Jump to content

User talk:Sadads/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Escambia County Fire Rescue

You have reverted my edits multiple times on a topic you have done no research on. I have actually spent time editing hundreds of fire station pages. The content stated on the page is NOT supported by anything. You say it is "his is not controversial material, and could be easily double checked". Well I would ask you to show me a place where you can double check it. I would love to keep this page and build it up to be something useful. The problem is that the department does not have a website that is worth a darn. So basically the page was created by some a year ago using WP:OR, not sources. --Zackmann08 (talk) 04:19, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Zackmann08:: have you considered offline sources or other databases? I am sure there is a local registry somewhere and/or the phone book and/or Google Maps records and/or OpenStreetMap. This is very basic data, that can be found in any number of databases (I am not saying that they are easy to find). However, we are not limited to just online sources (see Wikipedia:Offline_sources). Moreover, its very hard to fabricate this information, and their is little pressing controversy/need for this data to be 100% accurate (its not actually a matter of debate. Hence the ask for citations: its better to ask for improvements, and let someone who cares improve it: rather than scrap a bunch of data that is likely accurate (by learning how to edit Wikipedia, and making the effort to document it here, the editor is demonstrating a commitment to this information in some way)). If you can demonstrate its NOT accurate, then we should be improving it with citations; in the meantime: Verification of this data, is not a high burden on a reader (for example this page which I wouldn't use a Wikipedia source but provides the data presumambly from a phonebook or public dataset somewhere). For further argument about why I believe this article should continue, see the afd discussion, Sadads (talk) 13:28, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Wild dePROD

I'm sorry but this is wild and not what I would expect of you. You are the first person who has de-PRODed one of my noms for that reason, and I've used it for years as and when appropriate. Why not take up the burden yourself, either of AfD or sourcing? Or why not check the past PRODs and AfDs involving me before doing what you did? You've just created more work for everyone else because of a vague "not convinced" notion. - Sitush (talk) 02:22, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Didel. You could have dePRODed on the basis that DGG had previously dePRODed and therefore the thing is contentious. However, his rationale didn't stack up either and if I remember correctly he was reverting a whole bunch of PRODs that one contributor had made in rapid succession. I think what I presume was his underlying reason - sort of "something not right when someone PRODs so many, so fast" - has more weight than a "not convinced". - Sitush (talk) 02:36, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Sitush, Any good faith reason for removing a prod is valid. "Not convinced" is imo a very good reason. The recourse if you disagree with the removal is afd. Unless you think it was just a careless error removing it, and something else was intended, there is no point usually in even asking about it. First think again whether deletion is the right course, and if you still think so, use AfD. I have often deprodded with the simple reason "I think it best for the community to decide this" worded in any number of ways--whether or not I in the end think the article should be deleted. sometimes I then send it to afd myself, sometimes I wait for the original prodder to take it there, because they're likely to know better why they wanted it deleted. (& Sitush, if I had deprodded, why did you prod again? Isn't afd simpler? What's the pt in aruging of user talk pages when we can get a community decisions that will actually be binding? ) DGG ( talk ) 05:37, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, we will have to disagree. I spend far too much of my time having to go through AfD to get rid of caste puffery and the like, and when I have to take that route because others cannot see what is right in front of their faces then I'm afraid I get a bit miffed sometimes. Maybe I shouldn't, sure, but I'm like the boy with his finger in the dyke and a bit of support from people who arguably should know better would be nice every now and again - the number of times I am found to be wrong about caste stuff is vanishingly small and even the briefest of GSearches (let alone my extensive offline and academic sources etc) would show you that there is nothing reliable to support this article. I've explained the re-PROD above. - Sitush (talk) 05:50, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
@Sitush: I am sorry that you are working through these: have you tried a batch afd where you list 20-30 similar articles for deletion at once? I de-proded in part, because it seems like the level of notability is being applied inconsistently across large batches of these articles (if they exist), and I was think one central discussion would strengthen the case for deletion, and maybe even establish a principle for notabiliyt applicable for the caste: that and the prod reasoning, wasn't really a reasoning for deletion per WP:DELREQ. As @DGG: points out de-prodded is allowed at any point for any reason: it allows us to place a burden of proof on the prodder. Sadads (talk) 23:24, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Your response has been bugging me since I saw it and is in part why I've edited so little since. I am not "working through" anything. There is no method, no campaign etc and, no, I am not going to do a batch AfD. Feel free to do so yourself, although I won't guarantee supporting it - I may be wrong but my bet is you would be nominating without doing a decent WP:BEFORE that accounts for the often numerous transliterations/archaisms/synonyms etc. It isn't an easy task and it often takes months, on and off, to come to the conclusion that a caste stub is not notable and not redirectable.
If you think that there should be a topic-specific notability guideline for castes/tribes/clans/gotras/kootams etc then feel free to propose one. You'd be better campaigning for a change in our attitude to oral history, though, because that is where the knowledge for such articles really lies.
The GNG principle itself is already established and does not need affirming by some mass AfD. There is no inconsistency in the application of notability on my part and I have no idea why you would think that there is. If there are no reliable sources following a decent BEFORE then the article should go. Presumably you are unaware that I have dePRODed some caste articles myself because I was able to source, and I have caused a keep or two at AfD in similar circumstances - Boleyn was affected by one of those, IIRC. I wouldn't dePROD for the reason you gave because it is meritless, just adding to the amount of work and maybe even resulting in a "no consensus" keep of rubbish when the AfD is closed. Are you aware of the degree of puffery etc that goes on with these things?
If you doubt my research standards and accumulated knowledge in this subject area then I suggest you check with people like RegentsPark, NQ and maybe even Drmies, as well as the WP:RX archives, to confirm that I make queries regarding sources that are unavailable to me. Unlike a lot of people, I don't just read the big text on the page, I scour the footnotes and the bibliographies of the sources that are available, thus picking up a lot of other leads besides. The idea that you might even think I have prodded a caste article without doing decent research first makes me wonder why I bother doing anything here. There is a lot of stuff I am near-useless in handling (images, for example) and I know that I can be gruff in manner but, really, you're pushing it with this. I wouldn't mind if you had provided a reasonable rationale but despite the apparent knowledge that causes you to think there is inconsistency, you didn't. Placing the burden of proving a negative on a good faith, subject-experienced prodder, based only on a "not convinced", touches a nerve. And if the Didel article is retained due to a lack of participation "no consensus" at AfD then I really will be in despair. - Sitush (talk) 21:59, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I haven't checked the history here, but if DGG deprodded on the basis of "bad faith PROD" or something like that (which we do on AfDs as well, and it basically denies the process ever happened) then I see no reason why it can't be prodded again. In principle the batch AfD thing is correct and has some value to it, but it's a totally sucky process for a couple of reasons. One, it's a drag already. Two, frequently the discussion will focus on one or two items out of a list of many. Three, such discussion easily derails the entire thing with the result that a. it's difficult for an admin to decide which editors agreed on the deletion of what article and b. there is a risk of the whole thing just ending in "no consensus". But I assume Sadads (who is not, as far as I know, an idiot) deprodded in good faith and, my dear Sitush, you just have to roll with it, as I see you're doing on the AfD. Drmies (talk) 22:35, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

@Sitush: When people disagree with you, it's possible that you haven't done a good job at convincing them. "Fails WP:GNG" is a common reason given when people do drive-by deletion of articles that don't currently list any sources, and I wouldn't fault Sadads for assuming that this time, either. To avoid such de-PRODs in the future, please write a longer justification, particularly stating where and how you looked for sources. Anticipate the doubts people may have about your nominations. Same goes for your AfDs. -- intgr [talk] 07:55, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Do I come across as a drive-by deletionist? Sadads is well aware of my research capability and in fact acted as go-between in one instance that involved The Wikipedia Library and a provider's official blog. I didn't says merely "Fails GNG" either. I stress, no-one has ever challenged these before - that means umpteen admins have deleted such prods. What is even more weird is that the AfD now has two !votes from people who have certainly not conducted the depth of research that I did. You might argue that is because they accept my extended explanation but ultimately that is a trust thing, so why not just trust me in the first place. I'm no tyro and I'm no drive-by tagger; this deprod stinks of rampant inclusionism. - Sitush (talk) 08:03, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
@Sitush: sorry for the added stress: when I am doing admin work, like deleting prods, etc. I try to treat all of the arguments equitably based on what is in front of me (and not reputation: which you have). I am sorry that this is adding additional stress: in part I was recommending a batch deletion, because I have seen a number of these articles as well as part of de-Orphaning work, and we don't (as a community) treat these articles very consistently. I was recommending that we think about this systematically (or have some sort of policy tool that makes the argument more effective than just saying "Just another indian surname"), rather than having similar judgement calls being made over and over and over again about prods, etc.
And its unfortunate that you treat inclusionism as an insult or negative thing; in part I do think of myself as an inclusionist, because from my experience, creating easier ways for editors to include their contributions, helps us grow the community while also allowing experienced editors the opportunity to share their experiences. However, that being said: in the same period of time as I de-prodded this article, I also deleted a number of others, including another surname with a full explanation. I respect your contributions: they are very valuable; however, in using a process like prod: there needs to be adequate justification for the action within our deletion guidelines. Again: I am sorry for creating undue stress, I really do think you are a valuable contributor, and I would hate to see my actions harming your ability to participate, Sadads (talk) 14:47, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Nautical fiction

Hello! Your submission of Nautical fiction 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) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 18:15, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CX, May 2015

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Newbie with a Draft Talk

Hello, Sadads, I have a Draft Talk set up for a rewrite I did on an article about Conal Creedon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Cónal_Creedon/Temp). I do not know what to do next, since this is my first article, but would like to submit it for review, if appropriate. Will you advise me? Many thanks in advance for your patience! Adrienne Asher (talk) 14:24, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Adrienne Asher: I am very busy right now in real life, I would suggest asking for help from WP:Teahouse: you should be able to find someone with availability, Sadads (talk) 14:15, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply...will do! Adrienne Asher (talk) 14:17, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

New Wikipedians in Residence at PMML

The New Wikipedians in Residence at PMML started today. They have got through the Wikipedia Adventure tutorial and one has already had a stub AfD: Calling Me Home to You. It is going to be a good summer for Library Interns. TeriEmbrey (talk) 18:09, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks @TeriEmbrey:: I weighed in on the AFD, I think the article's information would be better as part of a list, like a WP:Discography or within the biography of McCormack himself. Sadads (talk) 13:04, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
I created a draft of an article for Draft:Oscar Seagle, who actually is as well known as John McCormack (tenor). If it's good, then Calling Me Home to You will no longer be an orphan article. I think we've fixed the sandbox problem. Thanks for all your help so far! TeriEmbrey (talk) 16:37, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Nautical fiction

Harrias talk 07:31, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

  • @Andrew Davidson: Indeed! I am working on an academic article, that highlights some of the implications of doing these kinds of broad scope articles around humanities topics: basically, I was anticipating the kinds of problems/questions that came up in the DYK nom, its just I had expected them in a GA review....we incentivize the narrow scope articles, and don't make it easy for newer users to engage in the reward systems (like DYK); I can't imagine what the review would look like if I didn't have much experience around topics like this. I am thinking there is a need for another in-between article visibility item, that might even be a bit more limited, but still gets front page recognition without the scrutiny, and time consuming review. Anyway! Now its through :) Sadads (talk) 13:23, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • ITN doesn't have such a rigid set of rules as DYK but nominations still get plenty of attention. My impression is that anything involving the main page will attract attention from the editors who follow the existing sections and they often agitate to raise the threshhold, rather than making it easier. DYK has a reasonable balance, in my experience. If you want something similar reviewing then feel free to ping me and I'll try not to give you a hard time. :) Andrew D. (talk) 17:04, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • @Andrew Davidson: Its not a big deal, and I don't have the time to investigate this, so more shooting the breeze than anything; its just the last couple times I have gone through DYK (or helped a new user go through DYK), the difficulty of meeting the review needs has been a bit extreme, and would have turned off a new user right away :P 3 years ago, the extended reviews I have seen that linger at DYK, would never have been objections or holds-until-fixed. I have also gotten questioned by other reviewers on multiple occasions when I do the QPQ reviews - related to quirks in the nomination process usually... it just seems a bit odd, that's all. Thanks for the offer for help in the future! Sadads (talk) 17:21, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I sometimes find that too — Bali Mauladad was a struggle, for example. But our difficulties are small compared to those experienced by those who go to sea. By the way, if you have a moment, please check out Arthur Beale, which went comparatively smoothly and is an establishment which preserves some of those old nautical traditions. Andrew D. (talk) 17:29, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for thanks....thanks!

Hi, and I've said it in the title. But thanks (again) for your very good work on literary templates and articles. I've added a Below section to many literary templates which usually include 'Commons', 'Wikiquote', and 'Wikisource texts' (the work involved includes seeing if the writer actually has all of those pages, and I add 'texts' to the word 'Wikisource' to tell the reader what the link actually is for), and if you have a few extra moments/months you may want to add those to some of your good templates (and as the old saying goes "anyone who creates a 'Robert Shea' template is a friend of 'Robert Anton Wilson'"). As for italics, it's still surprising how many pages either don't have italicized titles and have italics missing within the articles (commonly in External links), so I've bumbled around those for a few months now. All in a day's work. Good to meet you, thanks again. Randy Kryn 19:30, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey @Randy Kryn: Glad you appreciate them! I discovered that a fair number of novels were orphaned because they had no home, so I created a whole bunch of navboxes for authors in 2010- its been a while. I am going to take a pass at creating some more soon, if I can. The queries I used for discovering the gaps are at here for American novels, and here for British novels. I try to focus on groups by an author, but sometimes I discover that authors don't have cat's already, so end up making those and reorganizing a bit around those as well. Italics is something I have never kept an eye out for. You might consider asking for an WP:AWB or Wikipedia:Bot requests to fix the italics in the titles: I bet you would be able to do most of them pretty consistently with very little effort. I would recommend getting AWB access if you can, for the italics, its fairly easy to use, and makes the kinds of projects like italics titles waaaay easier. I am glad that someone found this work useful: it consumed several thousand edits and a fair bit of time a few years back :) But I am glad to do it, I am working on a number of other projects now, and am a bit too enthusiastic for outreach :P Let me know if I can help with a specific task Sadads (talk) 23:33, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, I'm pretty much tech-illiterate so haven't even looked at tools. Will at least read some of the data. No, I didn't mean you should create more, you've left really good ones, and something like that needs a form of self-motivation (the 'rightness' of working on a Wikipedia project) which ends at a certain point. We probably all recognize when a project has run its course, and I'm still playing with templates. The reason I mentioned that was you may have some favorite templates, and it seems to me that a below line containing 'Commons', 'Wikiquote', and 'Wikisource texts' (for those works old enough to have gone out of copyright) really adds quite of bit of information to the map. I'm still surprised that so much work has gone into those projects (Commons, Wikiquote, Wikisource, etc.). Bringing that work onto the templates seems to be a logical step. So I trudge on, and (as always here), in the process learn much more than I did before about the template subjects. The italics thing, a by-product of template work, and more often than not the needed italic edits are obvious, sitting there for the life of the article, waiting to be done. It's fun to come upon a title of a major author, or the page of a one-time great newspaper or magazine, which is missing an italicized title, italics within the page, in the infobox, external links, etc. Well, this note gets too long, and again, good to meet you. Randy Kryn 4:18, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
AWB is fairly simple, and you could always request someone to do the work: all you need to do is outline the task, and someone else will build the functionality at Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks or Wikipedia:Bot requests. Yeah, the sister project intrigue me a lot too: and its kindof sad their level of visibility in comparison to en wikipedia. Your campaign to add those links is a great idea! It inspired me to do this with the Sleeping Beauty template. I bet you would get a lot done thinking about and expanding the impact of Category:Fairy tale navigational boxes. I am imagining there are opportunities with most fairy tales, and a number of different literary motifs/tropes! Keep up the great work! Sadads (talk) 12:41, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Kwazidenge

FYI... you created a redirect to itself. Bgwhite (talk) 05:11, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

@Bgwhite: Thx, Copy-Paste error, Sadads (talk) 12:39, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXV, October 2015

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

AfD: Pantacles of Athens has closed

The Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pantacles of Athens discussion has closed as a consensus "merge." The closing admin, SamWalton, identified four of the 40 articles for further talk page discussion whether they should be merged to the list or maintained as stand-alone articles: Talk:Dandes of Argos, Talk:Philinus of Cos (athlete), Talk:Oebotas of Dyme and Talk:Eurybus of Athens. Your input is requested on those article talk pages. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:10, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

RFC

Thanks for putting the question up for more comments. Please check the page history now, I took your request to fix errors or add to the RFC, and noticed you included all Sister projects when the question was about "Wikiquote" and "Wikisource" sister projects as a slight extension. I modified the sections and question to show that, and Robsinden did the edit-war thing again, and now I can't revert a third time. Can you go in and change the question and question heads to reflect the original question minus "Commons", which I dropped when Moxy questioned it for overlarge load-up on mobile (and it's not needed because most of the data it presents are in images). Thanks. I really can't understand why Rob is so gung-ho against this, it benefits Wikipedia, our sister projects, and readers, researchers, and students. Rob, if you read his, why the passion to dismantle something which has worked fine? Randy Kryn 13:50, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

The RFC is about all sister projects, and people have responded to Sadads's RFC question without your restricting it to two specific projects. You cannot go moving the goalposts after people have responded. I notice that some templates have links to Wikibooks and Commons, and we need to establish the same rules for these too. And as to why, I thought you'd have understood my reasoning by now - it goes against the fundamental intent of a navbox to link outside the project. --Rob Sinden (talk) 12:02, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Robsinden, even I would oppose adding all the sister projects. The RFC is flawed as it now is worded, you know that and have reverted my trying to correct it to the original question. This is a very basic mistake, corrected, and then you pounced on it to come close to a 'gotcha' approach, and reverted my edits so the inaccurate question remains. This seems unfair, and might show you have a tendency to try to shape an unfair field of topic awareness. The people who have commented already are the ones who've commented before, so catching this early was the way to go. Your actions by reverting, when Sadads pretty much asked us to correct mistakes, if allowed to stay much longer, will muddy the waters so much on this that it makes your reverts themselves a reason for the two links to stay. Randy Kryn 12:14, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
It's not a flawed question as it stands - and it is the question that Sadads asked when submitting the RFC. If you're going to change the question asked, you negate every response to it. And if it is applicable to one sister project, it's applicable to all. Having Wikiquote links on a personal navbox would be like having a Wikivoyage link on a place navbox, or Wikispecies on a flora or fauna navbox. It's the same thing, and best we address them all together. --Rob Sinden (talk) 12:19, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Then submit each one individually. The present wording will allow the dictionary to be added to templates, which I would oppose, or allow 'Commons' to be added, which I have come to question from the comments on the proposal (modifiying my view). The question as it stands now is almost a sure oppose by most editors who know the extent of the sister projects. The Wikispecies and Wikivoyage on appropriate templates seem fine, so please submit those in another question and ping me so I can express support. But to include them all, no, that's a sure oppose from many and distorts the question of removing the already existing Wikiquote and Wikisource links on the appropriate templates. Randy Kryn 12:30, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Sadads' original question "Should Sister Project links be included in Navboxes when they are appropriately within scope of the navboxes topic?" wouldn't allow for wiktionary or wikidata links, suitably covers all bases, and is well worded, as is his precis of the arguments. I don't think I've seen anything so balanced in all my time as an editor! --Rob Sinden (talk) 12:35, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
@Robsinden: Thanks! The Wikidata and Wiktionary links were something that I assumed wouldn't be linked, but could imagine, at some point, being appropriate (especially Wikidata queries for certain subsets of articles). Sadads (talk) 15:15, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
If that was his intent he'll tell us, but on a quick read people will miss the "appropriately within scope" because the summaries and questions following the initial question do not include that limitation but pertain to all sister projects equally. How about giving several examples which would include the two original examples plus your appropriate 'Wikispecies' and 'Wikivoyage (although I've never looked at Wikivoyage, would it be appropriate?)' and include the "appropriate" wording in the questions themselves? To me, as it reads now, the anti and pro questions would include Wiktionary, which would unduly weigh against the proposal. So examples in the questions? Randy Kryn 12:40, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
@Randy Kryn and Robsinden: In general, I was trying to create a change to the policy that doesn't provide odd limitiations on the use of these links that makes us too legalistic (if it does get accepted). I wanted agreement on a principle which allows each template to discuss the issue, instead of being overly grand and disruptive in our consensus. There is very good opportunities for using commons links (for example, Visual artists whose paintings aren't notable, and would be best represented in a gallery on commons). The argument by Moxy of innappropriate size of images loading is moot: Commons has a mobile interface, and only displays small thumbnails. In places where Wikipedia Zero or another service makes Wikipedia cheap, there is a warning explaining if someone is leaving the free service, Sadads (talk)
Hi, and thanks for putting the question up. As we can see with the opposed comments, most of the opposed editors haven't answered the question but are simply saying that a policy exists already and that's that, not understanding that the question concerns an exception to that policy already in place. But that is limited to 'Commons', 'Wikiquote', and 'Wikisource' (and I've changed my mind on "commons", at least on the ones I've put them on). Adding all of the projects in one swoop doesn't take into account that some have already been accepted in terms of exceptions, and are not pointing out why those should now be removed other than tradition and a personal view of what templates should consist of forevermore. As for posting a link or ping to other projects and editors, I would think that all projects who create or watch over templates should be alerted, as should all editors who have made making these templates one of their Wikipedia interests. Randy Kryn 17:42, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
@Randy Kryn: Thanks for the thought on the scope; I welcome pinging any other projects you think this might directly impact. I already notified the main noticeboards, but would welcome including any specific projects as well. Sadads (talk) 14:29, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

The Wikipedia Library

Call for Volunteers

The Wikipedia Library is expanding, and we need your help! With only a couple of hours per week, you can make a big difference in helping editors get access to reliable sources and other resources. Sign up for one of the following roles:

  • Account coordinators help distribute research accounts to editors.
  • Partner coordinators seek donations from new partners.
  • Outreach coordinators reach out to the community through blog posts, social media, and newsletters or notifications.
  • Technical coordinators advise on building tools to support the library's work.
Sign up to help here :)

Delivered on behalf of The Wikipedia Library by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:16, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Malukugalu - deldetion - please enjoy

Please go ahead and delete mention of one of ancient puzzale traditions and derive a weird please from it. Way to go folks. Awesome. Destructive joy is just fun. Go ahead and delete it. ~rAGU (talk)

My RfA

I just withdrew my RfA in light of the good-faith advice on my talk page, but want to offer a very public "Thank you!" for believing in me in the first place. It was worth a shot. I truly hope that my mistakes do not reflect poorly on you, as my nominator. They were, after all, my mistakes and not yours. Thanks again, and happy editing! – voidxor (talk | contrib) 21:36, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

@Voidxor: Of course! As I have been mentioning, this was an overall a very positive set of feedback: in that you have identified some of the cultural quirks of the community that you weren't aware of, and now have more places to grow :) In general, you do an awesome job: keep it up! Try to get a sense of different community processes you could be involved in, and use that to grow your focus :) I would suggest helping on one or two AFD topical areas of interest, and getting some more familiarity with one of the other processes mentioned in the feedback; with those, I think you would be great, Sadads (talk) 14:34, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Aubrey Maturin novels

Sadads, I made a try at The Yellow Admiral, lead, by including a summary of the critical response. Is that getting closer to what you would like to see? Master and Commander article is slowly getting better, with more in the lead, Reviews section admitting the paucity of initial reviews, and expanding the publication history. I found a good article reviewing the classical music in the series, in particular the music mentioned in the opening sentence of M & C -- by a classical music guy on Minnesota NPR from 2003. I hope that suffices as a source. I deleted the line about basso continuo, as I could not understand it, and no one else found a source these five years (I looked, failed). I did try using the Wikipedia e-mail service you suggested, but my letters bounced right back to me, and I could not figure out what I had done wrong -- Wikipedia knew it was to you but somehow could not send it to you, so I let that go. I see you are very busy, no rush on perusing the articles. --Prairieplant (talk) 08:41, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 4

Newsletter • May/June 2015

Hello friends! We have been hard at work these past two months. For this report:

The directory is live!

For the first time, we are happy to bring you an exhaustive, comprehensive WikiProject Directory. This directory endeavors to list every single WikiProject on the English Wikipedia, including those that don't participate in article assessment. In constructing the broadest possible definition, we have come up with a list of approximately 2,600 WikiProjects. The directory tracks activity statistics on the WikiProject's pages, and, for where it's available, statistics on the number of articles tracked by the WikiProject and the number of editors active on those articles. Complementing the directory are description pages for each project, listing usernames of people active on the WikiProject pages and the articles in the WikiProject's scope. This will help Wikipedians interested in a subject find each other, whether to seek feedback on an article or to revive an old project. (There is an opt-out option.) We have also come up with listings of related WikiProjects, listing the ten most relevant WikiProjects based on what articles they have in common. We would like to promote WikiProjects as interconnected systems, rather than isolated silos.

A tremendous amount of work went into preparing this directory. WikiProjects do not consistently categorize their pages, meaning we had to develop our own index to match WikiProjects with the articles in their scope. We also had to make some adjustments to how WikiProjects were categorized; indeed, I personally have racked up a few hundred edits re-categorizing WikiProjects. There remains more work to be done to make the WikiProject directory truly useful. In the meantime, take a look and feel free to leave feedback at the WikiProject X talk page.

Stuff in the works!

What have we been working on?

  • A new design template—This has been in the works for a while, of course. But our goal is to design something that is useful and cleanly presented on all browsers and at all screen resolutions while working within the confines of what MediaWiki has to offer. Additionally, we are working on designs for the sub-components featured on the main project page.
  • A new WikiProject talk page banner in Lua—Work has begun on implementing the WikiProject banner in Lua. The goal is to create a banner template that can be usable by any WikiProject in lieu of having its own template. Work has slowed down for now to focus on higher priority items, but we are interested in your thoughts on how we could go about creating a more useful project banner. We have a draft module on Test Wikipedia, with a demonstration.
  • New discussion reports—We have over 4.8 million articles on the English Wikipedia, and almost as many talk pages as well. But what happens when someone posts on a talk page? What if no one is watching that talk page? We are currently testing out a system for an automatically-updating new discussions list, like RFC for WikiProjects. We currently have five test pages up for the WikiProjects on cannabis, cognitive science, evolutionary biology, and Ghana.
  • SuggestBot for WikiProjects—We have asked the maintainer of SuggestBot to make some minor adjustments to SuggestBot that will allow it to post regular reports to those WikiProjects that ask for them. Stay tuned!
  • Semi-automated article assessment—Using the new revision scoring service and another system currently under development, WikiProjects will be getting a new tool to facilitate the article assessment process by providing article quality/importance predictions for articles yet to be assessed. Aside from helping WikiProjects get through their backlogs, the goal is to help WikiProjects with collecting metrics and triaging their work. Semi-automation of this process will help achieve consistent results and keep the process running smoothly, as automation does on other parts of Wikipedia.

Want us to work on any other tools? Interested in volunteering? Leave a note on our talk page.

The WikiProject watchers report is back!

The database report which lists WikiProjects according to the number of watchers (i.e., people that have the project on their watchlist), is back! The report stopped being updated a year ago, following the deactivation of the Toolserver, but a replacement report has been generated.


Until next time, Harej (talk) 22:20, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Hush: An Irish Princess' Tale

thanks for the thanks

Coolabahapple (talk) 15:21, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Sister projects in templates discussion closure

Hi. An editor active in template discussions closed the discussion on sister projects in templates as "No action". Hopefully this means they can't be changed from their present state (and please look at the Wikipedia template, {{Wikipedia}}, which hopefully the closer looked at and took into consideration, the sister project links have been on Wikipedia's main template since 2009). If this decision means that editors can remove the links can we please take it to the next level and ask for a review of the closure? For at least the Wikiquote and Wikisource items? I don't know how the appeals process works here and where to go. Thanks, Randy Kryn 9:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello and pleasant salutations. Wondering if you missed this section while catching up on your talk page. I've been working with the {{Cicero}} template and it feels so odd not to just go ahead and add the Wikiquote and Wikisource text links to the below section, they are so valuable to the templates they are on. The closer said 'No action', and I hope that means that the status quo of adding those two to templates can stay. What's your take on it? And if anyone removes any of them from present templates I hope they go to {{Wikipedia}}, where the links have been exhibited since 2009. Please have a look at advise on the appeals process if applicable (the closer isn't an admin and is someone who works on templates and comments on some template questions, so not sure if total fairness can be brought to the close, I know I couldn't have done it fairly). Thanks. And congrats on the red link close (I've added two to the Speeches section of the Barack Obama template, the first red-links I've added to a template). Randy Kryn 17:40, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
@Randy Kryn: Hey Randy, yeah sorry for missing you: I have to come on-wiki for work-related (WP:TWL) things fairly often, so I frequently see but don't always respond to volunteer account communications (working on the Wikimedia community has had a bit of loss in my time volunteering). I read status quo as: do what is best based on the consensus on the individual page (and that its not a matter of mass removing the links), but that the policy doesn't explicitly support them or deny them, and its still a matter of interpreting what an external link is (its a very poorly worded close). As for the redlinks: whoopie! Glad that we have a concensus: the other arguments were quite lacking in backing (they were more about personal experiences of redlinks than about their effect on the encyclopedia). Sadads (talk) 12:37, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Seems about right, and I'd like to keep adding the two links to templates. The newest one I played with is {{Ken Kesey}}, and a Wikiquote link to that one seems appropriate to further enhance the accumulated data presented on the template. Thanks again, and when I add red links to templates (sparingly) I'll probably have you in mind. Oh, since I'm here, is your list of templates still not linkable? I have yours and INeverCry's in the first item on my talk page, but awhile back I saw it was dead-linked. Thanks again. Randy Kryn 00:34, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

JC's Girls

Hi Alex,

It has been a while! I hope life has been going well with you since we were last in touch. Might you be willing to provide your input at my current FAC for the JC's Girls article? Reviewers seem sharply divided, and I would be grateful for your thoughts.

Neelix (talk) 00:34, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

@Neelix: Hey! Long time no see! Glad you are back! In general, I can see both sides of the arguments, and without a more nuanced reading of both the article, and quick checking of the sources, I don't have a strong opinion either way (I did a quick scan of the article, FA critiques (a couple of which unfairly focus on the ideology of the topic) and read the criticism section quickly). I will say, that in general, I worry about topics like this which primarily get covered by single audience (Christian), non-reflexive, and narrowly messaged sources. Unlike (for instance) the book reviewing industry, there tends not to be much meta-awareness from the authors of the Christian press of how their writing, publication and interviews fit within other worldviews (its kindof like the problem we have been having with Gamergaters and their sources which refuse to reflect on the other perspective except them just "being" an irrational or un-understandable oppositional force ). Also, to put it in perspective: when writing Divergent (novel)#Christianity, I deliberately ignored a couple Christian sources because a) they didn't actually weigh in on the book without extreme warping of its reading outside the consensus or b) they focused on details or arguments that make no sense outside their limited audience, and thus didn't improve the encyclopedic reflection within the article. In part, though I appreciate the choice of topic and the work you have done so far to help it more than meet Good article status, a part of me is sceptical about whether such a limited audience topic, with such a biased and narrowly focused commentary community, can fairly (and comprehensively) survey the topic. The moral of the story: it might be a systematic bias in the model of neutrality and encyclopediality which FA stands for, which prevents some of the current commentators from being constructive. I will try to do some more commentary later in the week, but I will be at Wikimania, so no promises :P But really excited to see you back (and would love to see you continuing to produce such excellent good articles and well rounded B class articles!)Sadads (talk) 13:00, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) (I was GA reviewer.) Sadads, I am in complete agreement; you have eloquently and accurately stated the situation with both writing and reviewing this article. Enjoy Wikimania. Prhartcom (talk) 13:28, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the welcome, Alex! I am enjoying being back. I greatly appreciate your thoughts on the JC's Girls article, and would be glad for any more you may have if you find time to contribute to the FAC later this week. I anticipate nominating some book-related articles over the next year or so and may be coming to you for your expertise. I hope you have a wonderful time at Wikimania! I'd love to be there with you; maybe another year. Neelix (talk) 21:18, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
@Neelix: Most definitely on literature/book FACs and GANs: I love working on those, and they are much more intuitive for me :) We should get you to WikiConference USA: its going to be in DC this year in October (though the date isn't set yet). Cheers,Sadads (talk) 00:45, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
That would be great! Neelix (talk) 00:48, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 12

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 12, May-June 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)

  • New donations - Taylor & Francis, Science, and three new French-language resources
  • Expansion into new languages, including French, Finnish, Turkish, and Farsi
  • Spotlight: New partners for the Visiting Scholar program
  • American Library Association Annual meeting in San Francisco

Read the full newsletter

The Interior 15:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXII, July 2015

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:35, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Redesign

Hi, do you know if the foundation is planning on updating the graphics and main page design of the site in the nearer future? I did ask Jimbo but it's like talking to a brick wall. It's almost ten years since it was changed and in my opinion looks dated.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:03, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Dr. Blofeld: I am not aware of anything (my professional capacity with the foundation has nothing to do with user interface work); in general, a visual redesign of landing pages would be something better handled (or at least instigated) within the volunteer community. Are you talking about https://www.wikimedia.org/ or https://www.wikipedia.org/? If so I would recommend starting a conversation on Meta. If you are interested in the main page for English, I would recommend starting the conversation at Talk:Main Page or WP:Village Pump. Sadads (talk) 17:30, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Judging by the response on Jimbo's talk page it would probably be a waste of time. I do think it's a little disappointing that we've still not been given a fresh coat of paint so to speak in terms of the graphics and appearance of the site. It looks ten years out of date now. I think you could change a lot of people's perceptions of the site by a more modern interface. If you could mention it to anybody you know who deals with it, perhaps on metawiki, and why we haven't had a new main page for nearly ten years or improvement to the skins that might be good though. The major problem we have on here is that there is always disagreement, so genuinely good ideas which would bring about immediate improvement tend to get trodden on and overlooked. I think whoever deals with the tech stuff should seriously consider updating the appearance of wiki and taking a bolder approach, I think that's the only way to really bring about change.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:43, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
@Dr. Blofeld:Jimbo's talk page is a place to create a splash, not so much to actually start work. If you have ideas, you could probably reach out to the @Keegan (WMF) and WhatamIdoing (WMF): and they can help you get in contact with some of the design teams. I know that there is work going on around design/interface, but I am not sure who the contacts are, or what the focus is (or where documentation and/or feedback is located). Many of the other language communities have done their own front-page redesigns, with significant positive impacts. Also, I have found that proposals in the Wikimedia community work best when you have both a) a concrete plan put together and b) a group of people already ready to work on it. If you have some ideas, I would see if you can get a team together with likeminded desire for change, and work with them (like they are doing with WP:WikiProject X ). Cheers, Sadads (talk) 18:23, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Oh I'm sure there's many, many people who'd like to see us brought up to date graphically and presentation wise, but I always feel like I'm wasting my time trying to bring about change on here! Of course raw content building and breadth of research is the most important thing, but in terms of modern web design, it is sort of like that house which still contains 1960s decor, needs freshening up and updating!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:46, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

It's good to see someone taking an interest in something I've meant to do for ages. Thanks. J3Mrs (talk) 19:22, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@J3Mrs: Of course! Definitely worth continuing to explore however (and set up a new category tree at Category:Gendered occupations, that I think we would be able to populate quite easily, just take some more searching; I got most of the obvious sex worker and domestic topics, but I am imagining there are a bunch more I having trouble finding). Help welcome! Thank you for starting the article! Sadads (talk) 21:05, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Archbishop's Palace, Armagh

I removed the tags as a quick check on several paras with no inline refs showed they were in fact based on the refs at the end of the relevant section. I'm pretty busy today but I'll get back to the article tomorrow and repeat the relevant refs where needed (unless the original editor, Madra Argat would like to help with this). I was surprised you had included a tag on referencing as I thought the editor had done a pretty good job of citing the sources. And I really don't know why you thought the article contains original research. Perhaps you could be more specific.--Ipigott (talk) 16:08, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Felix Folio Secundus

Hello, Thank you very much for your compliments. What happened was that I changed my username because of some concern at the time about security of passwords. So I have been continuing similar work under the name Johnsoniensis.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 17:21, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

@Johnsoniensis: Haha! Great! I was very much saddened when I saw your other alias gone :P Maybe you should place a redirect or header over that user page? Or give a hint that that you have changed accounts. Also, if you are concerned with the security of that account, I would be glad to place a block on it, to ensure it doesn't get used. Sadads (talk) 17:27, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

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

Franeker
added a link pointing to Koninklijke Bibliotheek
Harich, Friesland
added a link pointing to Koninklijke Bibliotheek

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXI, June 2015

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:38, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Das ist ja schon Genug!

Alright, already with the thankses! You can buy me a burger at The Piper's Kilt next time you're in Upper Manhattan. Until then, your recognition is appreciated. μηδείς (talk) 00:50, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

@Medeis: :P Of course! I am in Vermont now so will have to make it down for a meetup at some point, Sadads (talk) 00:52, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 12 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Percy Jackson Task Force

Hello, Sadads! I'd like to invite you to join the Percy Jackson task force, which works to improve articles related to Rick Riordan and his books. Check out our page or contact me to learn more! 2ReinreB2 (talk) 02:31, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

@2ReinreB2: Hey! I will continue to work on assessment and categorization as part of the broader WikiProject Novels, but I don't have the time (nor the particular interest) to work on the Rick Riordian. I am much more interested in literary/scholarly-interest fiction, and have been working on Meta:100wikidays, which is taking up most of my volunteer time (the assessment you were seeing was late night mindless work). Cheers, Sadads (talk) 14:37, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

No problem, and thanks for your help anyways! 2ReinreB2 (talk) 22:16, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

"Due to the fact that"...

...is not a "colloquialism", which are informal and casual. The expression is something else altogether, an example of overwriting and the needless use of excessive words, with the intent of making the text appear more learned and important) than it is. BMK (talk) 04:46, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Its a turn of phrase that is very specific to Western English, only ever seen it an American English. But yes, also overwriting -> will clarify: its confusing for non-native speakers, Sadads (talk) 04:48, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
I'm not going to argue that removing or reducing "due to the fact that" to something simpler is a good thing, or that it's not primarily an Americanism, but I have a hard time believing that someone who understands English would have a problem with understanding what "due to the fact that" means, since the words are all standard English and do not operate in any odd way in the phrase. I also do not think that the simplest expression is always the best expression, since repetitive use of simple expressions can become monotonous and boring. Further, those whose proficiency im English is such that "due to the fact that" confuses them always have Simple English Wikipedia to turn to. BMK (talk) 05:57, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

A gentle reminder for Project Muse access

We need the Google form filled out so we can send it on to Project Muse. (We mailed it to you about 10 days ago via the email on your talk page.) Thanks NegMawon (talk) 23:19, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

@NegMawon:  Done I don't remember getting the email.... oops. Thanks for the reminder, Sadads (talk) 00:39, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

I need some help, please

Sorry to bother you. A person I think started an edit war has put me on some list for being the problem, on, of all things, an article about an Agatha Christie novel, The Moving Finger. What am I supposed to do, besides never look at that article again? SchroCat wants citations, give him some, he reverts anyway. He holds IMDb to be invalid, Wikipedia's article on IMDb says it is discussion, not policy. I say it is reliable for the date a program aired on television, SchroCat never replies to the point, just reverts. Of course, that editor does not seek to fill in the holes he (I am assuming he) creates by his objections -- easy to do with Agatha Christie, her novels and the adaptations of her novels get reviewed. He used the word recentism, which makes no sense to me. Well, you can see the problem at the article, or on that editor's page -- oh no you cannot, he deleted it from his page, our small discussion. Maybe it is somewhere else, but he did not move it to my talk page. I can walk away from one article, but his threats, I do not like those. He put those on my talk page. --Prairieplant (talk) 17:11, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Are you a robot that thanks everyone who makes an article or did you really find my change?

Hey there Sadads. Oh great, I've forgotten how to do the link to users..Are you a robot that thanks everyone who makes an article or did you really find my change?

My question is in the headline. Did you really find my edit? If so that's pretty interesting. Are you the creator of Wikipedia or a moderator of it or something?

Wow, I'm editing this because I just took that Wikipedia Adventure thing. Thanks for posting that on my profile. But the question still remains. Are you a real person or just a bot? And I'm kind of curious how you found me too :-) EggsInMyPockets (talk) 06:34, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
@EggsInMyPockets: I'm a real person! I saw your edits to the Last of the Mohicans page using my Help:Watchlist, and thought they were constructive, so wanted to welcome you! I use the pre-structured message, because we get a lot of new users, but very few of them actually stick around to do great work (like you!). Its very exciting to see you learning how use talk pages! The Wikipedia Adventure is great! It took me a couple hundred edits to figure them out when I first joined the Wikipedia community in 2007/2008!
I have been working on filling in articles on James Fenimore Cooper's other works (see Template:JFCooper). Most of them are short stubby articles, so could use lots of work (like Plot Summaries). I will take a pass at trimming your work on Last of the Mohicans, per the edit summary, later today! Feel free to ping me if you have questions, I am around for a bit most days -> and really enjoy helping new editors. I would also recommend the WP:Teahouse if you have any more pressing questions, Sadads (talk) 12:35, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
awesome Sadads. I'll add the page to my watch list too. I don't think I'm going to be reading any more of Cooper's works, though. Just felt like reading the most popular one. EggsInMyPockets (talk) 21:14, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

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

Brewing in Vermont
added a link pointing to St. Albans, Vermont
The Two Admirals
added a link pointing to Pathfinder

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Hiding in Plain Sight

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia Library Interns (Summer 2015)

Hello User:Sadads thanks for adding me to the above mentioned course. I am however lost. Can I still start the course from the scratch? Please fill me in.Regards--Rberchie (talk) 17:06, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:39, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXIII, August 2015

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:46, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

due to the fact that

Thanks for the thanks. I was just going to write to tell you that I found the following in an archived conversation at AWB: "...just make sure to check and see if "because" will fit better than "due to the fact that" and that it's not a quote." [Emphasis mine.]

But now I see that you have fixed the (my) problem elegantly. Thank you. --Hordaland (talk) 01:35, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

@Hordaland: Thanks for reaching out! I have been reading the changes, and that one must have slipped. I misunderstood what the difference was between {{not a typo}} and {{t|sic}], and your revert helped me figure it out! I am normally not a language and style person, but this particular phrase is really bothering me, for some reason :P Thanks much, Sadads (talk) 01:38, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Backlog Banzai

In the month of September, Wikiproject Military history is running a project-wide edit-a-thon, Backlog Banzai. There are heaps of different areas you can work on, for which you claim points, and at the end of the month all sorts of whiz-bang awards will be handed out. Every player wins a prize! There is even a bit of friendly competition built in for those that like that sort of thing. Sign up now at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/September 2019 Backlog Banzai to take part. For the coordinators, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:18, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:38, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2019).

Administrator changes

added Bradv • Chetsford • Izno
readded Floquenbeam • Lectonar
removed DESiegel • Jake Wartenberg • Rjanag • Topbanana

CheckUser changes

removed Callanecc • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Oversight changes

removed Callanecc • Fox • HJ Mitchell • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Technical news

  • Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
  • The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2019 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:37, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXI, September 2019

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:17, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Project invite

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election half-way mark

G'day everyone, the voting for the XIX Coordinator Tranche is at the halfway mark. The candidates have answered various questions, and you can check them out to see why they are running and decide whether you support them. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:37, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

DS Alert Climate Change

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in climate change. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:34, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

custom message

Hi... if you don't know, that template is strictly FYI. It is part of the procedures for "DS", and is fully explained by clicking on the links in the template itself. I placed the same thing on my own page, and will try to make sure recent Climate crisis editors all have one. No biggie. Just a procedural thing. But be sure to read about DS if you don't already know. Carry on! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:34, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 35, July – August 2019

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 35, July – August 2019

  • Wikimania
  • We're building something great, but..
  • Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
  • A Wikibrarian's story
  • Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:58, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2019).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories.

Technical news

  • As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:55, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Proposals regarding AfC & NPP

You are invited to comment at discussion currently taking place at Relationship of Articles for Creation and New Page Reviewer for pre-opinion on the combined functions of Articles for Creation (AfC) and New Page Review (NPR).

This mass message invitation is being sent to subscribed members of the work group at the project The future of NPP and AfC. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXII, October 2019

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:40, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

2019 US Banknote Contest

US Banknote Contest
November-December 2019

There are an estimated 30,000 different varieties of United States banknotes, yet only a fraction of these are represented on Wikimedia Commons in the form of 2D scans. Additionally, Colonial America, the Confederate States, the Republic of Texas, multiple states and territories, communities, and private companies have issued banknotes that are in the public domain today but are absent from Commons.

In the months of November and December, WikiProject Numismatics will be running a cross-wiki upload-a-thon, the 2019 US Banknote Contest. The goal of the contest is to increase the number of US banknote images available to content creators on all Wikimedia projects. Participants will claim points for uploading and importing 2D scans of US banknotes, and at the end of the contest all will receive awards. Whether you want to claim the Gold Wiki or you just want to have fun, all are invited to participate.

If you do not want to receive invitations to future US Banknote Contests, follow the instructions here

Sent by ZLEA at 23:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bernardine Evaristo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lara (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:40, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Category:American mystery

Hey there, I just came across the misnamed Category:American mystery, which you created back in 2010. I think you'll agree that it's pretty obvious it should actually be Category:American mystery FICTION. Anomalous+0 (talk) 10:30, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

@Anomalous+0: Go for it! Sadads (talk) 13:29, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXIII, November 2019

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:44, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Short description

Hi. Please see Wikipedia:Short description, which states "Eventually all articles should have a short description template". Why should this page not be included? Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:15, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

@Lugnuts: that set of language, has no backing in community consensus or conversations as far as I can tell (it's a pronouncement by a few editors) -- and copying the exact same language from Wikidata to Wikipedia creates no added value for the end user or editors. Sadads (talk) 19:24, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 36

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 36, September – October 2019

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Nine Years of Adminship!

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:53, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).

Guideline and policy news

  • A related RfC is seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:15, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

P.W.K. Harlley

I don't understand this edit. The inspector general of police at the time stated was J. W. K. Harlley, so this is clearly a duplicate article with the wrong first initial, as I said when I put the speedy deletion tag on the article. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:51, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

@Phil Bridger: Sorry I misinterpreted the multiple deletion rationals on the page -- you were correct. It should have been turned into a redirect however, if there is a reasonable likelihood of confusion (which seems possible), Sadads (talk) 19:25, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Freud and Philosophy

Hello, Sadads. On December 2, 2018 you assessed Freud and Philosophy as C-class. Since then the article has been changed significantly. Would you be willing to reconsider its class and rate it a B instead? I won't change the rating myself because I do not want to rate my own work. Freeknowledgecreator (talk) 08:01, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

@Freeknowledgecreator: Done, Sadads (talk) 18:53, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Climate change sources

FYI, I just started Wikipedia:WikiProject_Climate_change/sources and am going through the NAS reports there... I figured I would do this as a project page rather than user page so that others can find it too. We can transfer this to the spreadsheet as needed. cheers, -- phoebe / (talk to me) 15:24, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Short description

Hello Sadads,

you undid my edit at [1]. You indicate it is the same as the description at Wikidata. At WP:SHORTDESC the project indicates that "At some point, the Wikidata fallback will be removed." As such I believe it is best that my edit is introduced, because otherwise we end up with no description at all.

Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 19:47, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

I noticed that this has been mentioned before in a discussion above so I have looked further into it. I note that a Wikipedia community RFC has concluded "To populate the magic words by starting with blanks, and allowing them to be filled in manually and/or by bot" [2]. As such, you can consider the short description as blank, and it needs to be filled, even if a Wikidata description exists. The discussion on the talk page explains why it isn't seperated completely yet. Some arguments I read from the RFC for implementing this are the possibility of vandalisme on Wikidata which is less covered then Wikipedia, and the fact that people have to edit Wikidata to change the description instead of doing this locally at Wikipedia (or you need to know how to do it by template). This is the only consensus I see. There was an earlier RFC [3] with an 18-5 vote in favor of switching off the Wikidata input, though it was withdrawn due to no longer being needed. I believe the RFC decisions needs to be followed until a new RFC says otherwise. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 20:10, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
@Taketa: If you read the rfcs, and the WMF response, you see the the descriptions need to be useful in a way that is different than Wikidata -- simply copying a Wikidata description without improving it kind defeats the purpose.... Sadads (talk) 01:39, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
I'm joining this discussion above after this reversion. What would you recommend as a new short description for that article? Raymie (t • c) 01:45, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
Dear Sadads, I believe you are acting on your own opinion and some opinions in a discussion, while I am acting on the RFC consensus as expressed at the top right in the link I have provided. We start with blank info and fill it in. The fact that Wikidata exists does not matter in filling in Wikipedia, if it is useful we can copy it, but it does not stop us from filling in Wikipedia. Please get someone to support your position, that the RFC says what you say, before reverting any more editors. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 07:19, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
Addendum: As Wikidata admin and former steward I personally prefer a global approach in which all short descriptions are on Wikidata. Though I personally prefer Wikidata, I can understand that the enwiki already had most advantages from their size and only gets disadvantages from cooperating so they prefer to have their own. This is allowed. The direct cause to start the RFCs was vandalism. The RFC consensus was clear, blank everything and start on Wikipedia. If needed copy Wikidata with a bot. The WMF disagreed on some points of implementation, however this is not relevant right now. Right now we implement the RFC as far as possible. Personal opinions, and WMF personal opinions are not the majority opinion and are not relevant right now. You revert by saying it is the same content as on Wikidata. This is clearly against the RFC consensus. Nowhere does the consensus say we should not introduce the same content. Even to the contrary, it encourages us to introduce the same content if it is relevant. Having the same content on Wikidata obviously does not protect against vandalism on Wikidata or give people on Wikipedia easier access to edit via Wikipedia. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 08:25, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Spanish:Wikipedia:Wikiconcurso/Wiki por los Derechos Humanos 2019/Listado de artículos

First of all greetings, I am writing to you because they told me that you are the one in charge of the wikicontest in Spanish on human rights, there are many doubts, please, is there any person in wikipedia in Spanish who can clarify them for me?, sincerely Naturista2018 (talk) 03:57, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

@Naturista2018: That is in my professional capacity. @Luisina Ferrante (WMAR): is helping support and coordinate the Spanish campaign. Sadads (talk) 19:29, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
-Thank you for your help, best regards, Naturista2018 (talk) 07:35, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Washington Post

Hi, I don't know if you have access to this but can you get me [4] this source, send it to my email through here if you can, thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:27, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: I emailed it to you, hope it was what you were looking for :) Sadads (talk) 02:57, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Geograph Britain and Ireland

Years back I proposed a new sister project to supplement the Wiki commons, a global version of Geograph, to photograph the entire world in a grid square fashion like the UK project. At one point Geograph were interested in merging with Wikimedia but it fizzled out. Jimmy Wales showed an interest but nothing happened. Can you notify a few people and see if there is still an interest there? I was only saying to Ser Amantio di Nicolao the other day that the US photo coverage of smaller rural localities in the US is still poor and could benefit from such a project.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:23, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: You should be able to generate the map using the geocoordinates with Commons:Structured Data. Its going to take a while to migrate the existing data into that format, you could generate really dynamic maps that do just that. Sadads (talk) 06:26, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Can you ask one of the tech guys? I think photo mapping is incredibly useful as it shows weak areas of coverage which need to be worked on. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:33, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld:I don't know what you mean -- you could build this with any developer with a bit of API skills, you just need to find a collaborator to do that. Also, Magnus's  meta:WikiShootMe already kind of does this already -- you can do a lot with the linked data already on the files. Sadads (talk) 06:38, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Is Magnus still active? Yes, a lot of photos have coordinates. A world map and then being able to zoom in on areas and see grid squares with photos. Panoramio had a map with photos when you zoom in but not grid squares. Charles Matthews might see light in this, aren't the coordinates in the commons controlled by wiki data?. If we had something like that the commons could organize schemes to manipulate improvements of weak areas geographically.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:52, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Looking at the map on Geograph it uses OSM, when you zoom out it shows detailed areas in redder hues and weaker in yellow, so helps their contributors work on the yellow areas. I think it would be quite feasible to copy their system and scale it worldwide. I'm not sure who to ask on this?♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:00, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld:I mean its the kind of thing that you would have to shop around to different folks who might be interested in building a tool like that. For example, you could reach out to WMUK and see if that is of interest to them, and they know any tool builders that would be interested. Sadads (talk) 02:35, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

I'll find somebody, no worries. Wikipedia:The Great Britain/Ireland Destubathon is running in March btw, if you can help build the resources section and links to agreements the Wiki library has which could benefit this please add them. Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:57, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Dear Sadads

This user User:อัลเบิร์ is trying to make an edit war and I explain about the Wikipedia policy to him but I argue to block anyone who blames to edit in content that this user only thinks he is true. No one can edit on the page that the user was overseer. I need you to tell him to understand the rule and don't make another misunderstanding in Wikipedia rule, especially I need you to BLOCK him to resolve the problem that this user make.

Thank You Ministerboy (talk) 05:09, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Excuse me but are you, Ministerboy, the IP that are constantly making reverts on those pages? If you are, I believe that you are the one that are violating the rules and try to put your faults into the other's hand. The other user is asking for a discuss with you but you don't do it. Your version of edits cannot be accepted because it came later and the other user is not consenting with you. So you have to discuss first but you choose not to do it and instead, committed warring edit violation. อัลเบิร์ (talk) 05:11, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
Dear User:อัลเบิร์ That another IP is my friend that sits behind me, I work for Wikipedia Thai football for 4 Year and I was work for Thai FA for 2 years until now. Why you delete the honor content of every Thai team and why you delete the history of every Thai team. All the information I find with my ability with my Wikipedia user friend for 4 year and you came here to delete and tell me to talk with you first. That was absurd and can't accept. STOP doing this action for the better way of finding the information from Wikipedia. Ministerboy (talk) 05:16, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
As info, I blocked all 3 users for 24 hours for edit warring. Didn't realize Ministerboy had left this same message to 6-7 others. -- ferret (talk) 14:00, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
@Ferret: Thanks! Very curious that they found me. Sadads (talk) 15:23, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

"extreme weather"

Not all instances of the phrase "extreme weather" refer to the subject of the article Extreme weather. Going thru Wikipedia and doing a high-speed drive-by search-and-replace like you appear to be doing is not constructive. Cut it out, please. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 02:32, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @JasonAQuest: I have been reviewing them as I go (reading the sentences surround it), if its inappropriate lets fix the language then.  Sadads (talk) 22:46, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Discussion on the Draft namrespace

As a user who has expressed an interest in the Wikipedia:The future of NPP and AfC, you are invited to join a discussion at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Rethinking_draft_space. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:27, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Always a pleasure to see this :) Thanks for being so generous, Sadads (talk) 13:00, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

March Madness 2020

G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

WikiProject COVID-19 translation effort

Hello! Hope you're doing well. Curious if you have any suggestions for WikiProject COVID-19's translation effort, spearheaded by Netha: Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19/Translation Task Force. If nothing comes to mind, no problem, just trying to spread the word. Ideas also welcome on the talk page.

Stay safe, ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:16, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

@Another Believer and Netha Hussain: Just sent an email to you in personal emails via my work one: perfect timing, I had Netha on my list of people to contact today :P Sadads (talk) 15:35, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

SurVision Books and Magazine

Hello Sadads, Can you take a look at this: [5], please? I noted that you voted to keep Lapwing Publications in 2014 (I've recently improved that article a bit, but it still needs work to be done on it). Now the article about another Irish press, SurVision Books and Magazine is in danger. I would appreciate it if you could take a look and maybe vote? Cheers.--Bonmot (talk) 23:36, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

@Bonmot: I don't have a strong opinion on this one -- generally speaking its hard to make the case for presses, especially small new ones -- I would want better commentary within professional poetry or publishing trade journals demonstrating the notability of the organization. Sadads (talk) 01:37, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

The 50,000 Destubbing Challenge Summer Focus of the Week

Hi, just to announce that I've filed a £250 grant request for a "Summer Focus of the Week" feature for destubbing articles which will be run from May 1 to the end of July. £20 is planned to be rewarded each week, £10 most articles destubbed for the allocated focus of the week and £10 for the most destubbed for any topic of choice in total, a full £20 if most for the focused area. While it is intended to be more relaxed and open than an official contest, allowing editors to take a break some weeks from staying on focus and editing as they normally do, the winner will be whoever wins the most prize money at the end, so it is likely that some weeks they will need to tackle entries from the regional area allocated. The Summer Focus of the Week is planned to commence on May 1 with a 10 day focus on SouthEast England but will cover many regions of the globe by the end of the scheme. S E England was originally planned as a full blown contest (which you signed up for) but it will now be run as part of this 50,000 Challenge and I will redirect the contest page to the 50,000 Challenge. Please sign up on the Wikipedia:The 50,000 Destubbing Challenge page if interested if you haven't already and hope this will be something enjoyable over the next few months!† Encyclopædius 13:44, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata and categories

In a recent conversation over here, you mentioned that you prefer Wikidata over categories to maintain that sort of information. I have used Wikidata a bit, but I haven't seen how I might use it in the same way as I use categories. Mind describing what you mean by this? Or perhaps just point to a help page somewhere that explains it?

I'm putting this comment here rather than on the proposal page because this seems like an only semi-related discussion. Open to moving it back there if that'd work better.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts! I've appreciated the work I've seen you doing, and I'd love to get a suggestion such as that I may be a somewhat more effective editor myself. Jlevi (talk) 22:25, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Jlevi: Thanks for asking! So, when you do work on Categories you have several constraints that emerge:
  • Categories are always hierarchical, but because its a Folksonomy, the subcategories don't always inherit the characteristics of categories above them -- therefore they are useful for broad "these things should be on the same library bookshelf" but not, "these things are the same -- thus I can do x with those same things" (i.e. check if each of the articles in a category tree for novelists has
  • Categories are dependent on multiple facets being true, (i.e. American Women Novelists, needs the person to be American, Woman and a Novelist)-- if these things aren't true, you either need to create a new category at a different intersection of topics, which means that we proliferate more and more insane categories -- by example on Commons this kind of insanity exists.
  • Because of the two factors above, topics only get included in categories if someone knows the exact format of the category. This means that only someone who spends hours and hours knowing the category system can properly sort anything into the category system, making participation in the system kindof impossible for newcomers, individuals not familiar with Wikipedia's version of English (which may , or any number of other .
When you do work on Wikidata, you get a bunch of other benefits:
  • It is defacto multilingual and mutlifaceted (multiple aliases in multiple languages, so benefits all the other Wikipedias, and a newcomer doesn't need to know the exact English language term to contribute).
  • Newcomers don't need to know much about how Wikidata is organized, to add meaningful metadata that helps people find those items.
  • You can ask questions about it, and discover unexpected results (i.e. the classic example: which cities with more than 1 million population have female mayors? or [ https://medium.com/freely-sharing-the-sum-of-all-knowledge/writing-a-wikidata-query-discovering-women-writers-from-north-africa-d020634f0f6cthe other examples I document here]]) -- we would never create a category for something this arbitrary or it would only be created by the most experienced Wikipedians and quickly go out of date after elections, but that list would be super useful for running an editathon about Women in Government. Theoretically you could also generate membership in almost any category from intersecting various facets from the Wikidata items -- and they are already autogenerating categories on Commons using the Wikidata Infobox
Thus for me, all these pros and cons mean that (in my mind), categories are unusually labor intensive, in most situations, and rarely worth the effort of organizing and reorganizing, because eventually the benefits of the Wikidata system are going to outpace the main reason that English Wikipedia is so entrenched in the category system (control) -- and most of the value in spending time organizin content comes from putting high quality data on Wikidata.Sadads (talk) 13:42, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the edit-a-thon on SDGs in September 2020

Logo of "Wiki loves SDGs" initiative

Hi,

I am EMsmile, and I am a part of a group of people wishing to improve SDG-related articles on Wikipedia. We are organising this online SDG edit-a-thon during Global Goals Week, 18-26 September 2020. Please take part in it! If you have any questions about this work, please feel free to ask your question on the event's talk page here. The event page itself is here.EMsmile (talk) 02:26, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:47, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Which specific article(s) do you have concerns with?

You can always ask for WP:REFUND for a prod, or such. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:55, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

The WikiLoop Battlefield weekly barnstar

The WikiLoop Battlefield Barnstar
Congratulations, Sadads

You have been recognized as the weekly champion of counter-vandalism of WikiLoop Battlefieldseeking new name,
a crowdsource counter-vandalism patrol and label tool (http://battlefield.wikiloop.org)
for the week ending at 2020-03-01.


On behalf of the team and community of WikiLoop Battlefield and as Wikipedians, we like to appreciate your contributions, and look forward for more in the future. Also don't forget to bring your Wikipedian friends who you think are also passionate of keeping Wikipedia protected.
Cheers, xinbenlv Talk, Remember to "ping" me 04:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)



Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists of works

Hey, perhaps you could point to the section of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists of works which recommends you use the {{cite news}} template, complete with the bodged author field commented out and the completely inappropriate access date field, to generate a list of notable works for an author page. And when you can't, because it's not on that page, go and fix Michael Pollan. Thanks. Nick (talk) 22:25, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Questionnaire invitation (a new tool to be developed, to verify media data)

Hi there, I'm developing a tool to assist users in verifying (structured) data of media on commons.

To understand the community's needs, I would like to invite you to participate in this questionnaire: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScbNdJdQYN1yBvEeKne48eWDU6SBsdlUfNBAmZyvUEBkCR1Gg/viewform?usp=sf_link. It should take ~2 minutes.

Thanks a lot. :D

(You received this message as you seems to have experience with structured data on Wikimedia projects.)

-- Gabrielchl (talk) 23:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Structured data

Hi Alex, I'm just not an expert in strutured data. For [this edit] I'm not sure, if the previous state were better - I could see / seek, if it is a tree, or not. But because of I'm not an expert, I won't revert this. Can you explain this for me ? Greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 12:59, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

@Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR: The leaf is not the focus of the image, but the whole grown plant -- so if we are using something generic like leaf or branch, they should be qualifiers -- unfortunately we haven't quite figured out the right data modeling for this as a community -- so for right now, I am removing things that are not the focus of the image -- that particular one I probably should have done something like I did with this edit: [6]. However, the obnoxiously bad volume of depicts statements being created because of the CAT tool, I am assuming a lot of these are created by folks not being thoughtful -- sorry. Thanks for asking, Sadads (talk) 20:10, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi Alex, thank you for answer. Think I understand it better now. Greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 06:45, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

A little request

Could you remove https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Akademiefoto.jpg?

It will be used for private purposes.

Thanks!--2003:CB:2F1D:9732:251B:7714:2E7F:9A4 (talk) 16:56, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

What do you mean remove? It would have to be done through commons:Commons:Deletion_requestsSadads (talk) 17:46, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Master Skylark

Hi Alex! I hope you are faring will. I have started a draft on a subject more in your wheelhouse than mine. Please pitch in if you are so inclined. Cheers! BD2412 T 16:32, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

@BD2412: That looks quite good from what I can tell -- haven't been editing in novels lately, mostly focused on climate change -- putting it live might find some more attention :D Sadads (talk) 15:39, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
Okay, I'll work it up just a bit more and do that today. Thanks! BD2412 T 15:49, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced

G'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Peer Review

Hello Sadads. I don't know whether I am at right place. I found your name at Peer review volunteer list for literature. I have nominated my article Manilal Dwivedi (19th-century Indian writer) for Peer Review. I want to promote it to FA. It would be great help for me if you review it and suggest some points. Thanks. --Gazal world (talk) 08:48, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:María Teresa Mirabal

Hello, Sadads. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "María Teresa Mirabal".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Veľketaka (talk) 05:15, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Jessica Krug

Hi there. If you think the section about Jessica Krug puts unnecessary weight on one small scandal, mightn't we simply shorten the entry instead of deleting it entirely? The same with the Sokal affair. Being a scholarly gatekeeper is the core mission of a university press, so it's reasonable to mention notable failures. Happy to compromise with some brisker version if you thought my prose was too colorful. Nlfkng2eg (talk) 14:31, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Nlfkng2eg: that is the kind of content that should be covered in her page, with like 1 sentence in the main article -- but that much coverage, is violating WP:BLP. Also, almost all those sources are scandal papers -- so I am not convinced that they are particularly reliable sources othrwise. As for the Sokal affair: that has nothing to do with the press, but rather was a problem in one journal -- academic publishing allows the peer review process to largely happen independent of the publisher... so I don't understand the connection you were drawing there (also again, these sources are not very reliable). The other two problems are more systematic in the way they were described, and are more connected with the Press itself. Sadads (talk) 18:22, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi @Sadads:Thanks for your quick response. You don't say how the prose violates WP:BLP and it's not clear at a glance how, but I would gather that if the passage were framed around the press rather than the author, you'd withdraw your object. When you say "scandal papers," however, the citations were to 1) the NY Post, 2) Quillette, and 3) the monograph itself. I'll give you that the NYP is a tabloid, but there is a meaningful difference between a tabloid (which may be sensational but is still on a spectrum of reportage) and a scandal paper. Nevertheless, the NY Times wrote up the article as well and I'd by happy to cite them instead. Quillette can be provocative, but it doesn't fit anyone's definition of yellow journalism. I'll take away a suggestion to re-work this piece to center the press and citing the Times rather than the Post and to make it brisker in the spirit of not letting it expand to fill up an inappropriate space. . . . In the spirit of compromise, I'll forgo pressing for the Sokal affair, but academic publishing does *not* allow the peer review process to happen independent of the publisher. It is perhaps the scholar readers who comment on the content of a monograph, but the editors have considerable power in that they select the reader and the press assesses an author and project on numerous additional decision variables--the reputation and identity of the author being just two things. Nlfkng2eg (talk) 18:52, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
@Nlfkng2eg: NYPost is generally unreliable for the Wikimedia community in terms of coverage of political topics and Quillette is treated as a questionable source and described as an opinions paper for the most part. And you should never be citing a book itself. As for the broader question: yes please, make sure it focuses on public critic of the organization itself, not on you synthesizing various pieces of evidence to "prove" that the organization was responsible for some scandal -- these topics both feel like they should be treated on the specific organization or person pages, not on the press page, and certainly not for multiple paragraphs -- its undue weight.Sadads (talk) 19:13, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi @Sadads: You've made some insinuations or inferences about my intentions that I don't agree with, and I do not see how Quillette is more an opinion periodical than say, Jacobin or The Nation on the left or National Review or National Affairs on the right. But there's enough common ground here that I'll try this again. Thanks. Nlfkng2eg
Oh I am not arguing that those sources are more appropriate either: NYPost is actually much more widely cited than Jacobin for example. But Quillete in particular, has been removed way more often as evidenced by its use in talk pages rather than articles, than in actual content pages -- so its worth paying attention. Yeah please do try again! Sadads (talk) 19:50, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi @Sadads: Thanks for your feedback. The Chronicle of Higher Ed ran a high-spirited article early last year [7] titled "The Academy's Favorite Hate Read," and I have a hunch (typing to you from the campus of a large university) that it isn't so much that Quillette is all or more opinion, but that their opinions are deliberately and provocatively contrarian. In fact, sometimes what infuriates people is how bloody-mindedly literal or empirical they are. But it's reasonable to say that a reference in an article should persuade people and not turn them off, even if their revulsion is irrational. I'll need to set this aside for a while, but assuming you're watching the Duke press page, you'll see something fresh there in due course. Thanks again.Nlfkng2eg (talk) 22:05, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Invitation to review Eat Just page

I work for Eat Just, Inc., a sustainable food company. In compliance with WP:COI, I proposed a draft re-write of the page here that trims promotion, updates the page, etc.

I saw that you participated in the Sustainable food system page and thought I'd see if you were interested in chipping in on Eat Just page. Since I work for the company itself, I am required to rely on more impartial editors to approve any large changes.

Thank you in advance if you do take the time to participate. Anoyes202 (talk) 20:33, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Anoyes202: I am rather busy at the moment, so won't be able to dig into this until later in the week -- if I don't respond by next Weds or so, please feel free to ping me then. Sadads (talk) 00:32, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Help

Hi@Sadads:. I am a fawiki user but I rarely cooperate Enwiki. My account in wikimedia has been blocked since March 17, 2020 by a wikimedia admin named (Sealle) and I can not upload any photo. I could not find his Email address. I wonder if you could help me. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by پخش مطلب (talk • contribs) 19:21, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi! @پخش مطلب: Offwiki communication is not the best tool for contacting that user: please contact them directly on the wiki where you have been blocked. There is likely a process like the one described at Wikipedia:Appealing a block on that wiki. Each wiki is self governed and run by different editors. Sadads (talk) 23:41, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Peaceful transition of power

Hey, I get that you're trying to link people to the new article you created, but you need to actually review what you're linking with FindLink before adding the link. You've added it to a number of articles where it makes zero sense in context, such as Dali (goddess), where the phrase "peaceful transition" in context referred to the transition from one year to the next. I've reverted quite a few of these. Please take more care with automated editing tools in the future. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:43, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:52, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Military units and formations of the United States Navy by war

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:35, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Excerpt insertion

Hello, there appears to be a problem with this edit.

The insertion of text by the template {{Excerpt}} causes corruption of reference 14 (the first one it inserts). Looks like there is a problem with that template. Keith D (talk) 23:13, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

@Keith D: Thanks, @Sophivorus: is the maintainer -- he may be able to have insight on that, Sadads (talk) 00:36, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for having me

Dear Admin,

Thank you for having me. I am indeed happy to be here. I accept the cup of tea. I am yet to know how to do this Talk thing. I am sorry if I am violating. It's just that I needed to show my appreciation. I do not know where else to type or click. I am open to learning so please teach me. Please I do not know how to sign with the four tildes. I just copied and paste (the last one).

Thank you all. Ngostary2k (talk) 22:11, 24 May 2020 (UTC) Ngostary2k (Ngostary2k (talk) 22:11, 24 May 2020 (UTC))

"2012 Hurricane season" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect 2012 Hurricane season. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 4#2012 Hurricane season until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 16:50, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXV, November 2020

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:51, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

New page - Polymateria

Hi Sadads,

My name is Sophie and I am very new to being a Wikipedia user - editing and writing articles. I am contacting you because I saw that you had made changes to the plastic pollution Wikipedia page. I was hoping I could get your help to create a new page for the company I work for, we are developing technology for biodegradable plastic solutions (not oxo-degradation) to help combat plastic pollution and fugitive palstics. As I am currently working at Polymateria, I am unable to create the company Wikipedia page and was hoping you could help me.

If you are happy to help me I can send you the text that I would like to have on the page, external sources included.

Again, as said I am very new to this side of Wikipedia so please do let me know if there is another way I should be trying to make these changes.

Thank you and hope to speak soon, Sophie SophieStromback (talk) 17:28, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi @SophieStromback:, so the transparent process would be for you to share a draft on your user sandbox: User:SophieStromback/sandbox, and we can give feedback on it in the Wikimedia space -- for context, make sure you have read the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide, and disclosed on your user page fully -- Sadads (talk) 18:04, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi again Sadads, Thank you for your response! I have now added a request to my sandbox and also added it to my talk page. Any chance you have a moment to look at it, would love your feedback? Hopefully speak soon and have a great weekend! SophieStromback (talk) 15:55, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2020).

Administrator changes

removed Andrwsc • Anetode • GoldenRing • JzG • LinguistAtLarge • Nehrams2020

Interface administrator changes

added Izno

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Agricultural Productivity

What's up? 86.83.56.115 (talk) 13:48, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Ok, I want to leave, there's a storm coming and I must secure stuff, but here's a try guessing what your problem is with my edits. I'm guessing from your edit history that you are primarily concerned with climate change, and you specifically didn't like the one edit where I deleted your contribution to the article regarding that subject. Annoying, you could of just re-added that part with an edit summary explaining why you think it's necessary to have it in there, instead of reverting all the improvements I made to grammar. My motivation is thus: the article in question is a simple economical concept. I generally edit agriculture articles. There are very many editors who want to promote climate change stuff, and very few interested in agribusiness -this is true throughout the western world, where almost no one is employed in farming, but everyone has an opinion about it. Whilst there is nothing wrong with that, agricultural articles often get crammed full of this topic. I fail to see how that sentence I removed helps a reader who wants to understand, or read about, agricultural productivity. I mentioned it comes across as propaganda. Inherent bias is another term. Imagine how some farming student looking this term would sigh ... blablabla climate change again. Too much promotionalism can harm what you are trying to achieve - informing people about climate change. Can you feel me? 86.83.56.115 (talk) 14:59, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
What you are saying makes no sense -- we don't write content for how people feel....land use, and how its connected to climate change is absolutely central topic. Any economic concept is connected to the environmental and social systems that it influences -- by your same logic we should say nothing about food security in the article. You are removing an appropriately weighted concept again and again, Sadads (talk) 05:18, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
"Can you feel me" is a colloquialism from hip-hop music, it means do you understand what I'm trying to say? -perhaps you are unfamiliar with the term. Please, I removed your text, then re-added it as a compromise to you, then edited it to fit the subject matter better -I did not remove stuff again and again. Try and be a bit more collaborative. You've been around for a long time I see: you know how things work around here. I personally think food security is important and didn't touch that part, the third editor to join the fray must have. I agree that any economic concept has environmental and social implications, but I disagree that it is a central topic, and that's actually the reason I think it's superfluous and repetitive: a reader simply looking for info on the subject of economy or agriculture will not require this info. People have different viewpoints, this you must accept (as I must). Either way, I do believe the article is improving with the three of us fighting about it. 86.83.56.115 (talk) 14:56, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
I understand the expression -- your example of the ideal reader for the page appears to be quite radical than mine. I am imagining the average reader to be a random person or government administrator who sees a term "agricultural productivity" and needs to understand how that effects society and make a decision about how they respond to the topic -- anything economic has a human behavior and related impacts on society and the environment (thinking a bit like groups like Freakonomics would). Also, the climate adaptation literature spends a huge amount of energy and time on productivity v land degradation and climate change weather changes, etc, so we need to expand that coverage quite significantly in the article. As for the other editor -- they are prone to fringe theories about human overpopulation -- so I would be very skeptical of anything they are adding -- you and I have already had to correct several rather blatant moments of bias/racism. If you are interested I could really use some more eyes on human overpopulation -- that article is a trainwreck, Sadads (talk) 18:37, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Fair enough, the reader I was thinking of was myself as a student of agronomy a few decades ago... I'd sort of hope a "government administrator" has better sources than Wikipedia, hahaha! Regarding "human overpopulation", this concept actually really disturbs me -I consider it a fascist fringe theory unsupported by science, and I have deleted much promotion of it on unrelated pages over the years. If we say there is overpopulation, this implies there is a percentage of the population which must be culled. I always wonder who has to die according to these people. Blacks? Republicans? Indians? Jews? It is evil nihilism and crying about spilled milk -we have the world population we have: we must deal it, not complain that it would be better if all these people didn't exist. The moral thing to do is to address the problems of the world by helping people, not whining that they should be killed like Hitler's theories of Lebensraum. It's unfortunate, I'm familiar with the works of David Pimentel, he also wrote much else about agroecology and agroforestry, but on Wikipedia it is that one stupid essay that keeps on being quoted. I wrote most of the articles on normal overpopulation, carrying capacity and other ecological concepts being abused by that article, and had to constantly fight with a guy, didn't want to touch the human overpopulation one with a 5-ft pole at the time ... I'm so against the idea it will be hard for me to stay neutral. You are right, it is absolutely terrible - too long and too much OR. If it were up to me I'd delete huge parts. Ah, I see you've argued with the editor in question on the talk page of that article... unconstructive... sigh!
Regarding your suggestion about expanding the article, I added an online source with this edit that touches on all the subjects you mention from a more economic perspective. Perhaps you will find something useful there? Perhaps we should add something more about the importance of women regarding agricultural productivity. My interests are agriculture, ecology and botany -not so much environmentalism. However, real life calls -the storm is over and the damage has been extensive, I've never had this many glass panes smashed before, and 'tis the season for getting some growing done! I'm raring to go now this horrible corona is nearing some sort of resolution- so I will unfortunately be less available in the coming time. I'm actually taking a break from taking a break from Wikipedia. Regards, Leo 86.83.56.115 (talk) 21:00, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the input -- yeah I am getting up the willpower to start a conversation on the Fringe Theory Noticeboard about the article -- its a mess, and that editor consistently re-adds content that is fringe at best, and malicious in a lot of situations. I hope that as you come back we can continue to collaborate -- I think there is room for both of our approaches to the topic -- and other agricultural topics -- so I hope we get a chance to work on it, Sadads (talk) 22:16, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! So we are not alone on watching over the very problematic Overpopulation. PS: thanks for reporting the user. Nsae Comp (talk) 08:26, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Overconsumption, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Human development.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 42

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 42, January – February 2021

  • New partnerships: PNAS, De Gruyter, Nomos
  • 1Lib1Ref
  • Library Card

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).

Administrator changes

added TJMSmith
removed Boing! said Zebedee • Hiberniantears • Lear's Fool • Only • WGFinley

Interface administrator changes

added AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
  • When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
  • There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

WikiLoop 2020 Year in Review

Wikipedia mini globe handheld
Wikipedia mini globe handheld

Dear editors, developers and friends:

Thank you for supporting Project WikiLoop! The year 2020 was an unprecedented one. It was unusual for almost everyone. In spite of this, Project WikiLoop continued the hard work and made some progress that we are proud to share with you. We also wanted to extend a big thank you for your support, advice, contributions and love that make all this possible.

Head over to our project page on Meta Wikimedia to read a brief 2020 Year in Review for WikiLoop.

Thank you for taking the time to review Wikipedia using WikiLoop DoubleCheck. Your work is important and it matters to everyone. We look forward to continuing our collaboration through 2021!

María Cruz
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXIX, March 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:56, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Recent edit reverted as "not helpful"

Hi Sadads,

Like yourself, my goal on Wikipedia is to make it a better place. I saw a sentence that was (rather jarringly) interrupted by a parenthetical statement that created odd phrasing, and I tidied it up. With all due respect and for my own edification, could you please take a second to explain how such an edit could be considered unhelpful? I could understand such a reversion if I had massively expanded the sentence – but I did not.

Thank you for your time, and have a great day.

Sincerely, 1980fast (talk) 22:52, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

@1980fast: -- um, I reverted the addition because I misinterpreted your the diff -- sorry about that -- but at the same time, the new phrasing was still not clear. I just tweaked: check out the diff, Sadads (talk) 11:53, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks! Looks great! I did one further small tweak, removing the period (in compliance with WP:CAPFRAG) since it is no longer a complete sentence. 1980fast (talk) 02:34, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Cite Unseen update

Hello! Thank you for using Cite Unseen. The script recently received a significant update, detailed below.

  • You can now toggle which icons you do or don't want to see. See the configuration section for details. All icons are enabled by default except for the new Green checkmark generally reliable icon (described below).
  • New categorizations/icons:
    • Megaphone Advocacy: Organizations that are engaged in advocacy (anything from political to civil rights to lobbying). Note that an advocacy group can be reliable; this indicator simply serves to note when a source's primary purpose is to advocate for certain positions or policies, which is important to keep in mind when consuming a source.
    • Hand writing Editable: Sites that are editable by the public, such as wikis (Wikipedia, Fandom) or some databases (IMDb, Discogs).
    • Red journal with an X Predatory journals: These sites charge publication fees to authors without checking articles for quality and legitimacy.
    • Perennial source categories: Cite Unseen will mark sources as Green checkmark generally reliable, Exlamation mark in orange triangle marginally reliable, No symbol generally unreliable, Stop hand deprecated, and Black X blacklisted. This is based on Wikipedia's perennial sources list, which reflects community consensus on frequently discussed sources. Sources that have multiple categorizations are marked as Blue question mark varied reliability. Note that Green checkmark generally reliable icons are disabled by default to reduce clutter, but you can enable them through your custom config. A special thanks to Newslinger, whose new Sourceror API provides the perennial sources list in a clean, structured format.
  • With the addition of the new categorizations, the biased source icon has been removed. This category was very broad, and repetitive to the new advocacy and perennial sources categorizations that are more informative.

If you have any feedback, requested features, or domains to add/remove, don't hesitate to bring it up on the script's talk page. Thank you! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 23:09, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

You are receiving this message as a user of Cite Unseen. If you no longer wish to receive very occasional updates, you may remove yourself from the mailing list.

Template:Did you know nominations/Kandy Tuskers in 2020

Please see note on your DYK review. Yoninah (talk) 19:59, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

@Yoninah: Ah, thanks, I hadn't really thought about it in that way -- don't interact much with DYK these days, so some of the critical evaluation skills not there -- that was a QPQ review, Sadads (talk) 11:55, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Enhanced weathering

Hi, Sadads. Thank you to offer to collaborate on the improvement of the page Enhanced weathering. I am creating a new version of the page in User:Daniele Pugliesi/Enhanced weathering. I think at the moment the explanations are still confused, but I am trying to make it more clear, first of all distinguishing between chemical, mechanical and biological weathering of rocks. I think it is important for the reader to easily follow all the explanation step by step, so I am trying to make clearer the connection between natural chemical weathering, ocean acidification and enhanced weathering. Probably it could be worth to explain other related processes (natural or artificial) associated with natural and enhanced weathering, in order to have a wider perspective of this technology related to other natural and artificial processes occurring in the Earth.
Please let me know in case you have some suggestion. I will send another messages from time to time to update you on my edits and doubts for this page. Speak you soon. --Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 12:40, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

p.s.: I am not English mother tongue, so probably some sentence I write looks weird or has some mistake. Please let me know in this case, so I can improve my English. :) --Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 12:43, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
@Daniele Pugliesi: -- that looks great! you should definitely move the revisions to the main article! Great job!Sadads (talk) 10:27, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank You Note

Thank you so much for your timely intervention. Ptinphusmia (talk) 21:57, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the online edit-a-thon on climate change topics in November 2020

Guide: How to contribute climate change information to Wikipedia

Hi,

I am EMsmile, and I am a part of a group of people wishing to improve climate change-related articles on Wikipedia. We are organising the "Wiki4Climate" online edit-a-thon from 24 November to 1 December 2020. Please take part by registering here. This event is organised by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) and Future Climate for Africa (FCFA). If you have any questions about this event, please feel free to ask your question on the event's talk page here. Please also join us in the event's Slack channel for easier communication and to make this into a collaborative effort. To join the Slack channel, please click here.

We also recommend this new guide to you: Guide: How to contribute climate change information to Wikipedia (Baker, E., McNamara, L., Mackay, B., and Vincent, K. (2020). How to contribute climate change information to Wikipedia: A guide for researchers, practitioners and communicators. Cape Town: Climate and Development Knowledge Network and Future Climate for Africa). EMsmile (talk) 12:55, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 41

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 41, September – October 2020

  • New partnership: Taxmann
  • WikiCite
  • 1Lib1Ref 2021

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:48, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

New, simpler RfC to define trust levels for WikiLoop DoubleCheck

HI Sadads/Archive 1,
I'm writing to let you know we have simplified the RfC on trust levels for the tool WikiLoop DoubleCheck. Please join and share your thoughts about this feature! We made this change after hearing users' comments on the first RfC being too complicated. I hope that you can participate this time around, giving your feedback on this new feature for WikiLoop DoubleCheck users.
Thanks and see you around online,
María Cruz
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:05, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
If you would like to update your settings to change the wiki where you receive these messages, please do so here.

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:20, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Plastic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Garbage patch.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:09, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

When God Writes Your Love Story Featured article review

I have nominated When God Writes Your Love Story for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:39, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject Newcomer and Historian of the Year awards now open

G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVI, December 2020

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:49, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Voting for "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" closing

G'day all, voting for the WikiProject Military history "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" is about to close, so if you haven't already, click on the links and have your say before 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

January 2021

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Plant-based diet shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Make your case on the talk page and get WP:CON. You should know better. Project Drawdown is a promotional project, not a WP:SCIRS source; WP:PROMO. Zefr (talk) 22:03, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Kendra Pierre-Louis

Hello! Your submission of Kendra Pierre-Louis 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 as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Mujinga (talk) 15:17, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Kendra Pierre-Louis

Hi, we're unable to promote an article to the main page that has an image licensing problem. Would you like me to return it to the nominations page until the matter is settled? Yoninah (talk) 18:10, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

@Yoninah: There is nothing wrong with the image, the nominator made a spurious claim without evidence -- it should not interfere with the process on EnWiki, Sadads (talk) 12:26, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes, I did notice that the author approved the upload. OK, hope this deletion request is resolved quickly. Yoninah (talk) 12:36, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Del Mar, California, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bluff.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Go ahead

Go ahead and continue tagging the sections that concern you. I will correct or even replace them where necessary. I tried to re-add your edit in the history and cause of concern but missed the line. Go ahead and re-add it and continue tagging the relevant sections. I will attend to them soon after. In the meantime readers can see there is an accuracy issue there--Buzles (talk) 22:33, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

About the land, just add your edit, that with technology it's no longer an issue. You didn't need to replace that part. Just add to it that it is less of an issue now with more sophisticated technology.--Buzles (talk) 22:38, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your message!

Hi! I saw your message regarding the upcoming work on Climate and Human Rights and I am very interested in this topic and how we can spread information about it. Additionally, I would be happy to take a look at the To Do List on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Climate_change/Justice and see how I can help. MadisonWI1999 (talk) 18:34, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).

Administrator changes

removed Enchanter • Carlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

removed Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed to suppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Kendra Pierre-Louis

On 2 January 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kendra Pierre-Louis, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that climate journalist Kendra Pierre-Louis is a critic of mayonnaise? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kendra Pierre-Louis. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Kendra Pierre-Louis), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 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.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Thoughts on WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE

Hi, I'm moving here to follow up on the brief exchange that we had at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Annaïse Heglar, in the interest of not clogging up the AfD. I think your suggestion makes a lot of sense. Varying interpretations of this policy seem, to me, to be causing weekly (if not almost daily) problems in AfD discussions — I just saw it come up again at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruce Lerman. And as you noted it's not just esoteric stuff, but will probably come up more and more often, and is causing severe arguments not just on Wikipedia but also on social media, with lots of nasty implications for peoples' well-being and Wikipedia's reputation. So I think an RfC or a Village Pump thread is a sensible next step. The problem is that I don't want to poison the well by proposing a clumsy change that has no hope of making anything better, and I'm honestly not totally sure what I think it should be changed to. Do you have any thoughts about what a good way to proceed would be? No worries if not, I just thought that your suggestion of trying to make sure that the policy is aligned with consensus was a good one, and I want to be sensible about the next step. - Astrophobe (talk) 19:21, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

@Astrophobe: I agree with you on doing an RFP post deletion discussion -- its always delicate on these things, because sometimes attention has the opposite effect of those starting the conversation. I actually have a hard time imagining, her AFD for example, not concluding that she is a public person -- she is all over the U.S. environmental movement, and is actively promoting storytelling about environmental justice... the whole goal of the book All We Can Save is to promote women leaders in the space... they were included in the book because the editors thought they were notable.
But I could see a version of the policy that says something like "living persons not newsworthy or of regular public comment yet documented because of their livelihood that request removal", but the problem is that for every exception we make through these requests, the closer we get down the slippery slope of Right to be forgotten. I empathize with the reaction she has on Twitter, but have a hard time imagining a version of these rules that is appropriate for effective (yet inclusive) encyclopedic coverage... But then again, its been a long time since I have spent time in the trenches of AFDs on BLPs. Sadads (talk) 21:43, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVII, January 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:06, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 42

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 42, November – December 2020

  • New EBSCO collections now available
  • 1Lib1Ref 2021 underway
  • Library Card input requested
  • Libraries love Wikimedia, too!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2021).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Climate change in Kenya

On 28 January 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Climate change in Kenya, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that malaria is expected to become more prevalent due to the impacts of climate change in Kenya? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Climate change in Kenya. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Climate change in Kenya), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Infographics

Want to post this here as there is no need for conflict. Dispite what was said at Wikiproject COVID Infographics are used alot on medical articles. They are a great way to convey information especially for those with comprehension problems and non-native readers . Do you have a commons cat where this are like C:Category:Medical diagrams in English?--Moxy 🍁 03:09, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey @Moxy: Thats in my professional capacity -- but yeah the infographics are all at Category:Graphics_produced_by_World_Health_Organization -- I will reach out to you about using them more in my professional capacity, Sadads (talk) 11:59, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Loksmythe. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Injaz Lebanon, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Loksmythe (talk) 14:36, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVI, November 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:26, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

NPP Award for 2022

The New Page Patroller's Barnstar

For over 100 article reviews during 2022. Thank you for patrolling new pages and helping us out with the backlog! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks! Sadads (talk) 15:20, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Campaigns Product Team Office Hour - December 2022

Hello Campaigns Product Newsletter subscribers!

The Wikimedia Foundation Campaigns Team invites you to join our upcoming office hours. In each session, we will introduce V1 of Event Registration Tool, so you can begin using it for real events on Meta-wiki.

In V1, the following new features will be includedː

  • Support for the organizer to specify an event timezone
  • Automatic confirmation emails after participants have registered
  • Private registration: the option for participants to register and only display their registered username to organizers of the event and we will teach you how you can use it yourself.


Office Hour Sessions:

  • 1st Session: December 5, 2022 @ 18:00 UTC via Zoom
  • 2nd Session: December 10, 2022 @ 12:00 UTC via Zoom
Join us and share your thoughts on these developments!


These office hours will be multilingual, with live interpretations in Arabic, English, French, and Swahili. Email us @ ibrazal-ctr@wikimedia.org or sign-up here if you want to receive a reminder for this meeting.

Thank you.

The Campaigns Product Team

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations opening soon

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are opening in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 1 September). A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:52, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Merger discussion for 100% renewable energy

An article that you have been involved in editing—100% renewable energy—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:28, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Help on Wikiproject Climate change project

Hi,

any chance you want to help out on increasing coverage and info on this ? Carbon sink upscaling additional info on carbon sink upscaling (missing info) --Genetics4good (talk) 16:36, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Genetics4good: My expertise/skill is more on describing impacts, and adaptations in different contexts so that we help readers see the connections to topics they care about-- I am not sure how to solve that problem in particular. Maybe through: Intended Nationally Determined Contributions -- which is very underdeveloped and doesn't really address this set of issues i.e. it looks like there was a lot of criticism of this from India in their NDC. The other option could be to build something into the Carbon sequestration article. Do you have a specific set of documents/research you want to draw information from? Sadads (talk) 15:49, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Sadads, I'm discussing this at the Wikiproject talk page. Refer to that for more info which I am posting along the way.

--Genetics4good (talk) 09:46, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 54

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 54, November – December 2022

  • New collections:
    • British Newspaper Archive
    • Findmypast
    • University of Michigan Press
    • ACLS
    • Duke University Press
  • 1Lib1Ref 2023
  • Spotlight: EDS Refine Results

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:14, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Sadads!

Happy New Year!

Sadads,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ⋠T⋡ 02:34, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

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

— Moops ⋠T⋡ 02:34, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Why thank you! I really appreciate the Happy New Year! Sadads (talk) 15:21, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Administrators using the mobile web interface can now access Special:Block directly from user pages. (T307341)
  • The IP Info feature has been deployed to all wikis as a Beta Feature. Any autoconfirmed user may enable the feature using the "IP info" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features. Autoconfirmed users will be able to access basic information about an IP address that includes the country and connection method. Those with advanced privileges (admin, bureaucrat, checkuser) will have access to extra information that includes the Internet Service Provider and more specific location.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).

Administrator changes

readded Jake Wartenberg
removed Emperor • Viridian Bovary
renamed Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
  • An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.

Technical news

  • IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:27, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago

Awesome
Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:01, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Thank you so much! Sadads (talk) 11:10, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

=

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Land defender, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Environmental defender.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, February 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:03, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Excerpt tree

Hi! I notice that many or even most of the articles where you add excerpts are related to environmental issues. Thus I'm wondering if maybe an excerpt tree is emerging already. In the Spanish Wikipedia, I've developed several trees, including one rooted in climate change. Are you aware of the concept/technique? Cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 13:11, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

@Sophivorus: Added a few, but several are doing something funky where there is no transclusion happening (see the Algae tree). Maybe something is wrong with the method for identifying them? Sadads (talk) 13:42, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
@Sadads: Amazing!! I hope you find them as useful as I do, and not just a curiosity. :-) As to the bug, I'll look into it! Sophivorus (talk) 14:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

"Freaked Out" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Freaked Out. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 11#Freaked out until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 12:07, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

A beer for you!

For your work on the Human overpopulation article. I keep seeing it pop up on my watchlist and you have been extending effort there for some time now. Seems like monumental task! :) S0091 (talk) 22:22, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
It really bothers me -- because some of the research is legitimate, but some of the way in which its is currently compiled on the article is as if the "statistics" result in an "obvious" conclusion -- which is not the case when you read up on this stuff :P Also, now that Buzle is blocked I am feeling a bit more liberty in removing the marginal stuff -- hopefully whoever comes along in the future can actually summarize the scholarship that does specific attribution arguments -- and describe it as an argument :P Its going to require some really careful, careful reading of the content we have though -- its sloppy at best, Sadads (talk) 22:29, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
@S0091: Realized I forgot to ping :P Sadads (talk) 22:30, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Fertilizer

If you wish to discuss fertilizer article, I am very happy to so. It is a very large area of culture and technology, and like all large topics, it includes many controversies. It seems inappropriate to introduce the topic from the perspective of Mother Jones, which is not exactly NPOV journal. In any case I will be around. --Smokefoot (talk) 14:02, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

BR-319

Do not do experiments, as you did in the article BR-319. The article is a translation of the Portuguese version (native language of the object in question). You removed the road map, reliable sources from the main Brazilian newspapers and all kinds of unacceptable vandalism. Restrain yourself or it will be a reason to ask for your block. Rauzaruku (talk) 15:39, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

I replaced text brought from the Wiki in Portuguese, written mostly by the user Naldo Arruda, who lives in the Amazon region (therefore, has much more reliability to write about this BR than any user who lives outside Brazil and only reads biased information and partial by the world press), was supervised by Wiki administrators in Portuguese and the version there is considered neutral and informative enough not to be disputed by anyone. You want to start a purposeful R3R fight, right? Your will is visible. Rauzaruku (talk) 16:44, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi @Rauzaruku: I am an admin on English Wikipedia -- I don't respond well to threats. Consensus on Portuguese Wikipedia does not stand for consensus on English. We leave ecological content on English Wikipedia because it is part of the economic impact of a topic (including very controversial highways). Sadads (talk) 16:46, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
The whole ecological issue is addressed in the text you deleted. To repeat: this text that you deleted, in addition to being written by a RESIDENT OF THE REGION, has communist sources such as O Globo and Folha de São Paulo, who are totally interested in destroying Jair Bolsonaro. You better stop thinking that the article should be yours just because you are an administrator or not. It is not your job. Rauzaruku (talk) 16:51, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gross domestic product, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Human development.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive

Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive#Participants and create a worklist at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:26, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:27, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Awww thanks! Glad to see you again, Sadads (talk) 12:18, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
my pleasure also, to see a recipient still active, and even responding --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:59, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).

Administrator changes

removed Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
  • Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.

Technical news

  • When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
  • Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Campaign Product Team Office Hour - July 21, 2022

Hello Campaign Product Newsletter subscribers!


The Campaign Product Team will be having an office hour today, July 21, 2022 at 17:00 UTC via Zoom to demo the first release of the Event Registration Tool.

You may join the office hour using this meeting link.

We look forward to your participation.

Thank you.


Best,

The Campaign Product Team

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:46, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Library access

Hi, hope you're well!. I don't know if you're still a coordinator for the Wiki Library but where do I apply for access nowadays? On metaWiki? I would like access to the biggest newspaper archives we have like newspaper.com and a few others if we still have an agreement.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:07, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld you can go to https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/ -- and log in with oauth, Sadads (talk) 10:23, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

I reapplied for Newspapers.com here. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:12, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld thats great! someone who processes those will help!Sadads (talk) 16:59, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I applied at https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/applications/evaluate/18933/ and tried to access Newspapers.com just now but couldn't access it. I clicked the other button and it started another application. https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/applications/evaluate/19196/ I don't check my wiki email account, it's a very old email address and I'd rather not link my current one here. Can somebody just approve it and ensure I have access?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

I am pretty sure that one requires creating an account with Newspapers.com so there are an extra step that has to happen on email. @Nikkimaria may know, I am not longer involved with that part of the processing, Sadads (talk) 15:03, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
I had an account on there before, but can't remember my user name or password!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:30, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
Your login details would have been sent to the email linked to your account - are you still able to access it at all? Nikkimaria (talk) 22:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

""Prison tatoo" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect "Prison tatoo and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 15#"Prison tatoo until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. ―Susmuffin Talk 22:11, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Reverted you on DeSmog

See Media Bias/Fact Check and WP:RSNP. No problem unless you disagree. Doug Weller talk 15:22, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

@Doug Weller No worries, the underlying problem is that I know DeSmog to be reliable, especially as the climate reporting sector treats, and was looking for a source to document that -- I am sure I can find another one. Sadads (talk) 16:48, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Great. A lot of editors don't know about the problems with this source. I should probably search for it but I'm after a particular Creationist and his website right now. Doug Weller talk 16:50, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Category:Mining in fiction has been nominated for renaming

Category:Mining in fiction has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:50, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXIII, July 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:31, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

  • Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:18, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 45

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 45, May – June 2021

  • Library design improvements continue
  • New partnerships
  • 1Lib1Ref update

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:04, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Empire of the Moghuls

An administrator removed content from the article Empire of the Moghul stating that it is copyrighted. Should I add it back? ChikaToFlika (talk) 10:54, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@ChikaToFlika The back cover of a book is copyrighted text see A summary needs to be originally written by Wikimedia contributors. Sadads (talk) 12:46, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Eisenson

Notice

The article Eisenson has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable surname. Only one article contains the name so not suitable for use as a disambig.

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:46, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Food

The article is a mess and you delete that part? The source is fine for bread being one of the four basic groups. I can reduce the NOVA part, but it came up in a few google searches so a mention of processing as a system of classification of food is apt. Aircorn (talk) 17:08, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Aircorn nutrition classifications are at best a convoluted, invented political system (see for example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8375951/ ). Bread is not a separate distinct type of food in any nutritional sense, and most systems just call that grains or complex carbs. The idea of representing food groups at all in that part of the article is probably inappropriate: its a political process based on food lobbies and complex (and often oversimplified) ideas of food, Sadads (talk) 13:09, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Erica Stanford
added a link pointing to Climate action
Generation Climate Europe
added a link pointing to Climate action
John Englart
added a link pointing to Climate action
Juliana Buhring
added a link pointing to Climate action
Local Government Association
added a link pointing to Climate action
Order of the White Rose of Finland
added a link pointing to Climate action
Stella McCartney
added a link pointing to Climate action
Transformative justice
added a link pointing to Climate action

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:59, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Julius Nyerere Hydropower Station

What more would you like to see in the lead in the article Julius Nyerere Hydropower Station? --Bejnar (talk) 16:11, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

@Bejnar So at first glance, there is no coverage of two major sections: Risks to operation and Negative Impacts, moreover, I would expect at least a few sentences about the history section. For the length of the article, I would expect at least 3 4-5 sentence paragraphs, Sadads (talk) 16:25, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your prompt response. I could see more historical coverage than simply stating that it was controversial, albeit much of the history is overly detailed for an encyclopedia entry. I could break out that one lead paragraph by topic. Fifteen sentences for this lead seems a bit profuse from my angle, but I'll see what I can do. --Bejnar (talk) 17:09, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
I think its important to remember that most of our readers stop in the lead, so if there is a significant sub-topic covered in the article -- the main way that readers learn about it is the lead, Sadads (talk) 17:26, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Relized I didn't ping: @Bejnar Sadads (talk) 17:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Please fix your bad edits

Following are changes you made which appear to me to be "bad" in some respect or other. This is after reviewing a small handful of the changes you made.

Fabrickator (talk) 05:35, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Fabrickator Only two of the four were inappropriate among the ones you point at, and the error rate among others is quite low, I usually don't have that high of an error rate -- so not sure what you are talking about, Sadads (talk) 11:48, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Guess I'm a little more particular. For instance, this seems confusing:
n carbon sequestration
which probably should have been (ignoring wikilinking)
n-carbon sequestration
to begin with.

FWIW, I have seen other cases where only the word "sequester" or "sequestration" (adjacent to "carbon") was hyperlinked to "carbon sequestration". That makes good sense to me, e.g.

the advantages of carbon sequestration include...

But that still leaves open the issue: when nothing is wrong to start with, what is the number of errors that it's okay to introduce? Fabrickator (talk) 15:29, 20 April 2021 (UTC) (revised comment)

Community Configuration 2.0

Hello Alex

I’m contacting you as you edited Growth features configuration in the past, using Special:EditGrowthConfig. This page is visible to anyone, but only a selected group of users can edit it and configure Growth features

The Growth team plans to create a Community Configuration 2.0, based on Special:EditGrowthConfig.

This new feature will allow local administrators to change settings for Wikimedia Foundation-designed features. This way, they can configure the different features to best suit their wiki’s specific needs. This strategy eliminates the technical barrier for admins, to customize local settings. This also encourages a more inclusive and collaborative product development process.

But, there are currently two primary limitations to Community Configuration:

  • Discoverability: Many Administrators are unaware of the existence of Community Configuration.
  • Usage Scope: At present, only the Growth features can use Community Configuration.

We plan to integrate Community configuration into MediaWiki, as a default feature. Other Wikimedia Foundation teams and volunteer developers will be able to create Community configurable features. We expect this central place to be more discoverable.

Before the Growth team starts this project, we are seeking feedback, to guide our efforts in the right direction. We are particularly interested in your thoughts on the following:

  1. How do you feel about more Wikimedia Foundation features that can be configured (enabled, disabled, edited) by Administrators?
    • Do you have any reservations or concerns about this idea?
  2. What can we do to ensure that all Administrators are well-informed about Community Configuration?
  3. How confident are Administrators in making changes using Community Configuration?
  4. Based on your experience editing Special:EditGrowthConfig, are any parts of the procedure unclear or ambiguous?
  5. Community Configuration should be visible to all. Should it only be modifiable by a select group of experienced Wikimedians?
  6. Should all configuration options be only editable by Administrators and interface administrators?
    • Should we consider different user access levels for certain configuration options?
  7. Out of curiosity, do you have any thoughts on how many edits would be made to this community configuration page each year?

Your insights will be invaluable in shaping the trajectory of this project. We look forward to your constructive feedback!

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask.

Best, Trizek_(WMF) (talk) 15:37, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2023).

Administrator changes

added Firefangledfeathers
removed

Interface administrator changes

added Novem Linguae

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:54, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sadads/Archive_1&oldid=1169649140"