User talk:Vanamonde93

1954 Guatemalan coup d'état scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the 1954 Guatemalan coup d'état article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 18 June 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 18, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:58, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Mike! Vanamonde (talk) 14:45, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for "the most infamous, and probably the most well-studied, episodes in U.S. foreign relations, and as such is of great importance. ... a highly complex, and highly contentious, topic"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerda! Vanamonde (talk) 13:06, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Reverting others contribution(hardwork) irresponsibly

Hello Vanamonde i have been watching you and gone through your history. You are reverting other contribution on wikipedia on the excuse of "sources" when the sources are already present. The Sources you Like are only considered as "source" and source which don't suits your viewpoint are Not. Could you please let me know what kind of sources are reliable according to you, so i include in my edit.? And Please dont discourse new users/contributors in Wikipedia(Open source). Thank you --WikiBodhiVamsa (talk) 06:14, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@WikiBodhiVamsa: Please read WP:RS. What I like has nothing to do with it. In general, Wikipedia considers scholarly sources to be the most reliable, and does not consider court proceedings to be reliable sources. Vanamonde (talk) 06:18, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: This is not court proceeding, this is already Convicted by Special court appointed by Supreme Court of India accepted the pre-planned Conspiracy. Already read the WP:RS. And supreme-court order is considered as as Reliable source. All Convicted(not proceeding) conspire to target only Hindu Devotees(S-6 bogie) in Final verdict. Thirty-one people were convicted and 63 others, including the main accused Mastermind Farooq Bhana on May 18.

Source Reference-1 READ Death for 11, life sentence for 20 in Godhra train burning case (Times of India).

@WikiBodhiVamsa: Yes, the court convicted 31 people, and this conviction is widely reported by reliable sources. Therefore, the article says that 31 people were convicted. Likewise, the court accepted that particular explanation; therefore, the article mentions that the court accepted this explanation. However, not every reliable source accepts this explanation; therefore, per WP:DUE, we cannot use the court's explanation in Wikipedia's voice, because the court's ruling, by itself, is not a reliable source for anything other than the ruling itself. Vanamonde (talk) 07:12, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: Sorry, but i disagree with you. If court verdict by Supreme-court of india which is highest Judiciary not consider as reliable source then none of the private news article(tabloid) consider as reliable source. Disrespecting SC in india is Criminal offence and SC can take action on basis of suo motu against him or institute. SC verdicts are Valuable & respected in india. i don't know how any indian can say "court's ruling is not a reliable source". Court verdict is more Reliable and valuable than private tabloid news article some of them are paid. i think almost 985 wiki article were based on Final court verdict. --WikiBodhiVamsa (talk) 07:40, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@WikiBodhiVamsa: I'm afraid what you agree or disagree with does not matter; this is Wikipedia policy we are talking about. Please go read WP:RS like I asked you to; and since you seem to be suggesting that Wikipedia is committing a criminal offence, please read WP:LEGAL as well. Oh, and you don't need to ping me on my own talk page. Vanamonde (talk) 07:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: Sorry sir, you mistaken. i didn't said wikipedia, i said about you sir. you are refusing the verdict of india's Highest judiciary body as a reliable source. and reverting my constructive work in wikipedia article and indulge in editing war. You might have far-left Communist views which might be biased and it reflects your Hinduphobic viewpoint. This is agasint wikipedia ethics. this is my opinion. Thank you :) --WikiBodhiVamsa (talk) 08:09, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Please stay off my talk page until you have something constructive to say. Vanamonde (talk) 08:11, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: Sir, i want your help. i am learning editing in wikipedia. i want your help please. WikiBodhiVamsa (talk) 13:20, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

If you want my help, then begin by reading, comprehending, and abiding by the policies and guidelines I have linked here. WP:NPA, WP:CIVIL, WP:LEGAL, WP:NPOV, and WP:RS, for a start. Vanamonde (talk) 13:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

[1] --- He reverted again. Regards, Tyler Durden (talk) 17:56, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Tyler: Saw that. Will deal with it by and by. He has no leg to stand on, but no point in reverting him again. Might end up taking them to AE. Vanamonde (talk) 04:39, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

RM at Talk:How I Met Your Music

I started an RM discussion at Talk:How I Met Your Music, where I invite you to comment. --George Ho (talk) 17:41, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Vladimir Lenin

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Vladimir Lenin. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

RFC

Apologies for not getting back to the discussion yet - I have a number of things on my plate right now. I've started looking into the issues and I expect to have some proposals in shape by early next week. Cheers, Gatoclass (talk) 12:30, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

@Gatoclass: No worries. If we're going to take some time to do this thing, then at least we should do it properly. Vanamonde (talk) 13:05, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Islamic terrorism in Europe (2014–present)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Islamic terrorism in Europe (2014–present). Legobot (talk) 04:25, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Satuit Technologies Deletion

Hi Vanamonde93, I noticed that you deleted the Wikipedia entry for Satuit Technologies. Please can you reinstate this page. We've been inundated with emails from people informing us of this deletion. Not sure why you chose to delete this page... There are about 20 other competitors with Wikipedia pages in our market space so why specifically target us. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.113.246 (talk) 09:20, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

You are not being targeted in any way. The page was nominated for uncontroversial deletion, because it did not demonstrate why the subject was notable. Any topic that is not notable will eventually have its page deleted. Wikipedia is not a means of promotion, and so we are not really bothered by whether competitors have pages or not. Given that this was deleted via WP:PROD, under normal circumstances I would be required to restore the page upon request; but since you have an obvious conflict of interest in this regard, I am not going to do so. Vanamonde (talk) 12:10, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Thanks for showing me the RfC at WP:INDICSCRIPT. I updated that with some information. Would you please look over what I did and confirm that it is correct? Check the version I published, please. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:50, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

@Blue Rasberry: That looks fine, thanks for doing that (and for the coffee :) ) Vanamonde (talk) 13:58, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Öget Öktem Tanör

On 22 June 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Öget Öktem Tanör, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Öget Öktem Tanör, Turkey's first neuropsychologist, was charged with "terrorism propaganda" in 2017 for signing a petition? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Öget Öktem Tanör. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Öget Öktem Tanör), 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.

IronGargoyle (talk) 01:55, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi, thanks for helping out at ITN. It's usually a good idea to remove the oldest entry when you add one, so the ITN section length stays about the same. Thank you again! --BorgQueen (talk) 07:13, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

@BorgQueen: You're welcome. I debated removing the last entry twice; the first time, somebody else got to it first, the second time it did not seem necessary, as the blank space in DYK was quite small. I'll keep it in mind, though. Vanamonde (talk) 07:17, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

SPI ping

• I blame Ms Sarah Welch for making me waste my time on this mess but I think I'm done with it, but while I was about wasting my time on this, I came across User:Saffron Army that you may want to check out. At the end of the day, I think the two groups are the same or are at the least they are off-wiki connected and we're just being trolled massively out here. I'm sure that the geolocation vs the claimed location will play a part in the analysis of a CU if they are alerted to it. —SpacemanSpiff 11:02, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

• @SpacemanSpiff: Ah well, understandable. I'll leave the behavioral evaluation to somebody else, I guess it's not terribly urgent as long as he is topic banned...my gut feeling was something similar. A person doesn't make two socks to fight with (for whatever reason) while having a real fight with socks of other masters. Either the whole bunch of them are related, or Tyler is unconnected to any. I'll keep an eye on Saffron Army. The name itself has WP:RGW vibes. Vanamonde (talk) 11:07, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Main page balancing

Can you point me to where there was previous discussion establishing consensus to "balance" the main page with old DYK hooks? I understand the aesthetic appeal, but it seems to run afoul of the principle that DYKs can only show up once, and the recent discussion of this issue at WT:DYK showed that a fair number of people (including myself) were questioning this. IronGargoyle (talk) 13:25, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

@IronGargoyle: To be quite honest, I'm not certain; it's just been accepted practice for a while, certainly since before I got the bit. I saw a couple of posts at WP:ERRORS asking admins to do this; the next time I encountered the problem of imbalance, I just did it myself. The theory, I guess, is that those DYKs have already been approved. Given that DYK is not a competition or reward, I don't think there's really a problem with it. The issue at WT:DYK was not about this practice; it was about the fact that I had done it hastily on one occasion, and had therefore let a hook run thrice. Hooks run twice not infrequently, AFAIK. The Rambling Man might be able to tell you better than I. Vanamonde (talk) 14:16, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

There was no "consensus", simply an application of common sense. The left side of the main page is fixed pretty much on a daily basis by the TFA blurb and that day's DYKs. The right hand side can afford to have items dropped off if it's too long, but seldom to add items if they're too short. So we just re-add the odd old DYK. We can't remove DYKs because people "own" them and that makes for too much over-sensitive discussion. I'm not sure there's a problem, certainly nothing our readers have noted. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:21, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Vanamonde, The Rambling Man, You both raise good points, but might I suggest taking some DYK hooks from farther back in the archive if you're going to use them to balance the Main Page? That way people are less likely to remember and reflect negatively on the fact that they "just saw that" recent hook. IronGargoyle (talk) 11:34, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

That's not a bad idea; and if I have the time, I think I will try to do that. Further back in the archive, though, often means many changes since it's been reviewed; thus rendering the DYK review potentially irrelevant. I'll keep it in mind, though. Vanamonde (talk) 11:37, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Howl's Moving Castle (film)

This editor won the Half Million Award for bringing Howl's Moving Castle (film) to Good Article status.

Good Work! Adityavagarwal (talk) 16:01, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Vanamonde (talk) 16:29, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2017 Qatar diplomatic crisis

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2017 Qatar diplomatic crisis. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 June 2017

• News and notes: Departments reorganized at Wikimedia Foundation, and a month without new RfAs (so far)

• In the media: Kalanick's nipples; Episode #138 of Drama on the Hill

• Op-ed: Facto Post: a fresh take

• Featured content: Will there ever be a break? The slew of featured content continues

• Traffic report: Wonder Woman beats Batman, The Mummy, Darth Vader and the Earth

• Recent research: Utopian bubbles: Can Wikipedians create value outside of the capitalist system?

• Technology report: Improved search, and WMF data scientist tells all

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:31, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Tombs of Atuan

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Tombs of Atuan you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:40, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Tombs of Atuan

The article The Tombs of Atuan you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Tombs of Atuan for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:21, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Hsiung Feng III

Shenanigans continue on Hsiung Feng III immediately following semi-protection wearing off. You may or may not remember the mess of a discussion on the talk page over whether or not tabloids were reliable sources for the rocket being capable of hypersonic speeds. Anyway, it's clearly the same IP hopper. Lizard (talk) 16:01, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

It's already been protected, by RegentsPark: thanks, RP. Vanamonde (talk) 04:22, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

OTD June 25

I realize you needed an additional item for Main Page balance, but three things: 1) Mir is already on a different day. Be sure you check the article talk page to see if the article is normally included elsewhere. 2) Please write blurbs in the past tense. 3) There were plenty of other eligible articles. In fact, because there were already two 21st century items (also not ideal, because WP:RECENT), probably the 1940 item would have been better (chosen over the 1910 one because that would make 3 US items). The other problem with Mir on this date is that June 25 is not one of the most important dates for the space station. I don't mean to be discouraging. It's just that there's a lot of nuance to OTD maintenance. WP:OTDRULES is where I codified most of it. I was out almost all day on Sunday, otherwise I would have informed you earlier about this. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 06:50, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

@Howcheng: Agreed about 1 and 2. 3 is a lot messier, though. There will always be a number of eligible items. The challenge is to find one that is in decent shape, that is not repeating a recent topic, etc, etc. These days I appear to be often the only admin at ERRORS; so I do the best I can, as fast as I can. It's much easier to second guess these choices after the fact. In this particular case, we would have been featuring the 1940 item less than a month after we featured the Dunkirk evacuation, which is closely related. My point, I guess, is that yes, I could have kept searching for a better option; but if we really want a better main page, we need more scrutiny before things appear, not after. Vanamonde (talk) 07:12, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

What's more, I spend enough time as is correcting or changing OTD entries because they do not meet our basic policies. I was therefore more concerned with making sure the entries I added met the bare minimum for verifiability and factual accuracy, than with making sure I featured something on the most important day for that subject. And while I'm addressing issues in entries that are on the main page at the time, that's likely to remain my priority. Vanamonde (talk) 07:19, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a balancing act, that's for sure. Even though I feel like I've significantly tightened up my standards for articles over the last several months, apparently they're still too low. —howcheng {chat} 07:46, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Is it worth posting an OTD-improvement queue somewhere? Maybe at Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries there should be a standing subpage listing articles with notable anniversaries that are seen as below-par so folks can work on them (and remove from list) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:12, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Cas, I like that idea. That way Howcheng can continue to work on the queues, but other folks can also see them and make improvements without having to go looking for the page, and maybe folks can spot errors before The Rambling Man looks at them the day before they go on the main page (at which point they go to ERRORS where there often isn't enough activity to prevent the problems from hitting the main page. Now there's a link at ERRORS to tomorrow's OTD, presumably updated by the bot; perhaps we could make a similar thing happen, but for a few more days in advance? And this could be, as Cas suggested, at a subpage of selected anniversaries. Thoughts? Vanamonde (talk) 09:26, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, the biggest problem is that often updates aren't made until the day before and that means two things: (a) only admins can make changes to the template and (b) the chances of errors or bad articles getting to the main page is substantially higher, particularly as so few admins seem to work around the main page areas. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:35, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Right, I have made this - happy if folks play with it/change colours/make more elegant/put in different place etc. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:17, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/Articles for improvement

Thanks, Cas. I'm wondering if we could use Template:Tomorrow and Template:Day+1 to transclude the entries for the next two days onto that page; I know I'd find it helpful. Vanamonde (talk) 11:27, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Sure, I am sure someone can make it look and flow nicer with a different template, so have at it! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:57, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Cholera outbreaks and pandemics

On 26 June 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Cholera outbreaks and pandemics, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 12:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Miriam Makeba

On 27 June 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Miriam Makeba, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that South African singer and anti-apartheid activist Miriam Makeba (pictured) was followed by the CIA and the FBI after she married Black Panther Stokely Carmichael? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Miriam Makeba. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Miriam Makeba), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Miriam Makeba

hi, the original was- A record liner stated that Makeba's "multifaceted" music "knocks down walls, bridges, barriers, and transforms a dozen different languages into a universal tongue." Her music does not knock down bridges, her music bridges barriers. At least that is my reading. Some kind of powerful comma.```` billb — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billb (talk • contribs) 22:36, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Yeah you are correct, not sure where that error crept in from....Karellen93 (talk) (Vanamonde93's alternative account) 03:32, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Hopi Hoekstra

I undid your corrections because:

Sources: 1) "Elizabeth" not "Elisabeth" -- Danielle's birth certificate. 2) One parent not being born in Holland -- Hopi's parents, pers. comm. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eratosignis (talk • contribs) 18:06, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

@Eratosignis: Sorry, "personal communication" is just not good enough. We can only provide information about living people (see WP:BLP) it is supported by reliable sources. If the subject of an article (parents are close enough) contact you to say that certain material is incorrect, it can be removed, though the proper thing to do is to contact WP:OTRS. However, we are certainly not going to include material just based on your say-so that you have gotten it from Hoekstra's parents; you need to produce a source to this effect. The same principle applies to the spelling of her name, but in that case I cannot be bothered to argue. Vanamonde (talk) 05:26, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Precious two years!

Precious

Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 04:24, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks, Gerda! Vanamonde (talk) 05:28, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup 2017 July newsletter

The third round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 288 points being required to qualify for round 4. It was a hotly competitive round with all but four of the contestants exceeding the 106 points that was necessary to proceed to round 4 last year. Coemgenus and Freikorp tied on 288, and both have been allowed to proceed, so round 4 now has one pool of eight competitors and one of nine.

Round 3 saw the achievement of a 26-topic Featured topic by MPJ-DK as well as 5 featured lists and 13 featured articles. PanagiotisZois and SounderBruce achieved their first ever featured articles. Carbrera led the GA score with 10, Tachs achieved 17 DYKs and MBlaze Lightning 10 In the news items. There were 167 DYKs, 93 GARs and 82 GAs overall, this last figure being higher than the number of GAs in round 2, when twice as many people were taking part. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 4, we say goodbye to the fifteen or so competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 05:38, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Uroš Macerl

Hello! Your submission of Uroš Macerl at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:04, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Cattle theft and illegal slaughterhouses in India

Would appreciate Kautilya3 and your comments on Cattle theft and illegal slaughterhouses in India. Feel free to add / revise. Thanks, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 23:07, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

I'll take a look, Sarah Welch, though it might take me a while to get around to it. 14:38, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

No rush. Please take your time. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 15:13, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Breitbart News

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Breitbart News. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

"Soothe" page resubmission request

Hello, The page "Soothe" was once deleted by you due to issues with notability. I have been editing and making changes to the page and it is ready to be published. It is currently saved as 'Darft:Soothe'. Please let me know if there is any other issue. Thank you. Echoasis (talk) 22:25, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

@Echoasis: Thanks for making the effort. I believe that your questions have been more or less addressed by Swister Twister at AFC. Please take a look at WP:NOTPROMO before proceeding. Vanamonde (talk) 14:54, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Husan

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Husan. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2017).

Administrator changes

Happyme22 • Dragons flight

Zad68

Guideline and policy news

• The RFC discussion regarding WP:OUTING and WMF essay about paid editing and outing (see more at the ArbCom noticeboard archives) is now archived. Milieus #3 and #4 received support; so did concrete proposal #1.

Technical news

• Fuzzy search will soon be added to Special:Undelete, allowing administrators to search for deleted page titles with results similar to the search query. You can test this by adding ?fuzzy=1 to the URL, as with Special:Undelete?fuzzy=1. Currently the search only finds pages that exactly match the search term.
• A new bot will automatically revision delete unused file versions from files in Category:Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old.

Miscellaneous

• A newly revamped database report can help identify users who may be eligible to be autopatrolled.
• A potentially compromised account from 2001–2002 attempted to request resysop. Please practice appropriate account security by using a unique password for Wikipedia, and consider enabling two-factor authentication. Currently around 17% of admins have enabled 2FA, up from 16% in February 2017.
• Did you know: On 29 June 2017, there were 1,261 administrators on the English Wikipedia – the exact number of administrators as there were ten years ago on 29 June 2007. Since that time, the English Wikipedia has grown from 1.85 million articles to over 5.43 million.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Steve Biko Anniversary

Hi Vanamonde. 12 September 2017 is going to mark the fortieth anniversary since the death of Steve Biko. I got the Biko article up to GA status fairly recently and I'm hoping to get it up to FA status so that it can be the Featured Article of the day on the actual anniversary. In order to ensure that the article reaches FA status in time, it really needs to be nominated soon. Problematically, I already have one article in the FA system (Marjorie Cameron) and cannot unilaterally nominate another while that is in the queue. What I can do is co-nominate the article with somebody else, and I was wondering if—given the interest that you have shown in South African historical figures like Makeba—you might be interested in being that co-nominee? There is no pressure on you, so feel free to decline the offer, but I just thought that I would ask and see. Hope that your Wikibreak went well! Midnightblueowl (talk) 23:15, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

@Midnightblueowl: I'd certainly be interested, as Biko is a fascinating historical character, and one I've been interested in for a long time. I'd actually hoped to do the GA review for the article, but somebody else got to it first. My familiarity is primarily with Woods' biography of him and with a couple of other materials, though. So why don't you give me a couple of days to dig into some of the sources and go over the prose, and then we can give this a go? Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 05:03, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: Sure thing. I've got a few other bits I can add too, but will try and get them done tonight. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:44, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of secret police organizations

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of secret police organizations. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mannenberg

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mannenberg you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 13:01, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Starship Troopers

On 14 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Starship Troopers, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Robert Heinlein's 1959 novel Starship Troopers is a critique of US society of the 1950s, and advocates for corporal and capital punishment? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Starship Troopers. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Starship Troopers), 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

2017 Basirhat communal violence

Have you read the sources and corresponding texts in the article? Jionakeli (talk) 08:45, 14 July 2017 (UTC)