This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
Thanks for ur response i am trying to create this article its getting rejected. once it had got approved again it got nominated to speedy delectation person is notable has many individual sources but i am getting error as person is not notable now its showing Require extended confirmed access kindly look into the article & help me /info/en/?search=Draft:Anusharai_(actress) this user had accepted the article Nomadic_chiru after that its getting nominated to speedy delectation AjKa180
Hello, I just have attempted to do a merge between {{ Top25}} and {{ Top 25 report}} which you closed recently. I have set Top25 to a redirect, nothing seems to have broken & I updated the doc for Top 25 report. Just wondering if there is anything else I should have done, thanks. Terasail [✉] 22:19, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
HI Sdkb/Archive 3,
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.
What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar | ||
Thank you for starting the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates#Expired nominations. You were encouraged to take a passing comment on Wikipedia Discord and start a full discussion on Wikipedia. I'm impressed! Keep up the good work. :) MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 05:27, 20 November 2020 (UTC) |
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Random numbered subpages of Draft:Sample page. Thank you.-- Shirt58 ( talk) 10:33, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi! You were kind enough to come do a review of Biblical criticism, and I am guessing you are done with it as you haven't returned. If I'm wrong then please ignore this, but if I am correct and you are done, then I'd like to ask you to close it, and if possible, post your conclusions concerning what you did. If the comments are not struck, and it's left open as it is now, and there is no conclusion posted, then other reviewers think all those issues are unresolved - that I didn't fix them or cooperate with you. Since that is not the case, this creates a false impression about me and this review. I'm sorry to be a nag. This review is important to me. Thank you again for participating. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 04:52, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article RTGame is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RTGame until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 04:35, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
The editing introduction discussion is at User talk:Robert McClenon/Edit Intro. Robert McClenon ( talk) 04:56, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
On 28 November 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Champ and Major, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Major will be the first rescue dog to live in the White House? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Champ and Major. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Champ and Major), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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) 00:03, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Your new template shows "ACT" as a parameter. Could you relabel it "ACT Composite" for clarity to distinguish it from ACT Math and ACT English? Thanks. Contributor321 ( talk) 00:39, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Sdkb, I figured if anyone knew, it would be you. As of now, do you know if there is a way to add a custom link to the top toolbar alongside the "Talk - Sandbox - Preferences etc." ? I have a to do list I've been using for some time now, and figured if it's available I may as well talk advantage of it. Aza24 ( talk) 02:55, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
$( function() { // Add link at top for Tools page mw.loader.using( ['mediawiki.util'] ).done( function() { mw.util.addPortletLink('p-personal', mw.util.getUrl('User:Gog the Mild/Tasks'), 'To do', 'pt-todo', 'Go to User:User:Gog the Mild/Tasks', null, '#pt-preferences'); });
/* Override annoying purge dialog */
if ( mw.config.get( 'wgAction' ) === 'purge' ) {
$('form.mw-htmlform').submit();
}
} );
and paste it to your
js page it will put "to do" in between your "sandbox" and "preferences" at the top toolbar. Maybe that will be useful?
Aza24 (
talk) 21:18, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Category:QuestBridge partner colleges has been nominated for deletion. 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. Le Deluge ( talk) 11:05, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Why are you adding unsourced information to the encyclopedia? Have you read WP:V, WP:OR, and WP:AFD? ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 08:19, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
Good morning. It's been over a week since I left this message. (the one at the bottom of the page at the link) I know I should've wrote this message earlier, but I wanted to give some time to see if IVORK responded. I wanted to know, did you write a message to IVORK regarding the creation of this article? It's okay if you did not, but I'd like to bring this back up, because if it's suitable enough for Wikipedia, it shouldn't have been declined in the first place. I also thought this was important because maybe you have more authority over me that would prompt this person to send a response back? Please let me know when you can, and thanks for reading this message. Have a nice day. TrevortniDesserpedx ( talk) 16:42, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Hey Sdkb,
I hope you are well.
I see you just reverted an edit on the COVID-19 pandemic article. You seem to be the only dissenting voice in discussions regarding that topic.
Please participate in the discussions and explain your views more clearly so that we may find a compromise. Those discussions have been lasting months with no resolution in sight manly due to your dissenting opinion.
Let's fix this!
Thanks,
-- {{u| Gtoffoletto}} talk 13:18, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Sdkb,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged GeoWizard for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 08:54, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Welcome to the sixteenth newsletter from the Growth team!
The Growth team's objective is to work on software changes that help retain new contributors in mid-size Wikimedia projects.
Newcomer task experiments results
The team recently published our analysis of the impact of newcomer tasks. We are happy to announce that we found that the Growth features, and particularly newcomer tasks, lead to increased editing from newcomers.
In November 2019, the Growth team added the " newcomer tasks" feature to the newcomer homepage. After six months, we collected data from Arabic, Vietnamese, Czech, and Korean Wikipedias. We analyzed the overall impact of the Growth features, including newcomer tasks.
This analysis finds that the Growth features lead to increases in:
We also find that the quality of their edits, as measured by revert rate, is comparable to that of a control group.
Because of these results, we think all Wikipedias should consider implementing these features. Learn more about how to get them.
You can find more details about this experiment on the report page. Please post any feedback or questions on the talk page
General metrics
As of November 2020, across all wikis where the features have been deployed:
Learn more about Growth results here, and please post any feedback or questions on the talk page.
Variants C and D are two new arrangements of the newcomer homepage. We deployed them in October. After six weeks of these variants being deployed, we can see that they have led to increased interactions with newcomer tasks. Next, we will determine which variant is best and use that for all newcomers.
A separate list for workshops hosts
During workshops organized by education programs through the communities, workshops hosts like to mentor people they train on wiki. Several wikis requested to have a way to claim their mentees without having other newcomers being randomly being assigned to them. To address this need, a separate list can be created on wiki, for mentors that wish to claim mentees, but prefer not to have random mentees being assigned to them. Learn more about this feature.
Claiming multiple mentees at once
Mentors can use Special:ClaimMentee to claim a newcomer as their mentee. The feature now allows mentors to claim multiple newcomers at once.
The help panel allows people to post a message to the local help desk while editing. Previously, the tool always posted messages to the bottom of help desks. Wikis are now able to configure it to display new messages at the top of the help desk page. T261714
Growth team's newsletter prepared by
the Growth team and posted by
bot •
Give feedback •
Subscribe or unsubscribe.
14:22, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Pinging participants of the prior discussions on infobox plurality: @ GhostInTheMachine, Funandtrvl, AlanM1, BilCat, Jonesey95, RexxS, and Nikkimaria: I have drafted an RfC follow-up which could hopefully make it clearer how to proceed. It's currently at User:Sdkb/sandbox/early drafts, and would probably be hosted at VPT. I'd be interested in your feedback—is this the right way to proceed, and if so are there any tweaks I should make to it before launching it? {{u| Sdkb}} talk 00:03, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Sdkb deliberately introducing HTML errors. Thank you. Guy Macon ( talk) 06:33, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Sdkb,
It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by Rosguill who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to JTtheOG and Onel5969 who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to John B123, Hughesdarren, and Mccapra who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by DannyS712 which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.
Rank | Username | Num reviews | Log |
---|---|---|---|
1 | DannyS712 bot III ( talk) | 67,552 | Patrol Page Curation |
2 | Rosguill ( talk) | 63,821 | Patrol Page Curation |
3 | John B123 ( talk) | 21,697 | Patrol Page Curation |
4 | Onel5969 ( talk) | 19,879 | Patrol Page Curation |
5 | JTtheOG ( talk) | 12,901 | Patrol Page Curation |
6 | Mcampany ( talk) | 9,103 | Patrol Page Curation |
7 | DragonflySixtyseven ( talk) | 6,401 | Patrol Page Curation |
8 | Mccapra ( talk) | 4,918 | Patrol Page Curation |
9 | Hughesdarren ( talk) | 4,520 | Patrol Page Curation |
10 | Utopes ( talk) | 3,958 | Patrol Page Curation |
John B123 has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.
As a special recognition and thank you DannyS712 has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.
Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here
18:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Washington Post, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eugene Meyer.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:12, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the barnstar and the support. There won't be a next time for me. But I appreciate the good thoughts. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 05:30, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
On 14 December 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article David S. Breslow, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that plastics researcher David S. Breslow's interest in chemistry began as a child when he used a chemistry set to make stink bombs? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/David S. Breslow. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, David S. Breslow), and it may be added to the statistics page if it received over 400 views per hour. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile ( talk) 12:01, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
I've noticed you're updating various articles via AWB. It auto-sorts templates alphabetically, however per MOS:ORDER, the {{ short description}} template is to remain first. Please undo your changes that put 'short description' at other than the top of the article. Thanks — ADavidB 23:52, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Two things, I know I should've wrote this message before this damage was done, and I know you are probably sick of hearing of this, but is there anything we could do to fix the issue of the SML page being re-salted? The main reason I'm asking is because I don't understand why they would delete the article if, as you stated, it passes WP:GNG and WP:ENT, so I just wanted to ask if there was anything else we could do to re-vamp this, this time justifying an irrefutable reason against its deletion. It just honesty boils my mind at this point that so many people feel that the creation of an article revolving a relatively notable subject is going against their existence, and that this one person can make the final decision as to whether the page gets deleted again. I feel bad asking about this again, but I wouldn't feel right not doing so, in the sense of "getting [this] off my chest." Trevortnidesserpedx ( talk) 1:42 December 15, 2020 (UTC)
I just had a look at Yahya M. Madra, and I notice that you have rated it as a stub. I cannot tell whether the article was formally accepted into Wikipedia or simply added by its creator.
My question is: how did a short article which fails to demonstrate notability get into Wikipedia in 2020? I thought we were better than that. If you were the reviewer who let the article go live, I would like to ask whether you took a look at the interviews, papers and other connected sources supporting the article. It's a classic case of non-notabililty; the sort of thing which gets declined every day.
If I am mistaken as to how the article was accepted, please let me know who reviewed it and how a person can look at an article and find that out, as I have yet to discover where this information is found.
I'm sure Madra is a nice guy, and Marxists are always facinating, but that article isn't ready to go live yet, as nobody writes about him.-- Quisqualis ( talk) 06:05, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
The person has been the head or chief editor of a major, well-established academic journal in their subject area) as the editor-in-chief of the academic journal Rethinking Marxism, an argument I don't see fault with based on a plain reading of the guideline. Regarding "nobody writes about him", [1] and [2] seem to make at least a plausible case for GNG. Regarding the short length, we don't impose a length requirement for accepting drafts, and to the extent we de facto impose a style bar, this one was well above average in terms of MOS compliance. Based mainly on the NACADEMIC claim, I accepted the draft, although I didn't tick off the NPP so as to get a second pair of eyes on it. I hope that helps clarify. Cheers, {{u| Sdkb}} talk 06:45, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
I don't really know what you wanted to do here, but AutoWikiBrowser might help you if you're looking to generate lists of pages in a category and wrap each title in some wiki code. — swpb T • go beyond • bad idea 15:46, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Merry Christmas Sdkb!!
| |
Hi Sdkb, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
Thanks for all you do-- Ozzie10aaaa ( talk) 18:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC) |
This year, many people had COVID to fear,
The holidays are getting near,
One thing that will be clear,
We will still have holiday cheer,
Happy holidays and happy new year!!
From
Interstellarity (
talk) 14:14, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Apologies for not understanding this. I appreciate your advise but honestly I don't even know how to respond to your comment? I would be happy to move the subject to its own page but I'm not entirely sure how to do that. Can you assist in that, please?
-NW NinjaWarrior99 ( talk) 20:24, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021! | |
Hello Sdkb, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
File:Christmas tree in field.jpg | Merry Christmas Sdkb |
Hi Sdkb, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas |
Thanks for fixing whatever was in error but maybe a note about why you edited my sandbox would have been nice... Cheers, Shearonink ( talk) 00:57, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
decategorizing sandbox. I hope it wasn't any disturbance, and happy holidays! {{u| Sdkb}} talk 01:03, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for helping out with the closure of the RfC! I see that ProcrastinatingReader has closed it with the consensus that the first sentence should read: "TikTok ... is a video-sharing social networking service owned by [the] Chinese company ByteDance."
Although the consensus has been established, I'm concerned it still may not be appropriate for me to implement it myself. Can you go ahead and make the change instead? (Happy to do it myself if given the green light.)
Bkenny44 (
talk) 14:58, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
The article Gay Republicans has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
As per WP:BLPSOURCES ....contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion. This applies whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable and whether it is in a biography or in some other article.
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.
Moxy 🍁 15:42, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
I'm not too worried about those situations - just making sure this wasn't being build purposelessly for article displays. — xaosflux Talk 02:51, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Refractory materials are generally divided into two types, namely unshaped refractories and shaped refractories. Unshaped refractories are also called castables. They are mixed powder particles composed of a variety of aggregates or aggregates and one or more binders. They must be mixed with one or more liquids and mixed evenly during use. Strong liquidity. Shaped refractory materials generally refer to refractory bricks, the shape of which has standard rules, and it can also be temporarily processed during construction and cutting as required. Referred to as firebrick. A refractory material with a certain shape and size. Refractory brick According to the preparation process, it can be divided into fired bricks, non-fired bricks, fused bricks (fused cast bricks), refractory and heat insulating bricks; according to the shape and size, it can be divided into standard bricks, ordinary bricks, and special-shaped bricks. It can be used as high-temperature building materials and structural materials for building kilns and various thermal equipment, and can withstand various physical and chemical changes and mechanical effects at high temperatures. For example, refractory clay bricks, high alumina bricks, silica bricks, magnesia bricks, etc. We have been producing refractory materials for more than ten years, welcome everyone to discuss — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amy123lee ( talk • contribs) 08:14, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Sdkb,
I thought this got sorted out some months ago? This obviously isn't any big deal at all, but I guess it would be annoying to the anon users who find that their first attempt at editing get WP:G2-d . WP:AN thread
here.
Pete AU aka --
Shirt58 (
talk) 10:19, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Sdkb,
I just deleted this draft after it hadn't been edited for six months but I found it an interesting list. When I looked at the contributors to the draft, you were the only editor who wasn't an IP and who is still active so I wondered if you wanted to do any additional work on it and submit it. I can restore it if you wish. Liz Read! Talk! 00:22, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Sdkb! Season's Greetings,
I strive to be a contributor on Wikipedia, so I would like to improve the quality of my User Talk page by adding an Infobox on it, with the following labels: 'This user was last active on (date and time)', 'This user has last seen the Talk page on (date and time)', and 'This user is expected to be inactive until (date and time)', which I can update everytime I visit my Talk page. But the problem is that I am unaware of how to add such an Infobox as there are no pre-existing templates for this. I hope you can help me out.
Also it would be extremely helpful of you if you can guide me on how to send the Barnstars to other users.
Thank you.
CX Zoom ( talk) 11:13, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
{{REVISIONUSER}}
. For Barnstars, see
WP:Barnstar; one way to do it is (on desktop) go to their user talk page, click on the red heart in upper right near the search box, and then follow the instructions. Cheers, {{u|
Sdkb}}
talk 11:21, 27 December 2020 (UTC)Hi, Sdkb, I'm back.
I saw you commented on a move discussion on Talk:Gay Republicans, advocating that this article be merged with another. Subsequently, this article was PROD'd and is due to be deleted over the next 24 hours. If you have some interest in this merger, you might want to take action sooner rather than later or remove the PROD unless you agree that it should be deleted. If you have no opinion, sorry for bothering you! Liz Read! Talk! 01:03, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi. My request on the article Draft:Asif Tariq was declined because of lack of sources. Unfortunately this is very difficult to find many sources as i am from very small town. The said subject is a renowned Kashmiri poet i worked hard on this article. Please help me by approving this article. I did my best. Hope in your help. Majid Saleem78 ( talk) 21:33, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Sdkb, hi again, I hope you don't mind me coming back here for some insight – you seem to always to be very sensible. I was recently look at Hildegard of Bingen and noticed the (rather ridiculous) double infobox for her being a saint and philosopher/scientist/composer. I suppose I must have glanced over this before, as I've been to her page multiple times; I looked around a little and found a similar situation of two infoboxes on Ambrose and (this one is painful to see as there are three additional sidebars) Augustine of Hippo (I'm sure there are other pages like this). After discussing this with a user who works on Christian-topic articles, she concluded that there is no obvious reason for the infoboxes to be in such a manner. I'm assuming (?) the appropriate solution would to make one able to be imbedded in the other, presumably the saint one, any ideas? Also, where would you think be the best place to hold a discussion on finding consensus for this? Best - Aza24 ( talk) 01:07, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to request you to review the article Governor (United States) which seems to be outdated, especially the Race and ethnicity and Gender sections and its corresponding map. It clearly says 'as of October 2020', much of which might have been changed by now, after the 2020 election. My concerns arise from the fact that Puerto Rico now has a male governor ( Pedro Pierluisi) but the map shows it to be a female and 'race and ethnicity section' mentions the then-governor Wanda Vázquez Garced. But I don't have much knowledge about the other state's & territory's governors, so I'm reluctant to edit this article.
I'm not sure if I should've requested you here but I did so because your user page says that you're a member of "WikiProject Articles for Improvement" and "WikiProject District of Columbia". If I should've requested somewhere else, please let me know. I'll take care of it from the next time. Thank You. CX Zoom ( talk) 12:45, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello:
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Information ecology has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Regards,
Twofingered Typist ( talk) 14:29, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Just wanted to say a quick thanks for creating this article. I had read about him a while back and noticed there was no Wikipedia page. Bogazicili ( talk) 22:23, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello Sdkb, I've noticed that you have been active in creating RfCs on points of formatting/accessibility, so I though you may be interested in taking one up.
The guidance in
WP:STUBSPACING (Leave two blank lines between the first stub template and whatever precedes it.
) has been a mild point of contention on the talk page for several years now, but as far as I can tell there's never been a formal RfC (there's been low interest, and the discussions never quite closed one way or the other). There's been a couple of workable ideas thrown around, like (1) using just one blank line, and (2) using some kind of CSS solution, like the "clear" template. This suggests to me that it would be an issue that would ripe for a simple RfC. —
Goszei (
talk) 04:30, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I just completed the whole level 5 vital article categories for Video games (215 articles), Gambling (14 articles), Other games and plays (44 articles), Sports Basics (14 articles), Sports equipment (27 articles), and International competitions (top 12 articles). Plus, I did an odd one here and there. It takes a lot longer than expected because I have to patrol each article one by one to check the short desc. since the pet scan link takes too long to load and yields no results. I plan to do many more categories, as this kind of tedious work interests me. So, do I get a barnstar? Huggums537 ( talk) 10:56, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
No problem about the delay, and yeah it is a lot of work for one editor, but I think over time I'll be able to knock out a large swathe of it just by myself, so thank you for the barnstar! Huggums537 ( talk) 19:14, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Sdkb!
My name is Daniel, and I’m a senior at Harvard University currently writing an undergraduate thesis about Wikipedia. I’m particularly interested in how the Wikipedia community decides what facts are relevant and/or notable enough to warrant inclusion on a particular article — especially in regards to articles on contentious topics.
I noticed that you’ve been quite active editing the “COVID-19 pandemic” article over the past few months. So, would you mind if I send you a few questions (via email or right here) about your work editing that article, and the approach that you take? I’d really love to hear from you.
Thanks so much! -- Dalorleon ( talk) 16:16, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
Kepler-Gymnasium Ulm, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from
reliable,
independent sources. (
?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
Mccapra (
talk) 21:21, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello,
So Trump talk has now become a mess, and this is just a note to say I apologize if I inflamed it with my thread. When I originally asked if the predetermined proposal would be implemented, I got a series of responses that seemed unhappy (they weren't even answers to my question), and so fearing an edit war I managed to find a slightly different version that no-one instantly hated to be used temporarily, while a better one was found. In hindsight I don't know if it was the right decision to implement it, but I thought it was at the time. Sorry if that worsened things.
Anyhow, hopefully the page will settle down soon and a permanent wording can be found. Regards, Giraffer ( talk· contribs) 14:53, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for restoring this ref [3] I had deleted from Whitey (slang). I had read the page before I deleted it and thought it didn't mention "whitey", but I just read it again and saw that it does mention that "yt" can be an abbreviation for "whitey". I don't know why I missed that. Anyway, thanks for restoring it! — Chrisahn ( talk) 15:01, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Could you please comment on an undesirable effect I described at
and
which resulted from your edit Special:Diff/997387763 (the second line of the template's cod)...? -- CiaPan ( talk) 15:33, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Sdkb,
here's my view on the latest kerfuffle at Donald Trump (an adapted copy of my comment at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#GoodDay).
tl;dr: Let's cool down. :-)
The situation at Donald Trump is indeed very messy. Despite multiple attempts, we haven't yet been able to develop a consensus about the first sentence. You argue there has been "prevailing consensus" for using the word "was" instead of "served as", but that has been disputed, and the relevant item #17 on Talk:Donald Trump/Current consensus currently simply says "Note that this item is obsolete given that Trump is no longer the current president".
You argue that in the absence of consensus, we should try to stay close to the status quo, which was "Donald Trump is the 45th president of the United States", and replace "is" by "was" while changing little else. That's a reasonable position.
But others have argued that in the absence of consensus, we should try to stay close to the wording in other articles about former US presidents, which is "X is an American [occupation] who served as [n]th president of the United States". That's also a reasonable position.
So the problem is that we neither have a consensus for a long-term solution, nor a consensus for an interim stop-gap solution.
In the last two days, several users (roughly half a dozen) changed the first sentence to "served as", and you repeatedly changed it back to "was" ( here, here, and here).
You added warnings about edit warring and sanctions on other users' talk pages ( here, here, and here), using the words "you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree". But these words would also be a correct description of your actions on Donald Trump in the last two days.
Now you're trying to sanction other users. Somewhat understandable. But based on the same criteria, others would be justified to try to sanction you.
In conclusion: Yes, the situation at Donald Trump is messy, but neither "was" nor "served as" is a terrible solution for the first sentence. As long as we don't have a consensus, it will probably be changed back and forth a few more times. But let's not make the situation even messier by starting a back and forth of enforcement requests. Let's cool down, everyone.
I'd suggest that you take a step back, and take a deep breath. I'm sure someone will change the first sentence to "served as" again in the next 24 hours, and others will change it back to "was", whether you are involved or not. It's an unfortunate situation, and I wish I could think of a better solution. But neither "saved as" nor "was" is awful. Not really worth fighting about. I'm sure the situation will be resolved in a couple of days.
Take care!
— Chrisahn ( talk) 22:28, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Sdkb. I'm just posting to let you know that List of Pomona College people – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for February 12. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 ( Talk) 01:21, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Please don't tell other editors that content in articles, particularly content in embedded lists, must be independently notable. That is not true. Thanks! ElKevbo ( talk) 04:42, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
I am hoping to get an honorific parameter added to
template:sortname for titles like "Sir", "Rev", "Dr" etc which will be displayed but neither linked to or sorted on. E.g. {{sortname|James|Wales|ttl=Sir|dab=British Army officer}}
which would display Sir James Wales, link to
James Wales (British Army officer) and sort on Wales, James. Can you help? Thanks
Greenshed (
talk) 19:46, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Hey, Sdkb! Thanks for this revert. Actually I was using twinkle for the very first time so unfortunately that mistake happened. Now I will never use twinkle 🙁. Sorry and thanks! Hyderabadi Wikipedian ( talk) 15:31, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Sdkb. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Monymusk".
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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further 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.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 15:43, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
I am utterly lost in how to create a Wikipedia page. You said there were a whole heap of things wrong with what I submitted but I find all the instructions on correct practice utterly baffling. So if we want to create an academic profile for our employer please can you tell me what is the right process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian Paulsen ( talk • contribs) 05:09, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marilyn Manson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vanity Fair.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:29, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
On 5 February 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Frank LoMonte, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that lawyer and press freedom advocate Frank LoMonte helped pass legislation in 14 U.S. states outlawing censorship of student media by school administrators? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Frank LoMonte. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Frank LoMonte), 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) 00:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Gary Kates 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! Flibirigit ( talk) 06:13, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Respected sir
I am not a paid editor this page is mine and i am the CEO of this website i made this article my self but they marked as a speedy deletion kindly help me to improve this article my page name is /info/en/?search=Draft:Www.bismatrimony.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Setmroger ( talk • contribs) 07:49, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi there! Thank you for your interest in our campaign to improve the public's knowledge about local newspapers. Time has flown since we got going in September, and our six month campaign ends in just a month! We'd like to check in with you about work you have done, or any articles you'd like to write or edit to do before we wrap up.
We published a mid-campaign report, highlighting strong work from several Wikipedia editors (both new wiki folks and veterans); contributions from Kristy Roschke's journalism course at Arizona State University; and strong engagement from groups like AfroCROWD and Wikimedians of the Caribbean.
As we begin our final push, we would love to learn what you have been working on, or help you with any challenges. We're hosting several informal video conference sessions in the next week. (If that format is no good for you, just let us know.) We'd love to hear what newspapers have caught your interest, any articles you've already written, and also any kind of support you could use in writing up newspapers that lack Wikipedia entries. We'll focus especially on newspapers of the Caribbean in our final month, as we continue to work on Black-owned U.S. newspapers, and newspapers of Washington State.
Please register for one of these Zoom meetings. If these times don't work for you, or if you hate Zoom, etc., just reply here (please include the text "[[User:Peteforsyth]] and [[User:Shanluan]]
" so we get notifications), and we'll find another way to connect with you.
We hope to hear from you soon! - Pete Forsyth ( talk) 00:50, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
build trust in credible news sourcesshould fit very squarely with the project's goals. It does require AWB; details here and in linked discussions. {{u| Sdkb}} talk 02:18, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
New York Timesto
The New York Times, with the rationale being that if someone hasn't been picky enough to get the name correct, they're unlikely to have strong feelings about linking vs. not linking. I'm a little more hesitant to do
The New York Timesto
The New York Timesruns, though, since I'm guessing at some point I'll run into someone who prefers it delinked and objects. It'd be good to have a discussion to point to that establishes that, while certainly not required, when there's a question linking should be preferred. {{u| Sdkb}} talk 03:59, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
I tend to prefer on-wiki discussions for something like this if that's alright. Starting with smallish ones sounds good. {{u| Sdkb}} talk 07:00, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi Sdkb. Thanks for accepting my article. For a moment there, I thought I had been trapped in an episode of The Twilight Zone:) I had read through the notability guidelines enough to know that my subject meets the criteria. So, obviously, there was a breakdown in communication somewhere. But with you, and others like you, on the case, I now know for myself that Wikipedia does make an effort to be fair to everyone. You have redeemed my faith in human decency. And if you don’t mind, would you answer a few questions for me please?
(1) On the Articles for creation page, you said: “You can now create articles for yourself.” Could you tell me what this means? Do you have guidelines or a tutorial that can explain the process? (2) In regard to my Rasmussen article, you said: “the page still has some other issues.” What are the issues? Do you have guidelines or a tutorial that explain these issues?
I’m relatively new to Wikipedia. Even though I joined a few years ago, I never had time to contribute until now. So, I look forward to making contributions to Wikipedia. Thank you for your time. Phoenix7119 ( talk) 12:29, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi Sdkb. I guess I need to stop writing at 2 A.M. Wow! I really asked you how to create an article:) If you have a moment, I would like more information on how to create articles for myself. And if you could offer some suggestions on how I might correct the issues with my Rasmussen article, I would appreciate your assistance. If you're too busy, I understand. So, please point me in the right direction. Thanks again for help. Phoenix7119 ( talk) 00:55, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
rose to the top of the businessis a little flowery – it'd be better to just describe directly.
Hi
Sdkb Thanks so much! Yes, this information helps a lot. I'll do my best to locate additional sources and make the corrections. Also, could you help me with something else? I received the following notice yesterday: "Hello, Phoenix7119, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources." When I asked for an explanation, the person said the wrong template was used to send a "welcome message." Since the message was rather lengthy, I don't know which part of the message was the template and which part was the actual message. The person has yet to offer an explanation or clarification. So, I'm a little confused. Is there a possibility that my Rasmussen article "may not be retained?" Is Rasmussen's notability still being questioned? Since you are the most professional and straightforward person with whom I have corresponded thus far, I thought I had better ask you. I know you'll give me a straight answer. Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't trouble you with something like this, but if you remember, you settled the issue with Rasmussen's notability in the first message I received from you. So, I don't understand why other people keep raising this issue. I know I'm relatively new to Wikipedia, so am I missing something? I would appreciate your help with this matter. Thanks for your time.
Phoenix7119 (
talk) 08:27, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Sdkb OK. I appreciate the clarification. Thanks so much! Phoenix7119 ( talk) 09:58, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Alfred Woodford 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! Espresso Addict ( talk) 23:14, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
According to the source, it was actually Mt. San Antonio College. Thanks for calling my attention to it; not sure how that mistake was made. Sanfranciscogiants17 ( talk) 23:10, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Before I'm shortly exiled to Commons, i'd be interested in your thoughts on the change I sandboxed to the header. The transclusion was in there already, i just un-nested it and it appeared again. The featured host images work alright in the testcases but the dimensions seem too big, right? Kind regards, Zindor ( talk) 00:44, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi,
First of all, forgive me if I am doing something wrong here as this is the first time I try to edit something.
I wanted to add some relevant information about bicycle-sharing systems. The added information was rejected due to "No evidence this paper has been covered in reliable sources".
This information (my edit) is supported by a couple of references, the main one being a paper published back in 2017/2018 in the IEEE Access. For those who don't know this journal, it is the open-access (meaning the content can be consulted for free) journal of the IEEE, which is the main Engineering association in the world. This IEEE Access is a Q1 scientific journal (top category) with a high impact level (3.75).
Therefore, I don´t understand how this can be deemed as a non-reliable source, I am sure plenty of references in loads of Wikipedia articles are based on similar references.
Please can you help me clarify this?
Best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 232m232 ( talk • contribs) 22:41, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Sdkb,
Do you expect this category to ever be used? It is not connected to any parent category and just exists in isolation. I just happened to stumble upon it, it's not part of the Wikipedia category structure. If it is going to remain empty, it should be deleted according to CSD C1 criteria.
If you can find ONE page that is appropriately categorized into it (and not just any random page), its existence can be justified, otherwise it will be tagged for deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 16:52, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi SDKB! I'm a graphic design senior at Parsons School of Design, who is creating a series of zines on Wikipedia Community/Culture. I was wondering if I could feature the interview conducted by Dalorleon in a magazine that I am making? The zine, of course, will not be for profit, but instead be a free downloadable copy for whoever wants to access it. Here's a sample of what it might look like: https://www.ceciliazhang.work/blank-1-3-1 Let me know it's cool with you if I use some of your words! Thanks for reading! Hotplates ( talk) 23:07, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Oh how exciting- thank you so much! In fact, if you're in North America, I'd be happy to send you a risographed printed copy as well. Cheers! Hotplates ( talk) 00:14, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
On 17 February 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A Bread Factory, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 2018 comedy film A Bread Factory, about the difficulty of producing meaningful artistic work in a market economy, received acclaim from critics but earned less than $18,000 at the box office? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A Bread Factory. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, A Bread Factory), 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, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Someone is complaining about the length of the FAC at Biblical criticism and asking if discussions such as the one you anchored could be moved to the talk page. I would deeply appreciate anything you could do to help with this. Thank you. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 21:34, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Swati Sharma (journalist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Hill.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:17, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
GreaterPonce665 ( TALK) 20:18, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
On 1 March 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Alfred Woodford, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that for nearly two decades Alfred Woodford was the sole professor in Pomona College's geology department? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Alfred Woodford. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Alfred Woodford), 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) 00:02, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
On 2 March 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mary Custis Vezey, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that poet Mary Custis Vezey, an eleventh-generation American, published much of her work in Russian? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mary Custis Vezey. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if it received over 400 views per hour. 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) 00:03, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Welcome to the seventeenth newsletter from the Growth team!
The Growth team's objective is to work on software changes that help retain new contributors in mid-size Wikimedia projects.
Add a link: the team is continuing to engineer on our first "structured task", which will break down the workflow of adding wikilinks to articles, and assist newcomers with an algorithm to identify words and phrases that could be made into links.
Add an image: even as we build our first structured task, we have been thinking about the next one. "Add an image" is a structured task in which newcomers would be recommended images from Wikimedia Commons to add to unillustrated articles. This is an ambitious idea with many details to consider. We have already learned a lot from community members, and we encourage everyone to look at the project page and join the discussion.
Last November, our team published the analysis of the impact of newcomer tasks. We announced that we found that the Growth features, and particularly newcomer tasks, lead to increased editing from newcomers. Because of these results, we believe all Wikipedias should implement these features.
We have started to contact more wikis to deploy the features, including Wikipedias of all sizes. Bengali Wikipedia recently began using Growth features, and Danish, Thai, Indonesian, and Romanian Wikipedias will be coming soon. Please contact us if you have questions regarding deployment.
We are looking for translators who can help by translating the interface. Translating is done on Translatewiki.net (it requires a different account that your Wikimedia one). Communities that already have the Growth features being deployed are invited to check on the translations. Access translations here.
As mentioned in our previous newsletter, we ran a test of two variants of the newcomer homepage, meant to find a version that increases users completing suggested edits. We have completed the experiment, and learned that one of the variants leads to more edits on desktop while the other leads to more edits on mobile. Therefore, we will deploy the strongest variants for each platform to all newcomers.
Mentor dashboard: we have interviewed mentors from several communities as we plan a mentor dashboard feature, which would help mentors track the progress of their mentees. We encourage all mentors to share their thoughts on tools that would help them.
Magic word for mentors: it is now possible to
use a magic word, {{#mentor}}
, to display the name of a given newcomer's mentor. This can be used on welcome messages, userboxes, etc.
Help panel questions going to mentors: in most wikis, newcomers using the help panel ask questions to the help desk. On Czech Wikipedia, we have experimented with sending these questions to mentors instead. This simplifies the newcomer experience, and only led to a increase in mentorship questions of about 30%. We tried this in Arabic, Bengali, French and Vietnamese Wikipedias, and we are making it the default experience.
Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
16:02, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Susan McWilliams, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carey McWilliams.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:13, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
On 9 March 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gary Kates, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that historian Gary Kates turned down recruiters seeking to help make him a college president so that he could teach undergraduate history? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gary Kates. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Gary Kates), 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.