Jump to content

User talk:Pgallert/Archive2024 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Your recent edits on the Namibia

Hello @Pgallert. I saw some of your recent edits on the Namibia page. I wanted to ask about the demotion of the section on Demographics. Most other country pages, if not nearly all, have dedicated sections for Demographics. I was wondering what your reason was for demoting it, especially given the lack of discussion on it at its Talk page. I personally find searching for Demographics information on the new version rather difficult, given that it is split between the sections on Geography and Culture, and I think that it makes said sections excessively long. Thanks, --Amtoastintolerant (talk) 07:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi Amtoastintolerant, thanks for bringing this up. The section on demographics is rather small, and in my understanding the topic is part of geography. But checking now, most other country pages indeed have it as a main section after "economy", with health, religion, languages, subordinate to it. I can undo my sorting; You're right that I should have sought consensus first. Cheers, Pgallert (talk) 19:53, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

I love this project! Ovahimba verification Secretlondon (talk) 19:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, Secretlondon! I also enjoyed this exercise, and was surprised by its outcome. --Pgallert (talk) 14:03, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

(Note to stalkers: This page refers)

"Rita Mitsouko (album" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Rita Mitsouko (album 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/2024 February 10 § Rita Mitsouko (album until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:01, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: no longer accepting new proposals in phase I

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

  • Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
  • Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
  • Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
  • Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
  • Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
  • Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
  • Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
  • Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
  • Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
  • Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
  • Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
  • Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
  • Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
  • Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
  • Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
  • Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
  • Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Oshiwambo words and phrases

A tag has been placed on Category:Oshiwambo words and phrases indicating that it is currently empty, 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 it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 22:35, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Herero Wars

Stop removing information from the Herero Wars article. The other articles sited also include other events in their "See also" sections without including sources. See American Indian Wars and Australian frontier wars. DaRealPrinceZuko (talk) 22:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

That wasn't information but links to random pages that somehow also contain atrocities against the indigenous population of some territory. If they are somehow connected, state a source that says so. If they are not, do not re-add. That other pages contain similar content is not a good reason to include them. In general, unreferenced content here is often allowed to stay unless someone complains about it. If that happens, either a source will be provided or the content will be removed. Hope that helps, Pgallert (talk) 15:08, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Several German colonials, including Lothar von Trotha and Alexander Kuhn, compared their conflict with the Herero to the American Indian Wars. The former's comparisons are evidenced in his diary: "The natives must give way [weichen]--look at America."
  • Hull, Isabel V. (2005). Absolute Destruction: Military Culture and the Practices of War in Imperial Germany. Cornell University. p. 30
  • Lahti, Janne (2019). The American West and the World: Transnational and Comparative Perspectives. Routledge. p. 162 DaRealPrinceZuko (talk) 16:46, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Perfect! I have no objection if you make an entry in Herero Wars with this explanation and source. --Pgallert (talk) 06:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins

Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

For your information

Languages of Namibia :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:38, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:58, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: Discussion-only period now open for review

Hi there! The trial of the RfA discussion-only period passed at WP:RFA2024 has concluded, and after open discussion, the RfC is now considering whether to retain, modify, or discontinue it. You are invited to participate at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period. Cheers, and happy editing! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pgallert/Archive2024_1&oldid=1253870715"