User talk:Broter

Welcome!

Hello, Broter, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Islam and blasphemy. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! Mbcap (talk) 19:28, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Possible area of interest

I'm not sure if you have ever done any proofreading, but I have finished the bulk of the text over at wikisource at wikisource:Index:A dictionary of the Book of Mormon.pdf and another at wikisource:Index:Pearl Of Great Price (1851).pdf which could basically use what they call "verifying," or what is in effect a second proofread, of the pages before I split the content into separate pages for each entry in the dictionary and/or separate works in the Pearl. If you had any interest in doing that, it would be greatly appreciated. John Carter (talk) 16:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	Creating Portal:Community of Christ was a great idea. --- ARTEST4ECHO^(Talk) 15:20, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Broter/Glossary of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

A tag has been placed on Broter/Glossary of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 20:39, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Glossary of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mutual Improvement Association. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re:renaming category

I was under the impression that the pages in the category would be moved automatically, rather than manually as with the pages. I really appreciate the effort in moving all of the pages. If moving the category means that additional work would be needed then I agree that it is unnecessary. -- Hazhk (talk) 17:37, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your addition to Muhammad in Islam, and other articles relating to Islam

Additions need to be relevant. I'm noticing a pattern in your habits where you show a desire to make Muhammad look like a blood thirsty warmonger, using out of context primary source based original research that is only tangentially on-topic. In other cases, I'm seeing the use of outdated sources to make POV statements.

Wikipedia is not the place for any kind of sectarianism. Do you want Muslims to edit articles to push the idea that Joseph Smith was only a racist occultist who advocated pedophilia, pyramid schemes, and snake-oil, and get-rich-quick scams? No? Then do unto others...

I recommend that you avoid editing articles relating to Islam until you've learned to edit them neutrally. That means sticking to non-primary, modern mainstream academic sources and only summarizing them without addition, elaboration, or commentary. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:24, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Citing "Behind the Veil" only reveals that you're editing with an agenda and should not be editing articles related to Islam. Again, should we base the articles on Mormonism on fatwas and the writings of mullahs and imams? I want you to seriously think about that question and answer it, and then explain how your edits aren't hypocritical and sectarian.

I've seen plenty of editors like you taken to WP:ANI and topic banned for your sort of behavior -- Christians, Muslims, Atheists, doesn't matter what sect. No sectarian sources, no sectarian WP:ADVOCACY -- that means you, too. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:24, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reread my above message: I said "non-primary, modern mainstream academic sources." You still aren't finding academic sources. Also, if you're going to lie in your citations, make sure they're not on Google books. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:31, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:14, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Outline of the Book of Mormon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mosiah. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's a merger proposal rgdg LeBaron group/Ch1stborn

...Here: Talk:Church_of_the_Firstborn_of_the_Fulness_of_Times#Merger_proposal.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 17:38, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

I started a discussion about the content you added. I think there may be something to be added to the article, but our WP:BLP policy does not allow us to write that someone threatened to kill someone else, when in fact that someone merely posted a comment suggesting it. Please join the discussion. - Mr X 20:14, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First Warning

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Islamic Terrorism. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been or will be undone. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Please see also WP:QS, Terrorism_in_the_United_States and N°5 The number of terrorist attacks by Jihadist extremists between 2001 and 2011 is 6, compared to 50 by ELF and 34 by ALF--Namarhana (talk) 16:03, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Second warning

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Islamic Terrorism, you may be blocked from editing. . There has been a total of 9 terror attacks since 9/11, three with no harm caused. Even your own source states the same fact "There Have Been Six Successful Acts of Islamic Terrorism on American Soil Since 9/11" and The Guardian confirms it in "Islamist attacks since 9/11". "S.K. Maliks" self-published book fails to meet the standards for WP:SOURCE and is not acceptable. (See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published_sources and WP:QS.) --Namarhana (talk) 19:34, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Islamic Terrorism". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 28 May 2016.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 22:10, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Islamic Terrorism, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 19:21, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Islamic terrorism

You were notified twice about Spencer's unreliability: Talk:Islamic terrorism#Regarding recent edits and Talk:Islamic terrorism#Robert Spencer, and yet I see you reverting and reinstating his crap. As explained on the talk page, you need to go to WP:RSN and contest the already established view regarding his unreliability (linked earlier on the TP). Replying with idiotic statement like "Apparently you want to hide the problematic things, which muhammad said" does NOT absolve you from the need to go to RSN. I suggest you revert yourself or I'm going to raise your case with the admins. Al-Andalusi (talk) 15:21, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

		The Original Barnstar
		is hereby awarded to Broter for creating and developing the Outline of Joseph Smith. A very fine job indeed. The Transhumanist 19:14, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

LDS pioneers

Very interested in creating more articles about LDS pioneers--especially those who founded new towns in Utah or started new businesses.Zigzig20s (talk) 19:40, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Right-wing populism

I have noticed the portal that you created some months ago. Don't you think it may be better to turn it into Portal:Populism, and place the left-wing populists there as well? Cambalachero (talk) 17:51, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

October 2016

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. If you have questions, please contact me.

- Mr X 15:48, 9 October 2016 (UTC) - Mr X 15:48, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you

	The Donald Trump Barnstar
	Thank you for your contributions to the Donald Trump Portal. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 06:09, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Broter. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Outline of the Bible

Hello, Broter,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Outline of the Bible should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Outline of the Bible .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks,

DrStrauss talk 11:22, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re: AfD

I've posted a suggestion and a comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Outline of the Bible. The Transhumanist 20:39, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jehovah's Witnesses and Racsim

I have undone your edit at Criticism of Jehovah's Witnesses for two reasons: A) It was in the wrong spot, I believe, and should more appropriately be in the Social section, but B) more importantly freeminds.org is not a RS. However, the idea itself is not one that should just be ignored. If you can find RS's (merely stating that Bergman has them, through a 3rd party, isn't enough) I would like to see them. Vyselink (talk) 00:38, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Portal help

Hey! I see that you've done quite a bit of work with portals. I am looking to maintain Portal:Barack Obama and Portal:Donald Trump, and I wanted to ask your advice. The Portal:Donald Trump only has five selected articles, and I wanted to add some more. Can I just add any (high-quality, relevant) article? I was specifically looking to add Donald Trump (Last Week Tonight) and Business career of Donald Trump. Werónika (talk) 07:54, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have now added this articles myself to the portal.--Broter (talk) 09:21, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Portal:History of the Latter Day Saint movement/Download

Portal:History of the Latter Day Saint movement/Download, a page which you created or substantially contributed to (or which is in your userspace), has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:History of the Latter Day Saint movement/Download and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:History of the Latter Day Saint movement/Download during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. – Train2104 (t • c) 21:32, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trump userboxes

I have removed the section of userboxes that you posted at WP:TRUMP because I believe they violate WP:UBX#Content restrictions which states "Wikipedia is not an appropriate place for propaganda, advocacy, or recruitment of any kind, commercial, political, religious, or otherwise, opinion pieces on current affairs or politics, self-promotion, or advertising." It also violates WP:NOTSOAPBOX. The Muslim ban userbox is particularly troubling given our mission of building a global, inclusive online encyclopedia. Please let me know if you have any questions.- Mr X 20:43, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Broter/Ban on Muslim immigration

User:Broter/Ban on Muslim immigration, a page which you created or substantially contributed to (or which is in your userspace), has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Broter/Ban on Muslim immigration and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Broter/Ban on Muslim immigration during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. - Mr X 20:49, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In light of your recent edit to the Islam article...

In light of this edit to the Islam article, would it be appropriate to add the following to Mormonism?

References

^ From Roughing It, Chapter 16
^ "Chloroform in Print" Slate, 17 May 2017
^ Was 'The Book of Mormon' a Great American Novel? Daily Beast, 4 January 2015

Just looking to avoid any sectarian hypocrisy here, what with WP:NPOV being a guiding principle of this site and all. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:00, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

August 2017

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject or any other entity. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. – Train2104 (t • c) 03:18, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

Your recent editing history at Everybody Draw Mohammed Day shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:07, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Broter. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for all your hard work on portals!!!! Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 18:32, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, as you did at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals), you may be blocked from editing. --Guy Macon (talk) 20:06, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:CANVASSING. It is not appropriate to put up messages asking people to express a particular opinion, and it is not especially not appropriate to put up such messages in the portal namespace, which is primarily intended for readers rather than editors. A neutrally-worded message on portal talk pages would be ok.-gadfium 20:19, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your editing behavior, over the last few days, compels me to assume that either you are incompetent, (as to the meta-aspects of the site) or you do not wish to abide by the multitude of community policies that have been showered upon you w.r.t your acutely disruptive behavior on the locus of portals RFC.In that case and esp. in light of Gadfium's warning, if I see another attempt at non-neutral canvassing selectively targeted at a biased-audience, I will straight-way ask for a block.Best,~ Winged Blades^Godric 05:53, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar for you!

		The Burkie Barnstar
		is the Barnstar of WikiProject Conservatism and is hereby awarded to Broter for creating Portal:Republican Party. – Lionel^(talk) 07:21, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to WikiProject Portals

The Portals WikiProject has been rebooted.

You are invited to join, and participate in the effort to revitalize and improve the Portal system and all the portals in it.

There are sections on the WikiProject page dedicated to tasks (including WikiGnome tasks too), and areas on the talk page for discussing the improvement and automation of the various features of portals.

Many complaints have been lodged in the RfC to delete all portals, pointing out their various problems. They say that many portals are not maintained, or have fallen out of date, are useless, etc. Many of the !votes indicate that the editors who posted them simply don't believe in the potential of portals anymore.

It's time to change all that. Let's give them reasons to believe in portals, by revitalizing them.

The best response to a deletion nomination is to fix the page that was nominated. The further underway the effort is to improve portals by the time the RfC has run its course, the more of the reasons against portals will no longer apply. RfCs typically run 30 days. There are 19 days left in this one. Let's see how many portals we can update and improve before the RfC is closed, and beyond.

A healthy WikiProject dedicated to supporting and maintaining portals may be the strongest argument of all not to delete.

We may even surprise ourselves and exceed all expectations. Who knows what we will be able to accomplish in what may become the biggest Wikicollaboration in years.

Let's do this.

See ya at the WikiProject!

Sincerely, — The Transhumanist 10:19, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If I see a significant effort to fix the problems, I will change my !vote, even if you only get to a few. My support of deletion is based upon nobody caring enough to maintain the existing Portals. Free advice: as you improve portals, keep an eye out for ones that you realistically cannot fix and nominate those for individual deletion. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Portals WikiProject update, April 22, 2018

Thank you for joining the Portals WikiProject.

Here's our first project-wide update. I hope you enjoy it...

Reboot

The WikiProject reboot has been a success: the new re-envisioned project is up and running, with new members, ongoing discussions about automation, design, and upkeep; maintained task queques; and updates to members, like this, the very first one!

The RfC

As you know, there's a proposal to delete all portals. It started out looking pretty dismal for portals, with primarily posts supporting their demise. It turned out that the proposer didn't post a deletion notice on the very pages being nominated for deletion (a requirement for all deletion discussions). Once that was done, a flood of opposition came in and has apparently turned the tide.

RfCs generally run for 30 days. It started April 8th, and so it has about 14 more days to run its course.

The more work we can do during that time on the portals, the stronger the reasons for keeping them will be. And the more prepared we will be for any MfDs that follow the closing of the RfC.

AWB?

You may be wondering why we asked for AWB experience in the member-sign-up list.

We are gearing up to do maintenance runs on the entire set of portals, and the more people we have who can use AWB, the better.

But we're not quite ready to start this yet.

To be able to use AWB on the portals, we first need to know what the end result needs to be. Like on the news sections, do we comment out the out-of-date ones, or do we place the code to activate the newsbot on those pages? That would require an assessment of WikiNews and its news generating performance (areas covered, volume in each area), etc.

You can help us figure this out at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals#Discussions about news sections.

Another area we're gearing up for, to do passes with AWB, are upgrades to the intro sections of portals. Many of these have static (copied/pasted) excerpts that go stale over time.

We're trying to figure out how to make self-updating excerpts to replace the existing static excerpts that are on many portals, and once this is done, AWB will be used to place the new code. See the discussion on this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals#Discussions about selective transclusion in intros.

"What can I do?"

There are 3 major areas of activity right now:

Update the main portal list at Portal:Contents/Portals

There are a few hundred existing portals that are missing from this list.

The list of missing entries, and instructions on what to do, can be found at Portal talk:Contents/Portals#These are not listed yet.

We need everybody's help on this. It's a big chore for one persons. But, many hands make light work. Please help chip away at this chore as much as you can. A little each day, form all of us, will get this done pretty quick.

Familiarize yourself with the portal system

In addition to browsing the portals in the 2 lists mentioned in the section above, you should take a look at the portal name space itself and what is in it.

That can be done at Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals#Watchlist.

Join in on the discussions

There are discussions on many aspects of the WikiProject's operations, with more to come.

Such as about the purposes and functions of portals, design discussions, and so on.

There's even a automated design discussion over at Village Pump Technical, on selective transclusion.

I hope to see you on the talk page.

What's coming?

In addition to the automation efforts mentioned above, we will be looking into how to automate the selection and display of alternating excerpts, and alternating pictures, for the various portal sections.

Watch for these discussions on the Wikiproject's talk page.

Summing up...

Get ready, get set, go! — The Transhumanist 22:54, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: The main example given at the RfC of the problems of portals was Portal:Cricket. Therefore, it's the top priority portal to update. Please lend a hand. - TT

Please do not try to automate the ACW portal

Please work on one which needs the help not a stable and featured portal. BusterD (talk) 22:41, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Portals WikiProject heads up, April 27, 2018

We now have 52 members, and more are joining daily.

New and easier way to handle excerpts

Attention portal maintainers!

There's a new template to improve existing and new portals, called {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

It is a lot easier to use than copying and pasting text from articles, as it displays the paragraphs you specify automatically for you.

It makes excerpts so that they are always current and never go stale or fork.

It is more powerful than it looks, because it has the Lua Module:Excerpt supporting it.

Be careful, as it is alpha software. Please notify the WikiProject talkpage of any problems you come across.

To give you a sense of the reaction this template is generating, here is an excerpt of a discussion thread from the WikiProject's talk page:

This new template is fantastic. I've added it to the intro sections of the portals on Australian cities (eg P:PER) and it works brilliantly. My compliments to its creators. It can probably also be used in other sections of many portals (eg "Selected article" and "Selected biography"), and, for that reason, will probably make the task of maintaining portals a great deal easier. Bahnfrend (talk) 09:02, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for being so brave. Portal:Adelaide/Intro just got a lot simpler! Certes (talk) 10:43, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos on a wonderful template. — The Transhumanist 03:27, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is amazing stuff. I'm going to get to work on using it on the selected content at most of these portals very soon. Waggers TALK 13:40, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The RfC

I wrote a comment in the the April 26 section of the RfC explaining what we are up to. I liked the excerpt above so much, that I went back to my RfC posting, and inserted it.

Please add Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals to your watchlist

Wish list

What's this? An old oil lamp. It's so dirty, I think I'll polish it...

*poof*

Whoa! Are you a WikiGenie? In that case, I get 3 wishes!

I wish...

...that Portal:Contents/Portals becomes up-to-date. (The missing entries are listed on the talk page, with instructions).
...the WikiProject to have Article Alerts. ({{WikiProject Portals}} templates have already been placed on all portal talk pages).
...that Portal:Cricket becomes a shining example of portal excellence. (It was the main example of a crappy and unmaintained portal at the RfC).

Please make my wishes come true. See you around the portals! — The Transhumanist 08:01, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:History of the Latter Day Saint movement

I've converted the portal as requested. Please have a look at the results. Some pages such as Portal:History of the Latter Day Saint movement/Selected biography/2 have a lead of an unusual length, and have therefore become much longer or shorter than before. Certes (talk) 16:45, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Portals Overview, May 04, 2018

Thank you for being a member of the Portals WikiProject, and thank you for all the work you have all been doing on the portal namespace. To see the activity, check out the watchlist.

This is our 3rd issue, see previous issues at the Newsletter archive.

Top priority: Main list of portals needs updating

The top, and one of the most visible parts, of the portal system is Portal:Contents/Portals, which is intended to list all (completed) portals on Wikipedia.

About half of the missing existing portals have been added since this WikiProject's reboot (April 17th). Thank you to RockMagnetist, TriNitrobrick, Polyamorph, PratyushSinha101, Ganesha811, Bermicourt, Javert2113, Noyster, Ɱ, Lepricavark, XOR'easter, and Emir of Wikipedia, for working on this.

We are half-way to completion with this. We need everyone to chip in until it is done. Instructions, and the list of missing entries are at Portal talk:Contents/Portals#These are not listed yet.

I hope you'll join me there. ("Many hands make light work").

Thank you.

Membership

We're at 66 members, with more joining daily. We even have 6 WikiGnomes!

Special thanks

I have awarded Certes with a portals barnstar on his talk page for his work on the new excerpt templates that are revolutionizing the portal system (Template:Transclude lead excerpt & Template:Transclude random excerpt). If you'd like to show your appreciation, please feel free to stop by his talk page and add your signature to the barnstar itself.

Thank you Certes. You are enabling this WikiProject to get the right things done, fast.

By the way, the templates have already gone international. After being told about the templates, Mossab wrote:

Thanks You very much!. Those are fantastic and great templates! I transferred them to Arabic Wikipedia and they do a magic great job. I worked to improve portal anatomy here and i do every thing i can to improve it and i am very sad for the nomination for deletion of portals :(. I am glad to be member on WikiProject Portals and i added my name with pleasure. Kind regards

RFC

As you know, the (April 8th) proposal to delete all portals and the portal namespace inspired the reboot of this WikiProject. RfCs typically run for 30 days, which means there are 5 days left including today, before the RfC will be closed. The !votes are predominantly "oppose", but many editors have shared their disappointment with the portal system. We have our work cut out for us in correcting the problems of the portals to address their concerns. Complaints ranged from being out of date and lacking maintenance, to taking up the time of editors that they felt (due to low traffic) would be better spent improving articles.

Anti-WikiProject drama

This past week has been somewhat stressful for me, with more than a little conflict...

It culminated with my being reported at the Administrator's Noticeboard "for spamming and canvassing". This is the second time I've been reported there during the RfC; the first one was for posting notices of the deletion discussion (the RfC) at the top of all portal pages.

The accusations were 1) Posting notices of the deletion discussion (the RfC) at the top of all portal pages, 2) Adding an Article alerts section to the Portals WikiProject page, and 3) posting notices (invitations) about this WikiProject on user talk and portal talk pages.

None of which fall under the Wikipedia definitions of spamming or canvassing.

Thank you, Lionelt and Lepricavark, for coming to my rescue. I don't know how the discussion would have turned out if you had not spoken up.

The discussion was closed as "no action necessary".

After that, the person responsible posted their thoughts to my talk page. Here they are, with my response:

Congratulations, it appears your relentless targeted advertising of the RFC, your beating the RFC Supporters with a stick by posting countless times there, your dishonest insistence that Current Events was on the chopping block, and your obstruction of clean up efforts at MfD are paying dividends. Have fun playing with Portal space where no one will read your work. I'm sure someone will eventually clean up the mess when your interest wanes. Cheers. Legacypac

Thank you. I accept your congratulations on behalf of Wikiproject Portals and the portal-loving community – it was a team effort. In addition, I'd like to clarify some things about your claims above...

Each page nominated for deletion must have a notice at the top of its page, per the deletion guideline. Not to have one there, would be unfair to those who use such pages, and would constitute a secret deletion tribunal. We don't do things that way on Wikipedia.
As new facts became available (e.g., a motivated and thriving WikiProject to support the portals, new building blocks, etc.), it was appropriate to post the developments to the RfC, to support informed decision making.
Proposals are literal, not figurative. The proposal specified "all portals". All means all.
The fact is, the rebooted WikiProject is cleaning up the mess, rather rapidly. By updating and upgrading the portals, rather than getting rid of them.
I think I'll be hanging around for awhile, but the project is more than likely to achieve critical mass and may outlive us all, due in part to the development of tools to assist editors in building, upgrading, and maintaining portals that are fully dynamic and self-updating.

Portals are more fun to work with than ever. Thank you for your role in making this happen. You made us try even harder, and inspired us to pull together as a team. You'll have a warm place in our hearts, forever. The Transhumanist

Automatically refreshed excerpts

The main advancement we've made so far is applying selective transclusion Transclusion is template technology, showing a page on another page. Selective transclusion shows only part of that page. We use it to show excerpts that always match the source. The two templates we have so far, are Template:Transclude lead excerpt and Template:Transclude random excerpt.

Obsoleting subpages

Excerpts are migrating toward the base page of each portal, and where this is done, a subpage is no longer needed.

Template:Transclude lead excerpt will be able to be used to put the intro excerpt directly on the portal page, rather than on an intro subpage, once we adapt a portal design to accommodate this.

Template:Transclude random excerpt is currently being used on 1st-level subpages, and eliminates the need for 2nd-level subpages. (Many portals have 2 levels of subpages).

There are about 1500 portals, but there are around 148,000 subpages in portal space. Further discussions are needed to develop designs and components that do not require them.

It is my hope that the portal of the future will be a single page, or close to it, pulling in excerpts from specified dynamic sources (like category pages), filtered by ratings. This would obviate the need for subpages at all (except for maybe the header and footer subpages, which store a portal's settings). A more likely near-term solution would be subpages with a list maintained by a bot, or editors using semi-automatic tools.

New portals

Since the reboot, a new portal has been created:

Portal:Limited recognition

Please watchlist these pages

Some central pages in the portal system. The more eyes on them, the better.

Wrapping up...

There's more in the works, like a rating system, further redesigns, etc. Keep an eye on the discussions on the project's talk page. They should start showing up there soon.

Hope to see you there. Sincerely, — The Transhumanist 06:21, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Portals update, 11 May 2018

We've grown to 73 members, and morale is high. Thank you for joining. Here is some news, and some tasks...

The RfC will be closed soon...

2018-05-11: preparations are being made to close the RfC. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure#Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/RfC: Ending the system of portals.

When there, be sure to notice the consultation link.

We're trying to get a prototypical single-page portal developed in time to show the RfC closers before they make their final decision. You can help. It's Portal:Humanism. So far, we've applied selective transclusion (automation) to excerpts, and have made the following sections without subpages: intro, selected article, selected biography, categories, related portals, wikiprojects, things to do, and wikimedia. Eight down, 4 to go, plus 2 formatting subpages (not sure we can migrate those). Automating every section, would also be nice.

Main objectives

Our main objectives currently, are:

Replace static excerpts with selective transclusions, so that the excerpts always stay fresh (that is, match the source content). We are now doing this on the portal base page as much as possible, to reduce the number of subpages that are needed. See #2...
Migrate the functions of subpages to the portal base pages. There are around 150,000 subpages in portal space. We aim to make these obsolete by using templates and other calls from the portal base pages.
Improve portal design to make portals self-update. Semi-dynamic sections update from a static list, as used in {{Transclude random excerpt}}. Fully-dynamic sections would update from a list maintained elsewhere on Wikipedia, like a category. We haven't found a way to do this yet, other than to create a bot (which we will probably need to do).

Maintenance pass #1: Upgrading the intro section

The intro section of many portals transcludes an "Intro" subpage that has an excerpt in it.

We're replacing that with a selective transclusion directly in the intro section, bypassing the subpage. Though, there's a little more to it...

For instructions, see: Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals#Transclude intro excerpt directly on the portal base page.

Please skip Portal:American Civil War, as that is specifically being maintained by hand.

Maintenance pass #2: Obsoleting the Wikimedia subpages

One of the sections on many portals links to sister projects on the subject. This needlessly takes a subpage. The subpage can be made obsolete by using the template {{Wikimedia for portals}} directly on the portal base page.

This has been done for several hundred portals so far.

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals#Obsolete a Wikimedia subpage for instructions.

Maintenance pass #3: calling the category tree from the portal base page

Certes figured out how...

{{subst:Text|<category|tree>}}{{subst:PAGENAME}}{{subst:Text|</categorytree>}}

For more information, see the thread Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals#Rendering PAGENAME inside categorytree tag doesn't work (it does now).

More to come...

In the meantime, see ya around the portals! — The Transhumanist 15:20, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OWN

I've noticed all the notices above about your tendentious editing, and now you seem to believe in some sort of ownership of pages created. Well, read the link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.168.87.205 (talk) 00:32, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Portals WikiProject update, 15 May 2018

We are at 74 members. If you know anyone who might find this WikiProject interesting, please invite them.

The RfC has ended

The RfC was closed May 11th, and a closing statement was posted May 12th which says "There exists a strong consensus against deleting or even deprecating portals at this time."

Ongoing tasks

Some major activities that we are in the middle of include:

Adding the missing existing portals to the main portals list at Portal:Contents/Portals. Instructions are on the talk page. There are about 125 portals left to be processed. (There were 400). Keep up the good work!
Development discussions on how to migrate the subpages to the base pages. There are around 150,000 subpages in portal space, associated with the various sections on a typical portal. We are trying to obsolete them section type by section type. Currently, we're working on obsoleting the intro subpages and the "selected articles" subpages. Please join in.

Other tasks

The list of portals not ready to be listed on the main list can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals#These are not listed yet (scroll down to see them - they are marked Not ready). They are incomplete. If you want a specific portal to work on, please consider choosing one from that list.
Over the years, some incomplete portals (portals under construction) got added to Portal:Contents/Portals. Therefore, every portal listed there needs to be inspected, and any that are incomplete should be removed from that list and added to the not ready list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals#These are not listed yet (scroll down to see it). On Portal:Contents/Portals, I'm already almost done inspecting the portals in the culture section, and so you can skip those. The types of things to look for are empty sections (most will have a redlinked subpage), lack of "selected" sections, portal stubs with just an intro and end sections, and very poor layout (like seriously unbalanced columns).

Portal-building resources

During his work on portals, Broter found a quote randomizer. It is {{Random quotation}}.

Trailblazer: approaching the one-page portal

Broter has transformed the Portal:Community of Christ so it is comprised of only 3 pages in portal space: the base page, its box-header subpage, and its box-footer subpage. Its other other subpages are now obsolete and are waiting for deletion. Nice job, Broter!

Well, that's all for now. See ya around the portals. — The Transhumanist 06:37, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Templates

Hi! Since I don't know and I am sincere in the question, I am curious what the reasoning for trying to include the infobox information within the article, rather than having the template serve that purpose, as has been the case to this point? Thanks so much! ChristensenMJ (talk) 19:34, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the infobox information in the article because the template of the Portal can only recognise the pictures in this way. Furthermore I think we do not need an extra template-page for every person or temple of the church.--Broter (talk) 21:10, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks! I just wondered how that would impact many other articles where the templates are used - such as the one listing apostles (Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (LDS Church)) or temples (List of temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). We just need to be sure that an effort or attempt to address one issue does not create other challenges. Maybe the way you have done this won't be a challenge, but it seems like it could be.....? People potentially edit the article, but not the former template and so they get out of sync. Just recognizing that there's been a reason there was an extra page for the temples or people in the church. Thanks! ChristensenMJ (talk) 04:02, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What are the implications I noted with the above inquiry? Thanks! ChristensenMJ (talk) 14:41, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is better that the infoboxes are in the article-space!--Broter (talk) 14:44, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I am not trying to be difficult here, but that doesn't really respond to the question, nor does it answer why it is better that that the infoboxes are in the article space. According to who, or what principle or practice that is improved? If the infoboxes within the article are updated, do they carry over to the places such as those articles used as an example above? ChristensenMJ (talk) 14:52, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All LDS infoboxes should be in the article-space because it is crazy to use a extra-template page for every person or object in wikipedia-space!--Broter (talk) 14:56, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, although I don't know that's a big challenge for extra space, again - according to who or what guideline - what does that mean for places such as the listing articles I have noted? Do each of them, rather than having a single template line for each temple for instance, need to be expanded to reflect the infobox information within in the article? ChristensenMJ (talk) 15:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ChristensenMJ: Look at the infobox for Bryan D. Brown. The standard in wikipedia is to have the infobox within the article space. The User:ARTEST4ECHO who created this infobox-system for the LDS movement did it all wrong.--Broter (talk) 16:24, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

While I appreciate the example and the view that somebody who apparently got it started did it wrong, none of this still addresses the question about template use in other locations. The focus of response has been on whether it should be embedded or not and whether that's standard practice versus the extensive of the template across LDS Church-related articles. As an example, with the recent closing of the Oakland California Temple for renovation, if the template is updated to show "Closed for Renovation" it does not show up on the main article page. I get that. It does however show that status on the temple listing page I referred to above. The flip side is that if the main article page is updated where the infobox is now embedded in the article, those changes are not reflected on the temple listing. Now, I have no idea what this does to the portal stuff that you have worked so hard on, which seems to be why you started down the path of all these changes, but it creates inconsistency across a number of issues - and would require people to know/remember to update for the same issues in multiple way. This seems to warrant some discussion or awareness. I don't know how much traffic it might get, but at least for awareness, if not for consensus-building discussion, I will note this on the some of the related discussion pages. ChristensenMJ (talk) 16:17, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About Portal:Latter Day Saints/Selected Quotes/Layout

Hi. I have checked out your question (whether Portal:Latter Day Saints/Selected Quotes/Layout is still needed given your selected quote layout on Portal:Latter Day Saints) and I can say with reasonable certainty that it is needed. i.e the code still uses it;

|{{Portal:Latter Day Saints/Selected Quotes/Layout
  |image= Thomassmonson.jpg
  |text=Though we may not necessarily forfeit our lives in service to our God, we can certainly demonstrate our love for Him by how well we serve Him.
  |author=[[Thomas S. Monson]]
  |link= Thomas S. Monson
  |size= 100px
}}

The Cornwall portal relies on a template in a similar way, only it is located at Template:Cornwall portal selected quote layout instead of being a subpage.

Probably the best thing to do here would be to use Template:Portal selected quote layout instead. eg.

{{Portal selected quote layout
  |image= Thomassmonson.jpg
  |text=Though we may not necessarily forfeit our lives in service to our God, we can certainly demonstrate our love for Him by how well we serve Him.
  |author=[[Thomas S. Monson]]
  |link= Thomas S. Monson
  |size= 100px
}}

I hope this helps. JLJ001 (talk) 10:16, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a switch which disables the ...Archive/nominations text on Template:Portal selected quote layout by default. To show it use |archive=yes this should allow you to tag the redundant subpages. JLJ001 (talk) 14:50, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About the edit link on portal main pages

When you remove sub-pages, such as '/Intro' on portals please ensure that you edit the 'edit' link on the portal main page. This will ensure that editors are being sent to the right place when editing. (I have done this for you on Portal:Right-wing populism). I would also like to Thank you for being an active part of revamping the portal system! Wpgbrown (talk) 16:37, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Portals WikiProject update, 25 May 2018

We have grown to 79 members.

Please provide a warm welcome to our latest additions, Wpgbrown, Cactus.man, JLJ001, and Wumbolo.

A lot is going on, much of it on the WikiProject's talk page, so be sure to go there and join in on any of the many discussions taking place there.

Elsewhere around the portal project, or related to portals, the following is happening...

New news template ready for testing

Evad37 has created a new template, with supporting lua module, to handle news in portals...

{{Transclude selected current events}} is ready to be tested in some actual portals. Let Evad37 know if you need help with the search patterns.

Noyster commented that "This is the best portal innovation since sliced bread!"

See the relevant discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals#Alternative to Wikinews.

Thank you, Evad.

Coming soon: Automatic article alerts (but there is a glitch)

Our WikiProject is now subscribed to the bot that makes automatic article alerts, but the subpage where they are posted has not been added to our WikiProject page yet because of a weird problem...

Featured portal nominations from two years ago keep popping up on there.

Please check Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals/Article alerts to see if you can figure out how to fix this.

Once that is remedied, it will be posted on our WikiProject page.

Thank you.

Note that, this will only track base pages, because to track the rest, we'd have to create over 140,000 talk pages for the subpages, and that just isn't worthwhile (as we're trying to remove the subpages anyways). Therefore, any alerts for subpages will still need to be posted manually.

New portal, still needs work

Portal:Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, courtesy of Mozart834428196. See also, the discussion.

Drafting a new portals guideline

Your input/editing is welcome on the draft-in-progress of a new guideline for portals.

See or work on the draft at User:Cesdeva/sandbox11.

See also the discussion at: Wikipedia talk:Portal guidelines#RfC on new portal guidelines

RfC on new TOC layout for main portal list

There is a proposal to change the look of the table of contents at Portal:Contents/Portals.

See: Portal talk:Contents/Portals#RFC on layout update.

Deletion discussion survivors

Thank you to those who have participated in portal deletion discussions. There are still some editors out there who despise portals, and this comes across in their argumentation style. Wow. Such negativity. But, there is some good news...

Portal:Quidditch survived its 2nd deletion nomination
Portal:Prehistory of Antarctica did the same

Current deletion discussions are posted on our WikiProject page.

Portal space clean up

While portal detractors are trying to get rid of portals via MfD, we have deleted many of them via speedy deletion (per {{Db-p1}} or {{Db-p2}}). Essentially, they were bare skeletons, with maybe a little meat on them. The plus here is that speedy deletion is without prejudice to re-creating the portals. They can easily be restarted from scratch without getting approval, or be undeleted by request by someone willing to work on them. We have kept track of these, for when someone wants to rebuild them. They are listed at Portal talk:Contents/Portals#These are not listed yet.

We are also removing subpages, the functions of which have been migrated to portal base pages. To see which ones have been removed, look for the redlinks in our watchlist.

There is also an MfD concerning some of these at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Redundant subpages of the Cornwall portal.

For subpages that need to be deleted, you can conveniently place this speedy deletion template at the top of each of them:

{{Db-g6|rationale=of subpage clean up – this subpage's function has been migrated to the portal base page and is no longer needed}}

Then an admin will come along and delete them.

Please help list the unlisted portals!

There are still 100 existing portals not yet presented on the main portal list at Portal:Contents/Portals. There were 400, so we've come a long way. Thank you! But we are not done yet...

Please list a couple of them. Every little bit helps. If each member of this project listed one more, it would almost all be done. Many hands make light work.

The list of missings, and instructions, are to be found at Portal talk:Contents/Portals#These are not listed yet.

I hope to see you there!

Wrapping up

These developments make up just the tip of the iceberg. I'll have more to report in the next update, soon. — The Transhumanist 00:31, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, I missed one...

There's an article about the Portals WikiProject in the new issue of Signpost:

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2018-05-24/WikiProject report

Enjoy.

P.S.: We now have 80 members. Evad37 just joined! — The Transhumanist 01:36, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Portals WikiProject update #007, 31 May 2018

We have grown to 89 members.

This is the seventh issue of this newsletter. For previous issues, see our newsletter archive.

Welcome

A warm welcome to our nearly one dozen new members...

Our new members include:

Be sure to say "hi" and welcome them to the team.

The portal set has shrunk

There were 1515 portals, but now we have 1475, because we speedy deleted a bunch of incompleted portals that had been sitting around for ages, that were empty shells or had very little content. Because they were speedied, they can be rebuilt from scratch without acquiring approval from WP:DRV.

Maintenance runs on the portals set have begun

This is what we have been gearing up for: upgrading the portals en masse, using AWB.

More than half of the Associated Wikimedia sections have been converted to no longer use a subpage. This chore will probably be completed over the next week or two. Many thanks to the WikiGnome Squad, who have added an Associated Wikimedia section to the many geography-related portals that lacked one. The rest of the subjects await. :)

The next maintenance drive will be on the intro sections. Notices have gone out to the WikiProjects for which one or more portals fall within their subject scope. Once enough time has elapsed for them to respond (1 week), AWB processing of intro sections will begin.

Thank you, you

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you all for your part in the RfC. I went back and reread much of it. I believe your enthusiasm played a major part in turning the tide on there. I'm proud of all of you.

Why reread that mess, you ask?

To harvest ideas, and to keep the problems that need to be fixed firmly in mind. But, also to keep in touch. See below...

Thank yous all around

I've contacted all of the other opposers of the RfC proposal to delete portals, to thank them for their support, and to assure them that their decision was not made in vain. I updated them on our activities, provided the link to the interviews about this project in the Signpost, pointed out our newsletter archive so they can keep up-to-date with what we are doing, and I invited them all to come and have a look-see at our operations (on our talk page).

Sockpuppet, and reverting his work

It so happened that one of our members was a sockpuppet: JLJ001. According to the admin who blocked him, he was a particularly tricky long term abuser. This is a weird situation, since the user was quite helpful. He will be missed.

This has been somewhat disruptive, because admins are doing routine deletions of the pages (portals, templates, etc.) he created, and reversion of his edits (I don't know if they will be reverting all of them). Please bear with them, as they are only doing what is best in the long run.

The following pages have been deleted by the admins so far, that I know of:

Automation so far, section by section...

Intro – {{Transclude lead excerpt}}
Selected article – {{Transclude random excerpt}}
In the news – {{Transclude selected current events}}
Associated Wikimedia – {{Wikimedia for portals|species=no|voy=no}}
Categories – {{#tag:categorytree|{{PAGENAME}}}}

Automatic article alerts is up and running

Automatic article alerts are now featured on the project page.

Some super out-of-date entries kept showing up on there, so posting it on the Project page was delayed. Thanks to Evad37 and AfroThundr for providing solutions on this one. Evad37 adjusted the workflow settings per Wikipedia:Article alerts/Subscribing#Choosing workflows, to make sure only the appropriate page types show up. AfroThundr removed the tags from the old entries that caused them to keep showing up in the article alerts.

Other things that could use some automation

Noyster pointed out that it would be nice to automate the updating of the portals section at the Community bulletin board.

Another major component of the portal system is the main list of portals, at Portal:Contents/Portals. How would we go about automating the updating of that?

Please post your ideas on the WikiProject's talk page. Thank you.

Deletion discussion survivors

Keep in mind that we have already speedy deleted almost all of the nearly empty portals, which can be rebuilt without approval whenever it is convenient to do so. Other portals should be completed if at all possible rather than delete them through MfD (which requires approval from Deletion review to rebuild).

Portal:Juanes – see the discussion

(Current deletion discussions are posted on our WikiProject page).

Portals needing repair

Portal:Toys

Wrapping up

There's still more, but it will have to wait until next issue.

Until then, see ya around the project. — The Transhumanist 12:00, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:3RR, wp:own etc.

You need to stop mindless reverting without any rationales. You know you're biased, and this site strives for neutrality. You might have created the page but don't own it as mentioned before, when you didn't respond either. If you keep on at this and no responses the matter will go to a third party or a noticeboard and the page end up protected/you blocked. I provided my rationales in edit summaries, you didn't. 86.134.164.162 (talk) 14:22, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notification

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Ian.thomson (talk) 16:28, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:My Muhammad.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:My Muhammad.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:36, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Banned

This message is to inform you that are now banned from the English Wikipedia, pursuant to this ANI discussion.

You are also separately banned from making any edits related to the topic of Islam, broadly construed. This topic ban will be logged at WP:EDRC and will remain in place should the site ban ever be lifted.

For further information, please read WP:BAN. You may also want to see WP:Standard offer. Swarm ♠ 22:06, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Portals WikiProject update #008, 7 June 2018

The WikiProject now has 92 participants, including 16 admins.

Welcome

A warm welcome to the newest members of the team:

Be sure to say hi.

Congrats

Pbsouthwood has just gotten through the grueling RfA process to become a Wikipedia administrator. Be sure to congratulate him.

The reason he went for it was: "For some time I expect to be busy with subpage deletion for Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals as mentioned above. The amount of work is expected to keep me busy for some time. I am primarly a content creator and contributor to policy discussions, but would be willing to consider other admin work on request, providing that I feel that my involvement would be appropriate and not too far outside my comfort zone."

New feature: Picture slideshow

Picture slideshow

Image 1State Capitol Building
Image 2Sacramento Memorial Auditorium
Image 3Pocket Sacramento Canal
Image 4US Bank Tower
Image 5Sacramento from near the Sacramento River
Image 6Tower Bridge
Image 7Capitol Mall, seen from the Capitol
Image 8Old Town Sacramento, the capital as it looked like in 19th century

Evad37 has figured out a way to let the user flip through pictures without purging the page. Purging is awkward because there is an intermediary confirmation screen that you have to click on "yes". In the new picture slideshow section, all you have to do is click on the > to go to the next picture or < to instantly show the previous feature. The feature also shuffles the pictures when the page is initiated, so that they are shown in a different order each time the user visits the page (or purges it).

It is featured in Portal:Sacramento, California. Check it out to the right.

Keep in mind that the feature is a beta version. Please share your comments on how to refine this feature, at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals#Refining the Picture slideshow.

The one-page portal has been achieved

We now have a one-page portal design. It isn't fully automated, nor is it even fully semi-automated, as there are still some manually filled-in areas. But it no longer requires any subpages in portal space, and that is a huge improvement. For example, Portal:Sacramento, California utilizes the one-page design concept. While is employs heavy use of templates, it does not have any subpages of its own.

I commend you for your teamwork

This is the most cooperative team I've ever seen. With a strong spirit of working together to get an important job done. Kudos to you.

In conclusion...

There's more. A lot more. But it will have to wait until next issue, but you don't have to wait. See what's going on at the WikiProject's talk page. — The Transhumanist 02:07, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:History of the Latter Day Saint movement portal

A tag has been placed on Category:History of the Latter Day Saint movement portal requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. AusLondonder (talk) 21:17, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Book of Mormon portal

A tag has been placed on Category:Book of Mormon portal requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. AusLondonder (talk) 21:19, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Book:Jehovah's Witnesses listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Book:Jehovah's Witnesses. Since you had some involvement with the Book:Jehovah's Witnesses redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:26, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Portal:Community of Christ

Portal:Community of Christ, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Community of Christ and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Community of Christ during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. UnitedStatesian (talk) 13:44, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Prairie Saints listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Portal:Prairie Saints. Since you had some involvement with the Portal:Prairie Saints redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Legacypac (talk) 00:27, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Josephites listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Portal:Josephites. Since you had some involvement with the Portal:Josephites redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Legacypac (talk) 00:27, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:LDS Church portal

A tag has been placed on Category:LDS Church portal requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DannyS712 (talk) 01:21, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Guided Missiles of India listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Portal:Guided Missiles of India. Since you had some involvement with the Portal:Guided Missiles of India redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Legacypac (talk) 19:13, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Utah Church listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Portal:Utah Church. Since you had some involvement with the Portal:Utah Church redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:46, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Outline of Right-wing populism for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Outline of Right-wing populism is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Outline of Right-wing populism until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:15, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Broter, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

— Newslinger talk 23:15, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Template:User Eurabia

Template:User Eurabia, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User Eurabia and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:User Eurabia during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 03:44, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Template:User The pen is mightier than the sword of Islam

Template:User The pen is mightier than the sword of Islam, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User The pen is mightier than the sword of Islam and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:User The pen is mightier than the sword of Islam during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Dronebogus (talk) 06:15, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Broter/Deplorable Donald Trump supporter

User:Broter/Deplorable Donald Trump supporter, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Broter/Deplorable Donald Trump supporter and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Broter/Deplorable Donald Trump supporter during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Dronebogus (talk) 10:49, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Template:User Kafir Lives Matter

Template:User Kafir Lives Matter, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User Kafir Lives Matter and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:User Kafir Lives Matter during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. DanielRigal (talk) 18:56, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Outline of the Book of Mormon for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Outline of the Book of Mormon is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Outline of the Book of Mormon until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Big Money Threepwood (talk) 03:29, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] From Roughing It, Chapter 16

[2] "Chloroform in Print" Slate, 17 May 2017

[3] Was 'The Book of Mormon' a Great American Novel? Daily Beast, 4 January 2015

[1]

[2]

[3]