User talk:Elli/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Question from Stormpay on Talk:StormPay (13:41, 21 October 2021)

Hi Elli, my name is Sam and I am a representative of StormPay (www.stormpay.io). The article about StormPay on Wikipedia is about a company that doesn't exist anymore and had bad reputation. StormPay.io currently owns rights to the naming and is not associated with the old company, however, when customers search for stormpay.io Wikipedia shows old information and the article has our logo which is against the law. I want to edit the article but Wikipedia didn't allow me.

Could you please recommend what I can do in this case and how I can change the old article or create a new one for stormpay.io? --Stormpay (talk) 13:41, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@Stormpay: hi, this is an interesting situation, and thanks for reaching out. We can't delete the old article just because the organization no longer exists - we have many articles on things which no longer exist. If your company is also notable - meaning it has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources independent of you, then it could also have an article. Then, our guidelines on disambiguation would apply. I think you could make a decent argument that your company is a primary topic, meaning that it would be located at "StormPay" and the former company at "StormPay (former company)" (or something along those lines, I am not sure what disambiguation would be best).

This depends on your company being notable, though. Do you have multiple reliable sources discussing your company in depth? WP:NCORP is what's relevant here.

Sidenote: the current company at StormPay might not be notable and could potentially be deleted. I wouldn't count on this, though - its notability is iffy, though I could see it being kept.

Feel free to ask me any further questions you might have! Elli (talk | contribs) 16:27, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Thanks for your edit to Epidemiology of motor vehicle collisions. Is it too presumptuous to assume that you are another fan of Tom Nicholas who came to the article after his latest video to see if the highlighted claim needed removal? — Bilorv (talk) 20:33, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@Bilorv: thank you very much for the berries :) yes, I'm a fan. Elli (talk | contribs) 21:29, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Elli. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects and categories.
Message added 21:24, 22 October 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Qwerfjkltalk

@Qwerfjkl: thanks, didn't find that with a quick search but I don't have an objection to the redirect. Elli (talk | contribs) 21:34, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Antepavilion

Hello, Elli. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Antepavilion, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:03, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

About Template:Editnotices/Page/Lists of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Template:Editnotices/Page/Lists of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Template:List of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States editnotice. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 19:34, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

About Template:Editnotices/Page/Lists of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Template:Editnotices/Page/Lists of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Template:Editnotices/Page/List of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States, May 2021. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 19:36, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

@Primefac: was this really necessary? I didn't move the page because that would've made all the editnotices redirecting there double redirects, breaking them. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:36, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Editnotices should be in the Editnotice space, which is why it was set up this way. By copy/pasting those pages directly it's an improper copypaste pagemove. Primefac (talk) 19:38, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

@Primefac: no? Templates used in editnotices are generally not in the editnotice pseudo-namespace. I know what a copy-paste pagemove is and while they're generally improper, for ~four lines of text with no significant history I thought it was pretty clear that the benefit of doing the move like I did outweighed any potential harm. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:39, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Editnotices are listed in that space, yes, by Wikipedia:Editnotice. Having an editnotice for a page redirect to an editnotice for a similar page makes perfect sense. Primefac (talk) 19:49, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

@Primefac: the vast majority of templates used in editnotices are not located there - you can see a partial list at Template:Editnotice templates. And while I can understand the logic behind having an editnotice for one page redirect to a related one, it's not an optimal situation. If the first page is deemed to no longer need an editnotice, or to need an additional editnotice that the other pages don't, then that requires significant reconfiguration. Additionally, redirects do not have the same effect of transclusion as applies to categories - a category that the template would add is not added if the template is instead redirected to. I've been doing a cleanup of category-less editnotices as these are often ignored and therefore can become out of date or otherwise inaccurate. While these would likely not become dated, switching to transclusions has the other benefits I mentioned - far more flexibility with these editnotices in the future. Therefore, I would ask that you either self-revert or allow me to redo my edits. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:54, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. Editnotices should be on editnotice subpages. If there are exceptions then they should be fixed. If you want to change that, bring it to a noticeboard to discuss further. Primefac (talk) 20:09, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

@Primefac: I feel like we might be talking past each other here. Actual editnotices, as in the ones that apply to pages, are in the editnotice pseudo-namespace. Templates that are used in these editnotices tend not to be. I'll give another example to clarify this: the editnotices for the pages Girlfriend, Cuteness, and Beauty are at the titles Template:Editnotices/Page/Girlfriend, Template:Editnotices/Page/Cuteness, and Template:Editnotices/Page/Beauty. However, they all use {{Romeo editnotice}}, which is not in the pseudo-namespace. The cuteness editnotice also uses {{Image original research editnotice}}. If these were simply redirected to Template:Editnotices/Page/Girlfriend, then it wouldn't be possible to add {{Image original research editnotice}} to the editnotice for cuteness. Templates like {{Romeo editnotice}} and {{Image original research editnotice}} are what I refer to as "editnotice templates" - they are not themselves editnotices, but are used in editnotices.

I'm of the same position here for this set of articles. All of the editnotices for the relevant articles will remain in the editnotice pseudo-namespace. But the editnotice template that these editnotices transclude should be located in normal template-space.

I wouldn't be opposed to making another part of the editnotice pseudo-namespace, such as Template:Editnotices/Templates/, for the purpose of holding editnotice templates used on multiple articles. But that is not the current practice and would require an RfC. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:17, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

As I said, I'm happy to discuss this at a venue with more individuals (and likely, those with more institutional memory) can discuss and a consensus can be reached regarding how best to deal with these. Editnotices are supposed to be in that space so that they can be template-protected by default, so using generic templates in that space seems rather problematic. Feel free to ping me to that discussion if and when you decide to start it. Primefac (talk) 20:22, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

@Primefac: I'd be happy to start such a discussion, but I'd like to come to at least somewhat of an agreement with you here on what the status quo is first. The only editnotice template that is actually in editnotice space I can even find is Template:Editnotices/Group/U.S. Congress and its subpages (looking at Category:Editnotice templates). Editnotice templates that are in normal template-space include Template:Ds/editnotice, Template:Policy or guideline editnotice, and pretty much every other editnotice template I could think of. Therefore I think that the current consensus as established by what editors have actually done is to place the editnotices in normal template-space. So until an RfC occurs to change that, we should continue the status quo. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:28, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Worth noting that some of these are customizable through parameters as well, like the Image OR template or {{pronoun editnotice}}. Having worked with editnotices a bit (although not as much as Elli), I'd also be open to moving these to a pseudo-namespace. I think we can all think of some reasons that the current system may be suboptimal. (Although I think some flexibility would be good. See the decision I made at Talk:Martine Moïse#Editnotice for an example, although I guess you could just say that's IAR.) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 20:33, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

For me, the status quo to me is to use the editnotice subspace, and thus we're clearly in disagreement as to the status quo. There is nothing wrong starting the discussion asking what that status quo even is, though. Primefac (talk) 21:00, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

@Primefac: I've taken a few days to think about this further -- but I'd like to be able to continue my work here. I have not seen any evidence that your position is how things actually happen, how you think things should happen does not make them the actual status quo. I've given multiple examples of where these templates are actually located. I kindly request that you review these templates and get back to me, I'm not going to make edits that I know will be contested by you, so I'd appreciate if you'd consider dropping your objections here so I can continue without an RfC. If you'd like to move these to subpages of Template:Editnotices/ instead of their current location, you can always open an RfC yourself. Elli (talk | contribs) 04:20, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

At the very least, please hold to the proper procedures and do not copy/paste; if you're wanting the language to be at a specific location, move the page from its current location. That was my initial concern about this entire thing. Primefac (talk) 08:30, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll make sure to do that, then. Elli (talk | contribs) 13:36, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

There's a whole slew of templates in Category:Editnotice templates, so that seems like a generally accepted practice to me. It's certainly much better to have those than to copy and paste editnotice designs between articles. Regarding protection, it's unfortunate that all editnotices are template-protected, since most don't need that strong protection and we'd make more/better use of them if they were more accessible. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:29, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. (t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from Stormpay (07:27, 26 October 2021)

Hi Elli, thank you for your response to my previous question. Would you please help to understand if the following sources count as reliable sources that are discussing StormPay (stormpay.io) and we can use them to replace old StormPay (former company)?

https://www.innovatefinance.com/company/stormpay/

https://www.level39.co/partners/stormpay/

https://www.finextra.com/pressarticle/89761/stormpay-and-ozone-api-form-embedded-finance-partnership

https://ozoneapi.com/2021/10/11/ozone-announces-partnership-with-stormpay-an-embedded-finance-platform/

https://www.innovatefinance.com/news/clausematch-policy-portal-is-now-streamlining-compliance-for-90000-barclays-employees/

https://www.level39.co/ozone-announces-partnership-with-stormpay-an-embedded-finance-platform/ --Stormpay (talk) 07:27, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@Stormpay: thanks for your question. Sadly, no. Source one is neither independent nor significant. Same with source two. Source three could be considered significant but not independent - same with sources four and six. Source five doesn't mention stormpay at all. Can I suggest you look closely at WP:ORGCRIT? Thanks, and feel free to ask me any follow up questions you might have. Elli (talk | contribs) 15:45, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from Stormpay (06:14, 27 October 2021)

Hi Elli, thanks for your response to my last question. One last thing I forgot to mention in my last question is that StormPay (stormpay.io) owns the trademark for StormPay. Would that help us somehow to replace the information on Wikipedia or at least ask the old information to be removed? --Stormpay (talk) 06:14, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

DYK for 2021 Facebook outage

On 27 October 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2021 Facebook outage, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that their outage on October 4, 2021, also cut off Facebook's internal communications, preventing employees from sending or receiving external emails or logging in to Zoom? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2021 Facebook outage. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2021 Facebook outage), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—valereee (talk) 12:03, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

2024 senate elections in [state]

To elaborate on this edit, I have not been redirecting forever. I started NPP run from the oldest, and redirected them as I came across them over the past 2 or 3 days. I don't know if there are more to come, so if you think they should not be redirected, I won't. About the past ones, I won't be going back to articles I have reviewed, so I won't be doing anything whatever happens. I only reverted to tell you there was an AFD (which I also found during my run). But it felt like poor form, so I am here anyway, so I guess I needed not make that edit at all. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:15, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: thanks for the message. I was unaware of that AfD but given the result there I have no objection to keeping those articles as redirects for now. Elli (talk | contribs) 17:25, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Oops...

Apologies for this and thank you for catching it. I simply wasn't paying attention. Atsme 💬 📧 21:47, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

@Atsme: no problem, things happen :) if I looked closer I would've fixed the template link instead of removing it... Elli (talk | contribs) 21:49, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2021

• From the editor: Different stories, same place

• News and notes: The sockpuppet who ran for adminship and almost succeeded

• In the media: China bans, and is there intelligent life on this planet?

• Opinion: A photo on Wikipedia can ruin your life

• Discussion report: Editors brainstorm and propose changes to the Requests for adminship process

• Recent research: Welcome messages fail to improve newbie retention

• Community view: Reflections on the Chinese Wikipedia

• Traffic report: James Bond and the Giant Squid Game

• Technology report: Wikimedia Toolhub, winners of the Coolest Tool Award, and more

• Serendipity: How Wikipedia helped create a Serbian stamp

• Book review: Wikipedia and the Representation of Reality

• WikiProject report: Redirection

• Humour: A very Wiki crossword

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from Tt the don on User talk:Tt the don (19:12, 30 November 2021)

Can you look up ☝ going --Tt the don (talk) 19:12, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

@Tt the don: I'm not sure what you're asking here? Elli (talk | contribs) 19:37, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Joe Manchin Presidental Run

“You never know. You don’t know. There’s always a chance, absolutely,” Manchin said in an interview. When it comes to a potential reelection campaign alongside a presidential race in 2024, Manchin said: “You better be prepared, that’s all I can say. And I’m being prepared.” is what the article said

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cookiemonstericecream (talk • contribs) 19:18, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

@Cookiemonstericecream: that was referring to running for re-election. The headline makes that clearer: Sen. Joe Manchin said 2018 was his "last campaign for Senate." Now, he says "you never know" about 2024. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:20, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

References

What part of alongside a presidential race do you not understand Cookiemonstericecream (talk) 19:22, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

@Cookiemonstericecream: it means "he would be running for re-election, while there is also a presidential race going on", not "Joe Manchin is considering either running for re-election or for president. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:23, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism reversion

Hi. I have noticed that you have been reverting vandalism, which is much appreciated. However, I would like to draw your attention to Wikipedia:Vandalism, and also suggest you install RedWarn to make the process easier. RteeeeKed (talk) 20:40, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

@RteeeeKed: thank you -- I'm pretty happy with my current set-up, though. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:41, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2000 Alabama Amendment 2

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2000 Alabama Amendment 2 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 10:21, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! :-)

Hi Elli! I was informed via email from a couple of users a few weeks ago that a bunch of template pages that I created were nominated for speedy deletion under G6. Confused with what was going on and why, I went to find out what pages were nominated and what the reason was for. I ended up having to focus my attention elsewhere before I managed to figure things out. I eventually forgot about it and carried on...

Just now, as I was going through my old emails and deleting them, I came across the emails that were from those users that were notifying me of the G6 deletions a few weeks back. After some searching and peeking through logs, I found that you had nominated all of those edit notices that I had created for my user talk archive pages, and that you had created a group notice for me. Explicit was pretty spot-on in the deletion reason for those pages - I guess I never took the time to get group notices to work, and I just created a bunch of edit notice pages for each one instead... Looking back on that now, I guess that was pretty stupid and silly of me to do, huh? ... :-D

Anyways, I just wanted to reach out to you and thank you for creating that group notice for me. I took some time just a bit ago and read up on proper group notice creation at WP:EDN, and... yeah... it's actually a very simple process once you've actually read through all of the documentation on how to do so (which I... well... obviously didn't). ;-) Anyways, I greatly appreciate you for doing that. If anything, it forced me to go and read up on this, and I obviously learned something new. :-)

I hope you have an excellent day, and I wish you happy editing! :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:12, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

@Oshwah: thank you very much for the message! And I don't blame you at all for not understanding group editnotices initially, it's not a particularly intuitive system. Made the same mistake myself a few times. Elli (talk | contribs) 16:29, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Elli - Well, I'm glad that I'm not alone when it comes to that then. ;-) Thanks again, have a great day, and happy editing! :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:37, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Current Event editnotice documentation

I wanted to let you know that tweaked the documentation slightly to better encapsulate who the template is for, and to suggest a default time for the expiry parameter. You're welcome to adjust any part of it if you feel its needed. TomStar81 (Talk) 18:30, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

@TomStar81: looks good to me, thanks for the notice (made a tiny ce though, but I agree with the substance of your changes) Elli (talk | contribs) 19:33, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Please review my page when you get a chance?

Hi Elli, I hope you're having a good day. You have reviewed two of my pages in the past, Midnight Blue (Love Streaming) and Waterfall. I was wondering if you could please review my new page Cosmos when you get a chance? Thank you so much. —Bostonite01310 ^{talk | contribs} 16:32, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

@Bostonite01310: sure. The article looks mostly OK. You should probably add a "reception" section including some reviews to clearly establish notability though. Elli (talk | contribs) 16:54, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your review. Yes, as of right now no review articles have been written about the album. I will update the page as soon as there is an article. Thanks again. —Bostonite01310 ^{talk | contribs} 18:13, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Accidental removal of 2 requests

My bad I didn't mean to remove 2 requests. Also I didn't know that it was a c&p move as I thought it was just a request to revert an undiscussed move. My apologies. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:21, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

No worries, I'd just suggest not removing requests and instead fixing/ignoring them, especially as you're not a pagemover yet. Elli (talk | contribs) 18:22, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Huh? What do you mean as I"m not a pagemover yet? I can definitely move pages. Do I suddenly need special perms to move pages? ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:44, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Ohhhhh it's a separate perm that allows more advanced page moving. I see. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:45, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Yep, sorry for any confusion. Elli (talk | contribs) 00:56, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Elli, would you still be able to properly move Roush Fenway Keselowski Racing? The move itself was appropriate, just not the method. Not sure if I clarified that well enough in my request. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 18:33, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

@GhostOfDanGurney: sure, I'll just do a pageswap. Elli (talk | contribs) 18:34, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! :] GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 18:36, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Template:Big Nate The Crowd Goes Wild

Hello, Elli,

When you tag pages for speedy deletion, please post a notice on the page creator's talk page letting them know what's happening. Twinkle should post these notices for you once you set up your Preferences to "Notify page creator" and make sure all of the CSD boxes are checked. But if Twinkle doesn't post a notice, you should do so yourself. This is especially important for a brand new editor so they are aware why pages they have created were deleted. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:53, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

@Liz: Twinkle does not notify on G6 because it's usually not necessary. I was working on writing up {{Db-wrongnamespace-notice}}, should probably finish that. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:03, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2000 Alabama Amendment 2

The article 2000 Alabama Amendment 2 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2000 Alabama Amendment 2 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 18:21, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2021

• In the media: Denial: climate change, mass killings and pornography

• WikiCup report: The WikiCup 2021

• Deletion report: What we lost, what we gained

• From a Wikipedia reader: What's Matt Amodio?

• Arbitration report: ArbCom in 2021

• Discussion report: On the brink of change – RFA reforms appear imminent

• Technology report: What does it take to upload a file?

• WikiProject report: Interview with contributors to WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers

• Serendipity: "Did You Know ..." featured a photo of the wrong female WWII pilot

• News from Diff: Content translation tool helps create one million Wikipedia articles

• Traffic report: Reporting ticket sales on the edge of the Wiki, if Eternals should fail

• Recent research: Vandalizing Wikipedia as rational behavior

• Humour: A very new very Wiki crossword

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Don't bypass blacklists

I'd rather not bring more attention to this so I'm commenting here but just so you understand. You might think of it as benign or silly or whatever, but what you did here was grossly inappropriate and shows remarkably poor judgement. Sure, the article itself does not dox anyone but it contains a hyperlink which attacks three editors and doxes not just one but two of them. When you see that something is blacklisted, it is for a reason and it applies to project space as well, and at a minimum needs to be whitelisted before being included anywhere. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 14:43, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

@Tayi Arajakate: thanks for your message. I did not check all the hyperlinks of the linked-to article, which was indeed poor judgement on my part when dealing with such a link. I figured, given the listing at RSP, that the main reason for blacklisting was to prevent use as an article source and prevent the linking of doxxing of editors, neither of which was apparent to me when I added the link. But seeing further discussion and the reasons you presented I agree this was a mistake and I will not do a similar thing in the future. Elli (talk | contribs) 16:40, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, that's all I wanted to hear and sorry if I sounded too harsh above. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 00:19, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

@Tayi Arajakate: No worries -- it was my mistake so I can't really be upset at you for pointing it out. Elli (talk | contribs) 02:15, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Message from Redhatblue

+(3:00) Redhatblue (talk) 23:50, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

@Redhatblue: hi, is there something you're intending to discuss? Elli (talk | contribs) 23:57, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

עדיף להיפגש במקוםלהתווכח. Redhatblue (talk) 00:47, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

@Redhatblue: I do not understand what you are trying to communicate to me as I am only fluent in English and the machine-translation is unclear. Elli (talk | contribs) 00:53, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

POTD

OMG. Sorry. I've had some mistakes in different wikis. I'll fix it.--TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 20:22, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Now I have a doubt: should I ask for deletion the current POTD pages? I can't revert.--TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 20:33, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

@TaronjaSatsuma: sure, if you don't mind, I'll tag them for speedy deletion. Elli (talk | contribs) 00:04, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

I don't mind, go ahead and thanks and sorry.--TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 09:16, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

A reflection of your XFD for April Fool's nominations

Hello. As the one who came up with joke AfDs for Robinhood and Mike Soroka last April Fool's, I would like to apologise for my less-than-appropriate behaviour during that discussion. In hindsight, I should not have seen your nomination as targeting of any kind. Although I stand by my Speedy Deletion request for the two AfDs, I should have handled my on-Wiki comments better. Sorry, NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 06:41, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

@NotReallySoroka: thanks for the apology. It's ok, I'm not unhappy with you. Elli (talk | contribs) 12:47, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your participation in the November 2021 New Pages Patrol drive

		The Reviewer Barnstar
		For reviewing at least 50 articles during the drive.

Thank you for reviewing or re-reviewing 88 articles, which helped contribute to an overall 1276-article reduction in the backlog during the drive. And an extra thanks for helping with the grunt work of coordination! (t · c) buidhe 12:33, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

@Buidhe: was glad to help. Wish it would've gotten more of the backlog down though, I think we've learned some lessons for making the next drive (perhaps next year?) more effective. Elli (talk | contribs) 12:45, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

For sure. (t · c) buidhe 12:47, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for coordinating the November 2021 New pages patrol backlog drive. Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:58, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Sorry I was not able to do much. And it appears neither were most others (15 people who signed up but did 0 reviews?). I think NPP needs to seriously consider how to give reviewers more encouragement and support (or whatever else may be the problem? Maybe we need to consider that first). And I would be interested to hear your and other coordinators' thoughts.​​ Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:07, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have any ideas on that front. (t · c) buidhe 15:16, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

File talk:Arabic Numerals.svg

Hello, Elli,

Thank you for catching this vandalism. How did you happen upon a file talk page? Or are you just very active scanning recent changes? I worry about pages like this, that no one has on their Watchlists. Thanks again for all of the work you do here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:38, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

@Liz: I tend to look at Special:NewPages in some rarely-patrolled namespaces. Thanks for the work you do here processing these deletions too :) Elli (talk | contribs) 22:21, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

RFC

Please do not unclose/restore the RFC, we already have a discussion that has been ongoing for days and has been advertised in multiple venues to solicit additional feedback. We do not need a second discussion on basically the same thing. —Locke Cole • t • c 05:00, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Locke Cole: I agree that there had already been a discussion, but said discussion was not formatted like an RfC, did not start as an RfC, and was not heading towards a clear consensus that people would likely be happy with. I think that a new RfC would be far more effective at establishing a workable consensus than what we had previously, and you can see this in my discussion with Love of Corey here (permalink). I won't restore but I would ask you to self-revert. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:03, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but we aren't going to hit the reset button because someone now wants to make it a formal RfC. It's been promoted in multiple venues and received a significant amount of feedback from multiple editors. I have no intention of putting myself through this again unless it's a wider discussion to clarify that victim lists are not expressly covered by NOTMEMORIAL and are allowed absent a good reason to exclude them. —Locke Cole • t • c 06:12, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Locke Cole: fair enough. I'm stepping back from the talkpage discussion there because after re-considering I've seen that I got a bit emotionally invested, and I really don't care that much about what happens. Would support a broader RfC to clarify this so we don't have this debate every single time, ugh. Elli (talk | contribs) 06:29, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

That's reasonable. For what it's worth, it definitely has me invested as well, which is why I keep trying to steer the conversation away from what I or others prefer/like/want and what our sources state. I've rarely seen an article turn out badly that followed the sources and used them for guidance on balance/neutrality. I may try for something broader, if I do, I'll likely ping all involved at that discussion so we can end this cycle of debate. —Locke Cole • t • c 06:43, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Locke Cole: Yeah, agree with you there. Our goal should be to follow the sources, especially when editors disagree on what to do. Looking forward to such an RfC if you do decide to make one. Elli (talk | contribs) 06:48, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Question from Sergio Corbucci on Franco Nero (05:26, 8 December 2021)

Hello, I’m trying to add a credit on Franco Nero’s page:

2022 “The Man from Rome” Role: “The Pope”

Could you please help me?

Thanks so much! --Sergio Corbucci (talk) 05:26, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Sergio Corbucci: I've fixed the entry, it should look ok now? Elli (talk | contribs) 23:57, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Sergio Corbucci: noting that this has been reverted as an unsource change. FYI, please do not add uncited material to Wikipedia in the future. Elli (talk | contribs) 03:28, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Message from Block baby

Yes, sorry. (About Servant of the People party color) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Block baby (talk • contribs) 20:12, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

DYK for 2000 Alabama Amendment 2

On 14 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2000 Alabama Amendment 2, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that 2000 Alabama Amendment 2, which repealed the state's anti-miscegenation laws, was carefully written to avoid legalizing same-sex marriage? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2000 Alabama Amendment 2. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2000 Alabama Amendment 2), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Remove a Domain from Wikipedia blacklist

Hello Elli,
Hope you're doing well. So can you please assist me to remove a domain from the Wikipedia spam-blacklist?
Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MahfujNahid (talk • contribs) 19:30, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

@MahfujNahid: I cannot do this, but you can ask at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:55, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Elli for you reply

Hello Elli,

I have had a conversation last night about Spacious. This domain site was blocked. I asked to remove the domain, but now I think it doesn't work right now for heavy spamming.

But it was said, "If the link is keeping you from editing Spacious, you can make a whitelist request so that the corp link can remain there"

Then I have messaged Jamie. But maybe Jamie takes me the wrong way.

Please help to get out of this trouble!
Can you please mention someone who can help me?

Thanks in advance,

Mahfuj.— Preceding unsigned comment added by MahfujNahid (talk • contribs) 20:11, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Again, the relevant place to discuss this is at MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#spacious.hk. No reason has been provided why the URL should be whitelisted, and there's reason to believe it will be spammed again to articles. Please stop wasting valuable time of fellow users and stop forum shopping. – NJD-DE (talk) 20:28, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Test MassMessage

Test MassMessage for everyone who opted into being the subject of the test, to make sure I haven't forgotten how to send them. Hopefully this isn't broken! Vaticidalprophet 23:15, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Vaticidalprophet guess it worked? Elli (talk | contribs) 23:23, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

A very happy holiday season, whatever it may be for you and yours.

I wish you an enjoyable and safe season, and health, happiness, and success in the year ahead. Have a fantastic time! Vaticidalprophet 03:26, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Question from Ithinknationalgeographicisbetter (23:07, 8 December 2021)

Hi! Wikipedia has released false information to my students in an online learning facility! What do I do? --Ithinknationalgeographicisbetter (talk) 23:07, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

@Ithinknationalgeographicisbetter Hi Mia. I'm an admin here, and I happened to be passing by and spotted your question to Elli. Could you be more specific, please? What article? What misinformation? Is it still there? Was it vandalism, or a poorly sourced statement? Were the citations of an unreliable nature? If you feel confident, you could fix any error or vandalism yourself by making a WP:REVERT of any recent edit which damaged the page. Another way for a new editor to raise concerns is to post their concerns on the actual Talk Page of the article in the hope that those who watch that particular page might be moved to fix it for you. I'll leave you a welcome message on your talk page with a few useful links, but do drop by the Teahouse where our volunteer hosts are keen to help anyone new to Wikipedia and who needs help with editing. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:54, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Question from Pawn54 (01:23, 16 December 2021)

I want to edit the article on Peter A. McCullough. The cites uswed to support him spreading misinformation are, well blogs, politically motivated news media, etc. why can't you go to the article and click on your used name and edit that article --Pawn54 (talk) 01:23, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Question from LouFarr (15:26, 24 December 2021)

Hello Elli - I thought I had successfully edited the Gallery page of Jewish Legion and apparently my contribution was removed. I uploaded a photo of discharge papers showing my grandfather's service in the Royal Fusiliers from 1918-1920 along with a caption. Now it appears to be gone although it still exists on wiki here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Legion#/media/File:Royal-fusiliers-discharge-HermanGrant.jpg - Do you have any suggestions? Should I delete and re upload? Other link for file on wikipedia: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Royal-fusiliers-discharge-HermanGrant.jpg Thanks, Lee Turchin --LouFarr (talk) 15:26, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Question from Sosas Tune Studio (08:34, 27 December 2021)

How are you --Sosas Tune Studio (talk) 08:34, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

@Sosas Tune Studio: I'm good! Do you have a question about Wikipedia? Elli (talk | contribs) 21:58, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 December 2021

• From the editor: Here is the news

• News and notes: Jimbo's NFT, new arbs, fixing RfA, and financial statements

• Serendipity: Born three months before her brother?

• In the media: The past is not even past

• Recent research: STEM articles judged unsuitable for undergraduates below the first paragraph

• Arbitration report: A new crew for '22

• By the numbers: Four billion words and a few numbers

• Deletion report: We laughed, we cried, we closed as "no consensus"

• Gallery: Wikicommons presents: 2021

• Traffic report: Spider-Man, football and the departed

• Crossword: Another Wiki crossword for one and all

• Humour: Buying Wikipedia

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:07, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Template:Boulder, Colorado weatherbox

Where is the deletion discussion? The link in {{Template for discussion/dated}} (Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2021_December_24#Template:Boulder,_Colorado_weatherbox) is broken. ~Kvng (talk) 21:53, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

@Kvng: I fixed the link, it goes to the right section now. The nom messed up here by not properly linking the section, oh well. Elli (talk | contribs) 21:56, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Update on Jewish Population Table

In regard to the Jewish Population Rable on Jewish exodus From Arab Countires — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.178.96 (talk) 21:41, 29 December 2021 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_exodus_from_Arab_and_Muslim_countries Updates:

• Morroco 2,100 (2019) https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jews-of-morocco
• Algeria 200 (2020) https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jews-of-algeria
• Tunisa 1,000 (2019) https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jews-of-tunisia
• Iraq 4 (2021) https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jews-of-iraq
• Egypt 3 (2021) "BDE: One Of The Last Jews In Egypt Passes Away". The Yeshiva World. 17 November 2021. Retrieved 3 December 2021.
• Yemen and Aden 6(2021)
• Syria 0 (2021) https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jews-of-syria
• Lebanon 29 {2020) https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jews-of-lebanon
• Bangladesh 4 (2018) [But despite this history, today, the Jewish population of Bangladesh is virtually non-existent. According to local sources, there are only 4 Jews living in Dhaka and they keep their identity private.What happened to the Jews of Bangladesh? - Foreign Policy ...foreignpolicyblogs.com/2018/04/30/what-happened-to-th]
• Iran 8,500 (2021) https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/jewish-population-by-country
• Pakistan 200 {?] (2021)
• Turkey 15,000 [2021} https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/jewish-population-by-country Jewish Population by country 2021

This is a lot of work you're asking me to do here to update the table. Can I suggest you register an account, get extended confirmed (by making good edits elsewhere), and make the edits yourself in the future? If not, at least could you copy the entire contents of the page into User:Elli/sandbox5, make the changes you want made, and save it, so I can simply copy them over? Elli (talk | contribs) 22:11, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks this task has been done Note not sure of Pakistan Jewish Polulation {Sorry} — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.178.96 (talk) 04:50, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for making the changes. However, I'm not sure about the accuracy of all these numbers given the sources, for example this source: [1] which you gave for Egypt only says "less than 20". Can you please double check that? Also, a lot of the sources you gave are bare URLs, if you could make the Jewish Virtual Library ones full citations that would be great. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:11, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Jewish Virtual Library is an online encyclopedia published by American–Israeli Cooperative Enterprise. It has apparently drawn criticism for pro-Israel bias and "Zionist propaganda"; its entry at WP:RSP describes it as partisan and mostly unreliable. I don't think it should be used as a source for Jewish population in Arab countries. Some other sources here may have similar leanings. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 05:22, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

In reply to your query

• Algeria Jewish Population from 2020 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, U.S. State Department, (March 30, 2021). see https://www.state.gov/reports/2020-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/algeria/
• Tunisa see Sergio DellaPergola, “World Jewish Population, 2020,” in Arnold Dashefsky and Ira M. Sheskin (eds.), The American Jewish Year Book, 2020, Dordrecht: Springer, (2021).

Iraq see https://www.timesofisrael.com/on-passover-2021-iraqs-jewish-community-dwindles-to-fewer-than-five/

• Egypt see
• Syria _jewish Virtual Library of Syria
• Lebanon -see Beirut synagogue renovated after port blast, but no Jews likely to pray there,” Times of Israel, (December 17, 2020).
• Bangladesh -see But despite this history, today, the Jewish population of Bangladesh is virtually non-existent. According to local sources, there are only 4 Jews living in Dhaka and they keep their identity private.What happened to the Jews of Bangladesh? - Foreign Policy ...foreignpolicyblogs.com/2018/04/30/what-happened-to-th
• Iran see https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/jewish-population-by-country
• Pakistan {Estimate-Ive see estiamtes that go from 800 to 745 to 200}
• Turkey https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/jewish-population-by-country

References

Regarding GNG

Hello,

You recently voted delete for an article for GNG, which is now at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/RobOps

As per my understanding, GNG eligibility is considered to have been met if there are at least two significant coverage from independent, reliable sources.

This topic seems to have the required such coverage in the following:

Please explain how GNG is not met so that I avoid similar articles in the future.

Thanks Wickedwiki2 (talk) 07:28, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

For some reason there seems to be layout issues on your talk page after I posted this? Wickedwiki2 (talk) 07:30, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

@Wickedwiki2: there were, sorry about that. I'm kinda sleepy but will try to get back to you when I have more time to look at these sources. Please feel free to ping me in a few days if I haven't replied. Elli (talk | contribs) 08:52, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

References

DYK for Dash for Cash

On 1 January 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dash for Cash, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Dash for Cash, an event in which teachers competed to grab one-dollar bills to pay for school supplies, was criticized for being dehumanizing? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dash for Cash. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Dash for Cash), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—valereee (talk) 12:02, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 5,482 views (456.8 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of January 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 01:06, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: most viewed hook of the year! :O Elli (talk | contribs) 01:12, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

'Grats, Elli! ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 02:38, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for expanding it! Elli (talk | contribs) 02:38, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

ö well I'll be damned! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 06:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: (admittedly, it probably won't hold the record for long) Elli (talk | contribs) 06:20, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

still, you're holding the early lead out of the gate :) but i give it one day, two tops theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 06:23, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: Honestly, kinda impressed it did as well as it did. I'm always a bit in awe of the truly successful DYKs -- I have no idea where people get the ideas from! Elli (talk | contribs) 06:29, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

it's one of the nice things about being storytellers, the way we are—sometimes, you just don't know what stories people are going to like. I think a plate of meatballs made the top 5 hooks of November 2021. But I think this particular story connected with readers on an emotional level; no one wants to be forced to scrape together money like that, and given that the hook isn't talking about some far-flung place, it makes people (particularly parents and teachers) feel connected to the issue. At least, that's my reading of it—i suppose the lesson of the mondeghili is that we just don't know what people will choose to care about. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 06:37, 2 January 2022 (UTC)