User talk:BusterD

Archives

22 Jul 05 – 26 Sep 06 09 Oct 06 – 05 Dec 06 14 Dec 06 – 07 Nov 07 01 Dec 07 – 12 Feb 08 15 Feb 08 – 08 May 08 19 May 08 – 13 Nov 08 26 Nov 08 – 07 Sep 09 08 Sep 09 – 29 Oct 10 29 Oct 10 – 26 Sep 11 04 Oct 11 – 30 Sep 12 01 Oct 12 – 13 Oct 13 26 Oct 13 – 27 Aug 14 09 Sep 14 – 24 Dec 15 25 Dec 15 – 08 Apr 18 21 Apr 18 – 30 Jun 19 07 Jul 19 – 26 Apr 21 03 May 21 – current

.

RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report No RfXs since 12:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online

AfC submissions Random submission

3+ months

2,693 pending submissions to update

Warn before welcome

I would advise against warning a user who has not been welcomed yet. This can be seen as biting newcomers and can be seen as not assuming good faith. We don't wanted to scare away editors just because they made a mistake or don't understand Wikipedia yet. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:21, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate the engagement on the subject. I do a quite a lot of vandalism patrol, and I often find myself reverting and warning. I always use escalating warnings, and the level one starts with "Welcome to Wikipedia." As someone who has been editing the pedia since 2005, I appreciate feedback from a newer editor who might see things with fresher eyes. Thanks! BusterD (talk) 13:38, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

No problem! I actually was made to think about this myself when I warned a new user who had put something on a page that was not from a neutral point of view and they told me about it that they were new and I was like, "You know what, I shouldn't be warning people who haven't been welcomed yet and instead welcoming them myself" so that's what I do. Also I may have been on Wikipedia longer (check when my alt was made) however I forgot I had that account until I just discovered it. I hadn't edited until I got this account tho. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:17, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Also you have been editing since before I was born which is.. weird to think about. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:18, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Blaze The Wolf, you're talking about the message on User talk:Davidfradin? That's in response to this edit--I guess they're lucky to have run into BusterD and not me: I probably would have blocked them on the spot, since all they're doing is promoting themselves on Wikipedia--read all the way down the edit, and then see User:Davidfradin/David fradin. (I'm not going to delete that right away, so you have a chance to look at it.) So sure, welcome before warn--but Davidfradin has been trying to plug David Fradin since 2009. Buster, you're a kinder person than I am: I always skip the first level in cases of obvious vandalism. (This was a bit different--it was purely promotional.) Thanks, Drmies (talk) 19:18, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

So you're the one who rather have fiction than fact on Randy Newman's page, but pretends you have all the answers? So much for welcoming a stranger. And so much for wiki being a trustworthy site. 173.49.69.238 (talk) 15:14, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXI, May 2021

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick- D and Hawkeye7 look at intelligence gathering, doctrine and strategy

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:57, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

AfC

Thanks for joining the AfC team. I suggest you install the AfC helper script, as reviewing drafts manually is fairly tedious process. Cheers. – bradv🍁 19:06, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

No kidding. I'll expect to perform one page a day at first to get into a rhythm. Occasionally performing a few reviews manually will help me better appreciate the process, IMHO. I've got a pet set of my own creations I'm going to focus on for a bit, but I've avoided this process long enough. In the case of a contributor like User:Florida Army, IMHO that user is clogging AFC with large numbers of creations which are minimally formed. I guess it's wrong of me to criticize another editor because they don't edit just like me, but an editor with that much experience should be able to self-review. Is there a backstory which we can't talk about? BusterD (talk) 19:14, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

The process really isn't set up to be done manually, and I can't recommend trying to do it that way. The process and the script have developed together, so it would make more sense to just use the script and then review your contribs to see what it did.

Regarding FloridaArmy, you can find background information in the ANI archives, including this and this which together enacted the current restrictions. You should be able to provide feedback on those drafts and review them to the same standards as any other. – bradv🍁 19:32, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the info on both. Have checked that box and purged my cache. Will give the script a shot later on today. Nice to chat with you. BusterD (talk) 19:54, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) For a bit of back story, I tried mentoring FloridaArmy some years ago, and rescued / improved a few articles so they didn't get deleted at AfD, but I couldn't do that forever, and their creations always do seem to be a bit hit-and-miss. The best thing to do for all of them is try a quick Google, drop the extra sources into the article, which should hopefully be enough to pass it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:30, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

It's also worth noting that FloridaArmy primarily works on articles about a demographic that's traditionally been underrepresented, not only by Wikipedia, but by reliable sources as well. This is obviously quite a challenge, so as Ritchie333 says, it's best to try to help whenever possible. – bradv🍁 18:30, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

I have seen their "rants" at Jimbo's talk, and have come around to appreciating the positive contributions that editor makes. I agree wholeheartedly with Bradv's comment above about the dearth of sources, especially online sources, available to an editor attempting to find RS for AA subjects. As someone who at one time worked with an editor of an historic AA community newspaper (which does not yet have online archives), I'm sensitive to such a poverty of material upon which to draw. This situation also applies to sourcing for articles about female subjects. I'm fortunate that my latest article subject was successful in several professional arenas dominated by men; as a result I can find sources about her (with support from her sorority's national journal). BusterD (talk) 18:47, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Ha, guess what, I got two cents on this topic also. I've also tried to work with that editor, and found it very difficult; I write articles in the same (heavily underrepresented) topic area, so I appreciate what they're doing--and things are getting a bit better, though for all their years and all their edits they are still not very skilled. Plus my interactions with them were very abrasive, to put it mildly. So yeah, hit and miss--difficult. There was a huge thread on ANI, which didn't resolve anything. They're a net positive for the project, but that doesn't make it any easier to handle in individual cases. Drmies (talk) 19:22, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

RfA candidate poll

Regarding your RfA candidate poll, just a minor note: there is a typo in "Failed AfD RfA ten years ago". isaacl (talk) 22:22, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

It took me several days of staring straight at your kind critique before I realized my intense effort was spoiling my ability to actually look at this correctly. Sometimes the mind fills in the gaps by itself and can't see things freshly. I always like to have a human being look my writing over, or give the writing some time for a fresh look. I've never really worried too much about it on pagespace, because can I trust someone will come along and fix it. BusterD (talk) 22:17, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

My apologies—you had thanked me for the edit, so I assumed the typo was clear. Glad that you've found it now! isaacl (talk) 22:34, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I hate to be that person, but your edit changed the wrong instance of "AfD". (I see someone else fixed it already.) isaacl (talk) 22:37, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank the lord! Going to have to find someone to revdel that so I can get the controversy going if I ever decide to enter process. Goes to show you my head was elsewhere and not in the job. BusterD (talk) 22:45, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I probably should have just fixed it initially; I just generally have an aversion to editing other people's posts. (A notable exception is list nesting issues, once I convinced myself the changes have no discernable visual effect.) isaacl (talk) 23:18, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I have learned to use some version of the word "refactor" in edit summaries when I feel compelled to make such a change, just so I'm swinging big elbows and making my intention clear. In the last few days I've made statements on other new folks' talk, and as part of showing them how to edit have inserted a few indents to demonstrate threading. Thanks for helping in any event. I need to be more sensitive to knowing when to take a break. Funny, I just published an old essay this weekend at WP:PACE on this exact issue of knowing when NOT to edit. BusterD (talk) 23:29, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

• Just to mention that along with the "support" in the WP:RFAPOLL discussion, yes - I'd be willing to offer a co-nom statement. I think there are others out there that could likely do a better job (and would be willing to) - but I do offer my services if desired. — Ched (talk) 01:30, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

  It's very nice of you to offer, Ched. I was thinking Drmies and yourself as co-noms, since both of you have made offers, and I have trust in you both. In my first RfA, I chose wiki-friends to co-nom, two of whom were under clouds at the time. That granted, I was simply not ready at that time. Certainly the community did not yet see me as trusted, and the community was quite correct. As demonstrated by my inability to correctly interpret isaacl's comment, sometimes it's good to trust friends to tell me when my fly is down. I hope you and others will continue to do so. BusterD (talk) 22:17, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

  I'll work up a rough draft this week and get with Drmies so we don't just repeat the same things. — Ched (talk) 08:10, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

???

Do I know you sir?Valkyrie Red (talk) 05:49, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

We have argued the same position, I think. The last time was about an infobox on Battle of Cold Harbor. We might have disagreed once or twice, I believe, also about infoboxes many years ago. I saw your helpful edit to Battle of Antietam and wanted to say something welcoming. It's always nice to see an editor in the ACW sphere, especially one with experience. BusterD (talk) 07:51, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Category:American Civil War battle stubs

I've decided to try to look through this over the next few months as a summer project, to see what at least can be destubbed. Stuff like Clark's Mill and maybe Romney should be easily destubbable, especially once I finally get to move (the county I am moving to has a much better library system than the one I currently live in, so should make research easier) and I'm personally shocked Pickett's Mill and Rocky Face Ridge are stubs. But I'm really concerned that some of these may not be notable (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Young's Point for a recent example and see User talk:Eight-Nation-Alliance fan101 which has a bunch of AFD notices from that user creating a bunch of articles for tiny skirmishes.

The first one I looked at was Skirmish at Threkeld's Ferry, and I frankly can't find anything substantial beyond the Encyclopedia of Arkansas entry cited in the article, which only uses the OR's as a source. Is this one really that iffy on notability, or am I just missing something that's fairly obvious? I don't like AFDing ACW battle articles, but some of the ones in those categories are looking really bad. Skirmish at Ackworth is currently only sourced to Dyer, for instance (haven't looked in-depth into that one yet. Donner60 took part in the old 8NA Fan AFDs, so they might have some insight into this. And TwoScars may be knowledgeable about some of the WV ones like Battle of Clark's House. Hog Farm _Talk 04:27, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Very exciting. Yes, I'd very much be interested in de-stubbing ACW stubs. I've watched your GA/FA tally recently; you're making huge subject area gains for the pedia. Thanks so much for your boundless enthusiasm. I'm not sure what most normies think of wikipedians, but IMHO every time we create a well-sourced article of any stature we make a pledge to those of our past we don't forget and the world will continue to care. (I call your attention to the photographs on Queen City, Iowa.) It's so hard to vandalize a really well-done page without people noticing and reverting it. I have some pagespace ambitions myself, but I have a harder time reviewing than some. But de-stubbing is right in my wheelhouse. I am certain we can find other like-minded souls to help. I'm a Donner60 fan. He finds article subjects I think need creation and does a splendid job sourcing them. Let me spend some time and I'll see if I can come up with sources on your linked stubs. BusterD (talk) 08:32, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Have created User:Hog Farm/ACW battle stubs as an attempt to sort these by if the primary issues is sourcing, need of expansion, and noting two that its unclear if stand-alone or merger is the better option right now, as well as one that contradicts itself. Hog Farm _Talk 15:07, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Jacob Cox may have discussed Battle of Clark's House briefly on page 209 of his "Military Reminiscences of the Civil War" book (Volume I). Books about Rutherford B. Hayes might also mention it. The OR has reports by Cox, Scammon, and Jenifer. The OR is not that helpful and calls the incident a skirmish at Camp Creek. The Flat Top Copperheads (Confederate militia) might be interesting. Here is a brief source not good enough for Wikipedia. TwoScars (talk) 16:35, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Hog Farm TwoScars BusterD Great idea from HogFarm. Thanks to BusterD for the compliment. This idea reminds me of some necessary editing that has crossed my mind a few times, especially when Eight Nations Alliance was throwing up stubs, especially about the Camden Expedition skirmishes. For whatever reasons, I have let this idea drift along rather than giving it some of the attention it needs. I think Eight ground out some articles that were about skirmishes that were not notable and possibly a few that might be notable if they were expanded and better sourced. I'll pay some attention to this over the next few months. It will be a good project for several editors to work on. Donner60 (talk) 22:40, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXII, June 2021

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on RAAF aircraft, Hawkeye7 on mission command and nuclear secrecy

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:06, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 June 2021

• News and notes: Elections, Wikimania, masking and more

• In the media: Boris and Joe, reliability, love, and money

• Disinformation report: Croatian Wikipedia: capture and release

• Recent research: Feminist critique of Wikipedia's epistemology, Black Americans vastly underrepresented among editors, Wiki Workshop report

• Traffic report: So no one told you life was gonna be this way

• News from the WMF: Searching for Wikipedia

• Humour: Wikipedia's best articles on the world's strangest things

• WikiProject report: WikiProject on open proxies interview

• Forum: Is WMF fundraising abusive?

• Discussion report: Reliability of WikiLeaks discussed

• Obituary: SarahSV

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:14, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for what you said on User talk:SlimVirgin - missing pictured on my talk, with music full of hope and reformation --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:57, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

RfA poll

I missed your RFA poll but I forgot I was looking at an archived page and added support anyway. A bot did not throw me off the page so I guess it turned out ok. Best wishes if you go ahead with it. Donner60 (talk) 04:40, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

• Donner60, it is happening. BusterD, so far so good! Drmies (talk) 00:38, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Too early to say congrats yet, but best of luck! BOZ (talk) 14:08, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Precious

U.S. historic biographies

Thank you for beginning articles such as Charles Heywood and William E. Woodruff (soldier), for Samuel Escue Tillman, for offering admin services, for "I appreciate feedback from a newer editor who might see things with fresher eyes" and "wants infinite forgiveness", - Buster, repeating (3 May 2009): you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2626 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:55, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

What a very nice surprise this morning! Thank you for helping to keep morale high on Wikipedia. I admire the effort you are making these days. I've got a sweet 16th wiki-birthday coming up soon too. BusterD (talk) 15:08, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

I am a bit ashamed that I confused you with the also sweet Buster7, or you would have received this a bit sooner. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:12, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Jane Douglass White

On 7 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jane Douglass White, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that before she entered the U.S. Army in 1942, Jane Douglass White, a songwriter for soldier's shows, had already composed the tune which would become the official "Song of the Women's Army Corps"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jane Douglass White. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Jane Douglass White), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Song of the Women's Army Corps

On 7 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Song of the Women's Army Corps, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that before she entered the U.S. Army in 1942, Jane Douglass White, a songwriter for soldier's shows, had already composed the tune which would become the official "Song of the Women's Army Corps"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jane Douglass White. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Song of the Women's Army Corps), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Soldier's show

On 7 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Soldier's show, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that before she entered the U.S. Army in 1942, Jane Douglass White, a songwriter for soldier's shows, had already composed the tune which would become the official "Song of the Women's Army Corps"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jane Douglass White. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Soldier's show), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank You

Hello BusterD, I appreciate your thoughtful responses at RfA. I found the answer concerning reading with your daughter to be a nice little moment of humanity and it brought back memories of my Papa. Sometimes we forget the very human side of Wikipedia. I found that and most of your answers to be refreshing. It seems you will be confirmed but we will let the tally finish first. Keep reading with your daughter. You have a beautiful song to sing and it's moments like that where you share it with her that will most definitely impact her life for a long time to come as it becomes part of her song too. Thank you for your contributions here and I wish you all the best. --ARoseWolf 20:49, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello BusterD:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 2600 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:53, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.

Ehhhhhh let me be the first

Congratulations in advance for a successful relatively stress free RFA Celestina007 (talk) 22:47, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

While technically it's too soon to congratulate you, someone would have to find one hell of a dirty secret on you in the next several hours to get several dozen people to switch to oppose. :) BOZ (talk) 02:38, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Now it's official - congrats on a very successful RFA. :) BOZ (talk) 17:17, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Make that less than an hour now, haha. Anyway, congrats for finally getting the mop!  – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 16:27, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

The dirty secret? I still play AD&D 2.5. Don't tell anyone. BusterD (talk) 17:41, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

+ you owe me a drink for being the first to congratulate you 🙃. Celestina007 (talk) 17:46, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Admin common room

I've allocated you a chair, and plumped up the cushions. Welcome to the strange world of the Admin. SilkTork (talk) 17:18, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

What a kind way to treat a stranger. Hospitality. Now even stranger. BusterD (talk) 17:24, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Congrats! You'll do great. If I've made it almost 6 months without getting in trouble for sheer incompetence, then you'll have no problems. Hog Farm _Talk 17:48, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Wait Hog Farm, you have a mop? Well, congrats then! Drmies (talk) 21:56, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Drmies - Yes, since mid-January. I hope I haven't messed anything up yet. Hog Farm _Talk 01:37, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Well, Hog Farm, you haven't blocked me yet, haha! Drmies (talk) 15:36, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations BusterD, and welcome to the couple extra buttons. I also wanted to extend a heartfelt Thank You for allowing me to be a part of your RfA. It's an honor to be associated with such fantastic outcome and editor. Best of luck, and don't be a stranger. Cheers. — Ched (talk) 20:44, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Take the sacred mop and with it rinse the Wiki of its scum and villany! CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓

A way to help a new functionary administrator

I have seen welcome and congratulation for my successful run. I appreciate your trust; I will not betray it. That said, I'm not perfect but improving daily, I hope.

If you'd like to help me as a wikipedian, please begin by commenting on my answers to questions. I have zero idea how I sound in the wikisphere. I'm blind to myself. I try to write from experience, not projection. So, what did I say well and with what do you disagree? Please help me to understand where we are as a community. (FD: I'll move this to a subpage if it gets too ruckus/raucus). BusterD (talk) 17:37, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I really didn't want to be that person (it is my kryptonite), but, um... I don't think admins are functionaries Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:45, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I thought the answer to question 14 (particularly "somewhat condescending, certainly leading, and absolutely improper") was bravely honest as I believed there was a decent chance of it starting to garner opposition, whereas a more timid answer would have been safe. But I agreed with it and am glad you said it. I like your position on recall and stated criteria, but if the question had not come up, would you have not said anything about it? I would prefer people to set their conditions upfront, just to avoid even the appearance of coercion. — Bilorv (talk) 20:59, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. By today's RFA standards/common outcomes I find it awkward for a candidate to volunteer such a statement. I would not have mentioned it like I wouldn't mention the wart on my nose. It was considerate of User:Beeblebrox to ask the clarifying question during the process. I was happy to speak bluntly, if such it was. The question's principle is derived from a proper spirit of rotation. None of us gets out of here alive. This is a fair concern. This is true of all volunteer-driven enterprises and volunteers who serve them. So in my generation as administrator, I imagine the community devising a system where the torch is passed and trust maintained. I'm not retired but I'll give up my driving privilege eventually. Time will catch up with all of us. Burn brightly while we have choices. BusterD (talk) 21:59, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I will be AFK for the next hour or two so feel free to trash the place. I have a new set of tools right here (or there, somewhere, oh, up there). I might warn somebody... BusterD (talk) 17:52, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Don't worry, as far as I know its very hard to miss the tools. Accidently clicking them on the other hand... -- Asartea ^{Talk | Contribs} 18:33, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Wahoo! I can semi-protect my own sandbox. BusterD (talk) 18:45, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

• Given the header, I'll add this: don't become a functionary unless you want it to feel more like work than fun some weeks :) TonyBallioni (talk) 03:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Congrats

For the record, I would have supported you for admin but I didn’t get to the discussion in time. Sorry about that! - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 20:58, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

P.S. I’m sure you know this already, but ANI can be rough. Go slowly and say as little as possible but no less. Also, and I’m sure you also know this, people will hate you if you do the job right. Don’t take it personally. My only other advise is - be prepared to admit mistakes and if you are unsure of something ask for review. Oh, and take my advise with a grain of salt, I started out great as an admin, but flamed out spectacularly. - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 21:02, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

I thank you. You are still burning brightly as a wikipedian, User:Aussie Article Writer. I thank you for your question and I hope I didn't sound as though I was being cute. I decided the hill worth dying on was hypotheticals. Your question was legitimate. I would have to drudge all kinds of details from you about particulars. There's always a context. BusterD (talk) 21:19, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

All good, I never took it as such. I’m trying to live a quiet life of article writing, DYK and GA reviews. - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 21:41, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Same here. I've fallen out of regular practice, but you're the best kind of admin: nose to the grindstone. Keep up the good work. HiDrNick! 02:08, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

• Congratulations, Buster! Don't be shy about asking for help or a second opinion should you want one. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:14, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations, here is your new uniform. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:44, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

• Well done, BusterD. Congratulations on being handed the mop. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 19:37, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
• As said above, well done, congratulations, and thank you for your volunteer service! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:34, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
• Slightly belated congratulations. Glad you got through with minimal opposition. Best wishes. Donner60 (talk) 01:37, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
• Congratulations BusterD, You'll make a fantastic admin and I'm so pleased for you!, Sorry for the late congrats but hey late's better than never :), Anyway congrautlations, Happy blocking! :), Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 20:10, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
• Congratulations, Buster! Very well-deserved. :-) Patient Zero^talk 00:58, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
• Glad to see a new admin. Looking forward to seeing your good work. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 01:02, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Cheers--you did it. Well done. Drmies (talk) 21:55, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

A goat for you!

I GOAT you this goat to celebrate you becoming an admin. I supported you, you deserve it

EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 17:03, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

• Very nice; I didn't get you anything. But Paige Bueckers is the GOAT. All other goats look to her for leadership. BusterD (talk) 17:19, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Casting resurrection

As an admin, and content creator, and with a background and interest in tabletop games, you might just be interested in my project User:BOZ/Games deletions which I am still working on. :) I hope to be able to bring back anything that we can find sources for, although I'm sure most of what is on that list is going to stay the way it is. BOZ (talk) 13:53, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Congrats!

Take the sacred mop-head hydrangea and with it rinse the Wiki of its skill and vumany!

Sorry I did not get to !vote, BusterD. I'd say 99% a good result!! Martinevans123 (talk) 16:08, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Please also accept these bribes of yummy cream cakes to avoid you ever having to block me. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Belated congratulations on your successful RfA Buster. I've been on vacation the last couple of weeks. Glad I had a chance to vote for you before I left. Mojoworker (talk) 21:31, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for thank you

I don't think I have ever had a detailed thank you before from someone I have supported at RFA. Such scrupulous courtesy confirms me in the belief that you will be a top-notch admin. I wish you the very best of luck and great pleasure in your new capacity. Tim riley talk 17:34, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2021

• News and notes: Wikimania and a million other news stories

• Special report: Hardball in Hong Kong

• In the media: Larry is at it again

• Board of Trustees candidates: See the candidates

• Recent research: Gender bias and statistical fallacies, disinformation and mutual intelligibility

• Traffic report: Football, tennis and marveling at Loki

• News from the WMF: Uncapping our growth potential – interview with James Baldwin, Finance and Administration Department

• Humour: A little verse

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:10, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Very belated welcome

Maybe I'm the last to welcome you to the admin corps. Sorry 'bout that! I know you will do great. Besides welcoming you, I wanted to clue you in to a couple of things your new status entitles you to. I see that you haven't yet created your adminstats page. You can learn how to do that here: User:MelanieN/Admin bling. And if you are planning to do much in the way of page protecting, you might want to check out this essay: User:MelanieN/Page protection. Have fun, and see you around the Wiki! -- MelanieN (talk) 21:24, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXIII, July 2021

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Peacemaker67 and Nick-D on World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:29, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Battle of Big Bethel

Re your comment of 10/6/21: 'Not a good summary'. Does this refer to the lede? If so, I cannot see how it fails to summarise the action, as well as the context. Perhaps you could suggest key points that have not been covered. Valetude (talk) 09:56, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

I thought the diff and summary make my intent clear: the attempted new short description was not only a poor choice of words, it did not summarize the article well. The new current short description ("1861 battle of the American Civil War on the Virginia Peninsula") is overlong bit at least describes the event better than "Decisive Confederate Victory". BusterD (talk) 12:29, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, Buster. I don't have much involvement with the 'Short Description' features, and didn't immediately realise what you were referring to. Most of my disagreements involve lede-writing, on which I do claim expertise. Valetude (talk) 18:45, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Input requested about Seven Pines

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/James Longstreet/archive1. Essentially, William Garrett Piston attributes Longstreet getting on the wrong road to Longstreet making an error, and is the source currently used in the article. Stephen W. Sears states that the issue was probably caused by Longstreet thinking he had the authority to reroute his troops. Sears can be kind of a maverick at times, though. Would you happen to have access to other sources on this topic to try to determine what the consensus is here (if there is one?) Thanks! Hog Farm _Talk 04:33, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXIV, August 2021

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on Commonwealth armies and an Australian spy, Nick-D on the American Revolutionary War and RAAF mine laying Op-ed: RobDuch on United States coastal defenses

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:48, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 August 2021

• News and notes: Enough time left to vote! IP ban

• In the media: Vive la différence!

• Wikimedians of the year: Seven Wikimedians of the year

• Gallery: Our community in 20 graphs

• News from Wiki Education: Changing the face of Wikipedia

• Recent research: IP editors, inclusiveness and empathy, cyclones, and world heritage

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Days of the Year Interview

• Traffic report: Olympics, movies, and Afghanistan

• Community view: Making Olympic history on Wikipedia

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:41, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).

Administrator changes

Jake Wartenberg

Emperor • Viridian Bovary

Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

• Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
• A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
• A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
• A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.

Technical news

• The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration

• A request for comment is in progress to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. Comments and new proposals are welcome.

Miscellaneous

• The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:44, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

My recent absence

This statement is not intended to draw attention or sympathy, but to explain my recent inattention to matters Wikipedia. I have taken an entirely self-enforced break to deal with personal grief. I find it very hard to look at my watchlist. I trust all my fellow contributors will cover.

I had a sibling die. As we had been long parted and not especially close, I was startled by the overwhelming grief I felt, the despondence of us missing our window, the depression of inevitable mortality. I withdraw now from the community so as to cause no harm in my sudden unbalance.

I am grateful for my life, and I love my family and friends fiercely. While I am often at odds with my fellows here, I wish to express my enormous gratitude for my co-volunteers on Wikipedia. It is a strange thing that I gather my wikifriends by disagreeing with them, finding common ground on the other side of each conflict. Here consensus is a blessing born of skepticism and good-faith dispute. I am grateful for learning this lesson. I am grateful to each of my fellow editors for helping to teach me.

I am working to build gumption capacity back, and intend to get back to work (at some level) in a week or two.

BusterD (talk) 20:48, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Was traipsing through my quarantined talk archive and remembered your well wishes after the events of June. Made me want to personally express my congratulations, though late, to you for passing through that Godawful swamp. Thank you for all the kind words since; I'd like to offer my own now (and this coffee). ♠Vami_IV†♠ 11:51, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

And I'll keep it warm for you. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 11:58, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nomination period closing soon

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are still open, but not for long. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! No further nominations will be accepted after that time. Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:42, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election voting has commenced

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Appropriate questions for the candidates can also be asked. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

New Page Review queue September 2021

Hello BusterD,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.

---

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:30, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXV, September 2021

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on Australia and the UK in Iraq and Afghanistan Op-ed: Nick-D on writing about military procurement

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:58, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXV, September 2021

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on Australia and the UK in Iraq and Afghanistan Op-ed: Nick-D on writing about military procurement

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:02, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting period closing soon

Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche will be closing soon. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2021

• News and notes: New CEO, new board members, China bans

• In the media: The future of Wikipedia

• Opinion: Wikimedians of Mainland China were warned

• Op-Ed: I've been desysopped

• Disinformation report: Paid promotional paragraphs in German parliamentary pages

• Discussion report: Editors discuss Wikipedia's vetting process for administrators

• Recent research: Wikipedia images for machine learning; Experiment justifies Wikipedia's high search rankings

• Community view: Is writing Wikipedia like making a quilt?

• Traffic report: Kanye, Emma Raducanu and 9/11

• News from Diff: Welcome to the first grantees of the Knowledge Equity Fund

• WikiProject report: The Random and the Beautiful

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:53, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).

Administrator changes

Blablubbs

Alvestrand • Black Falcon • Deathphoenix • Dppowell • Mark Arsten • JGHowes (deceased)

Oversighter changes

Callanecc

Mkdw

Interface administrator changes

Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, extended confirmed protection may be used preemptively on certain high-risk templates.
• Following a discussion at the Village Pump, there is consensus to treat discord logs the same as IRC logs. This means that discord logs will be oversighted if posted onwiki.

Technical news

• DiscussionTools has superseded Enterprisey's reply-link script. Editors may switch using the "Discussion tools" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features.

Arbitration

• A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
• Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
• The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.

Miscellaneous

• Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
• The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:03, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2021–22 UConn Huskies women's basketball team, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page FS1. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

IPv6 ranges

So a couple of months, maybe a year ago, someone made a helpful tweak to the block process for IPv6's, with the option to quickly block the range. I've learned that it's worth checking esp. if the same IP made a series of vandal edits, indicating a habit; if that's the case, then often more came from the range. In this case that was valid, so thanks for blocking the range. Later, Drmies (talk) 14:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Masters world records progressions

The Masters world record progressions are a direct adjunct of List of world records in masters athletics. As in every other world record page that has progressions, the link is event specific, or in better wikipedia terms "subject specific," rather than a hodge podge of sublinks. When editing, you go directly to the article in question rather than a mass article and then needing to find the correct section to edit. For each sublink, all the targeting must be perfect or the user is taken to the wrong place. The user will be confused. Editing to articles is not limited to people who know what they are doing, anybody can edit meaning, in the process of adding new, relevant information, the linkage can be destroyed by someone who doesn't understand all this code. Yes it can be fixed once somebody notices, but that means somebody needs to notice. I'm monitoring 16,000 pages. Stuff slips by me sometimes.

In the case of the article under attack, yes the number of instances of improvement have been few. There are very few athletes qualified to attempt such a record, the requirements being male, 85+ years old and still capable of jumping in the very specific fashion required for triple jump. I've got decades before I can attempt it.

Let me ask you, why the concern about the size of the article. Yes the server has size limitations on large articles because it slows things down. On the List of world records in athletics we had to pare things down to make spacing work and its still slow to load. Another one I'm involved in is List of deaths due to COVID-19 which has been revamped multiple times to reduce size and its still huge. On the List of high schools in California, it used to include Los Angeles County and even Los Angeles City Schools in the master list (same for San Diego County) through sublinks. That got so screwed up repeatedly, we've just given up and post a link to the county list and it then links further to List of Los Angeles Unified School District schools.

Small articles do not cause the same problem. We use small templates constantly in our articles to make repetitive functions work. Mixed 4 × 400 metres relay world record progression is a small article because it has a short history. I don't see that under attack. Small articles only look like low hanging fruit to deletionists who want a new something to target. Deletionists are the cancer that will destroy wikipedia from the inside.Trackinfo (talk) 00:32, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Commentary aside, the technical point is intriguing and if I read your evaluation correctly, unavoidable. Why have you not raised this point in the discussion, where knowledgeable folks are engaged? For my part, I'm not sure of the limitations of the software. When I see a wikipedian with lots of years and loads of essential page creations in an important content arena, I presume they know why they do things, so I'm here to help. Is there some diff in the examples you've provided here which helps make your case? BusterD (talk) 21:16, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 2021–22 UConn Huskies women's basketball team

Hello! Your submission of 2021–22 UConn Huskies women's basketball team at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:06, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Stuart Scheller

User:BusterD could you please move the underlying entry to draftspace so it can be worked on. The subject continues to be very much in the news. Thank you. FloridaArmy (talk) 20:21, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment: Let's keep further discussion on this subject centralized on ANI or RfD. I don't want to be on four separate talk pages helping this along. BusterD (talk) 22:47, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

You came to my talkpage posting an aggressive and threatening post saying I should have worked on the subject in drafspace. All I'm asking is for a little follow through User:BusterD. Needless to say your comments and actions have been abusive and inappropriate. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:06, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

DYK for 2021–22 UConn Huskies women's basketball team

On 22 October 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2021–22 UConn Huskies women's basketball team, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that women's basketball Hall of Famers Chris Dailey and Geno Auriemma are in their 37th season of coaching the UConn Huskies together? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2021–22 UConn Huskies women's basketball team. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2021–22 UConn Huskies women's basketball team), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:47, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft proposal

Greetings BusterD. I created a draft proposal for your "Admin sponsorship" idea. Tonight I'll add some content to it. Currently it only has the {{under construction}} tag in place. Of course you can edit the page and add whatever you'd like, whenever you want to, and seek help from whomever else you wish. The page is: Wikipedia:WikiProject Policy and Guidelines/Draft proposal: Admin training with sponsorship, which is pretty long so I also made WP:ATWS. Best regards.--John Cline (talk) 13:19, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

i need your advice

Hey, i haven't gotten to the list assembly yet, I'll do that—but i need your help. I got these comments at WT:DYK [1] [2]. his comments are making me feel stressed out and overlooked—should i respond, or just ignore it? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 19:32, 23 October 2021 (UTC) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 19:35, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

I have said something (hopefully) helpful there. Be the bigger person. Always be the bigger person. Grow thicker skin, too. Pages have histories. Readers aren't stupid. As wikipedians we share a responsibility to model behavior to others so others can see how the societal norms manifest. Principles, pillars, policies. Other non-admins I know are way better at this than I. On sponsorship, I have been mostly reading a lot. Visit my sandbox and read the helpful signpost template User:Kudpung accumulated. This provides a very nice backstory to what's happening now. There's a lot more. I want to poke around in successful content-area WikiProjects for more training/mentoring stuff. BusterD (talk) 20:34, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the help :) I'll need thicker skin going forward, for sure—I'll read up on the successful sponsorship programs, too. Should be able to write something concrete by monday. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 00:42, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, 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. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. 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. (t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXV, October 2021

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on British conscription and German warship raiders

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:51, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
		For correcting the Trans-Mississippi map! Hog Farm Talk 05:04, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Hog Farm  Talk 05:04, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for saving my talk page from an angry bird! Princess of Ara 09:44, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Museums in Boone County, Illinois

A tag has been placed on Category:Museums in Boone County, Illinois indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:25, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2021

• From the editor: Different stories, same place

• News and notes: The sockpuppet who ran for adminship and almost succeeded

• In the media: China bans, and is there intelligent life on this planet?

• Opinion: A photo on Wikipedia can ruin your life

• Discussion report: Editors brainstorm and propose changes to the Requests for adminship process

• Recent research: Welcome messages fail to improve newbie retention

• Community view: Reflections on the Chinese Wikipedia

• Traffic report: James Bond and the Giant Squid Game

• Technology report: Wikimedia Toolhub, winners of the Coolest Tool Award, and more

• Serendipity: How Wikipedia helped create a Serbian stamp

• Book review: Wikipedia and the Representation of Reality

• WikiProject report: Redirection

• Humour: A very Wiki crossword

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Scardust lock

Hello. I was the one who requested Scardust be locked. I just realized that locks me out, but not the vandal who keeps reverting relevant information. Is there a way to lock the article do only admins can edit it, for now, or to have an admin monitor the article so the disruptive edits may not continue? The state of the article is good right now. I'm in the process of reporting the vandal as being in an edit war, although I'm not quite sure what I'm doing. 2601:44:C27F:83A0:B15B:D4FD:1BA3:F229 (talk) 04:47, 1 November 2021 (UTC) Edit: He (User:Binksternet) changed the article, once again, removing important information, such as the timeline I made and the most recent concert, now I can't even revert the vandalism he created. Could you please revert the article and place a higher lock on it? I've reported him with this IP address. This is ridiculous...

I appreciate you are engaging on this. All wikipedians disagree. A lot. Based on my reading, User:Binksternet seems to be acting in good faith by maintaining material based on reliable sources. Several ip contributors seems to be making identical edits in opposition to that named editor on the Scardust page. One of those editors has been blocked for their edits. The sources put forward by yourself and the others don't seem to meet the level of sourcing already applied. If you disagree with another editor like Binksternet, it is best to create a discussion thread on the Talk:Scardust page where you and other like-minded editors can create consensus on these sorts of disagreements. The talk page is unprotected so discussion can occur. BusterD (talk) 05:41, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).

Administrator changes

Clpo13

Brian0918 • JDoorjam • Karanacs • MrDarcy • Mindspillage

Interface administrator changes

Evad37

CheckUser changes

Dreamy Jazz • Ferret • GeneralNotability • Girth Summit • RoySmith

Oversight changes

Dreamy Jazz • LuK3

Guideline and policy news

• Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.

Technical news

• Toolhub is a catalogue of tools which can be used on Wikimedia wikis. It is at https://toolhub.wikimedia.org/.

Arbitration

• GeneralNotability, Mz7 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections. Ivanvector and John M Wolfson are reserve commissioners.
• Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves to stand in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections from 07 November 2021 until 16 November 2021.

Miscellaneous

• The 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of five new CheckUsers and two new Oversighters.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:43, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Star Trek

I re-read your response on Star Trek Into Darkness AfD. I wanted you to know that I probably laughed to hard, but I do think it is a keep. I am not sure if your were being flippant or serious with the response under my initial, lol. Just want to make sure I was not being dense by thinking you were reconsidering the article. Cheers. Lightburst (talk) 23:31, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

You and I are good. I appreciate your concern on this issue. I'm sorry where the ANI discussion has headed. This is a policy issue which has become an unfortunate personality issue. BusterD (talk) 23:47, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

thanks there was so much talk about my participation there so I was not sure. I guess looking at it I can see how it disrupted the process. My Lol. I still laugh at the thought of that article. There are participants who hold long standing grudges and they seem to be having a Festivus airing of the grievances. Perhaps next is the feats of strength? - I think the grievances go all the way back to 2007? - maybe 12 years before my edits, but my own responses to some editors have not been exemplary. If I had been an employee at McDonalds, they would have given me a stern talking to and maybe a sensitivity class. Lightburst (talk) 00:04, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

I very much enjoyed your input in that humorous sorta-meta AfD conversation. Wikipedians are interested in reading about themselves and rarely get to laugh with each other this much in RL. I still think it's a merge, but I pinged User:Dream Focus to the page because their involvement would move the discussion towards sources, which is what happened. If somebody were to ban me from discussing articles up for deletion, I would become the most prodigious cite inserter at articles at process. I'm a born troublemaker. BusterD (talk) 00:15, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

I already found what sources I could and mentioned them in the AFD. In case it gets deleted I exported it to https://cultural-phenomenons.fandom.com/wiki/2013_Wikipedia_Star_Trek_Into_Darkness_controversy for safe keeping. Dream Focus 00:27, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Friends, help me with this: Did Andrew get promoted Colonel when Colonel Warden retired? BusterD (talk) 00:32, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

He is from the UK, does a lot of Wiki meets I think. I do not know why people call him by Colonel but I think it has to do with a Wikipedia name he edited with years ago. Sometimes I think it is used in a backhanded way maybe just because I see he is not calling himself that but others do. I know him only as Andrew. But I am not sure. Lightburst (talk) 00:48, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

For many years he was Colonel Warden, that the name Winston Churchill used to hide his true identity from the Nazis agents. Then he started editing with his real name. Dream Focus 01:00, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Npa

Hi there BusterD, hope you're doing well. The IP from Van Cat page that you recently protected is making all kinds of personal attacks and rants against me, diff. They're doing the same WP:OTHERSTUFF arguments like they were doing in their edit-war descriptions, without attempting to talk. I'm not sure what to make of someone with such a high WP:COI and unawareness of their racism, so many baseless and weird assumptions topped with racially charged attacks. Seems to me like a WP:BATTLEGROUND mentality, and the IP mostly edit-warred in Van Cat page, using other ranges [3], [4]. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 07:35, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

All your edits are about Turks. You edit a bit of this and that to fly under the radar. You're an Armenian living in USA, trying to push the Armenian propaganda and when people react you cry at a random admins talk page, trying to get them to do what you wish. Rest assured clickity clacking on wikipedia won't change reality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.230.173.190 (talk) 20:32, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

88.230.173.190 I don't think you're fit to edit on Wikipedia, get well soon. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 08:43, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	"You wolf-folks stick together and stay warm", this phrase that you said on RoseWolf's talk page really made me smile. Thank you for your kindness (even though below that convo is a discussion I"m not getting into) ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 19:29, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the nice words. It's astounding how far we can go when we choose to be kind to each other. I was traveling to my big sister's funeral a few weeks ago and stayed at an Airbnb in California wine country, a nice old farm house with tiny ripe champagne grapes all around. While enjoying my morning Nambarrie I watched five kittens playing together. It reminded me of the sometimes too serious play my siblings and I shared. Wikipedians are stronger when we remember our love for one another and choose to handle whatever burden together. Thanks again for the star. Wikilove strongly appreciated. BusterD (talk) 19:39, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello, you misinterpreted the consensus on deleting Stephen Hogan

Hope all is well. The deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Hogan - Wikipedia was full of sock puppet vandalism by deity who is really User:Nyxaros2 and who had come to edit disruptively previously under the guise of User:Dollyplay and User:Sleptlapps as well. Though I respect the nominator {{ping|DGG}}'s vast and long experience over the years, he made factual inaccuracy about the actor's performance and didn't refer to Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Entertainers. Since his nomination, another article came out at Dublin actor stars in fascinating new Amazon Prime film about Indian revolutionary - Dublin Live which had been added to the underlying article to again demonstrate his notability. Maybe I was a poor writer who didn't know how to improve the writing. But clearly, the page shouldn't have been deleted. I respectfully request you to undelete and extend the deletion discussion at a minimum. Thank you for your time and consideration. Supermann (talk) 03:45, 5 November 2021 (UTC)