! Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:47, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Yum! --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 00:47, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Congratulations! My perfect record for successful nominations remains intact! wbm1058 (talk) 14:28, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Wbm1058 Thanks again! --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:31, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Ahecht Congratulations! Good luck for your Wikipedia journey ahead. Thanks for taking the AWOT seriously. You are an admin now. Maliner (talk) 14:38, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Belated congratulations! Also, bless you for your page swap script. Lifesaver. -- asilvering (talk) 01:42, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Congrats on the adminship.

Just a little something to relieve the stress. Wikibear47 (talk) 18:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Congrats! Andre🚐 22:55, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

A baton for you!

	The new admin baton
	Rsjaffe has passed the baton to me and, after a few hours of pure joy, I am passing it on to you! Congrats on winning your election and make sure to pass a baton on to the next admin once you're done! Sincerely, Dr_vulpes :)

Dr vulpes (Talk) 22:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

"He who does not keep peace shall lose his hand."

	The axe of responsibility
	Shiny new tools might be used to mete out justice, mercy or a dose of reality. Let us commit to not losing our cool when using them. Our only armor is the entire community's trust. We wear it for each other, each new contributor, and each new generation to come. May you ever be the community's champion. BusterD (talk) 14:20, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

For the new sysop in town. Congratulations :) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:14, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

+1. Great addition to the admin team. I was under the impression that @Ahecht was already an admin given their incredible work around RMT. _Regards, Aafi ^(talk) 18:27, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Script to add unreferenced tag

Is there any script to run through WP:AWB or WP:JWB to add the unreferenced tag to articles that has no references? VihirLak007^hmu!/_duh. 05:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@VihirLak007 I don't know of any way to generate that list of unreferenced articles within AWB/JWB. My suggestion would be to generate a list of articles with no external links by running a query through quarry such as this one: https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/87729 (you can download the results using the "Download" button). You would then feed that list into AWB/JWB, and then use the "Skip" tab to have it automatically skip any pages that contain the text <ref to catch pages with offline references. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:48, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

File:Arshin Mehta is an Indian actress andd model.jpg

I am not sure how you see this but wherever uploaders claim own-work (for work that belongs to others), files should be speedily deleted as copyright violations. In case, they attribute and are honest while they upload, {{Npd}} is fine. But given that a higher resolution with meta-data has been uploaded, I suspect COI. _Regards, Aafi ^(talk) 18:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@Aafi I saw you tagged it on Commons. Thanks! --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:28, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Ahecht, are you still working on the article? If not, I will proceed to revdel the copyvio revisions. I came across this article at WP:RM/TR. What a rabbit hole this article is. – robertsky (talk) 18:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Just what I have learned through my journey as an admin on Wikimedia Commons. Previous publication of the file + dishonesty from the uploader (claiming own work) = clear case of copyright violation. Npd belongs to files where uploader clearly attributes the file to other sources/authors, and there's a reason why {{Npd}} says, "It is attributed to someone other than the uploader, or to an external site". If there's no attribution, npd doesn't apply. _Regards, Aafi ^(talk) 18:36, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@Robertsky I got sidetracked before I could finish looking into that article. Feel free to go ahead and revdel. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

thanks! – robertsky (talk) 22:03, 8 November 2024 (UTC)