User talk:Amakuru

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TonyBallioni (talk | contribs) at 06:06, 7 November 2023 (→‎ACE 2023: cmt). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30 · 31 · 32 · 33

"CString" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect CString has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 2 § CString until a consensus is reached. Kpratter (talk) 13:40, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 October 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:29, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

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

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open regarding amending the paid-contribution disclosure policy to add the following text: Any administrator soliciting clients for paid Wikipedia-related consulting or advising services not covered by other paid-contribution rules must disclose all clients on their userpage.

Technical news

  • Administrators can now choose to add the user's user page to their watchlist when changing the usergroups for a user. This works both via Special:UserRights and via the API. (T272294)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:41, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Re-draftification of Mount Tamana

Hi. I saw you draftified Mount Tamana - I might have done the same but for the fact that it has previously been draftified, and articles can't be moved to draftspace twice per WP:DRAFTOBJECT. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 16:37, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Curb Safe Charmer: this is a slightly unusual case in that there's an editor who's been making large numbers of moves from draft space to main space, with seemingly little regard for the state of the article. A few were legitimately ready, but most are being reverted and the user is now blocked from draft space. See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Figbiscuits for the whole saga. If you still feel I've done the wrong thing, I'll happily self-revert, or you can feel free to move it back yourself and we take it from there. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 17:33, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, that's fine, I was a little surprised by the move, but I don't follow ANI and so I didn't realise the history. I see they've just been blocked. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 17:36, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Am puzzled about a newly-created category

I noticed you're an admin who has posted on Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion and I am puzzled about a newly-created category that has popped-up on my radar, I admit, I know hardly anything about categories and how to create them...but this one just doesn't make sense to me. Could you maybe take a look at Category:Assassinated subnational legislators and tell me if it is a viable category? For instance, I am not sure either Abraham Lincoln or James A Garfield belong in it. Yes, they were at one time members of state legislatures but at the time of their deaths they weren't. Same with Anton Cermak...yes, he was a past member of the Illinois House of Representatives but he was Mayor of Chicago when he was killed and so on. I would have posted about this on an actual Categories talk page somewhere but I couldn't figure out where to post about it so here I am. Thanks in advance for any help on this - Shearonink (talk) 01:53, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"🔞" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect 🔞 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 16 § 🔞 until a consensus is reached. Thryduulf (talk) 18:27, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Van Nuys

Hey, I'd like to apologize for what seems to be a misunderstanding. I did not have the intention of renaming the page when I did. I assumed it was the same fella who renamed the categories. It was renaming of the categories that I objected to since it made it inconsistant with the other categories of Los Angeles neighborhoods.

I'm only renaming one category now, the one about "People from Van Nuys" to make it consistant with the others about people particular neighborhoods in Los Angeles. Just wanted to give you a heads-up. -- Omnis Scientia (talk) 04:58, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October music

October songs
my story today

Today, it's a place that inspired me, musings if you have time. My corner for memory and music has today a juxtaposition of what our local church choirs offer. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:36, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A Romanian woman composer is today's topic. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:57, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RIP to her... And good to learn about her work.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:26, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! A French woman today with a small body and a great voice whose portrayal of a role with different aspects I enjoyed! And another interesting composer. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:57, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 October 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:00, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Gideon (2020) Move request draft

In case you don't get the ping (I don't trust those thingies :) Talk:Operation Gideon (2020)#Request for independent feedback on Requested move draft. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:46, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Amakuru. Thank you for your work on 2023 Zaman Park raid. User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 16:10, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FAR for Rwanda

User:buidhe has nominated Rwanda for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:23, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Admin

Hi Amakuru, I'm thinking about, after more than 15 years on Wikipedia, of applying for the admin bit. Given this, I've decided to start closing RM discussions as to date I've been limiting mostly to responding to technical requests. If you have time, would you be able to have a think if there is anything that might prevent a successful bid in my editing and is there anything you think I should be working on? I'm not planning on running in the near future, but let's say within a year or so...also, when the time comes would you consider nominating me. Other admins that might also know me well include Rosguill and Barkeep49. Best wishes Polyamorph (talk) 08:58, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Polyamorph Based on our interactions to date, I think you should pursue this! Unfortunately you've caught me in a very tumultuous off-wiki time so I can't commit to doing a more thorough investigation of your edits to check for any problems or otherwise promise much support, and thus should not be the a formal co-nominator. signed, Rosguill talk 16:01, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Polyamorph: agree with what Rosguill says here, I've seen nothing but good stuff from you so far, and thanks for coming to me for support - it means a lot when editors accord me with this sort of respected status, as indeed Theleekycauldron did earlier in the year with her RFA (regrettably I was unable to put in the time to nominate on that occasion, but was still very happy to be asked and to endorse the RfA). My time on-wiki is choppy, but as you say there's no deadline so I will endeavour to do some thorough searches for any gotchas over the next few months and hopefully be able to be a co-nom when the time comes. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 16:13, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks both, I think the first thing that I'll do is submit a request at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll, which should pick up any areas that I need to work on. And in the meantime I'll start preparing my case, to make sure I'm prepared. Cheers, Polyamorph (talk) 06:44, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am pretty negative on ORCP and the feedback offered as I write this is why: both people are saying you should run and yet the're making this harder by giving you problems - that might not even be problems - for you to solve. Creates unnecessary barriers for someone who already has admin in mind. You didn't list me as a potential nom but if you'd be interested in me being one I am happy to do my deep dive into you. I have one other editor up first that I need to get to. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:10, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I agree with Barkeep49 - an ORCP really isn't necessarily and can sometimes hurt you. If feedback is needed it's usually better to get it privately from your (potential) nominators. Galobtter (talk) 16:14, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to see ORCP as a sort of sanity check. It was very useful for me, not because the advice was that on point (they raised several issues that never came up in my actual RFA, and the overall assessment was more cautious than the eventual result suggested) but simply because if running for admin is a completely absurd idea, or there's some massive skeleton in your cupboard that will floor you immediately, then those guys will flush it out for you.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:16, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Barkeep49, I didn't put you down because you hadn't replied by the time I submitted the ORCP. But I'd be very happy for your co-nom. The ORCP gives me an idea of the kind of scrutiny I'm going to receive, I'd rather go in to an RfA knowing what to expect :) Polyamorph (talk) 17:18, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well Amakuru and Barkeep, the RfA candidate poll is pretty positive, so that's encouraged me further to do this. In terms of timing, it's very difficult to find a "spare" week to commit to an RfA. I am thinking the christmas holiday period might be best, if that works. Or if that's too soon, some time in the New Year, although I know I will have a lot of work on then! I will focus my nomination on Requested Moves, since there is a perpetual backlog there and I've started closing discussions there in addition to technical requests. AfD could also be an area I can contribute and is very quiet these days! RfD is also an area I have some experience in, which Rosguill could comment on, although I note in their comment above that they can't commit to a co-nom. Anti-vandalism is an area I've worked in the past, in the Huggle heydays, although to be honest the bots take care of that to a large extent now. Finally, the comment about NPP, I spent a good few years with that user-right and contributed a substantial number of page reviews. I stepped away from it because I wanted to focus more on editing, and I've done more than my fair share. With the admin bit, there is nothing stopping me stepping in to review articles again, although personally I think the solution to the NPP backlog is going to require more automation, with advances in machine learning this might not be such an issue in the future. Cheers Polyamorph (talk) 10:06, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that's too soon and you wouldn't be the first person for whom that is the best week. I hope to spend some real time vetting RfA candidates this week and you're #2 on the list. Barkeep49 (talk) 00:55, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coventry City 2–2 Bristol City (1977)

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 26 December 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/December 2023. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there by user:dying, who assists the coordinators by making suggestions on the blurbs, or by others. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before the article appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work!—Wehwalt (talk) 19:17, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Wehwalt: thanks, that will be a nice present for me on Boxing Day!  — Amakuru (talk) 16:17, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November Articles for creation backlog drive

Hello Amakuru:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 2600 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:23, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge history

I see that you have closed a WP:MOVEREQ discussion recently. Could you please merge the edit history of both the Allegations of war crimes against Israel and Israeli war crimes, if that's possible? 39.34.146.93 (talk) 04:35, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, per your request here I've restored the revisions from 25 March 2022 to 4 August 2023 back into the history, which were initially deleted during my recent rename. Hopefully this is non-controversial, as the revisions were all visible prior to the rename and were only deleted for housekeeping reasons. Also pinging Tamzin, who removed some content within those earlier revisions for arbitration enforcement reasons, in case I've missed something here. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 19:58, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's fine by me. Thanks. :) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe|she) 20:32, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request to delete the "Orang Amerika Malaysia" Wikipedia page

Hi Amakuru. I would like to make a request to delete the "Orang Amerika Malaysia" Wikipedia page. This is because the page is an error. The title and name of the page should be named "Orang Malaysia Amerika" instead of "Orang Amerika Malaysia".

Thank you. Belle vieu (talk) 18:00, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Belle vieu: I assume you're referring to the page ms:Orang Amerika Malaysia on the Malaysian Wikipedia? If so, it's worth noting that the Malaysian Wikipedia is actually a separate project from this one where we're talking now, which is the English Wikipedia. The policies and guidelines at that project may be very different from those we have here on the English project. That said, it looks like moving a page is fairly straightforward on the Malaysian wiki. If you follow this link here: [1] that should take you to the page where you can choose a new name and then move the page. I don't speak Malaysian and I have no authority on the Malaysian wiki so this is just advice, I have no idea if the proposed move is correct or not! Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 19:50, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2023 November newsletter

The WikiCup is a marathon rather than a sprint and all those reaching the final round have been involved in the competition for the last ten months, improving Wikipedia vastly during the process. After all this hard work, Delaware BeanieFan11 has emerged as the 2023 winner and the WikiCup Champion. The finalists this year were:-

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the competition, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.

  • Unlimitedlead wins the featured article prize, for 7 FAs in total including 3 in round 2.
  • MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured list prize, for 5 FLs in total.
  • England Lee Vilenski wins the featured topic prize, for a 6-article featured topic in round 4.
  • MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured picture prize, for 6 FPs in total.
  • Delaware BeanieFan11 wins the good article prize, for 75 GAs in total, including 61 in the final round.
  • New York (state) Epicgenius wins the good topic prize, for a 41-article good topic in the final round.
  • Berkelland LunaEatsTuna wins the GA reviewer prize, for 70 GA reviews in round 1.
  • MyCatIsAChonk wins the FA reviewer prize, for 66 FA reviews in the final round.
  • New York (state) Epicgenius wins the DYK prize, for 49 did you know articles in total.
  • Ukraine Muboshgu wins the ITN prize, for 46 in the news articles in total.

The WikiCup has run every year since 2007. With the 2023 contest now concluded, I will be standing down as a judge due to real life commitments, so I hope that another editor will take over running the competition. Please get in touch if you are interested. Next year's competition will hopefully begin on 1 January 2024. You are invited to sign up to participate in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors. It only remains to congratulate our worthy winners once again and thank all participants for their involvement! (If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.) Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:51, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 November 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:42, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move revert

I was the page mover who performed the page move at University Visvesvaraya College of Engineering. I am not getting why you reversed that move. There are over a dozen WP:RS that mention the University of Visvesvaraya College of Engineering, excluding the official website. Let me know if I am missing something. Pasting some source below. Maliner (talk) 11:23, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References


@Maliner: fine, thanks for the above. Given that sources seem to be split, it's fair enough we'll go with the version on their website and I've redone the move. It's only that we see far too many cases where editors assume that a change of WP:OFFICIALNAME means an automatic move of the page, without considering the other stipulations of WP:NAMECHANGES. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 11:03, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ACE 2023

There are too few strong content contributors on ArbCom; give it a thought? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:02, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia: ahhh.... actually you're now the second person to suggest this to me - I think TonyBallioni recommended I have a go a few years ago. And it really is a great honour for such great Wikipedians as yourself and Tony to consider that I might be worthy of such a position. Whether the community-at-large would think so, I have no idea - I sometimes feel like I'm becoming a bit tetchy or argumentative with people here these days for not very good reasons, which might count against me, but perhaps that's no more than anyone else! And yes, I do consider myself a content contributor first-and-foremost, although I've really not been able to do as much as I'd like lately and with Wikipedia:Featured article review/Rwanda/archive2 on the horizon and not enough time to do much about it, I think I'm going to be down on FAs this year for the first time. 😔
Anyway, to answer the actual question you asked - unfortunately right now I don't think I can commit anything like the sort of time that would be required for someone on the arbitration committee. And realistically I'd probably need to ramp up my activity at the drama-boardz™️ for some time before running, just to convince people I had the nous and experience in such area. But in principle I really would like to run, I think it would be a good experience for me. And also I'd be glad to represent the more content-focused people like yourself - which is not to say I think the project is actually divided into binary groups with some being content editors and others purely administrative, most senior editors do some of both - but I can definitely see the value of balance on the committee. So in short, I definitely see myself having a serious look at this in a few years' time, when real life commitments hopefully should be less onerous than right now and sorry I can't give you a better answer than that this year! Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 22:27, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Next year then :) The need to restore some content focus to ArbCom is urgent; there are changes in latitudes, changes in attitudes, that just make no sense. I keep meaning to tune in at Rwanda, but one shiny distraction after another, the current shiny distraction being my concern about said trends. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:38, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You'd be a great candidate; the content focus, unimpeachable activity as an admin, and the commitment to the project for over a decade would add a needed voice to the committee (by quick scan SilkTork is the only current arb who checks all those boxes.) That being said as someone once said, there are more important things in life than Wikipedia, and there are certainly more important things in life than being an arb or functionary. You'd be great at either would have my vote, and I share a lot of the overall concerns of SandyGeorgia, but at this point, I'm hardly one to ask someone to take one for the team . Real life and things you enjoy come first. Hope you're doing well and thanks for the happy ping. TonyBallioni (talk) 06:06, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Amakuru&oldid=1183906212"