Hi SSTflyer. I've just removed the DYK nomination for Into You (Ariana Grande song), which hadn't been completed. You added to the DYK nominations page, without the creation of a nomination. If you do want to renominate, you should still be within the 1 week time scale WormTT( talk) 08:36, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HTC First you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MrWooHoo -- MrWooHoo ( talk) 18:41, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Hey SSTflyer,
I noticed you haven't edited since the List of people named x incident happened. I've been checking your contributions for the last few days in the hope that you'd resume editing again. I completely understand that you'd want to take a Wikibreak, but whenever you're ready to return, please do so because you are a valuable member of this community. Don't let one mistake define you, there are millions of other ways to help out this project that don't involve creating thousands of pointless redirects. I've been really impressed with the breadth of your contributions, and it would be a shame to lose someone as instrumental as yourself. Thank you for your contributions to this project and I hope to hear from you soon. Best, --
Tavix (
talk) 15:03, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
The article HTC First you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:HTC First for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MrWooHoo -- MrWooHoo ( talk) 22:40, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Ozone-oxygen cycle in the ozone layer.
The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Please be bold and help to improve this article! Previous selections: Gustaf Skarsgård • À la carte Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:09, 16 May 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • |
---|
The article HTC First you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HTC First for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MrWooHoo -- MrWooHoo ( talk) 03:02, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a Move review of Azteca Records (California). Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk) 00:54, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
IMO that should have closed Keep, just as the previous AfD for that article closed keep under the exact same circumstances. -- Green C 17:23, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Can you please start a discussion about that link before readding it? I see what you're getting at, but aiming at the entire country seems much too broad to be useful. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 21:41, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
A small
whirlpool in a pond
The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Please be bold and help to improve this article! Previous selections: Ozone layer • Gustaf Skarsgård Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:08, 23 May 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • |
---|
Hi SST,
Thank you very much for your extreme courtesy and due diligence in asking for consensus before we decide whether to run this bot task of yours for events, deaths and births (I am deliberately not linking because I don't kinda wanna WP:OVERLINK to your talk page otherwise we end up in discussions in four dozen places as has happened to me with Neelix redirects and that is not helpful to anyone). I am not sure of its utility, am pretty neutral about it, and I have left both at WP:RFD and on the bot talk page a couple of suggestions that essentially narrow the redirects that are going to be created only to those things that we do have actual information about. But I have no problem in principle with it.
Anyway, my suggestion is this, some time ago I was going through every redirect we have like 30/5 and so on to see where they went. I got fed up at the end of April. Lots go to specific things because something will have been called "30/5" a tank or whatever and some are just going to May 30. There is kinda no order in these so I think it's a bit WP:SURPRISE. Like with "607" i just plucked that one at random I have no idea where it goes (I'll tell you once I post this) but that's kinda the point there's no predictability with these redirects (or date order with 5/30 and so on). I think most should be deleted but in any case a bot not to change them but to list them with their targets so we have a comprehensive list of where all our month-day and day-month ones go would I think be very useful just as a backroom list for easy reference. There are also spaced and hyphenated variants for many such as 30-5 and 5-30. As I say I just plucked that day at random as a not particularly remarkable day, you know not New Year's Day or Lady Day or anything like that, so where they all go I have no idea I was just giving an example. What do you think? Could you do that? I'm a software engineer but never done any "programming" at WP beyond templates. So I can kinda give you a more specific algorithm for how the bot should make such a list but am not interested in actually botching the code together. Si Trew ( talk) 09:15, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello, SSTflyer. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, and move subpages when moving the parent page(s).
Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving redirect. When you move a page, please remember to correct any double-redirects and make link corrections where necessary. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.
Useful links:
If you do not want the page mover right anymore, post here, or just let me know. Thank you, and happy editing! — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 01:12, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
I have read through the discussion numerous times, and cannot find any consensus. That was pretty clearly a "non-consensus" close from where I sit. Would you mind explaining your rationale? Thanks, MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 12:56, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Hey SST, I took out the {{ dead link}} templates you added because they're not dead, you just have to have a subscription. :-) Best, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:23, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
A
photodetector salvaged from a
CD-ROM. The photodetector contains 3
photodiodes visible in the photo (in center).
The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Please be bold and help to improve this article! Previous selections: Whirlpool • Ozone layer Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:06, 30 May 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • |
---|
Your bot task has been approved for trial, please see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SSTbot 1. — xaosflux Talk 13:55, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
When you closed the AfD for State decoration, you made it into a double redirect. That has finally been fixed by RussBot to redirect directly to Order (honour). GeoffreyT2000 ( talk) 17:59, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
An arbitration case regarding Gamaliel and others has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 03:38, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I saw that you recently closed this AfD. I believe this needs more discussion. There is also possible COI editing and socking going on. It is best if this is reopened and relisted. -- Lemongirl942 ( talk) 17:00, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
I also disagree with your non-admin closure of Death of Prince and have discussed it on DRV. Whiskeymouth ( talk) 04:10, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi SSTflyer; I'm sorry if this is a sore point, and I certainly don't mean to challenge your motives or judgement, but can I respectfully suggest that you self-revert? According to Wikipedia:Deletion process#Non-administrators closing discussions, a guideline, "Close calls and controversial decisions are better left to admins". I'd say that this was both a close call and (whatever the result!) a controversial decision, meaning that it's probably not an ideal candidate for a non-admin closure. (To be clear, I'm fairly happy with the result, as the lack of consensus has defaulted to keep, but I'm sure you can understand my worry.) Josh Milburn ( talk) 17:28, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
I know there are opposes, but why closing it so suddenly? Also, the WP:speedy keep is a deletion guideline. If you don't to reopen the discussion, can you adjust the closing rationale, so your revised rationale makes more sense? -- George Ho ( talk) 08:36, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
I also don't know why you add the link to a deletion guideline. Can you adjust the closing rationale to make more sense? -- George Ho ( talk) 08:46, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
The
Hilton Athens is part of the
Hilton Hotels & Resorts hotel chain.
The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Please be bold and help to improve this article! Previous selections: Photodetector • Whirlpool Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:07, 6 June 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • |
---|
Hey SSTflyer, you may be interested in looking at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 November 25#List Of Male Rappers. The redirect you nominated, List of American singers, was nominated there. In 2012, it seems that there was an editor who retargeted most of the person-related redirects in that nomination from WP:XNRs to categories to possibly unrelated/misleading articles. If you have a desire to take action on those, I thought I'd give you the opportunity first since you nominated the redirect that led me to find these issues. (If not, I may nominate certain ones myself for WP:RFD at some point during the next few days.) Steel1943 ( talk) 18:13, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Your bot has been approved please wait until a crat flags it +bot to begin your processing. — xaosflux Talk 01:09, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Death of Prince. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Valoem talk contrib 00:22, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi, could you please close Talk:Charles_Dodgson_(archdeacon)#Requested_move_22_May_2016? I can't because I'm involved in the discussion. The page is no longer protected so you should have no problems. Thanks, Anarchyte ( work | talk) 11:42, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Can you please revert your closure of this discussion? It only attracted 3 !votes, two of which are from editors who GA reviewed these articles and one of which is from a significant contributor. The discussion should have been relisted, not closed. Chase ( talk | contributions) 19:05, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
A
cubic zirconia crystal made by the
Shelby Gem Factory
The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Please be bold and help to improve this article! Previous selections: Hilton Hotels & Resorts • Photodetector Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:07, 13 June 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • |
---|
I'm skeptical your choice to close this; outcome not withstanding, non-admins in general are discouraged from closing contentious AFD's. It's best to let admins deal with those and just close non-contentious discussions. Snuggums ( talk / edits) 04:10, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello SSTflyer. Relating to your deletion discussion on the 100 Mile House Sikh Society, this article is written by me. I am a Sikh who was born and raised in 100 Mile House, and I lived there for 18 years prior to leaving to pursue higher education. My family roots can be tied back to 100 Mile House as far back as the early 1970's. My father played a significant role in establishing the society. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dalvinder K ( talk • contribs) 20:39, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi. just a quick note -- and a friendly one -- to point out that your close of this was not really a very good one. You did not give a policy reason for the close ( WP:SNOW is not policy), and the discussion really didn't qualify for a SNOW close - you should take a look at WP:SNOW as reminder of when it is and isn't applicable. When one side quotes policies, and the other doesn't, the close needs to be made not on the basis of nose-counting, but on the basis of quality of argument. You really should have let it run its course and be closed by an admin - in my opinion, of course. <g>
Anyway, that's all water under the bridge. I'm not planning on bringing it to WP:DRV, as the issue just isn't that important to me to pursue it further. I bear you no ill will, I just think your close wasn't the best. (And yes, I'm human enough to admit that if I was on the other side of the issue I'd just shrug my shoulders and this note wouldn't exist.) Best, BMK ( talk) 23:18, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi. For the context, I'm also a page mover, and I participated in the RM at Talk:Steve McLean. I'm ok with substance of your closure, but why did you leave pages Talk:Steve McLean/Disambiguation and Talk:Steve McLean/Disambiguation/Talk around? Yeah, they sort of preserve some attribution history, but if you are a page mover and properly execute WP:SWAP, there shouldn't be any leftovers like that hanging around, and I really dislike having such orphaned subpages. That whole Steve Mclean business is very messy to untangle, I admit. I (or, even better, you) can fix this by WP:SWAPping those two pages above with the appropriate Talk pages and then {{ db-g6}}'ing them, but I'm having difficulty locating those "appropriate Talk pages". No such user ( talk) 11:19, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
I'd ask you to please undo your close at Talk:New Music (style). It had been listed for a couple of weeks, no one had opposed and the nominator made a reasonable argument in favour. Quoting from RMCI, "Unlike articles for deletion, where lack of participation requires relisting, no minimum participation is required for requested moves because for most moves there is no need to make a request at all; the need arises only because of a technical limitation resulting from the target article name existing as a redirect with more than one edit. Thus, if no one has objected, go ahead and perform the move as requested unless it is out of keeping with naming conventions or is otherwise in conflict with applicable guidelines or policy." Cheers, Jenks24 ( talk) 12:03, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi,
Iam new here. I created a page - QuestionPro Inc. But since then the deletion tag was added, then removed, and then added again. Just to be clear (since I have been asked several times) I dono not have any links to this organization whatsoever. I went through their VB article, wanted to know more about the firm and was nearly sure it would be there (given they had a Venturebeat and a Mint_(newspaper) article) but couldn't since the page was not created. Hence I joined (always wanted to but hesitated), created the page and made some small other contributions as most of my free time goes into proving why this page is significant to readers. So basically I wanted your opinion as an admin that what do you feel about this article, and can you give me some suggestions on making it better or do you think that deletion is the only way forward.
Thanks a lot. RR007 ( talk) 14:07, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I believe the page move from Roman Catholicism in Afghanistan to Catholic Church in Afghanistan was incorrect. There was no strong consensus for the move, and the move introduced more ambiguity and inconsistency than the proposal corrected. The parent article for the series, Religion in Afghanistan uses the "Roman Catholic" convention, as do several templates on the page. The history section for Catholic Church in Afghanistan also discussed the "Nestorian" church (AKA the Assyrian Catholic Church of the East), which is unaffiliated with the Roman Catholic Church, and the article rename adds ambiguity that is difficult to correct without the "Roman" modifier in the title. See WP:Roman Catholic for more information. I would request you review the page move closing for possible reversal. Thank you. -- Zfish118⋉ talk 20:33, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a Move review of Catholic Church in Afghanistan. Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review.
Hello Wikipedia Library Users,
You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:
Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.
Thank you. 20:32, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
The
aqueduct of Segovia, Spain
The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: List of aqueducts in the Roman Empire Please be bold and help to improve this article! Previous selections: Shelby Gem Factory • Hilton Hotels & Resorts Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:07, 20 June 2016 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • |
---|
I'm confused why you created this redirect. You participated in the recent RFD regarding these redirects, so you should know where consensus is on the matter. Could you please explain? -- Tavix ( talk) 16:59, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, your closes beat me to my comments by literally a few seconds. (Your closes on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 20, specifically this edit, resulted in me having an edit conflict that I could no longer save due to the closes.) Anyways, for the record, here's what I was going to say on all of them:
Keep. It's a valid {{ R from song}}. Unless the redirect is proven to be ambiguous in name with another subject which currently exists on Wikipedia, no issue here as it directs readers to a topic which this title is a subtopic.(This doesn't apply anymore due to Notecardforfree's comments in the nominations after the discussions were reopened. Steel1943 ( talk) 16:31, 21 June 2016 (UTC))
Anyways, I just wanted to say this here in the event that your closes get reopened or sent to WP:DRV... Steel1943 ( talk) 17:01, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a Move review of New York (state). Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review.
Thanks for reverting the non-admin snow close on the songs. I'd like to see what the wider community has to say about creating this sort of redirect. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 04:46, 21 June 2016 (UTC) |