User talk:Alalch E./Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

Task list

Thought I might share the list of things I'm working on, in case you see something on there you'd like to join in on. Not everything is outline-related, though, at least not directly...

  1. Adding the missing outline links to Wikipedia:Contents/Outlines.
  2. Keeping the outline drafts alive by editing them from time to time, because otherwise, they get deleted after a period of no activity. Eventually, the edits will accumulate, and little-by-little, the outlines will become completed.
  3. Watching over all outlines, by having them all added to one's watchlist via "[raw watchlist]".
  4. Keeping an eye on article alerts for outlines. If you put the following code at the top of your talk page somewhere, the article alerts for outlines will float at the bottom of the page: "<ref>{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Article alerts}}</ref>"
  5. Searching for and adding links for worthy outlines to Examples of well-developed outlines.
  6. Archiving all the outlines and their edit pages at the Internet Archive, with the use of bookmarklets, as a backup, just in case. Archiving edit pages is the way to get back ups of articles' wiki text.
  7. Building a list of archived portals, of all the portals deleted during the 2019 portal purge (2500+). Most of them were archived before being deleted, but, so far, there is no centralized list of links to them.
  8. Awarding editors who've done exemplary work on one or more outlines, with barnstars. And gathering copies of all the barnstars awarded for outline work, at the Outline WikiProject's Hall of Recognition.
  9. Seeking out candidates for featured list status (FLS). Such outlines should have editors who actively develop or maintain them, who might be interested in further developing them over at FLS.
  10. Transcluding lead paragraph(s) in outlines, so that they auto-update. The leads of outlines are prone to falling out of date and out of sync with the corresponding root articles. Haven't started yet - this is in the research phase. We need to try to anticipate possible ramifications.
  11. Researching Template:Annotated link for producing annotated entries in outlines. Is the data injected by these suitable? For an example of an outline populated mostly by entries using this template, see Outline of fluid dynamics.
  12. Updating the Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/List of discussions concerning outlines.
  13. Developing and maintaining the Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines page, and its subpages.
  14. Keeping the Timeline of artificial intelligence up to date.
  15. Starting a new WikiProject on artificial intelligence applied to Wikipedia. Currently in the research phase. Like, what would its purposes be, and what should we call it?
  16. Working on the WP:OTS revamp. It's being rebuilt from scratch, presenting the best power user tools useful for wiki work. While I've been listing the best tools and techniques I'm experienced with, I've also been contacting experienced users from around Wikipedia asking about the tools and techniques they find most effective. Making the best collection will require more than one editor.
  17. Identifying or dreaming up userscript ideas that can be turned into real userscripts by perplexity.ai .

Feel free to jump into, or contact me about, anything in the list you find interesting.    — The Transhumanist   08:24, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Alalch E.'s topic ban rescinded

The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:

Alalch E. (talk · contribs)'s December 2022 topic ban (imposed under the username Twsabin (talk · contribs)) from post-1992 American politics, broadly construed, is rescinded.

For the Arbitration Committee, — Wug·a·po·des 09:46, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Alalch E.'s topic ban rescinded

If you arent too busy

Hello. I hope this message meets you well. If you aren't too busy, do review this page Iman Gadzhi. Cheers. Wallclockticking (talk) 19:07, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello and thanks, hope you're doing well. I have reviewed the page and nominated it for deletion. You seem to be a paid editor, and so I will post a template about that on your talk page. Sincerely —Alalch E. 12:46, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your time and review. I absolutely am not getting paid to edit on Wikipedia, I'm just trying to carve a niche for myself on Wikipedia like everyone. I appreciate your feedback. Wallclockticking (talk) 12:57, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Ways to improve Australian music industry

Hello, Alalch E.,

Thank you for creating Australian music industry.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Thanks you so much for this!

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Vanderwaalforces}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:45, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

@Vanderwaalforces I am not the creator (I created the redirect at this name when draftifying the initial version of this, and the redirect was then turned into an article). Cheers —Alalch E. 12:22, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Nogger

I am aware that you draftified the piece. I have accepted it on the basis that I view it is having a better than 50% chance surviving an immediate deletion process. I will not object should you wish to start one after considering the article further, though it might be pragmatic to leave it a couple of days to settle. It depends how strongly you feel about it. I see it as a borderline acceptance. A proposed merger might be better than AfD, of course. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:13, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. The draft was significantly improved by the creator in a short amount of time after draftification. I made some improvements too. I don't object to your AfC pass at all. In fact, I had marked the page as reviewed before your comment. I also closed the RfD. Everything went really well here, a smooth interaction of multiple processes. Best —Alalch E. 16:19, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
I like it when it all come together 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 16:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, mee too! —Alalch E. 16:28, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:OpenAI

Template:OpenAI has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Tom Harb

Alalch thank you for contrbutions to the page so far, would you mind checking the Tom Harb page once again and plese do let me know if there's anything to be improved or/and adjusted.Draft:Tom Harb Elijahwordpress (talk) 20:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

You are welcome. Please read the text in the red boxes on top of the draft. They explain in what ways the draft is lacking. It may be the case that, while there are certainly ways to improve the draft, however much it is improved in the foreseeable future, it will not satisfy what needs to be satisfied for it to become an article. This is explained within those red boxes (please follow the links and read all of the linked pages). —Alalch E. 14:16, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Blocked someone just on your say so

I took your AIV report in good faith, along with the fact the sandbox page was quickly oversighted. I've never blocked somebody before without doing the whole investigation myself. Thanks for saying something obviously necessary. You and I have come a long way... BusterD (talk) 20:03, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

I believe so too, yes. You have my unreserved gratitude for your sober and considerate words in the past period. They have meant a lot. And thank you for the work that you do.—Alalch E. 20:24, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

MOS: vs WP:

Kicking myself. Thanks for that. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 20:59, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Easy catch because it's something that also happens to me. You're welcome :) —Alalch E. 21:08, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Zossen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Al Jazeera.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
  • On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each review will earn 1 point.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

NPP Awards for 2023

The New Page Patroller's Barnstar

For over 100 article reviews during 2023. Well done! Keep up the good work and thank you! Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:42, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Nakba denial

On 12 January 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Nakba denial, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Nakba denial is a form of historical negationism pertaining to the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Nakba denial. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Nakba denial), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

Aoidh (talk) 00:03, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

New message!

Hello, Alalch E.. You have new messages at IAmChaos's talk page.
Message added 16:41, 24 January 2024 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi! Just letting you know about a message on my talk page from a BLAR you did recently. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 16:41, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Spaces

I don't understand the point behind this change. Do you believe that the spaces change the meaning, so that "one/two" and "one / two" are different things? WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:53, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes. Also MOS:SLASH —Alalch E. 18:56, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
  1. I don't think that's true in English.
  2. MOS:SLASH doesn't say that it changes the meaning of the words. (It does say that you may (i.e., optionally) add spaces around a slash if the items being linked are multi-word noun phrases.)
WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:59, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
It's true, "myalgic encephalomyelitis fatigue syndrome" is nonsense and "myalgic chronic fatigue syndrome" is nonsense, and "myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome" denotes those two nosnense alternatives. The intended meaning is myalgic encephalomyelitis a.k.a. chronic fatigue syndrome. The spaces are mandatory when the slash is used to connect syntagms at least one of which includes a space. —Alalch E. 19:02, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
@SMcCandlish: Hello, pinging you to share any thoughts on this ("myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome" or "myalgic encephalomyelitis / chronic fatigue syndrome"). /edit: perhaps better respond at the newly started more central thread: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Spaced slashes/ —Alalch E. 19:07, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the direction Alalch

Hey I saw you reviewed page Defiant Records I didn't realize I was using puffery, as I was quoting the news sources. I appreciate you for guiding me on my Wiki journey. Opnionatedone (talk) 20:14, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome! Thanks for using only the good sources such as Variety and Billboard, when creating this article, and not adding any low-quality references and superfluous links, which is so often the case when new articles of this sort are created. —Alalch E. 20:18, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
I appreciate that! And yes I see that with a lot of new articles as well. without quality sources everything becomes spam. Stay well Alalch. Opnionatedone (talk) 20:36, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
You too. —Alalch E. 20:36, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
Also Alalch there was another page that I created, would you mind reviewing it to see if I did good? Steve Carless
Thanks again. Opnionatedone (talk) 04:25, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
Sure, I'm reviewing it. I've made some remarks at Talk:Steve Carless, please respond there.—Alalch E. 09:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, I also responded there at Talk:Steve Carless Opnionatedone (talk) 20:44, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

hello sir Alalch E.

You recently added the speedy deletion tag on my draft:Mafatlal industries , please sir looks on the issue as the promotion of any organization has not been done . the draft has been created on real references and facts. Whatif222 (talk) 12:46, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello. I added the tag, and the administrator acted on the tag and deleted the page. The reasons for this are stated on your talk page. I do not have anything to add, and don't have any response to your assertion that the "the draft has been created on real references and facts". If you carefully read the message on your talk page, you will understand that the page which you had created had to be deleted, and if a similar page is created again, it will be deleted again. To create a page about this subject that does not get deleted, it must be done in accordance with the policies which are linked in the same message to you on your talk page. Sincerely —Alalch E. 12:52, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Bdóte

On 9 February 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bdóte, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Bdóte, an area of sacred significance to the Dakota people, centered on the confluence of the Minnesota and Mississippi rivers, was also the site of their forced exile from Minnesota? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bdóte. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Bdóte), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

—Kusma (talk) 00:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you

@Alalch E.: Respected, now the latest, it has been published on Macedonian portals a full critical look at Macedonian poets about Trajkovski's poetry, his life is also being talked about. Are you polite to insert it into the draft? Take the lead https://ekran.mk/kritichki-osvrti-za-poezijata-na-aleksandar-s-trajkovski/?fbclid=IwAR3XK03yAu4WEDzKcgSsRubfTk5TQhCPM1pKJlPqSV8ITVFQbGOHUn8b28g

https://novvavilon.medium.com/%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%B5-%D0%BE%D0%B4-%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%82-%D0%BA%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0-%D1%85%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%83-%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0-%D0%B1%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE-%D1%85%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%83-%D1%85%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%B8-%D0%BE%D0%B4-%D0%B4-%D1%80-%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D0%B0%D1%80-%D1%81-%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%98%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8-c7923bf4a052 Shviki (talk) 14:09, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

  • Hello, sorry for the delayed reply. I have added my comment to the Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski in my capacity as a reviewer.—Alalch E. 16:25, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
    • @Alalch E. dear, I will give you all the necessary information you will ask me to successfully modify the draft for our poet . Take a new independent source that I used to make the Macedonian version of the poet (Биографија - Д-р Александар Саша Трајковски (archive.org), and I will give you another source for the critical look at his poetry from other writers, not From Elija and not by Sonja. Мкдвики (talk) 20:01, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
      • Please post all new sources on the talk page (Draft talk:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski), and by new I mean those that are not included in and not duplicative to (i.e., not the same article published on different websites) any of the sources that were in the draft in this revision: Special:Permalink/1208389758—Alalch E. 20:06, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
        First, thank zou for help. I posted it where you told me the new link SOURCE independent of the existence of his book anthology Different worlds Александар Саша Трајковски со нова книга антологија ,, Различни светови” » ekran ...
        I saw the comment left over the draft for the critical review that it does not meet the conditions for an independent source, so I will send you a new link with new critical reviews and views of famous Macedonian poets about the subject's poetry (Trajkovski's poetry) in the draft.
        For his travels and poetic readings across Europe, I will send you a link, I see that you need a new source. Мкдвики (talk) 09:35, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
        I see. I have responded to this by asking that you be blocked for reasons stated in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Promoter generates online coverage in real time. Sincerely —Alalch E. 12:21, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Dear

I posted it where you told me the new link, but I will post it here and with you. SOURCE independent of the existence of his book anthology Different worlds Александар Саша Трајковски со нова книга антологија ,, Различни светови” » ekran ...

I saw the comment left over the draft for the critical review that it does not meet the conditions for an independent source, so I will send you a new link with new critical reviews and views of famous Macedonian poets about the subject's poetry (Trajkovski's poetry) in the draft. Мкдвики (talk) 08:47, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Prod

Re: this edit on Prod, if I understand correctly we should also fix RFD and TFD in the same way? --Jameboy (talk) 16:55, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Categories for Swindon Victorian Turkish Baths

Thank you for adding the category 'Public baths in the United Kingdom' to this stub. It at least brings the subject of the page into a generalised context. I am a newbie at this, so please forgive any idiocies in my understanding of categories.The reasons for adding this quite totally inadequte page as a temporary measure is explained on its talk page. It's a really important Victorian Turkish bath historically and only shortage of time has prevented a fuller treatment so far.

Please can you help me to understand why such peripheral catageories as 'Buildings and structures in Swindon', '1868 establishments in England', and 'Victorian architecture in England' have been added when the (in my personal view) more specific categories 'Victorian Turkish baths' 'Hot-air baths' 'bathing' and 'Swindon' (in that order of importance) have not been added. Or do I just add them myself as an edit? I would wish, at the very least, to include 'Victorian Turkish baths' as the first category. It then fits in clearly with the 'Victorian Turkish bath' page which is currently under major revision (see its talk page again).

Also, although I originally suggested the title of the 'Victorian Turkish bath' page when it was split from Hammam a couple of years ago, work on its revision has convinced be that the title should be in the plural, again, as explained on its talk page. If there are no serious objections to this change, how should I set about it?

I'm sure these are all simply solved issues but I can't seem to find my way about the jungle of guidance pages. Any help would be very much appreciated.Ishpoloni (talk) 21:48, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for this new article on a topic that certainly seems valid. Don't worry about it being unfinished, because Wikipedia is a work in progress. The real or perceived categorization issues you mention are indeed simply solved, it's great that it's something you'd like to discuss, and perhaps we will solve them right here, by talking about them. But, while this matter is "cognitively" simple, dealing with it isn't fun, and this will take a bit of typing. You're absolutely right that categories have to be defining. When you say "peripheral categories" it seems as if you would say that "Buildings and structures in Swindon" is not a defining category. But it is defining. A building exists as a building of a certain type, in a certain place, and exists from a certain time.
"Public baths in the United Kingdom" answers what kind of a building it is, "Buildings and structures in Swindon" answers where it's at. Just "Swindon" doesn't say that it's something physically in Swindon. Lacks the preposition. Going only by "Swindon" it could be something only associated with Swindon, such as the history of Swindon. Please see how the Eiffel Tower is categorized as one of the Category:Buildings and structures in the 7th arrondissement of Paris for evidence of how this categorization is common.
"1868 establishments in England" doesn't quite answer when it was built, but it's the second best thing, it answers when the building began serving its purpose. If we see the article's subject also as an establishment as opposed to merely a physical object (which we must), the "1868 establishments in England" category is especially defining, as the year of establishment is certainly a defining characteristic of any establishment.
"Victorian architecture in England" answers at least during which historical era the building was built. See Smedley Hydro for a pre-existing example of a similar topic categorized in this way.
While writing this, I remembered that there are two buildings, the former and the current one, and that's something to keep thinking about.
To continue, Category:Victorian Turkish baths doesn't exist. We shouldn't add non-existent categories unless we intend to immediately create them. I agree that this would be a reasonable category, and if added it could maybe replace "Victorian architecture in England"; but it probably should not replace it because "Victorian Turkish baths" would cover not only baths that are literally Victorian but also thoose that are are Victorian-style and date from a later period, while the "Victorian architecture" category is probably only for the literally Victorian-era architectural objects. We don't have a Category:Hot-air baths either. We have Category:Sauna but no Category:Turkish bath; The Carlisle Turkish baths is categorized as a sauna among other things, as it supposedly also had a sauna in addition to a hammam (the article doesn't go into detail; I presume that "sauna" as used in that article is not a misnomer). If we create the hot-air baths category, we should quickly come up with more articles to fill it with, and figure out how that category would fit in the hierarchical categorization scheme.
Now... "bathing" would be a rather bad category here. Because it's too general. Per the Wikipedia guideline on categorization, an article should be categorised under the most specific branch in the category tree possible. Category:Public baths in the United Kingdom is that more specific category, it already incorporates the notion of bathing, through "public baths".
Hope that helps, and I'm looking forward to your reply. My preliminary conclusion is that the only change that is needed is creating the Victorian Turkish baths category (and filling it with all of the Victorian Turkish baths).
P.S. There's something very important that you should know. Categories, as a category, are of questionable utility, and you should not worry too much about them. There are editors who seriously question if we should even have them. The "rules" of Wikipedia categorization have their logic, but this logic is not immediately transparent, and an article is supposed to be immediately transparent to a reader. The law of triviality strongly applies to categories. My recommendation to you as a new editor would be to completely forget about this non-essential feature, and to concentrate on developing prose for the time being, as that is what really counts.
—Alalch E. 23:01, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello. At the moment I just want to say thank you for taking the time to write such a really helpful reply to my plea for assistance. And to say that of course Swindon, on its own, is quite wrong—a result, I think, of working too late at night. I really found what you had to say helpful (and interesting too, which does not always follow) and I'll reply more fully later when I've had time to consider what you write more carefully than I've had time to do till now.Ishpoloni (talk) 10:39, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello again. I've been trying to gather my thoughts together before answering your kind posting. It seems to me there are two parts: a. how do I achieve the correct renaming (moving), revising, categorising the page, and discovering whether I can already upload images I've already uploaded onto Commons but on which no decision has been reached about my wish to categorise them as 'Victorian Turkish baths'; and b. rather more interesting perhaps is the seeming confusion between classifying a subject and categorising its uses, directly paralleling the 1970s discussions between professional school librarians (in the late lamented ILEA, where I worked till 1985) and the teachers who saw the way to help their students differently. If it is of interest to you, I can come back to this, but I will not feel offended if you feel this is not the place. So, to the current VTb situation.
As indicated on the VTb talk page I propose replacing the entire text with a new version, structured, and more comprehensive than the existing page, but which covers all the points made in the existing page and adds around 24 images. For reasons explained, also on the VTb talk page, I want to change the page title to the plural form so it clearly represents both the bath as a process and (in the plural) specific establishments. At present there appear to be only 29 links to the current page plus the disambiguation page, so it seems more sensible to change it before the revised version inspires many more links. Can I just do it according to the rules, or does someone have to do it for me after much more consultation? The whole of this first phase of the revision is written and waiting for me to upload it. If all goes well, and there are not too many corrections to be made, I will then write the additional sections to go between the history section and the concluding part about the bath today.
Finally, on just a few of your points made about categorisation, though I thoroughly agree with your last paragraph.
1. Peripheral was the wrong word for me to use. All I meant was that the subject of the page (as disambiguated and separated from the page on Hammam) was about the main subject of Victorian Turkish baths. All the others were subjects which might be found in a subordinate role within the article. For example, there is nothing on the page about public baths (as generally interpreted today as swimming pools), neither is there anything (other than a see reference) to Hammam, Sauna, Banya, or any other type of hot-air bath—or for that matter baths in any other media, eg, mud, milk, etc.
2. Of course Swindon on its own is wrong, and I can certainly agree that though the main subject of the page is the Swindon Turkish baths, when it is filled out a bit, it would be of interest to someone wanting info on 'Buildings and structures in Swindon' but if I wanted to know what was oldest established Turkish bath I would go to the VTb page, where there might be a link. '1868 establishments in England' was a complete surprise to me, and I can certainly see that it could be interesting, but there are problems. I know the established dates of more than 400 out of 900 Turkish baths; should each of them have a page on Wikipedia? The problem is always, surely, consistency of approach? And care is needed: the Swindon building was opened in 1891 (I think) but the Turkish baths only moved there in c.1904 (I'm away from my data!). I agree that VTb should not replace 'Victorian architecture in England'; they are quite different, though not mutually exclusive. Nowhere in the Carlisle Turkish baths was there a Hammam, though there was a sauna which complemented the Turkish baths.
Classification is a fascinating subject, though not as harsh as cataloguing where in national cataloguing committees I've seen (in the 70s) revered professional librarians almost coming to blows over whether a "corporate author" such as a company or a local council should be preceded by a / or a ;. All now dealt with by computers.
Sorry about the length of this reply; your own post was so thought-provoking. Ishpoloni (talk) 23:45, 14 February 2024 (UTC)


I just wanted to thank you again for your help over the matter of categories. This has now been sorted with the adoption of 'Victorian Turkish baths' and it seems that Wiki Commons has adopted it also. Many thanks.Ishpoloni (talk) 20:38, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Fantastic! You're welcome. I am sorry for not replying to your previous message. There's a lot of stuff on my radar lately and I'm a bit all over the place. I see you've been making some really substantial contributions and are being WP:BOLD which is the right approach. Best —Alalch E. 20:44, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation

Hi Alach E :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 21:26, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

A Barnstar For You!

The Editor's Barnstar
Thank you for your amazing work on fixing up Visegrád 24 after a TNT occurred. Keep up the amazing work here on Wikipedia! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 01:06, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Thank you!—Alalch E. 01:10, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Deletion review for Sills Cummis & Gross

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Sills Cummis & Gross. 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. Gdavis22 (talk) 18:48, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Help writing articles

I'm glad you approve. I wanted to find a way people could see your list. Some lists like that appear multiple times in the Teahouse and Help Desk and I figured out it was a template.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:03, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Glad you liked it. —Alalch E. 22:04, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your help at DRV

Hello,  Thanks for helping out with my request at DRV, much appreciated. Geardona (talk to me?) 02:51, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome! :) —Alalch E. 09:21, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

{{subst : The Special Barnstar

Thank you! Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 19:57, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Can you help me?

@Alalch E., I am trying to place userboxes on my userpage, but even though I looked at the article on how to do it, I still can't. I will try to grant you access to my user page Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 20:15, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

I'll help. You or I don't need special access to edit others' userpages. —Alalch E. 20:16, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Fixed! Hoo boy, I feel like I really deserved that barnstar you gave me up above now. I deserve it so much now that I even want it to actually display as a barnstar instead of as broken markup. Will you fix it for me? Maybe you can figure it out now, especially if you take a look at what went wrong on your userpage by viewing the diff: Special:Diff/1214074423—Alalch E. 20:27, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

~~~ has given you a Cheeseburger! Cheeseburgers promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Cheeseburger, whether it be someone you've had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy eating!


Spread the goodness of Cheeseburgers by adding {{subst:Cheeseburger}} to their talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cheeseburger on the giver's talk page with {{subst:burger-munch}}!


Thank you! Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 20:31, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I can't figure it out! I'm new. But I think I'm getting barnstaritis! Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 20:35, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't even know what a "diff" is! Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 20:36, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

You can click on the word to find out, I made it blue for you by creating an internal link. —Alalch E. 20:38, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Will you become my mentor?

Will you become my mentor? Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 20:41, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

You seem really smart! Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 20:42, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

I read it, but I still don't understand. Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 20:59, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

@Amoxicillin on a Boat: Just do the Wikipedia:Wikipedia Adventure for starters, figure out what you would like to do on Wikipedia (see the Wikipedia:Task Center), start doing it, and ask questions along the way. You can do so at the WP:TEAHOUSE. I think that's the best way to get you introduced to editing. Person-to-person mentorship takes a certain amount of commitment which I don't think I'd have at this time. But someone else might. After a while, after you've made some more edits, take a look at WP:AAU. —Alalch E. 21:02, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Aw, man. Well, can you be my friend? Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 21:21, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
I can be, and am, your colleague, as a fellow volunteer editor. Everyone here is your friend in this sense. We collaborate in a friendly, collegial way, on this project to build an ever-better encyclopedia. I am probably not going to be your very special friend here because I am not the kind of person who makes friends on the internet very much. But never say never. You can always ask me stuff on my talk page, and if you have any ideas for articles and would like to work on something with me, you're very welcome to ask. —Alalch E. 21:30, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Thank you. Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 01:18, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

New York Times investigation

A question was asked here. [1] ---- Deblinis (talk) 03:50, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, please see Help:Fixing failed pings for the future. —Alalch E. 08:46, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Because you helped me so much the day I started Wikipedia. Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 18:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Do you want to make an article together? Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 22:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar :)
What do you have in mind for an article? —Alalch E. 22:37, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
We should make one about hot air tubs! Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 22:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Do you have any reliable sources on those, that are independent of the subject, and contain significant coverage on the topic? —Alalch E. 22:44, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Oh, no... I don't! Should we make another article instead/ Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 00:00, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, let's. Got some other topic to write about? —Alalch E. 05:57, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
We could write a humorous essay. Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 12:28, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Got an idea how a humorous play on a Wikipedia convention or trope or common misconception could help someone form a clearer picture about Wikipedia beyond what is accomplished via serious projectspace writings? —Alalch E. 13:49, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes, we can also go to a funny article to get some ideas, like the article Wikipedia:Don't stuff beans up your nose. Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 14:01, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
I don't think that we have a ready idea for that yet. Let's revisit that later. But I got an idea for a new article and made one just now: Radar (news magazine). What do you think about it? —Alalch E. 14:17, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Neat! Let's do it! Also, it's my birthday! Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 14:19, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Happy birthday! So want to deorphan that article? —Alalch E. 14:22, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes. Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 14:29, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
I'll help you do it: You can check if it's still an orphan by using the "What links here" tool for that article. See Help:What links here for what that is. When you've figured it out, please tell me if the page is still truly an orphan or not. —Alalch E. 14:48, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
It has only 2 links; what should I do? Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 14:51, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
The types of pages that are included in the list matter. One of the links is the article itself. The other link is this very talk page, because I made a link to that article in my comment here, a little above, causing my talk page to show up in "What links here". So based on this: Is the article still an orphan? —Alalch E. 14:56, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes, it is Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 14:58, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Correct. An article being an orphan is a problem that needs to be fixed asap, by finding at least one appropriate other article for which it makes sense to include a link to the new article, and then creating that link. Can you do this yourself? (Hint: one or more of the articles linked in the article that we are discussing could be good candidates) —Alalch E. 15:01, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes, I added Swarajya (magazine) from Related articles. Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 15:16, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
It's the other way around. You need to add a link to the Radar article to another, relevant, article. Try again please. —Alalch E. 15:18, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
I just did that. What next? Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 20:00, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

BTW, at indentation level 19 (the number of colons before the last comment), this thread can definitely benefit from an WP:OUTDENT, so I did that using {{outdent|19}}.—Alalch E. 15:28, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay. I am about to edit it. Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 15:30, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Have you identified the article which should contain the link to the Radar article? (Hint: How Radar came to be, the background of the founding of the magazine.) —Alalch E. 19:59, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
I did it! I got on NIN (magazine) and I added the link to Radar (news magazine)! You are gonna have to scroll down, though. Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 20:11, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes! Good job. Doing great. Now there's an unsourced statement however, and we need a reference and a citation. I'll tell you more about that tomorrow. —Alalch E. 20:49, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
OK! Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 20:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
I'm ready! Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 17:38, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Okay, so you wrote this: The editorial staff created a new magazine, Radar (news magazine). But... how do you know that NIN's editorial staff created a new magazine, Radar? —Alalch E. 17:57, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
I found it out on the Radar article Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 18:10, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Of course. And how can you trust that the Radar article is accurate on this? —Alalch E. 18:23, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Um..by checking the history Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 19:02, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
By checking the cited source (the reference). You and I know where the information comes from in the NIN article, but the reader of the NIN article doesn't. And we must enable the reader to know how we, the editors, come up with the statements that we include. Because it's all about the reader. So we need to copy the reference from the Radar article into the NIN article thus making this statement equally supported by a source in both articles. Can you figure out how to do this yourself? See Wikipedia:Citing sources. —Alalch E. 21:54, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

A reminder that the living persons policy (WP:BLP) is also designated as a contentious topic (WP:CT)

Information icon You have recently made edits related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. This is a standard message to inform you that articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, see WP:CTVSDS. El_C 16:40, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. —Alalch E. 16:42, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
For the record, I've elevated my caution to you (diff) into a warning (diff) following your response (diff) which I again found lacking (a warning, though, that at this time remains un-logged). You may respond here instead of at the AfD, if you so wish. To be clear, the transparency of the process of you recreating the page a day after I deleted it—after two AfDs (in 2023 and, prior to that, in 2021) that twice resulted in that page's deletion—is what concerns me. El_C 18:14, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
I'll copy your last AfD reply here:

Upon deletion, I pointed to WP:AFC approval, specifically so that there is a record of such a review—a summary—on a page involving a living person that was twice deleted in procedures such as this (diff). But you have ignored and circumvented that, making that timeline challenging to parse. Do I need to log this caution at WP:AEL to get that point across? I didn't think I needed to, but your response above gives me pause. El_C 17:57, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I did not have the mens rea of ignoring and circumventing. I did not take your directive to pursue AfC for a title that is protected at an EC-level as something that applies to longstanding editors. I honestly misunderstood. My thinking was colored by my general view that editing is permitted, that restrictions on editing are implemented on a technical level, that AfC, which is not implemented on a technical level is optional (it is commonly held that it is optional) and that administrators don't have special control over content. This is why I did not think that you would find it strange if someone who doesn't need to go throuh AfC to create this specific article simply created the article.
But I accept what you are saying, and knowing what you meant now, I would not have moved the draft to article space, but would have simply edited the draft without moving to article space. —Alalch E. 18:31, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

How I "operate"

@El C: In the AfD you said something about being upfront how I operate. I sometimes edit drafts on marginal topics out of fun, exploring whether they can be understood to be notable in the very process of editing them. One such example is Draft:Platinum Moon which I researched and edited quite a bit and did not ultimately move to mainspace, determining that, despite my efforts, the topic is not notable. There are other examples, some probably G13'd by now. One example is Thai Boon Roong Twin Tower World Trade Center, a seemingly questionable subject that was feared to be a hoax. I didn't know if it's notable when I started editing that draft, and I also painstakingly researched that topic, and unlike the previous example, I determined that notability is present here, and so I moved. Another example is The Violent, which was a five-time declined draft taken to MfD. I took over that draft and mainspaced it because in the process of editing it I came to understand that: (1) the content is useful for someone who wants to learn about this band; (2) if this had been an article and if someone were to AfD it, the chance for a delete outcome is low (singles have charted leading to an WP:BAND pass). Another example: Hiroshi Nagai. This is how I sometimes operate (one of the things that I do on Wikipedia), and this is absolutely the same approach I have taken to the recent topic, but I was extra careful here and applied a special level of scrutiny to the sources. I operate objectively and self-critically.—Alalch E. 18:42, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

You accept, you don't accept? What are you asking of me? I'm not gonna repeat the circumstances here, except to note again: twice deleted in recent AfDs, with you recreating a day after I delete (3rd time), without AfC or any kind of a summary that one could reference. I'm not gonna go through these examples and I'm not sure why you'd expect me to, when I don't know if they bear relation to this case or not. But you need to decide, again, are you accepting or are you challenging. Because I need you to be straight-forward rather than say one thing, than another. El_C 19:36, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
No, no, I accept. I was explaining how I operate, meaning that I have a modus operandi that was exhibited here, and should not have been exhibited because of special circumstances, that I failed to properly evaluate, but the modus operandi is not nefarious. I am not challenging. —Alalch E. 19:40, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Are you sure? Because this is what I had written and would be submitted had it not been for the edit conflict caused by your latest reply:
Upon further thought, I'm just gonna log a warning at WP:AEL as I find your follow-up answers have fallen short. In light of your replies, I just don't think that I'm getting [through] to you. Unlike your spartan keep at the AfD, which I also criticized, now you write at length, when I am after a concise and pointed response. Mainly assurances, which I thought I had, but apparently not?
So are we clear now? Multiple recent AfDs? Contacting a deleting admin when recreating a page 1 day after (3rd) deletion? WP:BLP, WP:ARBBLP? El_C 19:51, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes, I am sure. When there has been a recent deletion in a contentious area, I will contact the last deleting administrator about recreating the page with a concise summary about how there is a basis for recreation, and if I or editors in general are directed to use AfC by an administrator to create a page in such an area, I will pursue AfC. —Alalch E. 19:55, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Fair enough, we can leave it at that, then. Take care. El_C 19:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
You too. —Alalch E. 19:57, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Starting an RfC

Hi, regarding this edit, you must never copy the |rfcid= from another RfC, they must be unique - you should always let Legobot assign its own. By copying the |rfcid=, this caused the listing entries to become corrupted.

No corrective action is required in this instance because this removal by Nemov (talk · contribs) has triggered Legobot to repair the listing entry. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:06, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. —Alalch E. 14:10, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Killing of Shani Louk

The article Killing of Shani Louk you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Killing of Shani Louk for comments about the article, and Talk:Killing of Shani Louk/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Irruptive Creditor -- Irruptive Creditor (talk) 07:02, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Where is Kate? for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Where is Kate? 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/Where is Kate? (3rd nomination) 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 until the discussion has finished.

IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 11:55, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, but it isn't needed to notify me in this way as I am not a creator and not a major editor of that page. —Alalch E. 11:57, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
I've been notifying editors who participated in any of the associated discussions. I'm sorry if you didn't want this notification! IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 11:58, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
No problem! —Alalch E. 12:01, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

What is your Email? I made a project...a WIKI project...and wanted to share it with you.


P.S. It is on Google Sites. Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 03:37, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Boccacini Wiki is the name of it. Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 03:39, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024

Hello Alalch E.,

New Page Review queue January to March 2024

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Re: Piped links and WP:NOTBROKEN

The meaning of WP:NOTBROKEN is that we're not supposed to go around "fixing" the use of redirects that are not broken. I don't see any functional difference between that and what I observed in those edits - the edits changed from linking the text "xyz" to the river article under that same name, to linking the text "xyz" to the river article under another name. Whoever would follow that link would not even get the redirected from <that name> caption, they'd just find themselves in the river article which has been renamed and so you just ended up creating a WP:EASTEREGG. It's a pointless activity that has no value to readers or editors, please don't do that. --Joy (talk) 17:43, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

@Joy: The redirect links are not to be considered broken when the name of the redirect page fits naturally in the prose, but in piped links, the link should not be a redirect link, but the direct link. The reader does get a message that they have been redirected when arriving on the destination page via the piped link that uses a redirect link instead of a direct link, and that is the functional difference. —Alalch E. 17:46, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
This does not follow from any Wikipedia editing practice I've ever been aware of. In fact, we have converse examples of e.g. MOS:DABREDIR where we intentionally link topical redirects. I don't quite understand what you mean by the last sentence. Let's just look at what happens: right now, when a reader reads e.g. History of Montenegro, and they click the linked text "Bojana", they arrive at the heading Buna (Adriatic Sea) with a subheading of "(Redirected from Bojana (river))". If you use Buna (Adriatic Sea) in the pipe link, the reader gets no notification about the redirect and instead finds themselves at a place that doesn't match the text they saw before and they have to read further into the lead section to understand why they are there. With a redirect, there's less of a chance of astonishment as we make the action of changing where they were going explicit, they'll be more likely to more quickly recognize that as an intentional action, not as a possible mistake. --Joy (talk) 17:59, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
So, in an example case of [[Bojana (river)|Buna]] (at this time Bojana (river) is a redirect to Buna (Adriatic Sea)), the reader who clicks on "Buna" will arrive at Buna (Adriatic Sea) and will get a notification that they have been redirected through Bojana (river) which is not desirable, and fixing this is not a pointless activity that is discouraged. —Alalch E. 17:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Well, that's the issue - in these two cases, the reader did not click on "Buna". They clicked on "Bojana". --Joy (talk) 18:00, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
But the reader was not genuinely redirected, they followed the pipe term "Bojana" to get to the piped name "Buna (Adriatic Sea)". That gives them all the information they need. The start of the Buna article explains that its a river named Bojana and Buna. Telling them in addition that they have been redirected from "Bojana (river)" is completely useless to them and is just a distraction. It's a useless extra step. —Alalch E. 18:03, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't know about you, but I've actually been in this sort of a situation myself, where I'd follow the links through to new topics using a lot of strange new words, and would find myself at a place where I didn't even realize I clicked. Being told I am redirected is a very helpful feature. --Joy (talk) 18:27, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Basically, we never pipe through redirects. This is never correct. Piped links should always only work as piped links, and redirect links as redirect links, but mixing the two is never the desired state and can always be fixed by rectifying the link in the pipe, and this is categorically never a pointless activity. —Alalch E. 18:15, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to see a citation for such strong language :) I don't quite see any hints of what you just said at e.g. WP:PIPE and MOS:PIPE. --Joy (talk) 18:31, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Linking#Piped links through redirects —Alalch E. 23:54, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

(BTW I'm not 'she', rather 'he'. Sorry for the confusing name, it's a relic of a different time, a time of joy and happiness, when I wasn't aware it was a feminine name in the English-speaking world. :) --Joy (talk) 11:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC))

Noted, apologies :-) —Alalch E. 11:34, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Entheogen IP

Is also trying to coatrack entheogens and religion into the {{Alcohol and health}} template, then spam that template onto multiple religion articles, FYI. Skyerise (talk) 19:47, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. —Alalch E. 19:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alalch_E./Archive_2&oldid=1223192004"