Jump to content

User talk:MB/Archive 17

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10←Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17

Which oblast for Bezimenne?

Hi. Thank you for your interest in Bezimenne. Before we can finalise the name we have to solve the puzzle of which oblast it is in. According to the map in the infobox, it is in Kherson Oblast, not Mykolaiv Oblast. See the discussion at Talk:Bezimenne, Snihurivka urban hromada, Bashtanka Raion, Mykolaiv Oblast#Mykolaiv Oblast or Kherson Oblast?. Ymblanter thinks OSM is pretty accurate, in which case the map in the infobox is wrong. I have not been able to solve it and am unconvinced either way. Can you help? Thanks. Nurg (talk) 05:36, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry but I am of no help. I was just reviewing redirects as part of NPP and found this. I know it should have a shorter name, but I can't help determine the correct Oblast. MB 05:47, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Reversion of edits

Greetings, I happened to notice that you reverted my edits regarding Bishop Luke Waddinge of Fens and Fr. William Devereux of Piercetown. To take the page The Wexford Carols as an example: the articles you reverted the links to are for entirely different men. Bishop Luke Waddinge is not the same person as the Friar Luke Wadding, and Fr. William Devereux is certainly not the same as the Anglo-Norman nobleman William Devereux. Factually, they are all completely different people, so I cannot conceive of why you reverted my edits as "Non Constructive". I will fix the errors again soon, if you don't wish to. Best regards, DefeatingLine (talk) 23:05, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

You changed many links from articles to things that do not exist, such as Kilmore, County Wexford to Kilmore Carols, making your whole series of edits very suspicious. I see another editor has removed your changes in Kilmore, County Wexford, so perhaps you should explain yourself on the article talk pages and get WP:CONSENSUS. MB 23:29, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
Regarding the Kilmore Carols, I made those edits in anticipation of an article I drafted. I believe that the Kilmore carols are unique and notable enough to warrant their own article. My draft can be found here. I was probably too hasty in adding the links, as I see that it can take over four months for an article to be reviewed. My draft is hardly perfect, but I expect that's the point of review. Any suggestions you have regarding the draft, by the way, would be most welcome. DefeatingLine (talk) 01:53, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
You should definitely wait to see if the article is accepted before adding links to it. The Draft looks well referenced, so it could get reviewed fairly quickly. You can change the numbers in the list to just "#", that creates an numbered list with proper spacing between elements. It's great that you have references. Those are acceptable, but it would be better if they were more complete with citation templates like {{cite book}} or {{cite web}}. That is something you could work on while waiting for a review. See WP:REFB for help, and you can always ask for help at the WP:TEAHOUSE. MB 02:05, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pascaline Edwards, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lome.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Maa Tara Chandi Temple

What does your edit summary mean? Please do not revert my edits giving such reasons. Instead of reinserting bare references you may try to fix them. Egeymi (talk) 16:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Polson Logging Co. 2

Remember that steam engine-related article you edited and added that “bare URLs” banner? Well I’ve tried two improve the URLs since then and now the page is longer than it was when you probably saw it. Is it alright if the bare URLs banner gets removed? 23.169.64.51 (talk) 01:02, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes it seems that there are no longer any bare urls so you can certainly remove it. But there is a different referencing error now - Ref #13 says there are to refs with the same name but different content. Probably just needs a minor correction. Can you fix that too? MB 01:52, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Happy New Year, MB! In 2022, other editors thanked you 1010 times using the thanks tool. This places you in the top 9 most thanked Wikipedians of 2022. Congratulations and, well, thank you for all that you do for Wikipedia. Here's to 2023! Mz7 (talk) 23:42, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, MB!

Happy New Year!

MB,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 03:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

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

Abishe (talk) 03:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, MB!

Happy New Year!

MB,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ⋠T⋡ 20:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

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

— Moops ⋠T⋡ 20:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Billard

How much more of this[1] kind of trolling cleanup, typo(s) fixed: Billard → Billiard should I expect? This has continued for a few months now. Invasive Spices (talk) 31 December 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Invasive Spices, it's interesting that you didn't revert it then - but you knew of course that the edit hadn't actually been made and was an AWB false positive leaving a non revertible edit summary. What the AWB run did do was to remove a lot of unnecessary overlinking and effect some other MoS corrections. Its a long article and I see you added 86.9% of the text. Probably took a long time to write and I found it very interesting, but clean ups and copy-editing are necessary evils and any editor is welcome to do it. It even happens on the many articles I write, but with the arthritis in my fingers I've become a rather clumsy typist and I'm grateful for it. MB was doing the right thing. Perhaps being so quick to accuse experienced editors of trolling isn't quite the best reaction. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:11, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
"Several months" and "so quick" don't go together. The dichotomy of an immediate impression and several months experience is the important thing here.
it's interesting that you didn't revert it then no it isn't. I read the edit. Why would I revert any of it? but you knew of course of course I did. Invasive Spices (talk) 1 January 2023 (UTC)
As a retired professional linguist, I am unable to resolve how that can be a dichotomy unless you are confusing the word with its botanical sense. Your 'several months' and your quick and incorrect impression don't conjoin in theory and method in any sense. The accusation of trolling was just plain wrong. Perhaps you might wish to thank MB for his clean up work. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:50, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
The place to voice your disagreement with WP:Talk#User talk pages is WP talk:Talk#User talk pages Kudpung. Discussion of disagreements on Talk:s occurs perhaps hundreds of times every day and your desire to prohibit such discussion would seriously disrupt Wikipedia business. As an admin you are well aware of that so I don't see why I should have to remind you. My phrasing[2] was as oblique as was possible. Invasive Spices (talk) 12 January 2023 (UTC)

There is a mop reserved in your name

You are a remarkable editor in many ways. You would be a good administrator, in my opinion, and appear to be well qualified. You personify an administrator without tools and have gained my support already!

— TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 06:28, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Remarkable work in patrolling mainspace, and could clearly use the tools. I'd support if you decided to request adminship. — Wug·a·po·des​ 20:15, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
I think patrolling and XfD look good, but would like to see more content creation, probably a GA. If you have one, which I think shouldn't take more than three months once you pick a topic, I'd be more than happy to support. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:50, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
I already have two (and 85 DYKs). MB 01:34, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

My mistake, the edit count gave me the contrary impression. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 02:43, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

NPP Awards for 2022

Redirect Ninja Award
For over 6,000 redirect reviews during 2022. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

The New Page Reviewer's Bronze Award

For over 1,000 article reviews during 2022. Well done! Keep up the good work! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
I wish you good luck on your adminship bid! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:50, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
I hope you will be successful but right now the odds are falling... Thingofme (talk) 10:16, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Hang in there!

It feels difficult right now...
Regardless of the outcome, you've managed an unexpectedly difficult RfA with patience and reasonableness. It's clear the community writ large approves of your previous behaviors and actions. I admire the apparent calm and gentleness with which you've interacted with others during the week. BusterD (talk) 15:31, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

World oil market chronology from 2003 ‎

I was given advice to have detailed articles on a few years at a time, with a brief summary in the parent article.

There would have been no content to speak of in the 2023–2025 world oil market chronology article but it made it easier for me to start today to have one.

You wouldn't be the only one to consider deleting it, but can I feel safe in creating that now even though it currently has one paragraph?

Because it will get really, really long as information is added.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:02, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For stepping up at RfA. Ad Orientem (talk) 22:29, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Your RfA

I always hate to be the bearer of bad news, but as of a few minutes ago the bureaucrat chat for your RfA was closed as unsuccessful. Primefac (talk) 18:39, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey MB, I know it's not the result you were hoping for, but I wanted to swing by and leave some positive words. I don't want this to discourage you from continuing your great work at NPP and hope you'll continue to grow as an editor here. Once the inherent stress of RfA fades I'd encourage you to take another look at the feedback provided, keep it in mind moving forward, and know it's not a 'no' forever.
Looking forward to seeing you around, and hope you'll make another run for it in 6-12 months time. All my best, Lord Roem ~ (talk) 19:36, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Don't take it personally. It's not a reflection on you personally or your work here. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:45, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Commiserations. I just wanted to say how much I appreciate your volunteer work here, and that I hope you continue to do it. I'm sure that the comments in all sections of that RfA give you a lot of food for thought and self-reflection. We live and learn - just know that a great many people have the utmost respect for your contributions. Girth Summit (blether) 20:54, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
+1 to everybody's comment, especially Lord Roem. I hope you make another run in around an year. —usernamekiran (talk) 22:08, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
And when you decide to go again, I'll happily nominate you. Keep up the good work, the pettiness on display notwithstanding you're a huge asset to the project. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 01:56, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Hey, MB. I'm sorry it didn't happen. Take the feedback as a gift. This can be turned around in six months to a year, the community wants it to happen for you. Valereee (talk) 02:56, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
As someone who supported this RfA, I will be looking for your second attempt in the future. My first attempt didn't go so well either, but I came back a few months later. Good luck and stay with it! --rogerd (talk) 03:12, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
MB, I also want to jump in here and tell you that I am very grateful for the valuable work you do here, especially at NPP. There are many people that believe you would be a great administrator, and I am one of them. Valereee's comment above that feedback can be a gift is spot on. I hope you decide to run again in the future. Thank you for all that you do for the encyclopedia! Netherzone (talk) 03:23, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
You do great and necessary work. Others recognize that. I hope it brings you satisfaction and you will stick with it. Several administrators have succeeded on their second or third try after a period of time. If you wish to do it again, wait a while and give it another try. Best wishes. Donner60 (talk) 04:27, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
My first RfA didn't go well. I think it's quite a large and respectable group. SilkTork (talk) 16:39, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Bummer. :( As I said in my support !vote, much of what you said about NPP etc. resonated with me, and I'm sorry it got turned into a club to beat you with. Don't let it get to you, though, there was a lot of support also. Cheers, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:44, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for all you do on Wikipedia. I think you would make a great admin. — Archer1234 (t·c) 16:46, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for running under the bus that is RfA, M8! Sorry you didn't pass this time. VQuakr (talk) 16:54, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Sorry to hear this, it is simply absurd. How is there going to be a WP if there are no admins? How are there going to be admins if the scrutiny levels are ten times higher than what is required to join the US Congress? Geez. I guess NPP is going to wither now, too.  Mr.choppers | ✎  04:18, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
It was truly a shame to watch a hardworking, efficient, and level-headed editor have their candidness used in such a way against them. I'm positive you would have been an asset to the admin team. PhotogenicScientist (talk) 00:21, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
I may be late to the party, but I would add that it is a shame that you failed. Like it or not, NPP may be impacted by what is going on. Thanks for running, I am sure the future will be brighter! Have a great day! ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 06:47, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
+1 SunDawn - knowing MB's abilities, I have no doubt that his future will not only be bright, it will be successful. A big portion of the community is behind him. Atsme 💬 📧 15:00, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Beezer Brothers

Hello! Your submission of Beezer Brothers at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 18:02, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol newsletter

Regarding the latest newsletter: it's missing a closing div tag, and thus its formatting is leaking out to subsequent sections. isaacl (talk) 21:09, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Ah shoot, we will probably need someone to use WP:AWB or similar tool to go through all of the pages at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers/Newsletter list and add </div> to the end of the newsletters. Mz7 (talk) 00:58, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
I would be willing to help with the cleanup effort for this. At the moment, I only have access to a Mac, so it's a bit cumbersome to get AWB set up, but I'm looking into WP:JWB as a potential alternative to AWB. Mz7 (talk) 01:07, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
@Certes, @GoingBatty, could either of you fix my screw-up. I could do this myself, but am a little tied up at my RFA right now. MB 01:08, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Ah, I will leave it to one of them as well, then! Looks like they have more recent experience with AWB. It's probably an easy fix: just look for the text <!-- Drafted by User:MB, Reviewed by Novem Linguae, Kudpung --> and preprend the div tag to that. Mz7 (talk) 01:19, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
The tricky part would be detecting if it has already been fixed, as I did at User talk:Valereee, since there are numerous ways of making an edit to fix the problem. Of course, an extra closing div tag isn't the end of the world for most pages. There are some who do want their entire talk page enclosed within a box, and so deliberately leave an unclosed tag at the top of their page. Adding an extra closing div tag in that case would close the box prematurely. isaacl (talk) 02:17, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
@MB: Fix it like this? There are 869 pages to review, so it would take quite a while. GoingBatty (talk) 04:07, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
That looks correct. Can you manually watch for ones that have already been fixed, in case any of those would have the problem described above if there was another wrapper box? MB 04:13, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for confirming. If DannyS712 has a bot that could fix this, I'll defer to him. Ping me if that doesn't work out. GoingBatty (talk) 15:39, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Ping @DannyS712 for help running his Mms fix bot. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 14:10, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Also, (and I realize you're busy at the mop festival) there are three incorrect usages of semicolons in the newsletter that I always have to correct, because it renders invalid HTML5 and creates issues with screen readers per H:DL, so please fix that when you get a chance. The incorrect semicolons are just before the "Backlog", "2022 Awards" and "Reminders". Thank you for fixing this, and I have added the closing div tag to your newsletter above this section. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 02:39, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about that. I've updated the draft, should not happen next time. MB 02:52, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
my pleasure and thank you very much! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 02:56, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Although I agree using semicolons to create pseudo-headings results in invalid HTML, I can't get too excited about that aspect in content intended for talk pages, which typically contain many colon-based list items, and those too create invalid HTML without a preceding semicolon list item. It is nonetheless semantically incorrect, with one possible consequence being screen readers misinterpreting how to read it, and thus inadvisable. (No easy alternatives exist for lists with only colon-based list items, so for better or worse we just live with that problem.) isaacl (talk) 03:34, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
WP:AWBREQ may be able to help if you guys add a request there. –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:06, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Hey MB. I have just gone through around 300+ user talk pages to manually add </div>. Hopefully this should help out with the cleanup! echidnaLives - talk - edits 12:45, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Hmm, since we're in a situation right now where some people already have it fixed and some people don't, I don't think a fully automated solution (what I presume DannyS712's bot is) is worth the time to investigate (especially given the risk of bugs creating even more work). 869 pages is a lot, but it's still within the realm of what's accomplishable in a semi-automated fashion using AWB or JWB. I am now in the process of using JWB and going through the user talk pages—checking first if it has been fixed already by seeing if any </div> tag exists after the newsletter. Mz7 (talk) 06:57, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
OK, I was able to go in alphabetical order through all of the user talk pages from the letters A through F. Edited 228 pages and manually skipped 33 either because the issue was already fixed or because the newsletter got removed. I think I'll call it here for the night, but somebody else can feel free to pick up where I left off (the next user talk page to process is User talk:GRuban). Mz7 (talk) 07:58, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
@GoingBatty, see above. @EchidnaLives and @Mz7 have gone through a lot of these, but there may be a couple hundred left. If you can do any more it would be much appreciated. MB 14:21, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
I am through them all now -- I wrote the regex to detect if there was already a closing div (and skip the page if there was), but a couple people have said they still got two closing divs. I think that if we went from a thousand messed-up pages to a dozen, it is probably still an improvement (although I can give it another shot). jp×g 03:40, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
Nice work, JPxG! I sampled several pages and looks like we can call this issue  Fixed at this point. Mz7 (talk) 06:53, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

For future, I have approval from MalnadachBot Task 12 to fix Lint errors like this. You can drop them at User:MalnadachBot/Signature submissions and I will process them. I have fixed many newsletters like this. It is good practice to run Wikipedia:LINTHINT on a page once before sending a mass message. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 04:30, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Saw this change on my page and it looks like the edit to the URL in the comment has duplicated an existing part of the URL. Not a big deal but a little bit odd. – numbermaniac 07:53, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

In recognition

Seven score and four years ag–
wait, shit, let me try that again
From one MassMessage sender to another: I feel your pain. It happens to the best of us! jp×g 22:37, 17 January 2023 (UTC)


NPP newsletter, Jan 2023

Hi. I hope you are doing well. I am not sure, but I think there was an extra/unnecessary /div tag at the bottom of the "New Pages Patrol newsletter January 2023". Courtesy ping to Novem Linguae. —usernamekiran (talk) 11:28, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey usernamekiran. Yes, you're correct. A couple people went through and removed the extra div tags. We thought we got them all, but if we missed any, please let us know. Thank you. –Novem Linguae (talk) 13:56, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
done. There were ~255 pages. —usernamekiran (talk) 18:44, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Per_Christian_Münstermann

Please publish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Per_Christian_Münstermann Thanks in advance! 94.121.173.168 (talk) 14:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

You have some problems with your article, such as your references being bare, and you forgot to add the template to your article. If you want your article to get to the mainspace, submit the template. `~HelpingWorld~` (👽🛸) 18:42, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Your opinion needed about possible disruption of airport articles

Hello MB. Please see your post on my talk page from December 23. I issued a one-month block of Special:Contributions/2607:FEA8:6000:0:0:0:0:0/36 as a result of your complaint. This IP seemed to be a high-volume editor of airport articles who didn't quite know what they were doing and who never discussed their changes. Since their block expired on January 23 they have come back full force. Would you look at the latest contributions from the /36 range and see if you think a further three-month block is justified? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 01:40, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: Hopefully MB will be back soon but, for now, they haven't edited since early this month. --RegentsPark (comment) 02:06, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
I was hoping that my exciting issue might be enough to coax User:MB out of retirement. But even if he stays away, maybe some other airport people will see this message and offer an opinion. EdJohnston (talk) 02:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

tapestry brick

I need a tapestry brick article! Now that I know what that is, i am incensed that the prow of the Pullman Flatiron Building was rebuilt with inferior, cheapo, flat-toned brick in 1994 after damage, rather than with high-quality 1905 materials. :( If i recall correctly, there were sources for such an article here on your talk page, probably in the archives. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 19:56, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Square units vs. units squared

You made an error with this edit [3] that I thought I'd point out, in case this sort of thing is something you do frequently. Prior to your edit, the article said that the area of the park was "55 meters square". You changed that to "55 square meters". While this might sound reasonable, your edit leaves this park at a size smaller than most flats/apartments. While I personally would never have written "55 meters square", I do understand that the person meant 55m multiplied by 55m, which is 3025 square meters, or in other words, 55 times larger than what you left it reading. Given that most articles on the park indicate that it is about an acre in size, the 3025 square meters is much closer to correct. I totally understand why you did what you did, and I hope you understand why this needs to be changed. Unschool 12:13, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Revert

Can you take a look at this? ABHammad (talk) 02:46, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

@Drmies:@Oshwah:@Femke:@Extraordinary Writ:@ComplexRational: I am sorry that I can't look into this myself but I have just had eye surgery and it is difficult for me to remain online for long. I checked to see if MB had returned after his failed RFA (and he has not) and saw this post. The concern in this post which was raised by User:ABHammad is that the reference linked article has a contributor with a possible conflict of interest- and I might add but only from a quick glance, there nay be a concern about advertising and promotion. The COI template was removed by an IP user after the first post here. Sorry for the forwarding of this message to so many, but I wasn't sure who to ping. I thought it best to bring it to your attention because one of you might have the time and interest to give it a glance to see if there are concerns about the article that should be addressed. Best wishes and thanks. Donner60 (talk) 04:04, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
This is a rabbit hole of apparent paid editing. I just went through Milo Runkle and Jennifer Stojkovic, which are related through editors. Drmies (talk) 15:28, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Review page

Hello, can u give a review for this page? Belenggu Masjarakat (1953) (link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belenggu_Masjarakat) Asphonixm (talk) 05:45, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

@Asphonixm: I have noticed that MB has not edited since January 8. I suggest you ask for help from someone else. I have had recent eye surgery so my time online is limited. Otherwise, I might have been able to review it myself. Donner60 (talk) 02:33, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

"The El (disambiguation)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect The El (disambiguation) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 20 § The El (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 20:06, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:48, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Review my article

Hi, Dear MB sir please review this my new article https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandan_Madan_(Indian_actor) Hiyicam (talk) 07:24, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Numbeo needs NPoV rewrite

Hi, you have contributed to the page Numbeo in the past. I have raised several concerns at the Talk:Numbeo as a CEO of the company. As that within 24 hours there were only 2 people engaging in the Talk page, I kindly ask you to visit, express your opinion and potentially revise the page: Talk:Numbeo#Open_Statement_(1)_by_Numbeo_to_Wikipedia_to_address_Wikipedia's_article_bias_-_TheLocal_article other topics at the Talk page and the Numbeo page itself. 

Thank you Mladen.adamovic (talk) 08:28, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

New discussions with the Foundation Growth Team

I remember you playing an important role in attracting Foundation attention to NPP, and discussing improvements with them at the time of your deeply wounding RfA. I also have unhealed wounds dating to January, so I understand if you're still not ready to come back, but if you have been considering reengagement with the project, your input would be valuable at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation#Article creation hypothesis and/or Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Coordination#Article creation hypothesis (wherever the discussion ends up being merged to). Blessings, Folly Mox (talk) 14:53, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Might be a bit late, but I must be honest that RfA is a toxic place, and that it's likely made many editors leave Wikipedia. But if you ever see this message, please consider coming back to NPP and Wikipedia as a whole. Even if you don't come back to Wikipedia, thanks for all the work you have done for NPP. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 12:55, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
Hear, hear! It happens that "all the work" is measured, crudely, in MB's edit count of 341,678 edits, yielding rank #104 among Wikipedia editors, as currently reported at Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by edit count. (That list, for a long time, deliberately obscured edit counts and randomized placement of the top 200(?) or 1000(?) editors by edit count, I think, but I just noticed it is reporting in detail again.) That's higher than the statistics for any other editor ever very active in WikiProject NRHP, it appears to me. The corresponding Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by article count report seems not to be functioning accurately, as one of its subpages reports MB at rank #3706 for having created 211 articles, while I believe that MB has created far more than that. On the other hand, they devoted extensive and productive effort in very well developing new articles to "Good" status and/or to be highlighted in Wikipedia's main page's "Did you know..." section. That work was awesome but would not contribute much to the article count measure. I hope you will choose to return, and believe that you will be more properly appreciated for what you do and have done, if/when you do. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 01:41, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
MB's edit count of 341,678 edits. The 5,493 patrols are quite impressive too. You are missed, MB. –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:07, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Questions and requests

Inquiring minds want to know:

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports § Suggestion: Changing "Achievements and titles" order in Template:Infobox sportsperson

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports § Suggestion: Changing "Achievements and titles" order in Template:Infobox sportsperson. This invitation comes as you have been one of the most recent to edit the wrapper template {{Infobox climber}}. CLalgo (talk) 10:00, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

The 25 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal

The 25 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
Thank you for all your work! --evrik (talk) 15:32, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

ALS Good Article nomination

Hey there wiki-buddy! I'm hoping I can attract some interested folks to consider reviewing the Wikipedia page about amyotrophic lateral sclerosis for Good Article status. As you may know, ALS is a rare and fatal neurodegenerative disease that quickly causes people to lose the ability to move, speak, and breathe. The Wikipedia page about ALS is read over 2,000 times each day in English alone, and often experiences spikes in traffic whenever a celebrity is diagnosed. There have recently been a number of genetic advances made in the space and some recent drug approvals, thanks in part to the momentum started by the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge. I've been grinding away at it since early this year but keen to see it improve further, hope you'll consider! PaulWicks (talk) 13:21, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Trinidad and Tobago at the 2023 Pan American Games moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Trinidad and Tobago at the 2023 Pan American Games. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has too many problems of language or grammar and skeleton coverage of an incomplete event. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mikeblas (talk) 17:28, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of I-17 Mystery Christmas Tree

Notice

The article I-17 Mystery Christmas Tree has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Just because it's received news coverage doesn't mean it's notable.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Greggens (talk) 21:25, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MB/Archive_17&oldid=1194790199"