User talk:Serial Number 54129

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Yunshui (talk | contribs) at 15:20, 13 June 2020 (→‎Why?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


A sudden realisation.

"Remarkably unremarkable."

This user is very lazy. Please feel free to do his work for him.
This user opposes the Wikimedia Foundation's arbitrary, opaque, and dictatorial office-banning of administrators when the community and ArbCom are more than capable of handling the issue themselves.


    You may want to increment {{Archive basics}} to |counter= 24 as User talk:Serial Number 54129/Archive 23 is larger than the recommended 150Kb.

    This page was last edited or modified by Yunshui (talk).


    From the absence of study comes the absence of women in history.

    Sylva Federico, Federico, S. (2001). "The Imaginary Society: Women in 1381". Journal of British Studies. 40: 159. OCLC 931172994.

    Edits to Deepak Rao Wiki Page

    I think there is a vandal campaign going on that page. Here are some links from leading news sites that are not his interviews but references to his work by Richard Bustillo (Original student of Bruce Lee) and in general about him being given an honorary rank along with 2 others.

    https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/more-sports/others/Bruce-Lees-legacy-is-being-abused-Bustillo/articleshow/11325249.cms https://www.hindustantimes.com/cricket/ms-dhoni-begins-15-day-stint-with-territorial-army-in-kashmir/story-fhcnR4uYQoxeFhuQGjjqfL.html https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZr9PpPcnto https://www.timesnownews.com/sports/cricket/article/ms-dhoni-to-perform-patrolling-guard-duties-with-troops-during-army-training-in-kashmir/459162

    I think this has to do with his BJJ credentials. The others who are editing the page seem to have come with the agenda of smearing. If self-promotion is not a Wiki philosophy so isn't single-minded maligning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Modyyash (talk • contribs) 04:25, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


    Greenock Stowaways

    Hello:

    The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Greenock stowaways has been completed.

    Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. A couple of things I noticed. In the Ill-treatment section it reads:

    Kerr, hearing of this, declared that the boys would henceforth get "the ground of their stomachs before they get any more", (Sfn|Donald|1928|p=54) but the footnote says: Refn|”Specifically, Kerr swore, according to Roughead, that the first mate would "give the ground of their stomachs before they got any more".sfn|Roughead|2014|p=15}}|group=note

    Of the two mentions – the one in the text cites Donald, one as a footnote cites Roughead. One says "get" one says "give". I'm not even sure what this quote means. The citations should be checked and corrected if necessary.

    Also:

    It's unclear how many boys had shoes. "the stowaways had no shoes between them" or "since some of the boys had no shoes" – is that "no" or "some" – needs clarifying

    In the Arrivals section the quote box mentions some had, some didn’t have shoes.

    Arrivals:

    Mentions five stowaways were put off the ship, where are the other two?

    Same section, then we have "Of the six boys, Reilly and Bryson were keen to leave…" Seven boarded in Greenock. This just needs clarification.

    Best of luck with the GA review.

    Regards,

    Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:17, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for restoring my post

    It was 2 minutes sooner than yours :-) It is nice to know that great minds were on the same track. HeeHee. MarnetteD|Talk 12:07, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Cheers MarnetteD, sorry about that  :) at least one of those minutes is testament to my steampowered PC! ——SerialNumber54129 12:09, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    No worries SN. If your PC is a big as this it must take up a whole room in your home :-) MarnetteD|Talk 12:13, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Seeing your mention of White Horse whiskey prompts me to leave you this pic for your enjoyment. JW has a whole line of GoT whiskeys in honor of their last season. Glug Glug. MarnetteD|Talk 12:20, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @MarnetteD: Brilliant! New slogan: "Stupor is coming" :) ——SerialNumber54129 12:44, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Superb!! MarnetteD|Talk 15:40, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


    Please discuss on the talk page

    Please discuss your changes on the talk page of Waqar Zaka. There appears to be a question about some of the sources, which is of course a valid discussion to have. I have added 2 more sources and am seeking engagement on the talk page.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 21:49, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    I've responded there. Your sourcing is/was poor enough, but the NPOV language—worse. ——SerialNumber54129 21:55, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see any NPOV problems - the language that I used is in multiple reliable sources, and doesn't seem to be either praising or damning anything. It's just very plain factual language. Perhaps on the talk page you could explain what you find POV about it.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 22:40, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    It has been explained to you, multiple times. ——SerialNumber54129 09:20, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Ah fun memories

    Hello SN. The last bit of this post calls back to a memorable moment from Yes Minister. Jim Hacker writes "round objects" on a memo from Humphrey Appleby. Later in the episode Bernard Woolley tells Hacker that Appleby asked him "Who is this Round and what does he object to?" :-) My dusty old memory banks have forgotten which episode this happened in but it still is an all time funny - or is that punny - for me. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk

    @MarnetteD: It was "Equal Opportunities"—rather apt considering current goings-on  :)
    But yeah, that was exactly what I was alluding to, safe in the knowledge that not one in a 1000 here would have the faintest idea what I was talking about. Except—except—I forgot about your truly encyclopaedic knowledge of british TV. Absolutely effing incredible! ——SerialNumber54129 17:39, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Now you are making me blush! Great job on remembering the episode!! Cheers again. MarnetteD|Talk 18:10, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    PKK terrorists

    Calling PKK terrorists as freedom fighters is extremely offensive. Readding the template is not justified.--SharabSalam (talk) 18:56, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @SharabSalam: stop edit warring over another editor's user page. You are not the arbitor of acceptability on Wikipedia. ——SN54129 19:02, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Serial Number 54129, offensive material such as saying that you are a terrorist and calling the terror groups freedom fighters should be deleted.--SharabSalam (talk) 19:07, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    You've made your comment at the MfD, now stop edit-warring. ——SN54129

    Review your changes at OpIndia

    In one edit you removed my so much good faith edits, here is my version and compare with latest one. You removed following things:

    • Template of Indian English
    • Portal's HQ, country, languages and chief editor
    • Justification from the side of editor over accusation (WP:DUE)
    • Current ownership of company (and restored ownership at time of 2018)

    Just a humble request to revisit your changes with calm mind and by assuming good faith. You will see what you have reverted. Regards,-- Harshil want to talk? 11:09, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm glad to see you have not been blocked yet. ——SN54129 08:15, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Your wish...

    The Closer's Barnstar

    ...came true (maybe). I can't remember where I saw the discussion but I remember you being part of it. I threw together a little animation you can add to a customized wikilove message for whoever you want to recognize as a closer. The animation is set to repeat 3x - anything more might drive people nuts. Atsme Talk 📧 04:02, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Atsme: That is, frankly, brilliant! Thanks very much! I think that discussion might have been here—in any case, that's gonna be my first use of the new barnstar. LOL yeah it might drive some people nuts...on the other hand I could watch it all day. H'mm, which might say more about me than anything else  :) Hope you are well! ——SN54129
    :-) Atsme Talk 📧 12:08, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Special recognition example

    The Closer's Barnstar
    Your thoughtful and concise close at diff/ did not go unnoticed.

    Please accept this token of appreciation for your excellent work.

    <sig>

    I'm going to add this to User:Atsme/Banners This was the only way I could see if it worked using Wikilove customized. X-) Hope you don't mind my using your page to do so. Atsme Talk 📧 14:06, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    A beer for you!

    Yes indeed, it was the Peter Brook book....thanks. TheLongTone (talk) 12:13, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    ANI

    See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:_Serial_Number_54129.-- P-K3 (talk) 16:08, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Pawnkingthree: Don't you mean, "My Lord, the Queen dost demand your urgent presence on pain of death"  ;) Many thanks for this though! ——SN54129 16:13, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Don't get me started on Blackadder quotes. Have you seen my alternative account?-- P-K3 (talk) 16:19, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Good one! :D ——SN54129 16:23, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, that didn't go to well for Kazemita1—this was in fact a retaliatory report for their edit-warring on People's Mujahedin of Iran ([1], which is almost the only place I've encountered them, so it's hard not to see how they found their diffs except by going through my old contributions. However, they forget, perhaps, "following another user around", if done to cause distress, or if accompanied by tendentiousness, personal attacks, or other disruptive behavior, may become a very serious matter and could result in blocks and other editing restrictions)—and I see 78.26 has saved Kazemita1 from further embarassments and/or stains on their record. I expect Kazemita1 is somewhat glad that none of this got mentioned at ANI.
      However, I also suspect a subtext to your close, 78.26...and if so, it's been taken on board loud and clear. ——SN54129 17:14, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    You're welcome to take it loud and clear if you want, but it wasn't really directed at you. I seriously doubt Ritchie received an education, and sensitive types really shouldn't be at ANI in the first place. Context, context, context. Now, if you had used said edit summary at Shining Time Station, I might have tossed a minnow your direction. Mostly I saw an opportunity to head off some utterly useless drama, as I've seen this topic of discussion unfold in the past. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 17:43, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Dear SN, if you were trying to say "Good fuck everyone" at [2], you made an unfortunate typo. Bishonen (unfortunately impervious to subtexts) | talk 17:17, 13 December 2019 (UTC).[reply]
    The Bishonen, I reckon you eat subtexts for breakfast  :) ——SN54129 17:20, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    December 2019

    Information icon Hello, I'm Hirolovesswords. I noticed that you recently removed content from Mike Kelly (gridiron football) without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Hirolovesswords (talk) 19:56, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    For watchers: I have, of course, already left a message on their talk page, and this is retaliatory. For a flavour of Hirolovesswords's approach, it reads Edit-warring to shoehorn in a potential BLPVIO? Take it to talk, get a consensus of editors who agree with your assessment and there you have it. But as you must know better than me, BLPs always verge towards caution. But no, they appear to prefer to edit war their contentious material back in. Repeatedly. ——SN54129 20:04, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Well then!

    Congrats, you're the latest entry to my "what do you mean you're not already an admin?" list. creffpublic a creffett franchise (talk to the boss) 20:46, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    A Dobos torte for you!

    7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.


    To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

    7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:58, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:Beaune Altarpiece

    Hello SN, could you please elaborate on your close here? What is "Incendiary" about this? I have reverted until explained per WP:TALKCOND (premature closure concerns). I would have waited, but given your talk page header about little to no internet access for an indeterminate amount of time thought it best to revert to allow the discussion to run a more natural course in the meantime. --TheSandDoctor Talk 08:20, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Cheers

    Damon Runyon's short story "Dancing Dan's Christmas" is a fun read if you have the time. Right from the start it extols the virtues of the hot Tom and Jerry

    This hot Tom and Jerry is an old-time drink that is once used by one and all in this country to celebrate Christmas with, and in fact it is once so popular that many people think Christmas is invented only to furnish an excuse for hot Tom and Jerry, although of course this is by no means true.

    No matter what concoction is your favorite to imbibe during this festive season I would like to toast you with it and to thank you for all your work here at the 'pedia this past year. Best wishes for your 2020 as well SN. MarnetteD|Talk 22:38, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Cheers, MarnetteD, back at ya!  :) ——SN54129 12:10, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    You're a guinea pig...

    I promoted Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/William Bonville, 1st Baron Bonville/archive1 tonight, my very first FAC promotion. Hopefully I didn't break anything. If I did, let me know, please! Ealdgyth - Talk 00:18, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Ealdgyth: Speaking on behalf of my client, so far so good. It all looks fine. I am sure that he would want me to pass on his appreciation to you for your pressing of the button, flicking of the switch, and all of the other oh so necessary backgroundy things that you need to do. Of course, if by morning it has all fallen apart, legal proceedings will be initiated before you can say "I was only cleaning it and it went off." Cheers. Gog the Mild (talk) 00:43, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, well, your client might discover that they'd mostly get a big-ass pile of books from me, since I seem to spend most of my disposable income on those. Of course, given that a number of them are medieval history books, maybe you both would like that... uh, oh. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:47, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh! Oh! Runs round room squeaking in excitement. Sadly I am increasingly coming to resemble a character from one of SN's articles. Maybe I should leave his talk page in peace. Or maybe not, he never seems to do anything useful on it. Gog the Mild (talk) 01:01, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Ealdgyth: Glad to be of use! I'm sure it all went perfectly, many thanks and "Welcome"; although that may be congratulating you on your choice of goblet  :) ——SN54129 12:26, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    An elevation

    Woo hoo. Bill Bonville is finally elevated to his appropriate station. I wondered if he was going to die of old age first. It looked like a bit of a slog. Well done. Gog the Mild (talk) 00:32, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Gog the Mild: Cheers. Don't worry, I'm sure Pontvallain will go the same way :p ——SN54129 12:26, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Your help desk question

    Did you find an answer to this question? You didn't get a response but for that type of question WP:VPT might be the place to ask.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:05, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Vchimpanzee: thanks very much for that, I appreciate the advice and will do so. Season's greetings to you! ——SN54129

    Benjamin Butterworth

    Thanks for the revert and ponting that out, I hadn't looked far enough down the history - my bad! --2.99.1.51 (talk) 13:45, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    No problem, .51, easy mistake to make! All the best, ——SN54129 12:10, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Ethos Capital

    Hi. I had, indeed, consulted WP:NEWSORG before removing the tag. It seemed the main concern was accuracy which, in this case is the main justification for using the primary sources. There have been some vague allusions to double-dealing in secondary sources, which is why it is important to accurately specify those personal connections. How do you construe those as unreliable? I had also looked up WP:SPS which, in fact, says nothing about press releases. As to blog, I'm not sure to which ref you refer. The statement by the Internet Society CEO? Wwwhatsup (talk) 20:06, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Six sources, three press releases, one blog = an article with only two WP:RS ∴ a question of notability. ——SN54129 12:10, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Might this be sufficient to confer notability? Wwwhatsup (talk) 01:27, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Whisky Galore!

    Feck! That was quick! Thank you and hope you have a great 2020! JennyOz (talk) 14:55, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Don't template the regulars

    It's a good idea to not talk to people who've been on Wikipedia a lot longer than you have as though they're newbies. In particular, you seemed unaware of this when you posted to my talk page about the National Rifle Association wherein you ignored my warning against posting unverified information to Wikipedia without so much as discussing it beforehand. This is not edit-warring. It's called the way Wikipedia works. -- Frotz(talk) 17:15, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Frotz: Act like a noob, get treated like one, sorry. And you can attempt to redefine edit-warring all you like: reverting multiple editors in spite of a talk page discussion is not "how Wikipedia works". As a so-called experienced editor, please see WP:3RRNO. All the best. ——SN54129 22:12, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I notice that you haven't posted on this issue at Talk:National_Rifle_Association. Had you done so, you might have some validity to your retorts. Making statements like "Act like a noob, get treated like one" is not a good way to convince people that you're being civil. -- Frotz(talk) 05:56, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Lucky I wasn't uncivil eh  :) Apologies for the delay in replying Frotz. Tbh, I wasn't sure I really had to after observing Mathglot somewhat forensically lay out precisely where you had gone wrong...multiple times :D ——SN54129 21:23, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia Administrator Page

    The problem has been fixed with sources and references, no need to tarnish my name Coloursred1 (talk) 14:29, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    The problem certainly has been fixed...for 31 hours, anyway. May I suggest a change in approach on your return? ——SN54129 14:32, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • What prompted my emergency blocking was your refactoring of other people's comments on the notice board. That quite crosses any line -- Deepfriedokra 14:35, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    derp

    I might be blanking but I added two g4 tagshere because there are two discussions due to some sneaky efforts by a vanity spammer but I can't recall if there's a way (like g12) to add multiple discussion links in one g4 tag? Praxidicae (talk) 18:34, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Praxidicae: apologies, I didn't look closely enough at the discussions. You're right, of course; I can't think of a means of combing two discussions in one template either. A shame it doesn't like |xfd2=; I wonder if that could be added? ——SN54129 18:57, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    That would be extremely helpful (and so would the ability to do g5+g4 with the actual fields available.) I'll ping @Amorymeltzer:. :) Praxidicae (talk) 18:58, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Praxidicae, I haven't forgotten about G4/G5 fields when multiple! Been a busy 1/3/6 months, but I'm hoping to get it taken care of later this month/early February. As for the multiple xfd parameters, that'd obviously require a change to {{db-g4}} first, but I'm not sure how often that shows up. Maybe (as far as Twinkle goes) doing the custom for that situation (>1 discussion) would be easier. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:27, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    My comments at the AFD

    here you removed my comments. I had already put them on the article's talk, page. Do NOT remove my comments. You know better. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:07, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Serial Number 54129, I already know how you feel about the ARS based on the ARS mocking image you placed on the Levivich talk page. I am further discovering how you feel by your refactoring of the AfD. I went to refactor my own strike of the duplicate !vote by the nominator and saw that you did. Just now I saw that you erased the comments of another ARS member. Can we please let this AfD proceed without you refactoring the AfD? I have no gripe with you and I have seen your good work on other AfDs. I had no reason to believe that you thought negatively about the ARS until now. Anyway, here is hoping that we can let the lake AfD proceed and move on. Lightburst (talk) 15:11, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lightburst: both of your behaviors in that discussion are suboptimal. 7&6, you know better than to discuss anything other than the deletion review on an AfD page—and that definitely includes commentary on user behaviour. It is extraneous and belongs on te talk page. As does this discussion. And, Lightburst, you're hardly countering the argument that "ARS don't tag team to get their own way" by coming here four minutes after 13. And although you are correct that the nominator (or anyone else) does not get to !vote twice. Nut, per WP:REFACTOR, it always preserves the original author's meaning and intent—as I did, and as you did not. I'm afraid your argument here is as strong as that you "made" on Levivich's talk: that you even consider accusing me of refactoring you, when you had refactored someone else...I'm sure there's a Tom Stoppard in that somewhere.
    Anyway, get ye both to the talk page if you want to have any more off-topic discussion. Or AN/I, of course—but that doesn't seem to have gone too well recently  :) all the best! ——SN54129 15:24, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes I had an edit conflict with 7&6 here on your talk. When I saw what you erased the comments of 7&6 after what you did to my own strike of the duplicate.. (AfD is watch-listed) I came here. I think it is best to discuss rather than take unilateral action. I was asked to refactor my strike (on my talk page) however you decided to do it yourself. We all have our own beliefs and I have not ABF of you. Please do not ABF of me. Lightburst (talk) 15:32, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    If you had done what you were supposed to do in the first place, you wouldn't have had to be "reminded on your talk": pointing out someone's errors is factual, not an assumption of any kind of fith. ——SN54129 16:00, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Perhaps consider spending less time on drama and more time building the encyclopedia. Your blunt/brutal comments are designed poorly. I suggest minding your own business - I no longer AGF of you. I would have left the entire comment stricken. The closer can get the flavor of the tendentious nominator through one of their 15 other comments. Lets steer clear of each other since we are both on WP for different reasons. Lightburst (talk) 17:31, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      I'm afraid your passive-aggression is what is "designed poorly" (whatever that means). You're lack the experience to understand the full nuance of "good faith", which you have not shown, I fancy, since that AfD began. And I include your discussion with Levivich, in which you demonstrate nothing but the purest, unalloyed WP:IDHT. And accusations of dramamongering sit poorly from somene who started the ANI thread in question. Not your finest hour, I admit.
      FYI, if you have the lack of foresight to accuse me of not building the encyclopedia, then you must expect me to see this and raise you this. Goodbye. ——SN54129 18:08, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      Referring to your 22% in the main space. I hope you work with instead of against, and stop outward aggression. Good work on the article creation. Lightburst (talk) 19:03, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, the dangers of statistics; yes, something else that's a little more nuanced than at first it seems. You see, however hard one tries, it's difficult to inflate one's mainspace percentage point when so many were dumped into main space in a single edit, almost fully formed. Never mind, I'm sure ANI will have something to say about my mainspace edit count if it's ever an issue. ——SN54129 20:07, 4 January 2020 (UTC).[reply]
    We will have to agree to disagree. The conduct of the AFD participants and their vandalization/Bowdlerization of the article (and what the article should be) are pertinent and fair game Don't touch my comments EVER. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:40, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Oooh, ALL caps eh? Well, we can continue this at your (oh-so-successful) the AN/I thread. ——SN54129 16:00, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Think again. I did not start that thread, and am not a participant. Your sarcasm becomes you. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:13, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you 13, you're right, and I've struck that portion, apologies. Ironically if you had have already taken part, I would not have had to notify you of my mention of you. Swings and roundabouts... 16:18, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

    Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Happy New Year to you, too. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:22, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Yes, thank you, 13, but since I've already commented on that thread multiple times, this is mildly unnecessary. But, Happy New Year to too, even if the world does seem to be going to hell in a handcart as we speak. ——SN54129 16:27, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    We are of one mind at least on that. Idiocracy turns into Wag the Dog. Australia burnt down. It makes me want to cry. PTSD, is not a 'delusion' but it is a very real 'disorder'. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:33, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    13, it's an absolute fucking tragedy, Australia, and as usual the animals suffer the most. But their has been heroism too; at least that's a reminder of how adversity can be confronted if not overcome. As for the other: yes, I agree with that. ——SN54129 18:23, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I've heard it's not true that Nero Fiddled while Rome burned. But Trump played golf and started (not yet, but it's coming) two wars to distract the American voter from the impeachment trial, while the world ... You know the rest. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:08, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your GA nomination of Der Rosendorn

    Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Der Rosendorn you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:41, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    No edit wars

    Please don't edit war on this lake article. I will walk away from it. I hope you will consider that we both share the same goals about the project. Maybe we have some competing philosophies on some issues, however we both want to improve this project. I am not trying to be condescending or to troll you. I stayed off Wikipedia a couple days to get perspective on these things. I will likely take another break rather than be to involved in these dramas. All my best Lightburst (talk) 02:15, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Ah, that's why you took a break? Nothing to do with your having been warned ~10' earlier to retract your personal attacks upon other editors? In any case, anything further to do with this lake, your opinions or the ARS generally should be made on the relevant project- or article-talk pages. Here, they'll be rolled back I'm afraid. ——SN54129 02:26, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    California New York Express Movers

    Greetings! I saw you changed the CSD tag by User:Celestina007 to PROD. Thank you for that because I too believe CSD is inapplicable here. Can you please suggest any improvements so I can expand this article? Thank you again, --Zettiezac (talk) 06:38, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Reverted my contribution

    Hello, I added a tag for deletion review to the deletion discussion of Toks Asher Young, can you kindly explain your reasons for that and is it in accordance with Wikipedia policy.Techwritar (talk) 18:12, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Techwritar: and I have reverted you again. The discussion is over. Do you not see it even says Please do not modify it....No further edits should be made to this page. As I said, you should either discuss it with the closing administator, or file your objection at WP:Deletion review. Please do not edit the old AfD page again. ——SN54129 18:23, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Techwritar: And I advise you that you have not followed my advice; viz go to WP:DRV and follow the instructions there. Which I have now fone for you. Your future activities should be on that page, not this one or the AfD. ——SN54129 18:30, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    SPI

    Hi. Thanks for logging the SPI for Chandra Shekher Mishra yesterday. Much appreciated. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 09:47, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    No problem Lugnuts. Username huh, what a imagination that guy had. ——SN54129 10:50, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your edits to List of My Hero Academia characters

    Discussion is taking place where it should: on the talk page.

    The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


    Quote from admin Drmies: "plot doesn't necessarily need secondary sourcing"

    Also, My Hero Academia isn't a fanfiction, and thus doesn’t fit into WP:FANCRUFT. 99.203.40.43 (talk) 19:18, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Drmies is correct. None of that was a plot. Please see MOS:PLOT for guidance. What that was, was a collection of factoids culled from various sources culled to form statements. That is the essence of WP:SYNTHESIS and should be avoided. Incidentally, why are you not thanking me? Much of what remains is not just poorly sourced, but totally unsourced: I left it in purely on grounds of maintaining comprehensiveness. Another editor, not so broadminded as me, may take a stricter view. ——SN54129 19:36, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for listening and leaving in the info. Sorry for not thanking you earlier; I was in a rush. 99.203.40.43 (talk) 19:44, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Why the hell did you remove it again? You said you would keep it in to retain comprehensiveness, and then went back on your word by removing it again, with your summary saying "no thanks". Is this out of spite because I forgot to thank you initially? Because I eventually did. Secondly, you say it's original research, but it isn't. Most of them are descriptions of the characters' abilities. Original research would be talking about each characters ships (which there were several actual ″vandalous edits regarding that). 99.203.40.43 (talk) 22:18, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Additionally, I asked another admin, Xezbeth, if the current page was fine, and he said it was. 99.203.40.43 (talk) 22:23, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    One more thing. Explain why you removed the characters at the end. You explained why you removed the descriptions, but you never explained why you removed the characters at the bottom, who are major characters in the series. 72.203.118.154 (talk) 05:55, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    The Bugle: Issue CLXV, January 2020

    Full front page of The Bugle
    Your Military History Newsletter

    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) 12:56, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    My edits on the 2011 Turkish Sports Corruption Scandal

    Hi, hope your day is going well. I've tried to shorten the lead in and deleted the parts that was already in the article. I taught I was doing a service for the article. Would you kindly let me know how we can correct the lead in? Thanks in advance for your time. (Ashur (talk) 10:32, 21 January 2020 (UTC))[reply]

    Ellesmere Colliery

    Hi, did you see my ping re Ellesmere Colliery? Apologies if you did and I'm now pestering you, but it really needs your attention. All the best.TiB chat 19:54, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Trappedinburnley: Hope you're well! I'm afraid I never watchlisted that page. All the best! ——SN54129 00:28, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Tareq Salahi

    Hello, Serial Number 54129,

    I'm not sure how you interpreted a "Keep and think about merging" decision on a 2009 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tareq Salahi as being a consensus right now to delete the article content and turn the page into a redirect. That is definitely a bold move but it should have been preceded by at least a proposal on the article talk page. Or start a new AfD which is probably warranted since consensus might have changed in the past 10 years. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 03:59, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Liz Please see here. But now Isuppose you will take responsibility for the trolling, the socking and the outright promotionalism that has wracked both that and its fellow traveller? No? Oh, shame. ——SN54129 11:14, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Sean Bonney

    I don't appreciate rude, shouty, dismissive edit summaries like this, especially when in the edit summary you're responding to I'm actually agreeing with you, albeit suggesting (with politeness I'll now abandon) that you be a bit less cack-handed about things. It's never okay to bite the newcomers, but deleting without discussion or any apparent consideration a month's work of work that's obviously intended as a tribute to someone who's recently died is especially obnoxious. Unfortunately I won't have the time to work on the article anytime soon, and won't hold my breath for you to add anything constructive to it, so I imagine it will stay as it is for some time. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 23:37, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    • Firstly, my thanks to Serial Number for responding to my request that someone edit the article. It was filled with cruft that really doesn't belong here, and acknowledging that is no disrespect to the subject. It is a reminder to those who may have a conflict of interest, and would in good faith use an encyclopedia article as a place of tribute. That's not what we do. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:19, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • The edit summary doesn't read as particularly rude or shouty, but is a justifiable response, with a valid suggestion re: how better to handle that much cruft. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:25, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Arms & Hearts: I'm sure if my edit summary had been rude, shouty, dismissive, then User:Drmies would have said something, to take a wild example  :) still, as long as our articles stay cruft-free, that's a service to the WP:READER we all can perform. Also, note policy: it may seem harsh, but there's no getting away from it.
    Many thanks too, BOB. ——SN54129 12:24, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm--sorry, Arms & Hearts, but you did restore a bunch of cruft; I would have cut it too. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen that many crufty, spammy, and unworthy links. There were Facebook links for poetry readings in there? No, SN# was not being rude: please do note that their comment wasn't about you as a crufter or something like that, but about the cruft. That the onus would be on you to make a case for inclusion, that's really a given. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 18:36, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    This could use another look, and maybe a lock, Drmies. The cruft was restored. Thanks, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 04:03, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    hI sn54129, I'd like to join this discussion, which unfortunately seems to have become unnecessarily bad-tempered. I wonder if you could point out the specific elements of the edits that you don't believe fit Wikipedia's objectivity standards? The page as it stood before was extremely bare-bones, and as far as I can see, all the information added is verifiable material with sources. The page performs a useful function in gathering together information that is otherwise very scattered and disparate. I don't want to get stuck in a cycle of you deleting all the additional material and me restoring it, so some specificity would be very helpful. As it is, though the page has a reliability alert at the top, I can't see the specific areas you're concerned with. I'm interested in the page being accurate too, and would appreciate it if we could work together on this. As you can see, I and others are willing to put the work in, but some direction might help. Hope you're having a good day. Dmg37 (talk) 13:00, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Dmg37: The place for this discussion is on the article talk page, not here. You have now restored a large amount of crap to a BLP which is mostly unsourced and extremely poorly sourced (blogs, etc). You have also restored a massive list of every single thing the guy appears to have written: this is unencyclopedic and advertorial, against which we have an important policy. The purpose of the project is not, I'm afraid, to perform...a useful function in gathering together information that is otherwise very scattered and disparate. We use summary style, and are not a a bibliography. Please revert yourself; be also advised the strategy of you repeatedly restoring it is considered edit-warring, and can be deleterious to a newly-minted Wikipedia account. Many thanks. ——SN54129 13:14, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Dmg37, a few things. First, just because you can verify something doesn't mean it warrants inclusion, especially not if it's sourced to primary works and to a blog, as in this edit. Worse, in this link you're not even pointing at a primary work, you're pointing at a website where you can buy the book. That's pure spam. In this huge edit you again link to a blog--you need to consider that this is an encyclopedia, and WP:RS is one of our most important guidelines. Worse (again there's something much worse), you re-add an enormous and unacceptable chunk of links. First of all the External links section falls foul of WP:EL to the point where it's just a bunch of spam, and combined with the rest of it it's enough for me to drop a spam warning on your talk page (just did). You included Facebook links to poetry readings--and I think there's nine more. You included some tweet for a reading. You included (and this is possibly the best of all of them) a paper uploaded to Academia from some dossier, not a peer-reviewed, properly published paper. I can go on, but it's a waste of my time. If you did this to promote your poet, you should be blocked for spamming, possibly for COI/paid editing. if you did it because you honestly think that somehow adding a million links is encyclopedic, then you should be blocked per WP:CIR. Drmies (talk) 16:08, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The Signpost: 27 January 2020

    * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your GA nomination of Murder of William de Cantilupe

    Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Murder of William de Cantilupe you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 14:41, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your GA nomination of Thomas de la More

    Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Thomas de la More you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 14:42, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your GA nomination of Thomas de la More

    The article Thomas de la More you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Thomas de la More for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 00:21, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk

    All's well that end's well. Elizium23 now warned on John from Idegon's talk page, for ironically, not staying off talk pages after being requested to.
    This would seem particularly apt. ——SN54129 11:19, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


    I was removing personal attacks, and perfectly within my right do so. Please do not drop warnings on my talk page for this. Elizium23 (talk) 20:01, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Elizium23: No you were not, and no you were not. If you think they were personal attacks, then report it at the relevant noticeboard. But note WP:TPO: Removing harmful posts, including personal attacks, trolling, and vandalism. This generally does not extend to messages that are merely uncivil; deletions of simple invective are controversial. Posts that may be considered disruptive in various ways are another borderline case and are usually best left as-is or archived. Your interpretation of a personal attack is unlikely to be upheld. Also, note that per policy, Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence also constitute personal attacks in and of themselves. Serious accusations require serious evidence, usually in the form of diffs and links.}} Be mindful.
    Also I suggest that you read WP:DTTR: if you don't want to receive templated warnings, it is best not to use them yourself. FYI. ——SN54129 20:07, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Also you should note WP:NOBAN: While allowing you to "ban" people from your talk page, a user cannot avoid administrator attention or appropriate project notices and communications by merely demanding their talk page not be posted to. (My emphasis). So this saga is unlikely to end the way you would like it to. ——SN54129 20:10, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    Maybe entertaining

    This nonsense —PaleoNeonate – 23:15, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The Sweeney

    They cover Westminster and parliament. The only time online harassment is ever really acted on by the police is when the troll makes the mistake of going for an MP (and ideally a Jewish or Muslim MP, as UK law becomes a lot clearer in such cases, as the racial aspects can be used as well). MPs also have a substantial legal budget for this. The two of my trolls which have gone to prison have both been through that route. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:05, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your GA nomination of Thomas de la More

    The article Thomas de la More you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Thomas de la More for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 14:41, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    TGS Unblock Appeal

    Since you asked here's my longer explanation. I learned of this appeal and decided to watch it having remembered the whole situation and agreed with both the unblocking and subsequent reblock. I don't normally comment on such things and originally got involved in this because I saw a way for me to play the role Ritchie has here. However, I didn't get what I needed from TGS so I declined to post the appeal. When Ritchie came along I was glad someone was willing to do it even if it wasn't me but still had my concerns. While posting my original message I considered not leaving a formal oppose and just noting the relevant unblock text and two most recent community discussions, because again I don't normally participate in these discussions. Then when I saw some of the people supporting I decided to strike the oppose. I want to think well of all editors - even those who have been deservedly community banned. Good faith doesn't mean we have to be gullible either so I didn't see a way for me to support TGS at this time given their repeated abuse of the community's trust. But that also didn't mean I needed to be counted as an oppose. When I struck I did so knowing that Cullen and Swarm would be posting influential opposes (and probably should have guessed you'd have done the same) which I knew might swing the discussion and was comfortable basically taking my voice out of the discussion. Hope that all makes sense. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:45, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 12

    News and updates associated with user scripts from the past two months (December 2019 and January 2020).

    Hello everyone and welcome to the 12th issue issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter:

    Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 06:12, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    FAC noms since 1/1/18

    Answering here to avoid cluttering up WT:FAC. Here's what I have; I counted John/Eleanor Rykener twice, since it was nominated twice; is that the discrepancy? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:40, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    FAC ArchiveNumber Nominated
    John de Mowbray, 3rd Duke of Norfolk 1 3/2/2018
    John/Eleanor Rykener 1 6/2/2018
    Parliament of 1327 1 8/23/2018
    John/Eleanor Rykener 2 10/8/2018
    William de Ros, 6th Baron de Ros 1 12/8/2018
    Humphrey Stafford, 1st Duke of Buckingham 1 1/12/2019
    Keldholme Priory election dispute 1 4/15/2019
    Vale Royal Abbey 1 5/22/2019
    Littlemore Priory scandals 1 6/18/2019
    Coterel gang 1 7/30/2019
    John FitzWalter, 2nd Baron FitzWalter 1 8/17/2019
    Battle of Pontvallain 1 11/14/2019
    William Bonville, 1st Baron Bonville 1 10/13/2019
    Cheers, Mike Christie, that would be it, yes. A shame though—I thought there might have been another I'd forgotten about  :) Thanks for going to this trouble, it's cool to have 'em all boxed up like that. Hope you're well, and thanks for all your work at FAC! ——SN54129 11:45, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    You're welcome, and I'm glad it wasn't a mistake -- there are plenty of data entry errors in what I have, I'm sure. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:52, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Oops! Sorry about this, Mike Christie, but there is a minor error, although only in the articles, not your final tally: the list is missing Henry Clifford, 10th Baron Clifford (promoted 22 January 2020), but includes Vale Royal Abbey (which was tanked* by Eric Corbett on 24 May 2019). ——SN54129 11:53, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes -- I should have noted on WT:FAC when I posted the original table that it didn't include anything nominated in 2020; I haven't captured the January nominations yet. I doubt it'll change the overall table much but that's why Henry Clifford isn't in the list above. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:33, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    And I realized something else that isn't obvious -- I tabulate a month by the promotion date, so Henry Clifford isn't included even though it really was nominated in 2019. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:54, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    *Only kidding, EC  :) ——SN54129

    February 2020

    Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not do on User talk:TheBestEditorInEngland. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ;'(69TheBestEditorInEngland 17:58, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Wouldn't worry about it SN, took me at least three re-readings before I figured out what he was on about.-- P-K3 (talk) 18:39, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Cheers, Pawnkingthree, yeah, all i'll say in my defence is that it was (is) kind of asking to be misread :) apologies for refactoring you temporarilly there, it was just the quckest/easiest way to sort the thing out that I could think of! ——SN54129 19:16, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Heh, no problem. I see that he's still going... Quite a character.P-K3 (talk) 19:48, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

    Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

    Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
    40 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start World XI (talk) Add sources
    12 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Thomas Ros, 9th Baron Ros (talk) Add sources
    182 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Thundarr the Barbarian (talk) Add sources
    286 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Northern Ireland peace process (talk) Add sources
    455 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Vellum (talk) Add sources
    29 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Zarathustra's roundelay (talk) Add sources
    41 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Health in the United Kingdom (talk) Cleanup
    59 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Murray (surname) (talk) Cleanup
    74 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Edward Balliol (talk) Cleanup
    4 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Charleston Theatre (talk) Expand
    571 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Illegal immigration to India (talk) Expand
    662 Quality: High, Assessed class: GA, Predicted class: B Real Irish Republican Army (talk) Expand
    25 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B The Troubles in Portadown (talk) Unencyclopaedic
    12 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Saint Laurence Gate (talk) Unencyclopaedic
    124 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Book scanning (talk) Unencyclopaedic
    647 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: GA Shovel Knight (talk) Merge
    90 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Burgher (title) (talk) Merge
    20 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start McDonnell (surname) (talk) Merge
    533 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Refugees in India (talk) Wikify
    751 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Nikah mut'ah (talk) Wikify
    113 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: C Textile industry in Pakistan (talk) Wikify
    2 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Brij Moudgil (talk) Orphan
    3 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Barry Ache (talk) Orphan
    3 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Enrique García Hernán (talk) Orphan
    16 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Embassy of the United Arab Emirates, London (talk) Stub
    7 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Siege of Autun (talk) Stub
    5 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Tipton High School (Indiana) (talk) Stub
    11 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start John Stafford, 1st Earl of Wiltshire (talk) Stub
    44 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Glitterati (film) (talk) Stub
    12 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Francis Clifford, 4th Earl of Cumberland (talk) Stub

    SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

    If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:03, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for the thanks

    There should be a button for that.. Oh, wait, no there shouldn't...

    I won't be returning, but your "thanks" for telling the bots to "off fuck" while I was still online made me smile and deserved a reply. I stay logged in because I prefer my javascript/css stuff to be operative when I click the myriad pedia links online, so it looks less ugly.

    Be well, and take care... - Begoon 16:50, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    I hope, Begoon, that actually you don't leave, although I don't blame you if you do. I mean, who'd volunteer anywhere if it became more hassle than it was worth. But, "keep your powder dry" is an expression, I think. All the best, ——SN54129 17:07, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • The lack of a "new section" link should have been a clue...

      that I was on your user page instead of your talk page... and so should the missing signature button in the toolbar...

      Hopefully that means that I'm forgetting all that....

      Oops and all. Thanks again. ttfn -- Begoon 17:08, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Block notice

    Well... Not blocked, no, but they are globally locked. But I couldn't find a lock template. That's why I posted this one. Trijnsteltalk 18:58, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Trijnstel: I do apologise! I've restored your block notice as if they're globally locked I'm sure the local paperwork will follow. The funny thing is, I thought their global contributions page would tell me if a lock was in place, but it doesn't. And yet I know I've seen it happen a few times today (this page seems to have attracted an unusual amount of attention, which is tiresome for my overworked and underpaid TPSs). Thanks for the note though, and for not mentioning that you clearly have all the promotion you need  :) ——SN54129 19:03, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Hehe, that's okay. The only reason you don't see it in CentralAuth is because it's locked and hidden. ;-) Trijnsteltalk 19:45, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    wp:rx

    Hi, thanks for trying re my recent WP:RX request. There are apparently 300+ volumes of "Dictionary of Literary Biography" and some of them are two subtitles deep to get to the right book. Ironically vol. 2 and 3 of the book I needed can be borrowed from Internet Archive's "Open Library", but vol. 1 was nowhere to be found... and I did peruse the 'list' you sent me so thanks for that. Outriggr (talk) 08:16, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks Outriggr, yeah it did confuse me a bit! Hope you find, as the feller says, what you're looking for :) ——SN54129 08:44, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your GA nomination of Murder of William de Cantilupe

    The article Murder of William de Cantilupe you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Murder of William de Cantilupe for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 14:42, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Ealdgyth: Thanks very much  :) do you think it's ready to "kick upstairs", as it were...? It was a pleasure working with you, cheers. ——SN54129 14:53, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Given that I'm not really a prose polisher up there with the best of them, I'd suggest getting someone else's eyes on it for prose - I can not promise that my idea of FA-ready prose will necessarily be up to snuff for others. @Gog the Mild: might have some suggestions? The sources though, should pass FA easy. (ping me and I'll do the source review since I can't possibly promote because of the GA review anyway) Ealdgyth (talk) 14:56, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ealdgyth and Serial Number 54129: I would be happy to give it a gentle copy edit if SN would like me to. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:36, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    If you could, Gog, much appreciated! Looking forward to the subsequent edit war[FBDB] :D ——SN54129 18:43, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    You're looking for...

    MOS:PLURALNOUN. Im not aware that we've ever needed a policy/guideline that says titles need to be grammatically correct - it might be buried somewhere in WP:TITLE. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:09, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks, Ealdgyth. you wouldn't have thought we would, would you? But there's always a firsttime...I'll dig through WP:TITLE also. Cheers! ——SN54129 14:31, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Dominic McGlinchy

    If that is what you mean by "expand slightly", it might take me a year to read something substantive.

    Very impressive work by the way.

    CivisHibernius (talk) 02:10, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Well, an edit-summary of "~13X expansion" would have been looked massively big-headed! Thanks for the appreciation, CivisHibernius; I like to get out of my comfort zone every now and then. What you think re: NPOV? Being so notorious, that was always going to be the tricky bit. ——SN54129 13:10, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Personal attack and bullying without reason

    Dear you threatening me of mega blaockage even without explaining reason, your mentioned article des not explain reason, please explain why you deleted edit o God in Islam ° — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truth is this (talk • contribs) 17:33, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your edits are consistently poor, I'm afraid, and syou are clealy a sock. ——SN54129 17:45, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Well spotted

    User talk:Truth is this. Doug Weller talk 17:46, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Cheers, Doug Weller, I don't think Sherlock's got anything to fear though  :) ——SN54129 18:08, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Amused, but confused

    @Serial Number 54129:

    Your edit summary for this diff gave me a chuckle, but your correction also left me quite confused. What do you mean by returning to the RfA process?

    Cheers,
    Doug Mehus T·C 15:59, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your GA nomination of Der Rosendorn

    The article Der Rosendorn you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Der Rosendorn for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:22, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Dillegrout

    Hey, SN! So here's the recipe for dillegrout, which the holders of the manor of Addington were required to serve at every coronation in perpetuity from 1068 to keep their tenancy. Someone finally let them off the hook after 1821:

    Take almonde mylk, and draw hit up thik with vernage, and let hit boyle, and braune of capons braied and put therto; and cast therto sugre, claves, maces, pynes, and ginger, mynced; and take chekyns parboyled and chopped, and pul of the skyn, and boyle al ensemble, and, in the settynge doune from the fire, put thereto a lytel vynegar alaied with pouder of ginger, and a lytel water of everose, and make the potage hanginge, and serve hit forth.

    So I'm thinking

    (Make a reduction of almond milk and sweet wine?) and bring to a boil (or maybe simmer?), add (the dark meat?) of capon, braised. Add sugar, cloves, mace, pine nuts, and minced ginger. Parboil a chicken, remove the skin, chop the meat, add it, and boil (simmer?) everything together. After removing from the heat, add vinegar combined with powdered ginger, and a little rose water. But what the heck does 'make the potage hanginge' mean before we serve it forth?

    I'm considering making the darn thing just so I can photograph it, because that's how crazy I am. I mean, this is clearly a sweet chicken porridge-y thing that must taste a bit like pumpkin pie. :D Thanks so much for any help! --valereee (talk) 14:23, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Valereee:, "make the potage hanginge" means let it thicken before serving. It can be referenced to the Early English Dictionary, I'll send you the relevant page.
    Go ahead. I'm sure it tastes as good as it sounds  ;) ——SN54129 14:32, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks so much, I'll watch for it! --valereee (talk) 15:09, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Valereee: Oh, I sent it over half an hour ago! ——SN54129 15:17, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Found it, thanks so much! --valereee (talk) 15:23, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Valereee: Couple of tings, Beidget Anne Henisch describes it as "chicken in a piquant sauce", also linking it to Bardolf, "which may reveal the secret of Dillegrout". Eileen White, meanwhile, calls it a "sacremental oat of pottage". Unfortunately I can't see any more from Gbooks and don't possess hardcopies. ——SN54129 16:33, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, very cool, thanks! My library has the Henisch book! Hm, looks like the other isn't available via my library/interlibrary loan. Maybe I can find someone at the reference desk! --valereee (talk) 16:44, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Rare view of the King’s Assistant Sewer
    —EEng
    This may be what spawned Monty Python: The first dish of hot meat is now brought into the hall preceded by two clerks controllers, two clerks of the green cloth, the Master of the Household, the Cofferer, six sergeants-at-arms, the Lord High Steward, with the Earl Marshall on his left, and the High Constable on his right hand. These three dignitaries are on horseback. They are followed by six sergeants-at-arms, then by the Comptroller of the Household, and the Treasurer of the Household, the Assistant to the Queen's Sewer and the Queen's Sewer, the Assistant to the King's Sewer and the King's Sewer. The course of meat is carried either by Gentlemen Pensioners two and two, or, as is more proper, by the new made Knights of the Bath. After them comes the Lord of the manor of Addington carrying the "mess called dillegrout," and the procession is ended by two clerks of the kitchen. --valereee (talk) 18:31, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Forgive the statement of the obvious, but is this not just the standard traditional recipe for blancmange? ‑ Iridescent 21:56, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Iridescent, it's been compared to blancmange by various later-commenters! But isn't blancmange a slicable thing? --valereee (talk) 23:21, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Traditional blancmange was basically spiced and sweetened chicken soup made with milk, reduced and thickened until it had the consistency of porridge; some recipes recommended serving it as a stew in bowls, some recommend boiling it until it's thick enough to serve in slices. It only evolved into the present-day "opaque white jello" in the Georgian period. When it comes to medieval blancmange, we have the luxury of knowing exactly how it was made, as it was so popular the recipe appears in a ton of medieval manuscripts. The recipe from The Forme of Cury, the cookbook of the medieval English royal court, uses aniseed as a flavouring instead of rosewater, but is otherwise virtually identical to the one at the top of this thread. ‑ Iridescent 06:40, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Iridescent, very interesting! Hm, he Forme of Cury recipe is maybe the similar maupygernon, as it has fat added. (I assume that's what grece is, that's added with the sugar?) But wait...does rys = rice? Because there's no rice in the dillegrout recipe. They've both got capons and almonds/almond milk and sugar, for sure.
    I added Blancmange as a See also, but I'll go back over the sources and see which ones were saying what about the similarity to blancmange! Thanks! --valereee (talk) 11:47, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Valereee: and they wondered why it was stone cold when it got there  ;) ——SN54129 12:01, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Forgive the statement of the obvious, but is this not just the standard traditional recipe for blancmange? ‑ Iridescent 21:56, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Iridescent, it's been compared to blancmange by various later-commenters! But isn't blancmange a slicable thing? --valereee (talk) 23:21, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Traditional blancmange was basically spiced and sweetened chicken soup made with milk, reduced and thickened until it had the consistency of porridge; some recipes recommended serving it as a stew in bowls, some recommend boiling it until it's thick enough to serve in slices. It only evolved into the present-day "opaque white jello" in the Georgian period. When it comes to medieval blancmange, we have the luxury of knowing exactly how it was made, as it was so popular the recipe appears in a ton of medieval manuscripts. The recipe from The Forme of Cury, the cookbook of the medieval English royal court, uses aniseed as a flavouring instead of rosewater, but is otherwise virtually identical to the one at the top of this thread. ‑ Iridescent 06:40, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Iridescent, very interesting! Hm, he Forme of Cury recipe is maybe the similar maupygernon, as it has fat added. (I assume that's what grece is, that's added with the sugar?) But wait...does rys = rice? Because there's no rice in the dillegrout recipe. They've both got capons and almonds/almond milk and sugar, for sure.
    I added Blancmange as a See also, but I'll go back over the sources and see which ones were saying what about the similarity to blancmange! Thanks! --valereee (talk) 11:47, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Iridescent: (I nearly typed {{reply|Blancmange}} there) excellent analysis. As late, indeed, as the 19th century!
    Yeah, the principle flavours of the upper-class medieval menu were the contrasting sweet–savoury combo. At a conference some years ago one of the extracurricular exhibitions was medieval cuisine, at the top of the menu being sugared lamprey. Samples were available  :) ——SN54129 12:01, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, "rys"=rice. Because it doesn't grow either in England or in any of medieval England's main trading partners (it was later grown in Spain and Aquitaine but at the time we're talking about it only grew in Islamic countries and Byzantium) in the middle ages substituting rice for corn or oats was an extreme in-your-face form of pointless conspicuous consumption. The modern equivalent would be Himalayan salt or imported water. ‑ Iridescent 12:49, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    This is one of the best talk page threads ever. --bonadea contributions talk 13:32, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    If you liked this, you may want to sample the wares at Template talk:English cuisine. ‑ Iridescent 15:16, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    OMG where has THAT been all my life! --valereee (talk) 16:45, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Bearing in mind that Iridescent's page is WP:AN/BN/RFC/JIMBO all rolled into one, I think they come here for the light relief  :) ——SN54129 15:21, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    So I did that

    SN, I got the Henisch book and have added a section at Dillegrout#Similar serjeanties -- would you have any idea who this Walter in Essex might be? --valereee (talk) 17:12, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Valereee: Short answer, no; I have to pull the old "not my period" card, I'm afraid  :) perhaps Ealdgyth—lately of this parish—might have more idea. Is it definitely talking about the conquest period? It could have been Walter of Douai, who although a predominantly a West Country landowner, did hold estates in Essex also (Havering-atte-Bower, IIRC for example). There's also Walter de Clare, although he's a few years later. All things being equal, I'd bet my shirt that this Walter is an early version of the FitWalter family. See "my" John FitzWalter, 2nd Baron FitzWalter for a particularly tasty 13th-century version  :)
    If you don't mind me saying, bloody good work with the article though, it's really interesting. ——SN54129 18:54, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks so much! Walter of Essex was in Domesday, so, um...:::embarrassed cough:::...yes, conquest period? hahahaha --valereee (talk) 20:02, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    No embarrassment required, Valereee  :) My fault, I've got the memory of a goldfish, and although I'd read your piece a few minutes earlier, by the time I replied to you here, I'd bloody forgotten what you'd writen. Well, it is Saturday evening here, that's my excuse! ——SN54129 20:07, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Saturday afternoon for me, which is good enough here. Sun's over the yardarm somewhere! --valereee (talk) 21:11, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    valereee, that-----------------> looks...interesting  ;) how did it taste? ——SN54129 13:17, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    My husband and son also pronounced it "interesting." :) I can see how in the 11th century someone might have thought it was the best thing they'd ever eaten. We, on the other hand, have the benefit of an additional 1000 years of human cooking experience. The almond-milk base, I'll definitely try again. Adding cloves, sugar, and rosewater, not so much. I suspect the sugar and spices were there mostly to make it an expensive and therefore kingly dish. I did write out a recipe, might put it into the wiki cookbook just for the lolz. --valereee (talk) 13:30, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, and your thought this might be an early FitzWalter lines up with what the Henisch book says: "The history of both tenures shows how the service demanded for the land changed significantly in the course of time. Thus, Walter in Domesday is described as a cook, but by the early thirteenth century his successor's duties are more narrowly defined: he is to be the king's turnspit. A little later, he is merely expected to clock in for work in the royal kitchen on the three great feasts of the year, Christmas, Easter, and Whitsun. By the middle of the century, this humble labor was no longer required because some annual military service had taken its place. By 1294/1295 he paid for his land each year with money." Baron FitzWalter was created in 1295, and his father was Sir Walter FitzRobert of Woodham Walter, Essex.
    Henisch is sourcing to Round, The King's Sergeants and Officers of State p43. Might have to just go look that up...--valereee (talk) 13:50, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Nice bit of detective work, Columbo  :) conveniently, Round is on Archive.org. ——SN54129 13:59, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    OMG Dillegrout got nearly 15,000 views yesterday at DYK hahahahaha sometimes I love this place --valereee (talk) 01:51, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Re: edit summary on my talk page

    Hi. Sorry, I wasn't meaning to accuse you of 'twattish gloating'. I was just expressing my opinion of what motivated the person who reverted an edit on my talk page. Apologies if you were offended. DrFrench (talk) 09:12, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    DrFrench, no problem and thanks very much for the message. I just didn't want to leave you a message about something you'd just archived, which could/would have looked a bit arseholery! Cheers, ——SN54129 09:25, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    There again, if you hadn't removed the block and appeal notice - as it specifically tells you not to do on the blocking message - then maybe someone wouldn't have had to put it back. There was no gloating at all, let alone any "twattish gloating", which says more about you than me, I think. - SchroCat (talk) 16:29, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your accusation of ethno-political POV pusher

    Could you tell me why you accused me of being an ethno-political POV pusher based on that request for deletion?. That is exactly like saying I am racist.-SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 00:38, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm very glad to see you haven't been indefinitely blocked yet. No, it is not the same thing at all. Unless of course you have been making racist statements.
    Your MfD screed was a polemic. Quoth an administrator from early in the discussion: ...if you're unable to separate your opinions about them from how Wikipedia discusses them, then this is a topic you are likely to be removed from. Happy days. ——SN54129 08:33, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The Bugle: IssueICLXVI, February 2020

    Full front page of The Bugle
    Your Military History Newsletter

    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) 13:04, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Orphaned non-free image File:Richard Roose being boiled alive.jpg

    ⚠
    ⚠

    Thanks for uploading File:Richard Roose being boiled alive.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

    Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:31, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    A favo(u)r

    Would it be possible for you to block my old account name (anmccaff) from posting? I log into it occasionally to see the old watchlist, and I’ve accidentally posted using it about 5 times now. Qwirkle (talk) 22:41, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Qwirkle: Thanks very much for the (massively undeserved) promotion; but I think I saw fine admins @Nick-D and ST47 around a minute ago, hope one of them can help. Have a good weekend  :) ——SN54129 09:35, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Ahh, that was just wishful thinking? My apologies. When I was younger and stupider I’d have suggested you run, then, but I wouldn’t wish going through an RfA on any sentient being.

    Mind if I nuke this rather than archive? Qwirkle (talk) 10:29, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    you are so asking for it

    death or hell.

    --Letsdothisdothis (talk) 09:23, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    And Yet, I Dwell In Both ——SN54129 09:35, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    That sounds unpleasant. Join me instead? Cheers, --bonadea contributions talk 10:28, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bonadea; what is that they say—"Hell is other people"?! But as an afficionado of the—oddly-named mutton—that's a great poem, thanks for the introduction. Lovely sense of unending breathlessness. ——SN54129 18:48, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The fulminating (and now blocked) user is a sock of User:Iniced, the Churlish Chump from Chorley. How dwelling in Lancashire should be classified, I'll let others decide. Favonian (talk) 10:36, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    ​ Down one of their many holes, perhaps :D ——SN54129 18:48, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I went to a football match in Chorley one night. I cannot for the life of me remember why the hell I was there though. Typical Northern Premier League solid stadium. As I recall, one end was ten metres higher than the other. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 19:18, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Roxy the dog Kind of Chorley Ultras eh? ;) ——SN54129 19:28, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    I added your image to an article.

    The fair use image you uploaded was almost deleted, so I added it to Richard Roose. Analog Horror, (Speak) 18:03, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Analog Horror, many thanks for taking care of old Roose there, I'd forgotten all about it. Thanks very much. Just as a pointer, if you want to link to a file without actually showing it, put a semi colon before the file name; e.g., in this case, it's now [[:File:Richard Roose being boiled alive.jpg]]; While I'm sure my talk page could always do with more medieval brutalia, some of my stalkers are timid creatures...though not many, mind you ;) Have a good weekend! ——SN54129 18:38, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Jo-Jo Eumerus RfB

    Did you mean to revert yourself? As much as I hope you have reconsidered, it's quite rare to do so with rollback. :) Maxim(talk) 13:27, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Maxim: Thanks for he note. Yes, it was intentional—I decided that the decision deserved deeper, less superficial, consideration than I had then given it. Apologies if I messed up the percentages or anything. How do you mean, "as much as I hope you have reconsidered"? ——SN54129 13:38, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    D'oh! I just realised, of course, that as a nominator, that's why you would hope that  :) ——SN54129 13:39, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Serial Number 54129, the percentages didn't get messed up. It's usually more clear if the !vote is struck out, just because the rollback looked an errant click. (And as a nominator, I'm equally happy with a strikeout or a rollback - it's all the same to me. :p Maxim(talk) 14:16, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 13

    News and updates associated with user scripts from the past month (February 2019).

    Hello everyone and welcome to the 13th issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter:

    I hope everyone is having a great year so far! --DannyS712 (talk) 15:53, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    WikiCup 2020 March newsletter

    Recent email from Capt. Gog. Unfortunately it has been caught in the Duke of Alençon's spam filter and torn in half.

    And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 57 contestants qualifying. We have abolished the groups this year, so to qualify for Round 3 you will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two contestants.

    Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

    • New York (state) Epicgenius, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with a featured article, five good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 895 points.
    • England Gog the Mild came next with 464 points, from a featured article, two good articles and a number of reviews, the main theme being naval warfare.
    • United States Raymie was in third place with 419 points, garnered from one good article and an impressive 34 DYKs on radio and TV stations in the United States.
    • Somerset Harrias came next at 414, with a featured article and three good articles, an English civil war battle specialist.
    • Pirate flag CaptainEek was in fifth place with 405 points, mostly garnered from bringing Cactus wren to featured article status.
    • The top ten contestants at the end of Round 1 all scored over 200 points; they also included United States L293D, Venezuela Kingsif, Antarctica Enwebb, England Lee Vilenski and Nepal CAPTAIN MEDUSA. Seven of the top ten contestants in Round 1 are new to the WikiCup.

    These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. In Round 1 there were four featured articles, one featured list and two featured pictures, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. Between them, contestants completed 127 good article reviews, nearly a hundred more than the 43 good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Contestants also claimed for 40 featured article / featured list reviews, and most even remembered to mention their WikiCup participation in their reviews (a requirement).

    Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.

    If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:47, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Vanamonde93 Out of curiosity, wot do the little flags next to the contestants' names indicate? ——SN54129 16:50, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Nothing, really...Editors choose a flag to display next to their name when they sign up. I chose the United Nations flag, the one time I did this. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:49, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Cheers Vanamonde93. I'd assumed it to be some kind of geolocation thing— until I realised that, if that was the case, somehow Gog the Mild had managed to geo-relocate himself back to 15th-century England :) ——SN54129 11:05, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    But I have! Which would explain the rubbish internet connection. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:41, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The Signpost: 1 March 2020

    * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:46, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    WikiCup newsletter correction

    There was an error in the WikiCup 2020 March newsletter; United States L293D should not have been included in the list of top ten scorers in Round 1 (they led the list last year), instead, United States Dunkleosteus77 should have been included, having garnered 334 points from five good articles on animals, living or extinct, and various reviews. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:30, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    William Bonville, 1st Baron Bonville scheduled for TFA

    This is to let you know that the William Bonville, 1st Baron Bonville article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 18, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 18, 2020, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

    For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.

    We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:55, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for the reminder to unwatchlist Bill on 17 April :D ——SN54129 15:05, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Aw

    You could have used the phrase "OK boomerang" in this close! (But on the whole it was probably better not to.) Yours randomly. --bonadea contributions talk 19:30, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Dang!—that would have been so Joe Cool as me the non-millenial might say  :) ——SN54129 19:33, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

    Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

    Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
    70 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Metamorphosis (Rolling Stones album) (talk) Add sources
    737 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Gloucester (talk) Add sources
    27 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Stub Occupational Personality Questionnaires (talk) Add sources
    477 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: GA Between the Buttons (talk) Add sources
    69 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Nanker Phelge (talk) Add sources
    31,504 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: FA Boris Johnson (talk) Add sources
    36 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Heart of Stone (Rolling Stones song) (talk) Cleanup
    370 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out! The Rolling Stones in Concert (talk) Cleanup
    206 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C As Tears Go By (song) (talk) Cleanup
    257 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B In-flight entertainment (talk) Expand
    6,485 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: FA Shaheen Bagh protests (talk) Expand
    10,808 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: GA Citizenship Amendment Act protests (talk) Expand
    202 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Maggie's Farm (talk) Unencyclopaedic
    118 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Shifta War (talk) Unencyclopaedic
    346 Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: GA Allen Klein (talk) Unencyclopaedic
    47 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Leslee Udwin (talk) Merge
    231 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Cow vigilante violence in India (talk) Merge
    22 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Virtual Boy hardware (talk) Merge
    579 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Game Boy family (talk) Wikify
    227 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Premiership of Margaret Thatcher (talk) Wikify
    232 Quality: High, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: GA Comparison of open-source configuration management software (talk) Wikify
    2 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Russell L. Caldwell (talk) Orphan
    8 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: B Timeline of British undercover forces in Operation Banner (talk) Orphan
    2 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Anthony Gelsomino (talk) Orphan
    38 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub The Andrew Oldham Orchestra (talk) Stub
    13 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Stoned (Rolling Stones song) (talk) Stub
    13 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Richard Carpenter (footballer) (talk) Stub
    8 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start 2014 Ms. Olympia (talk) Stub
    11 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: C Woodhall Spa Golf Club (talk) Stub
    28 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Vojtech Mastny (talk) Stub

    SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

    If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:43, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Dr. Nick

    Please explain on the talk page. You reverted without any explanation. Christian75 (talk) 10:14, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    A barnstar for you!

    The Original Barnstar
    For (the now slightly more one and only) Eric Easton, an intersting person I had never heard of. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:51, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    True that, Gråbergs Gråa Sång, and thanks very much. It's almost finished, but it would be good to know a bit more about his pre- and post-Stones career—there's so little in RS. Having any luck with the family? ——SN54129 14:12, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    If you mean the discussion at User talk:T Boy Jackson you know as much as I do. My guess is that they were reasonably pleased. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 23:22, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    thank you

    ...for expressing what I was feeling so succinctly. Praxidicae (talk) 13:23, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Praxidicae: The most generous interpretation of tossers on the internet is that they think their comments have no real-life consequences. They are of course wrong, as you know. Just like racists. ——SN54129 21:46, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Arbitration case opened

    In 2018, you offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has now accepted that request for arbitration, and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 23, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

    All content, links, and diffs from the original ARC and the latest ARC are being read into the evidence for this case.

    The secondary mailing list is in use for this case: arbcom-en-b@wikimedia.org

    For the Arbitration Committee, CThomas3 (talk) 17:32, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

    This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the WP:DRN regarding you contributed to the discussion. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Steak and Blowjob Day".The discussion is about the topic Steak and Blowjob Day. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! ItsGolfTime (talk) 21:59, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    ANI

    I would like to make it clear that I have no content dispute nor did I challenge any material on that grounds. Consider reevaluation or I will open new ANI making it clear that there is no content dispute. Sauvahge (talk) 11:49, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    (talk page stalker) Sauvahge, it is a content dispute (you are disagreeing about content and sourcing), and a discussion is already taking place in the right place. Please don't raise another ANI thread about this, just engage with the discussion - you don't want to be boomeranged for wasting people's time. Best GirthSummit (blether) 12:06, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    No, again I want to clarify. I have no dispute regarding the content at all. What I found troubling is that soure from 1905 is quoted and used to explain movement that will develop years later. How can you quote source from 1905 and say Art Deco will be this and that. That is textbook Original Research. Sauvahge (talk) 12:09, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Sauvahge, this is exactly what is meant by the phrase 'content dispute' - you disagree with other another editor about content and sourcing. Take your concerns to the article talk page, discuss it with other editors, and if you can't come to a consensus try dispute resolution. ANI is for behavioural issues - the closest thing to a behavioural issue on that page is your edit warring to remove content you don't like (let's be clear - you removed content (bold), ColdCreation reinstated it (revert), you then removed it again without consensus to do so - you were wrong to do that). Engage with the discussion, or walk away. Anyway, I doubt whether SN wants this discussion taking place on his talk page - please feel free to drop me a note on mine if you disagree with anything I've said. Best GirthSummit (blether) 12:31, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Many thanks, Girth Summit—just got back online. ——SN54129 13:28, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    No worries - is that Wikibreak notice at the top of the page a real thing by the way, are we not going to be seeing you around the place? :( GirthSummit (blether) 13:41, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Hiya

    Well I am dyslexic and can sometimes get stuff muddled!! Govvy (talk) 22:52, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    No problem at all Govvy, they're dead close to each other. Although, by the way, both A7 and A11 are for articles...not user pages  ;) ——SN54129 23:07, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    heh, just had four alerts from ya! I was getting in to the New Page feed, going through the articles and checking them out, I do love the ones on history that popup. But ye, guess you noticed that think on Ross Flom‎, maybe I leave that for someone else to deal with then!! Govvy (talk) 23:14, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Apologies for all the pings! Gotta little bit confused...  ;) ——SN54129 23:27, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The Bugle: Issue CLXVII, March 2020

    Full front page of The Bugle
    Your Military History Newsletter

    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) 01:51, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Disambiguation link notification for March 15

    Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)

    Illy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
    added a link pointing to Francis Francis
    Loveday, 1458 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
    added a link pointing to Cognizance

    It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:37, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Yes yes yes...

    This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

    Please carefully read this information:

    A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
    The specific details of these sanctions are described here.

    Broadly, general sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

    Template:Z33

    This sort of nonsense is why everyone should just stop contributing to the main namespace. The people who claim to be in charge can't manage our effort to write an encyclopedia beyond bullshit rulings to disallow reverts and punishing editors under behavior policies. SanFran will take their $35M in profit but you guys are all under 1RR. Chris Troutman (talk) 13:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    This implies that the punitive regime is mostly the WMF; I doubt that that is true, and the damage done by political, social, and fanboy POV-pushers is considerable. It ain’t always about the money. Qwirkle (talk) 14:02, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Qwirkle: I see every ARBCOM DS ruling as an admission that they are only competent to enforce the veneer of civility. This enterprise seeks no method for resolving content disputes or cracking down on the POV pushers, fans, and crazies. That strategy only burns-out our good-faith volunteer contributors. Chris Troutman (talk) 14:40, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Can’t, and wouldn’t wanna, argue with that, but I’d add that part of the reason this happens is because some of the POV-pushers say things that the various PTB are comfortable with, and their mortal sins against scholarship are treated as peccadilloes. Cf. Cirt, and Mr. WikiWelcomeWagon, so to speak, (now at ARBCOM) Qwirkle (talk) 14:57, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    You always make excellent points Chris, and as ever it's a pleasure when you drop by. Our paths don't cross often enough.
    Same to you of course, Qwirkle.
    Yes, I made my one edit to a C-19 article and thought I might as well template myself before someone else does  ;) but I do intend to steer clear of the subject. Talk about a minefield. ——SN54129 14:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Wait, what? We authorized COVID-19 GS? I suggested that a week ago and was told that it wasn't worth it...Nope, I'm not bitter at all. creffett (talk) 14:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Heh  :) Creffett I missed it too—I was probably glancing at my watch at the time! It goes to show though that no man is a prophet in his own land... ——SN54129 14:37, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    DYK nomination of Station Squabble

    Hello! Your submission of Station Squabble at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 22:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for this, BlueMoonset, but it's nothing to do with me. I merely expanded the article to save it from deletion; the dyk nominator added my name to it without my permission. Cheers, ——SN54129 06:05, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for letting me know. I'll close it, then. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:08, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Disambiguation link notification for March 22

    An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Illy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Francis Francis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

    (Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:24, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Precious anniversary

    Precious
    Three years!

    --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:31, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Danke schön, Gerda. I'll make the most of this—might not be here for the next one! :) ——SN54129 06:58, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Same for me. Did you know that RexxS made the template, so in the future - after me - a bot could issue it, - provided I get the dates in the table organised? I managed for the user names. - Did you read Jessye Norman yesterday? I feel so blessed that I heard her (Carnegie Hall), and won't forget the gesture keeping the audience breathless even for a very long piano postlude. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:04, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you today for William Bonville, 1st Baron Bonville, Next in a series of bad or bonkers barons, here's Lord Bonville. Nothing to do with this, unfortunately. The early part of his career was pretty run of the mill—suing relatives, fighting the French—but in middle age, he found his niche: engaging in a long-running bitter and bloody feud with a more powerful neighbour, the Earl of Devon, in which they both had their share of victories and defeats. A small feud like that, of course, couldn't really stay the course against its bigger and badder brother, so both they and they squabble became part of a national political crisis which culminated, in early 1461 in both Bonville and his rival dying violently in quick succession for their favoured causes."! - Here's a (later) funeral sentence ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:36, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Gwenno Saunders

    This is being discussed at WP:BLPN and input there would be infinitely more useful than reverting, especially as 'my' version is restoring something which has been there since the article was created (13+ years); 'your' version has been there 5 months. Ever heard of WP:BRD? GiantSnowman 08:50, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @GiantSnowman: as it happens, I have. The question—since you made a Bold edit ([3]), which was then Reverted, but which you then reverted twice more until you hit 3RR ([4], [5]) and now have decided to Discuss—is whether you have—although your willful disregard of the process you cite suggests that you do and care otherwise  :) since you have been addressed at WP:BLPN by Messrs Iridescent and Mr rnddude, is my assistance in showing you the way really required?
    Notwithstanding all that, snowmen rock, so stay safe. ——SN54129 07:15, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Nope - the bold edit was the one in October 2019 changing 13 years of stability. I reverted that edit. You (nor of the other editors) have not discussed. GiantSnowman 17:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you just going to ignore that fact? Why have you restored a (relatively) recent edit which messed up the 13 year stability of the article? GiantSnowman 19:40, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Dashing through the snow, in a one-horse open sleight ...
    Quite a sleight
    (talk page stalker) – It didn't mess up anything. The article stayed stable for another half-a-year before you disputed the change. For which you are yet to give a cogent argument beyond MOS:ETHNICITY, which is inapplicable in cases where the subject's ethnicity is relevant to their notability. Imagine describing the Dalai Lama as Chinese because Tibetan isn't a nationality (anymore). He might dump pacifism just to whoop some ass for a sleight like that. Mr rnddude (talk) 20:24, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    That tells me that I used the wrong slight. Damn it. Mr rnddude (talk) 23:44, 31 March 2020 (UTC) ->[reply]
    Cornwall is an English county. It is not a country. The China-Tibet analogy is not suitable. What makes her Cornish, other than her recording music on Cornish? After all she also recorded an album in Welsh...indeed, she was born and raised in Wales, and her record label describes her as being "from Cardiff" and not "Cornish". Yes one of her parents is Cornish and she is fluent in the language, but that does not make her Cornish! GiantSnowman 18:22, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 14

    News and updates associated with user scripts from the past month (March 2020).

    Hello everyone and welcome to the 14th issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter:

    Stay safe, --DannyS712 (talk) 05:48, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    My bad

    I thought you were not joking. Did not know it was April fools lol, my bad dude. New3400 (talk) 21:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

    Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

    Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
    14 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Kalarippayattu stick-fighting (talk) Add sources
    2,978 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: GA Bangkok (talk) Add sources
    2,988 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B Bhumibol Adulyadej (talk) Add sources
    11,475 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Daniel Dae Kim (talk) Add sources
    1,878 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Muay Thai (talk) Add sources
    22 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B McKenna Long & Aldridge (talk) Add sources
    331 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B Human Rights Campaign (talk) Cleanup
    86 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B History of Milan (talk) Cleanup
    823 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Kathoey (talk) Cleanup
    46 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start United States Senate Democratic Steering and Outreach Committee (talk) Expand
    12,180 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: FA 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Thailand (talk) Expand
    395 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Skeksis (talk) Expand
    48 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Rayong F.C. (talk) Unencyclopaedic
    770 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: FA Prayut Chan-o-cha (talk) Unencyclopaedic
    80 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: B Eastern Orthodox opposition to papal supremacy (talk) Unencyclopaedic
    30 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Catholic lay organisations (talk) Merge
    969 Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: GA 2020 coronavirus pandemic in South Asia (talk) Merge
    48 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Profession of faith (Christianity) (talk) Merge
    379 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: FA Catholic Church and Nazi Germany (talk) Wikify
    17 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Võ thuật Bình Định (talk) Wikify
    66 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: FA Views of Lyndon LaRouche and the LaRouche movement (talk) Wikify
    7 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Modern Vidya Niketan School, Aravali Hills (talk) Orphan
    3 Quality: Low, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: Start Emidio Campi (talk) Orphan
    2 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Fred Roe (talk) Orphan
    2 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Gregorio della Suburra (talk) Stub
    44 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Ajahn (talk) Stub
    14 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Stub Trout memo (talk) Stub
    3,223 Quality: Low, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: Start NHS Nightingale Hospitals (talk) Stub
    69 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Asalha Puja (talk) Stub
    92 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Dil Apna Punjabi (talk) Stub

    SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

    If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:00, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    PainMan

    You wrote -

    Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not do on User talk:FDW777. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ——SN54129 19:47, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

    I've been doing wikipedia for 15 years now. Maybe longer. I haven't looked to be honest. But I'm no newb. When I very first started editing I had several negative experiences with folks I call Page Commandos. I learned that several people can essentially high jack an article and stop anyone else from contributing to it. It's also clear that these claques extend into the administrator hierarchy. 'In short, if ya ain't a member of the Club, ya ain't gonna win any appeal'. One Admin was frank about this, telling me I'd be blocked for even challenging his ukase. I do wonder if this is what Jimbo Wales wants or if he just doesn't care.

    Check my record, am I a guy that regularly engages in controversy - pointless or otherwise. I don't care enough about FDW777 to continue with the nonsense. He leaves me alone; I'll leave him alone.

    I've authored 3 articles. I've made thousands of edits. The vast majority or grammar, spelling, typo corrections and rewriting bad English, especially when written by non-native speakers. I almost never change facts. I feel I'm doing a bigger service to wikipedia than engaging in "ferocious quibbles over a comma".

    PainMan (talk) 17:40, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    • @PainMan: Thanks for the message. For the record, you'd be better of making this statement at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#PainMan. Apologies for the template though!
      A couple of other things. I left you that message 17 days ago; this response then would be more persuasive than this response now. I'm also not doubting your commitment to the project, and I don't see anyone else doing so. All that seems to be an issue is an occasional blindspot on a topic for which you hold strong feelings. There's nothin wrong with that—as long as it can be controlled.
      I'll link to this message over at AE, thanks again for it. ——SN54129 14:50, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    I got vandalized on my sand box

    So I got vandalized on my sandbox and thanks for the help for that one time reply if you can help I removed the vandalism check my sand box thank you (Maokn (talk) 19:48, 5 April 2020 (UTC))[reply]

    (talk page stalker) Yeah I hate it when I get vandalism in my sandbox. Levivich [dubious – discuss] 06:43, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Levivich, hey, you got your sandbox in my vandalism! creffett (talk) 14:53, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Since their sandbox has never been edited by anyone else, let alone vandalized, I think it may be the case that all their sandbox are belong to us... ——SN54129 15:00, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Revdel, please.

    "I wouldn't join a club that would have me as a member!"

    Hi. Could you please revdel both edits by LucyMarie39 (talk · contribs)? Thanks. Kleuske (talk) 15:48, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Bloody hell Kleuske, as if the Coronavirus wasn't bad enough, you've only gotta go confuse me with an admin  :) No can do I'm afraid, but I think I saw @Acroterion and RegentsPark: wandering around earlier...?Hope you're well! ——SN54129 15:57, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    RfA! RfA! RfA! creffett (talk) 16:10, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    On edit, they have already been caught in the BEAM  ;) ——SN54129 15:58, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Not 1000% sure about the revdel, but it seemed to make sense so I did it. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:04, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I suppose this is the time to say [we] are once again, asking for your [mopping] support. Mr rnddude (talk) 16:07, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    A bloodbath is announced, to be followed by light music. "Gentlemen, it was a pleasure playing with you."  :) ——SN54129 16:36, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Ooops. Well, if you aren’t a mod, you bloody well should be. All’s well, here. Kleuske (talk) 17:01, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I've got it! Nominate the usual pun/bad joke/silly image group (you, EEng, Levivich, Atsme, who else?) as a batch RfA like what we do with mass-AfDs, so that we can conveniently vote them all down in one place. creffett (talk) 17:35, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your unsubstantiated accusations

    You have called me an ethno-political POV-pusher and now accusing me of calling other editors ISIS. This is a warning to you, don't make unsubstantiated accusations against me again.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 17:33, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    • Are you sure you want to do this SharabSalam?
      OK. Let's clarify, for a start. What you're presumably referring to was my comment at AN/I that It wasn't that long ago though, was it, that an administrator instructed you to "dial it down immediately" for, err, comparing things to ISIS. This is not, unfortunately, an unsubstantiated claim—as I'm sure you remember—because it is less than six months since administrator Vanamonde93 told you to that you need to dial it down immediately. Comparing anything to ISIS is unacceptable without solid evidence (this was followed by the pretty unequivocal if you're unable to separate your opinions about them from how Wikipedia discusses them, then this is a topic you are likely to be removed from). Ironically, it was precisely those kind of remarks that you complained of at ANI.
      It was, of course, only March when another admin, Liz, warned you on your talk that you were being unnecessarilly antagonistic—again, at noticeboards. Then there was January, when admin Drmies had to advise you against personal attacks
      Sorry, but the best way to avoid very substantiable comments with regard one's interactions with other editors is to recalibrate one's approach: perhaps consider that it is you that is, perhaps, overly abrasive rather than consistently being other people's. All the best. ——SN54129 17:58, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      I am pretty sure I want you to clarify your accusation that I am an ethno-political POV-pusher. Also, I didn't compare any editor to ISIS. I compared the KGP, a terrorist organisation that is designated as a terrorist group by all European countries, the US, Australia, Japan and the UN. When you made you comment there you made sound as if I have compared an editor to ISIS, like that editor who called editors ISIS. Any further "ethno-political POV-pusher" accusation against me and I will fill a report against you.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 18:07, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Also that Drimes' comment was after an editor kept calling me names like "Yemen khat kid" and insulted my grandfather, I told that editor that he is mentally incapable of continuing that discussion, what I meant is that he was so angry. I said that I didn't mean to make as a personal attack. I have explained to Drimes what happened--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 18:11, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • It was January, [6], and you'll find keeping your cool and presenting rational, cogent arguments at MfD a surefire way to avoid the appearance. But of course that's a shame about your grandfather. ——SN54129 18:34, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your GA nomination of Alec Eist

    Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Alec Eist you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 18:21, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    A goat for you!

    Thank you for the clean up assist on my talk page. Cheers!

    ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia talk 19:06, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your GA nomination of Alec Eist

    The article Alec Eist you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Alec Eist for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 10:23, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Minor request

    Hello, Serial Number 54129,

    I have a minor request. When you close complaints on ANI, could you please sign off with {{nac}}? Looking over your user talk page, it seems like many editors believe that you are an administrator and this tag would indicate in a closure that you are not. It's standard practice for nonadmin closures on ANI/AN so I'm not singling you out. Thanks for your help and participation on the noticeboards! Liz Read! Talk! 23:17, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't think it's more frequent than an annual event :) but done. Thank you, Liz. ——SN54129 18:15, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your TP notice

    Hi SN, I just noticed your talk page notice says that you do not have immediate access to the internet and are on a wikibreak (diff/added 28 Sept 2019). Is the notice still accurate? I noticed that you have been fairly active recently. Best, TheSandDoctor Talk 00:30, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    I appreciate

    your colorful closes. Even if some others don't. Just wanted to let you know. Levivich [dubious – discuss] 18:23, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Well the place needs brightening up. Happy Easter, btw, if that's your bag, and on the assumption anything's allowed to be bleedin' happy any more. ——SN54129 19:59, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    As someone pointed out, "If you are going to pick a holiday to break a quarantine you can do a lot worse than one honoring the time Jesus was supposed to stay inside but didn’t." EEng 20:07, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    What better way to say hello to Spring than to mark the anniversary of a crucifixion by painting eggs delivered by rabbits? Happy Easter to you both (from a safe distance)! Levivich [dubious – discuss] 20:14, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your GA nomination of Alec Eist

    The article Alec Eist you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Alec Eist for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 09:01, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Boso

    No, you want NYB for that. He actually remembers all this stuff; I just know where to look. ‑ Iridescent 15:58, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Can you help?

    I'm trying to move my edits and user talk page from my old account to my current one. Old account is New340 to move to New3400. Help? New3400 (talk) 20:44, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Hope you're well, New3400. No, I can't I'm afraid, but your previous account only has 34 edits so does it really matter? I think it's too late after the event to merge accounts (i.e. you can move one to another, and even take them over), but for this, you want to talk to renamer, this is their bread-and-butter, so definitely the ones to talk to. Sorry I couldn't be of more help! All the best, ——SN54129 21:10, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The Bugle: Issue CLXVIII, April 2020

    Full front page of The Bugle
    Your Military History Newsletter

    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) 05:21, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your GA nomination of Richard Roose

    Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Richard Roose you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CaroleHenson -- CaroleHenson (talk) 06:01, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Electrical telegraphy in the United Kingdom

    Since you are on the Peer Review volunteers list, I wondered if you would care to look at Wikipedia:Peer review/Electrical telegraphy in the United Kingdom/archive1? It's had one reviewer, but I would feel a lot more comfortable if at least one more person looked at it before putting it up for FA. I was about to archive it, so please let me know soon if you are going to be able to do something. SpinningSpark 13:29, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Spinningspark: Thanks for this—it looks interesting! I'd definitely like to look in, but I'm a bit tied up today. Would tomorrow be too late for you? ——SN54129 13:38, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    No, not at all. Take as long as you like. I didn't mean to rush you, I just needed to know that I shouldn't archive yet. SpinningSpark 13:44, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your GA nomination of Richard Roose

    The article Richard Roose you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Richard Roose for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CaroleHenson -- CaroleHenson (talk) 21:21, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    What happens here please?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Farbenprofi All posts go more or less imediately to history....

    Your GA nomination of Richard Roose

    The article Richard Roose you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Richard Roose for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CaroleHenson -- CaroleHenson (talk) 18:01, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your submission at Articles for creation: Burhaan has been accepted

    Burhaan, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

    Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

    The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

    Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

    If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

    If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

    Thanks again, and happy editing!

    ——SN54129 14:17, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Sandbox deletion

    With all due respect, why did you put a speedy deletion tag on my sandbox? What is the point of doing that? It's a sandbox. Seems like a pointless exercise. --Legis Regis (talk) 19:41, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Oddly enough, I would agree. However, that video is definitely going to be deleted unless there's some proper licensing soon. Primefac (talk) 19:42, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    My U5s aren't normally erroneous, Primefac, what was wrong? ——SN54129 09:48, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, I guess it was borderline, I can see a TNT-approach to the fact that it was one problematic video on an otherwise blank sandbox. I guess in my mind blanking would have been just as easy. Primefac (talk) 15:46, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Must be part of the Wikipedia-Starbucks joint conspiracy to harrass me. --Legis Regis (talk) 19:43, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    [citation needed] Primefac (talk) 19:44, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Is the conspiracy taking applications? Do they pay in Starbucks gift cards? Because I'd totally work for the conspiracy if they did. creffett (talk) 19:47, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    You can apply for a position at the Wikipedia-Starbucks conspiracy, but to be hired, you must be committed to their mission, "coffee anyone can make". They accept applications online at Keurig.com. Levivich [dubious – discuss] 19:52, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    No thanks, conspiracies Costa fortune. ——SN54129 09:48, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    I have retired from Wikipedia

    Dear User:Serial Number 54129, I have mentioned you on my retirement message on my userpage. I hope you can be cleansed of your ties to the corporate establishment in the future. Kind regards, --Legis Regis (talk) 19:59, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Most people don't "retire" on their first day. Anyone would think you were just trolling us.-- P-K3 (talk) 20:06, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Didn't even make it an hour. Primefac (talk) 20:10, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Somebody should phone Guinness... ——SN54129 09:57, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I went for a 72min/6km walk and all this happens in the meantime. Mr rnddude (talk) 20:52, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Dude, we know it was you socking. Nobody's buying the "I was out for a walk" alibi. Levivich [dubious – discuss] 20:56, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The Mr was obviously out buying some more ties for the corporate establishment. Which SN will then launder. Did I get it right? --bonadea contributions talk 21:01, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm still polishing Mr rnddude's boots with Levivich's socks, Bonadea, it'll be awhiles 'fore ah gets promoted t'laundry room! 🍻 🧦 ——SN54129 09:57, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    ANI discussion involving you a little bit

    Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Chris.sherlock's misuse of their userpage to make a prominent personal attack. . --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:48, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Glad to be of help, BHG ——SN54129 09:38, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your GA nomination of Pope Adrian IV

    Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Pope Adrian IV you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Augend -- Augend (talk) 01:00, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    black book

    Sound as a pound. Internet dead here, only have work WiFi. Thanks. Be safe. Ceoil (talk) 13:43, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The Signpost: 26 April 2020

    * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Disambiguation link notification for April 28

    An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fédon's rebellion, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mason, Earthworks and Liberty cap (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

    (Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:33, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Ta, bot. ——SN54129 07:38, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

    Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

    Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
    979 Quality: High, Assessed class: GA, Predicted class: FA Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick (talk) Add sources
    448 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Review (talk) Add sources
    200 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Primacy of Peter (talk) Add sources
    1,877 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B Kievan Rus' (talk) Add sources
    18 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start ATRL (talk) Add sources
    100 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: B Media Blasters (talk) Add sources
    88 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: C Pre-lucid dream (talk) Cleanup
    750 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Gun politics in the United States (talk) Cleanup
    322 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Non-rapid eye movement sleep (talk) Cleanup
    10 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Courtesy tenure (talk) Expand
    64 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Burgundian (party) (talk) Expand
    34 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Maurice Bénichou (talk) Expand
    534 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Saint-Domingue (talk) Unencyclopaedic
    21 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Stub Dream guide (talk) Unencyclopaedic
    113 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Denglisch (talk) Unencyclopaedic
    170 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C January 2015 Île-de-France attacks (talk) Merge
    95 Quality: High, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: GA Amedy Coulibaly (talk) Merge
    450 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Calling of the disciples (talk) Merge
    3 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Dream consciousness (talk) Wikify
    148 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Singapore Post (talk) Wikify
    88 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: C Manual fire alarm activation (talk) Wikify
    2 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Roman Catholic Diocese of Gradisca (talk) Orphan
    9 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Lamplight Analytics (talk) Orphan
    4 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Shireen Dalvi (talk) Orphan
    7 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Excelsior Recordings (talk) Stub
    4 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Oleshky Raion (talk) Stub
    11 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub A. J. Pollard (talk) Stub
    14 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Christine Carpenter (historian) (talk) Stub
    71 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Sōran Bushi (talk) Stub
    7 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub White-Out Conditions (talk) Stub

    SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

    If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    WikiCup 2020 May newsletter

    The second round of the 2020 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 75 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top ten contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 186 good articles achieved in total by contestants, and the 355 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.

    Our top scorers in round 2 were:

    • New York (state) Epicgenius, with 2333 points from one featured article, forty-five good articles, fourteen DYKs and plenty of bonus points
    • England Gog the Mild, with 1784 points from three featured articles, eight good articles, a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews and lots of bonus points
    • Botswana The Rambling Man, with 1262 points from two featured articles, eight good articles and a hundred good article reviews
    • Somerset Harrias, with 1141 points from two featured articles, three featured lists, ten good articles, nine DYKs and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews
    • England Lee Vilenski with 869 points, Gondor Hog Farm with 801, Venezuela Kingsif with 719, Cascadia (independence movement) SounderBruce with 710, United States Dunkleosteus77 with 608 and Mexico MX with 515.

    The rules for featured article reviews have been adjusted; reviews may cover three aspects of the article, content, images and sources, and contestants may receive points for each of these three types of review. Please also remember the requirement to mention the WikiCup when undertaking an FAR for which you intend to claim points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

    If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth. - MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 15

    News and updates associated with user scripts from the past month (April 2020).

    Hello everyone and welcome to the 15th issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter:

    Miscellaneous

    Hope everyone stays safe. --DannyS712 (talk) 20:27, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Their/there

    Note the difference between what things are called and there[sic] actual function. DroneB (talk) 22:35, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk Page Harassment

    (See WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Retaliatory AFD) ——SN54129 10:07, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Please do not post on my talk page. Anything posted there by you will be removed. Simmo86 (talk) 09:34, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    ^^^Accusations of trolling ([7],[8]), weaponising ANI ([9]) and AfD ([10]), accusations of bad faith ([11]), removing another editor's post ([12]) and then edit warring to remove it some more ([13],[14], being warned not do so by three administrators ([15],[16],[17]), accusations of bad faith while showing bad faith ([18]) and now accusations of harassment? I think User:Doug Weller is probably correct. ——SN54129 10:07, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    (talk page gnome) @Simmo86: while it's fine to ask someone not to post at your talk page, such request will not prevent necessary warnings (WP:NOBAN). —PaleoNeonate – 10:16, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Less than or equal to

    What's going on with your keyboard today? Anyway, I've always seen you more as a ≥ sort of editor. :P GirthSummit (blether) 11:20, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Girth Summit: That's very kind, particularly as I have now learned what that bloody symbol means  :) It's completely bizarre. It's happened a few times—mostly with that symbol, sometimes with others—and always when on mob device. But I've checked, and the virtual keyboard thingy doesn't even have this symbol on it! Even the second page. Am I fated to be followed by a mathematical symbol gently tapping, rapping at my edit-window door, etc.  ;) SERIAL# 16:04, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    At least it's not a tilde - goodness knows what would happen if you started dropping them all over the place... GirthSummit (blether) 16:09, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Goodbye

    I imagine edit-warring on your own talk page didn't help. Incidentally, do we have a word for "You're banned from my talk page but I can post whatever the hell I like on yours"?
    Yes, I thought we did. ——SN54129 05:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


    Due to your actions, Wikipedia has lost another editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simmo86 (talk • contribs) 01:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    note re section

    Hi. I noted that you closed the section of the WP:Village pump (proposals) page that pertained to my proposal. I think that is totally fine, and I accept your reasons for doing so. I just wanted to invite you to present any feedback, or comments, or remarks you might have on the direction of the discussion there, and the content there? I appreciate your help in advance. Please ping me if you reply here. thanks!! ---Sm8900★ 🌎 05:52, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    I am not going to ping anybody who leaves me a message, instructs me on my own talk page but does not have the courtesy to watchlist it. In any case, I think Nick Moyes says most of what needs saying. serial# 18:14, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Barnstar!!!

    The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
    This is for your valuable efforts on countering Vandalism and protecting Wikipedia from it's threats. I appreciate your effort. You are a defender of Wikipedia. Thank you. PATH SLOPU 09:58, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Check, Path slopu. You broke my duck—first barnstar since October :) cheers!
    I hope, also, that you and yours are keeping well in the Crazy Times. SERIAL# 16:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion == File:Para SF personnel at Kashmir.jpg

    Sorry for disturbing you, but earlier I had claimed for a Undeletion request for the File:Para SF personnel at Kashmir.jpg, after personally again going through the Common usage criteria thoroughly from the site from where I had ,I had understood that I accidentally misinterpreted the common usage.And the image is somewhat not free. So I apologize for unnecessary creating a Undeletion request and I take back my Undeletion request. I hope you understand me. Thank you and have a great day Swastik Mridha (talk) 14:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    No problem at all, Swastik Mridha, copyright is extremely complicated and it's easy for anyone to make a mistake. Unfortunately, I don't think the Indian Government releases its own work, but if someone takes a photo of the group they could upload that. If anyone gets that close to them of course  :) Take care. SERIAL# 15:02, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    A message from Ed6767 about RedWarn

    RedWarn - user feedback needed!
    RedWarn - user feedback needed!


    Hello RedWarn tester! I hate to reitterate, but thank you so much for being willing to test RedWarn, I really appreciate it.

    In the past few updates, I have added AIV (admin) reporting, a preferences panel, themes, customisation options and made many, many bug fixes and added many features based on your suggestions and feedback.

    Unfortunately, recently feedback has run dry.

    Even if you do not use RedWarn at the moment, or you do (tysm), I would greatly appreciate feedback of any kind. While I go round Twinkle users, sounding like that broadband salesperson in the mall that nobody ever wants to speak to, I'd like some updated feedback from recent and current users.

    Any sort of feedback below would be greately appreciated!

    • Your first impressions when you tried RedWarn?
    • How have you used RedWarn as time has gone on?
    • Would you value customisation features, such as macros or shortcuts, such as adding your own quick revert reasons so the tool can fit your exact editing practices?
    • Any suggestions for how I could promote the tool to a wider audience?
    • Would you appreciate a more developed and thorough user guide?
    • Any theme suggestions?
    • Anything you'd like changing?
    • Something you've always wanted to see in an anti-vandal tool? (I might add it!)
    • RedWarn app?
    • A way to introduce Recent Changes patrol to new users to make using RedWarn or other tools less daunting?
    • Any bugs, gripes, or things that just really annoy you about RedWarn?

    Click the button below to begin a new section on the talk page

    [[User_talk:Ed6767/redwarn|Leave Feedback]]

    My goal is to create the most user friendly moderation tool, and that's why I need your feedback to help make this truely the most favorable anti-vandal tool. While we will never elliminate vandalism on this site, we can get closer to fighting it quickly and easily.

    Many thanks for your continued support. Ed6767 (talk) 00:29, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    If you do not wish to get these feedback reminders, let me know on my talk page.

    New signature

    It's like the Wikipedia equivalent of a new haircut! creffett (talk) 17:53, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Whiiich is about as close as I am to getting one, now the barber's are shut  :) yeah, my old one suddenly started looking a bit ostentatious...an undiscovered puritan streak perhaps! Hope you are well, Creffett SERIAL# 18:05, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    A butcher's...

    Just spotted this. I'll bet you a nickel that if you keep doing that you'll freak a non-UK editor out eventually. Please don't butcher my article... Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:07, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Well, I'm sure the colonials can keep themselves busy, Major! Have you got an article up then, Mike Christie? serial # 21:41, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I do, as it happens. You don't have time for a source review, do you? I'll trade you for a review of one of yours, if you're looking for one. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:49, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    It was a pleasure, Mike Christie, and I wish they were all so simple. As for the other thing *cough* I think I might've mentioned it earlier...  ;) serial # 20:04, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Um, sorry, must be slow on the uptake today — you mean a review of your current FAC? Happy to oblige if so.Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:28, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    At WP:AN/EW

    Duplicate report of what I did just previously, no? Thanks 107.190.33.254 (talk) 18:38, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    So it is. Great minds think alike...and edit conflict. I've resolved the issue; better for the optics this way. All the best! serial # 18:43, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


    Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:ESTIMATED DISTANCE OF AL-ARSH (CENTRE OF THE GREATER UNIVERSE AND SEAT OF AUTHORITY OF ALLAH SWT) FROM OUR EARTH USING THE INFORMATION GRANTED US IN THE HOLY QUR'AN BY ALLAH SWT:-

    @Praxidicae and L235: If I could just take this opportuity to confim I am not, in fact, a complete arse who either delights in wasting the community's time or completely msunderstands the CSD criteria, I'd just like to clarify that, if you look at the history—what you can do now, Kevin, and Praxidicae maybe soon—you'll see it had already been declined G1 already twice, by an admin. Hence my reasoning that someone was basically forced to start an MfD purely in order to get some more eyes on it, and, possibly a little common sense that would stop us having to waste 168 hours discussing the bloody thing. I was the patsy; hence my deliberate references to CSD criteria and IAR in the nom. Still, more haste less speed wins the race, eh. Take care all. serial # 19:56, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Yep, I saw, no worries! Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 20:00, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    DYK nomination of Don't Stop...

    Hello! Your submission of Don't Stop... at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --evrik (talk) 17:32, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:Did you know nominations/Church of St Thomas à Becket, Box

    Hi, sorry, I don't understand your edit summaries. What exactly would you like me to do? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 18:43, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Yoninah: check the history...your promotion to prep was reverted; I reverted that, and then, on consideration, thought you might like to have had the choice yourself. serial # 18:50, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, now I see what happened. Thanks for reverting; I've brought this up at BlueMoonset's talk page. BTW that picture on your talk page interferes with seeing the last posts. Best, Yoninah (talk) 18:57, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Xactly, Yoninah. Some more admins patrolling noms rather than just queues would probably help. Get to it, and pass the message along. serial # 19:22, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Nice gloves

    You man of mystery GirthSummit (blether) 15:00, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Girth Summit: You wouldn't want my finger tips to get cold. serial # 15:49, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    No indeed - that would only add to the random characters problem. GirthSummit (blether) 15:52, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    ANI

    Not sure what you mean here. My real name is very easy to find, and has been for years. That doesn't mean I want people just referring to me by it on WP. Johnbod (talk) 23:57, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    This; all the best. serial # 08:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Revert incorrect

    It was a vandal who removed sections on his own talk page. Educate me about if that is correct. He is incorrectly removing talk page sections and you removed the same talk page sections. I still don't understand. 3125ATalk!Contributions! 14:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


    Ugh....

    It's confusing, 3125A, as are a lot of things around here. See the link I gave in the editsummary, WP:BLANKING explains:. If a user removes material from their user page, it is normally taken to mean that the user has readand is aware of its contents. There is no need to keep them on display, and usually users should not be forced to do so.
    And they're not—officially, anyway—a vandal which has a pretty specific meaning on Wikipedia. Yes, they've been blocked, but HickoryOughtShirt?4 did so on the grounds of competency, not vandalism; there's a difference.
    Hope this helps. serial # 15:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Some falafel for you!

    Hello there from the other side and thank you, that you noticed my contribution to Kendall's article. I actually spent some free time on wp, due to the corona crisis and want to keep the most visited portals of the main page and its main article's like the arts or biography and so on updated. Have fun here and enjoy your lunch later. Kind regards from Germany. Abani79 (talk) 08:35, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Danke schön, Abani79 that's tasty :) yes, great work with PMK, not only filled out but more sources than it ever had. Nice one! Take care of yourself, serial # 09:47, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    You've got mail (re RX - thanks!)

    Hello, Serial Number 54129. Please check your email; you've got mail!
    It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 10:25, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    DYK nomination of Honora Jenkins' will

    Hello! Your submission of Honora Jenkins' will at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Johnbod (talk) 13:33, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The Bugle: Issue CLXIX, May 2020

    Full front page of The Bugle
    Your Military History Newsletter

    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) 15:03, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry

    Sorry about this diff, I must've done that by accident. --Stay safe, ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 20:49, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you for your amazing help in researching!

    The Working Man's Barnstar
    I hugely appreciate your help at WP:RX in finding sources that I wouldn't otherwise have had access to. You're doing something absolutely wonderful for the encyclopedia - keep it up! Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 14:02, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    No problem, Naypta, and thanks for this. If you see me around, don't hesitate to ask directly if you want. After all, it'll only be a matter of time before I haven't got what you need and you have to go off and post at RX anyway  :) serial # 14:03, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    County Londonderry

    Hey there. As for not calling changes to County Londonderry to read County Derry, as vandalism. They're deliberately changing the name of a place to be a different name. County Derry isn't the name of the county, never was, it's a purely colloquial name. And there is massive numbers of continually changing IPs and newly registered accounts that come to Wikipedia to change it all over the place on even a daily basis. Deliberately changing something to a name that it isn't I maintain is vandalism. It's deliberately trying to change content from what it is, and historically is, to what they wish it to be. Could it be pure ignorance, in some cases yes, but it's constant. Canterbury Tail talk 12:00, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    I understand the history of the place only too well; still, if the answer to the question Could it be pure ignorance is anything other than no, then I rest my case. Anyhow, I'm not arguing about it, and fair play to everything else you do here CT. All the best. serial # 12:06, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, I hear you. It's just a frustrating constancy. Lets get back to our regularly scheduled programming :) Canterbury Tail talk 13:58, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Indeed, Canterbury Tail; all things being equal, it's good to see some common sense patrolling the bloody topic! All the best, serial # 14:01, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah I inserted myself as an admin and patroller on Ireland, especially NI, topics a long time ago. I've been accused of everything, of belonging to both sides, sometimes even on the same day and for the same edits :) Canterbury Tail talk 14:04, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Warning

    Stop icon This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Template:Z190 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesgavinfan (talk • contribs)

    Finally! An excuse to block serial#! I've been waiting for this since...uh...a few days ago, I guess. creffett (talk) 18:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    For less than ten days I would've thought, Creffett :p thanks for warning this guy though, and for putting Teds back together. ——Serial # 19:00, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Reclose

    Hi Serial! I noticed that you adjusted the close at this ANI thread in which I am involved. I wanted to check whether you saw the message I left at the bottom of the thread and the message I left for Barkeep49 (which caused them to revert their previous close). Would you be willing to do the same, and if you're inclined, to perhaps give your thoughts on the matter itself? I understand that it's undesirable for ANI threads to sit around for long periods, but the matter is still clearly unresolved, so I unfortunately don't see any alternative to waiting for others to comment.

    If I could make one other observation: the way the page currently appears could give the very misleading impression that JzG's close was made after the entire discussion, rather than that it was made after two hours and later became the subject of discussion itself. I would therefore ask that, when the thread is reclosed, it be done with a new archive template on top of the old one signed by the closer with their rationale, rather than by just extending the bottom of the old close. Thanks for your attention to this and best wishes, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 23:08, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

     Done ——Serial # 17:15, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for this adjustment. I have to question per JzG as a reading of the consensus of the second half, though. I realize the situation is a bit muddled, so to summarize from my perspective:
    • Moxy files the thread, alleging that I made widespread template changes with ZERO talk.
    • Several editors weigh in saying that widespread undiscussed template changes are not okay, and on that basis JzG closes the thread 1hr43min later, revoking my template editor rights.
    • He performs a mass rollback reverting hundreds of my template edits in some cases going back years, most of which have nothing whatsoever to do with the welcome templates. He later acknowledges on his talk page that it was a misclick, but ignores a request from an admin to go through and undo the accidental portion of his rollback. Some of the edits have been fixed by other editors but many remain unfixed.
    • When I see the thread the next morning, I comment that my changes were not undiscussed, but were based on a consensus achieved at a formally closed VPR discussion that resulted in changes to the standard welcome template and a discussion in which the admin closer established that the changes carry to other welcome templates with the same basic structure as the standard one. Moxy was a strenuous dissenter in both discussions.
    • The admin closer of the VPR thread, L235, and Naypta both criticize Moxy for leaving out vital context ("very disappointed in the conduct of the user filing this ANI thread. ... this comes across as a trick designed to make Sdkb look more culpable" from L235), and Naypta criticizes the premature initial closure of the thread.
    • Subsequent discussion establishes that the way to deal with the content question is via an RfC, which is subsequently launched, but there is not further discussion of the conduct aspect.
    I do not think per JzG is a fair reading of the consensus of the second half, since in his close JzG removed my template editor rights, whereas in the second half no editor argued for that.
    I'm sorry to have to keep dragging this along — I very much want to be able to just let it go and get on with normal editing, but I hope you can put yourself in my shoes and understand how I feel that hundreds of my edits have been rolled back. It's obviously not up to me, but if I were reclosing the discussion, I would:
    • Note that the accidental rollback edits unrelated to welcome template wrapperification should be undone (this would give me something simple to link to in my edit summary if I end up having to clean up the remainder myself).
    • Note that the content issue was resolved.
    • Note that there was insufficient discussion in the second half on my template editor rights to reach a consensus on that matter, but that serious concerns were raised about the initial rationale for revocation such that it can no longer be said to be the consensus. As such, the emergency stopgap revocation should be reverted back to the status quo as fruit of the poisonous tree.
    Would you consider it reasonable to close with something along those lines? Regards, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 19:10, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Serial — I just wanted to quickly follow up. No worries if you need a little while to get to this, but if that's the case, could you confirm you've seen it? Thanks, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 06:03, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    ITN recognition for Pakistan International Airlines Flight 8303

    On 22 May 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Pakistan International Airlines Flight 8303, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. P-K3 (talk) 13:12, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    TFA (June 2020)

    This is to let you know that the John FitzWalter, 2nd Baron FitzWalter article has been scheduled as today's featured article for June 23, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 23, 2020.—Wehwalt (talk) 00:25, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Quick note on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard

    Thanks for your edits to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard.

    Should we notify Iridescent about my edit restrictions review? Aasim 11:40, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Awesome Aasim: I'm sure Iridescent has already seen it; if they chose not to comment, that's probably a sign of approval  :) although a note on their talk would be polite. All the best, ——Serial # 11:45, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Serial Number 54129, no prob :) Maybe I'll just let the discussion play out. Aasim 11:47, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Yo

    I left a follow-up set of questions for you on the User talk:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry. You can just reply back to my talk page. --Criticalthinker (talk) 11:46, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Criticalthinker: I'm trying to dig out an old copy of Steam World which, IIRC, carried a detailed article on it. Give us a day or two, if you could? (Also note, it's Wheler Street, apoogies for the typo back there! ——Serial # 17:16, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Just checking back. Yes, I'd like to do a rewrite Bishopsgate (Low Level) railway station, but would like to know 1. which set of platforms were built first and 2. where each of the platforms were, exactly, in relation to the surrounding streets. The one diagram I've found looks a bit unclear, but it looks like two side platforms and an island platform. From the diagram I posted, it looks like there up and down mains were on the south side of the cut, and the up and down locals were on the north side of the cut. Interestingly, it looks like for the platforms on the main that they did not align with the up being entirely east of Wheeler and the down existing west of Wheeler. Anyway, let me know locations and dates and such, that is unless you wanted to rewrite the page with the update info. --Criticalthinker (talk) 20:35, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Just missed being corrected

    Howdy, had 'fixed' your small text at ANI, but before I could implement it, you deleted you entire 'small text' post :) GoodDay (talk) 15:09, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for looking out for me, GoodDay; yeah, it hadn't (so I thought!) been replied to, so quietly removed it as by then moot. Hope you're well! ——Serial # 15:20, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Cool. BTW - Had to read your post in 'edit form', as the Eastwood photo keeps blocking half the post. GoodDay (talk) 15:26, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Userpage

    Why did you edit my userpage!? Logo fixer (talk) 13:35, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Did you mean....

    Regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Human rights in Asia (2nd nomination), to my way of thinking your argument would indicate you think the article should be kept, but you have "delete" in bold. Now, I wouldn't want to suggest an error, but my teeny-tiny brain is easily confused. All the best, 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:16, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Oops! Thanks, 78.26. I did mean keep, and have rectified. That'll get used against me to indicate an inherently deletionist streak in the future I expect :) ——Serial # 14:31, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    must be from all the spinning creffett (talk) 14:31, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Not to mention all those revolutions!  ;) ——Serial # 14:33, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    You have no idea, given the shelter-in-place order... I may be running out of new material for the first time in 15 years. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:42, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    DS alert

    This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

    You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

    For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

    Template:Z33 SarahSV (talk) 05:51, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice

    Hi Serial Number 54129, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.

    Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.

    To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!

    Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, Sam-2727 (talk)

    MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Serial Number 54129, thanks that you fixed the situation at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/List of reviewers by subject where some users had added usernames in wrong format. But what was wrong in ur-3, besides my name. Didn't it mean, Urdu language of advanced level. Please clarify. Thanks. - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (talk) 16:59, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/List of reviewers by subject

    I'm sure it was unintentional but your edit here [19] removed my entry which as far as I know was correctly placed. Theroadislong (talk) 17:06, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    There were probably a million edit-conflicts with that thing. All the best! ——Serial # 17:17, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    FAC for Hyborian War

    Hi SN54129. I'll be nominating the article Hyborian War for Featured Article again in about a week after its ongoing peer review (improvements complete). Since you commented on it during its first nomination, would be willing to give it a review when it posts again? Not asking for a free pass—just a fair review as per the criteria. I'm a bit concerned that it might sit without reviews given that it's a niche topic. Thanks for your time. Airborne84 (talk) 02:43, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Regarding AFD

    Hi Serial Number 54129, I have requested an article for deletion. Can you please conclude this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Hundred and Eight Shiva Thandavam, Thanks - MRRaja001 (talk) 07:11, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The Signpost: 31 May 2020

    * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:06, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    DYK nomination of Don't Stop...

    Hello! Your submission of Don't Stop... at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:19, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Stalkers needed for James Brock, the Monson Motor Lodge swim-in and civil rights in St Augustine, June–July 1964

    If I happen to have any literate stalkers, from the ole' colonies, doncha know!  ;) who can turn my middle[ing] English into good old new-fashioned AmEng in the above article (I've caught the obvious: favor, etc, one-l'ing), would be appreciated. It's a sensitive subject...indeed, more broadly, it's become a lot more fucking sensitive since I started the thing, sadly. Hope everyone's well. ——Serial # 19:24, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Should probably use the month-day-year date format, right? I didn't want to go through and change it all without checking with you though!-- P-K3 (talk) 01:16, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @P-K3, it's a US topic, so yes it should, I suppose. That was one of the things that never even occurred to me! ——Serial # 08:57, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    It did leap out at me as one of the things I’ve had to train myself to do since moving over here:) I’ll get to it today. P-K3 (talk) 11:51, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Pawnkingthree: Ah, your redcoat's turned blue?  ;) ——Serial # 12:44, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, although through gritted teeth in this particular case...-- P-K3 (talk) 16:44, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Following up

    Hi Serial — I wanted to follow up about my inquiry above. I really don't want to have to go to WP:AN to ask for a review of the reclose, since that would just waste even more of editors time, but I will have to do so if the current close remains in place. I tried to lay things out as cleanly/concisely as I could above, but you need to be the one to give it a proper close and put everything to rest so that we can undo the damage. Regards, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 23:55, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Sdkb: apologies for the delay in getting back to you. To clarify, I only re-closed the original report to ensure that the bot would archive them together, rather than separately, as would otherwise (probably) have happened, hence my rather formulaic "Per JzG". I expressed no opinion in that thread, not do I express one now. I was stretching my nacability by editing a closed discussion (in complete breach of the instructions at the top of the page—if Bishonen had noticed, I'd be dead meat right now, for example), in order to make the point-of-order you requested which seemed fair enough.
    But. It is bizarre to try and dictate the terms of the closing of a thread that has found against you, as surely that's what you were doing in this thread above? In any case, it would effectively re-write an admin close on an admin noticeboard, and I'd need my brains tested to do that. Honestly, if you want to re-litigate Guy's close (or mine for that matter), AN is as you suggest the place to be. All the best! ——Serial # 12:41, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Serial Number 54129: Thank you for your reply here. I certainly understand where you're coming from, both with trying to clean up the ANI noticeboard by getting the thread to archive and with being hesitant to take some actions as a non-admin. The issue is that, even though you seem not to have intended it that way, Per JzG is unfortunately not a neutral close, but rather one that endorses the initial close, implying that further discussion bore it out, which I do not think anyone could reasonably argue. I was hoping that the thread would remain on ANI long enough for it to receive a fuller close (my message above was me trying to illustrate what such a close might address; I recognize it's not up to me to dictate the terms), but I understand why you acted as you did, and I agree that WP:AN may be the best place to go at this point. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 22:36, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    edit conflict?

    [[20]]?Slatersteven (talk) 14:23, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Must have been, although it didn't tell me. Many thanks, I've restored the "lost" material. All the best, ——Serial # 14:27, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    To be frank its such a mess its not a surprise.Slatersteven (talk) 14:28, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    FloridaArmy Data Mining

    Curious about how you did your data mining of FA. I'd be curious to look at that data set and in particular know if those 454 results were unique or included the same article multiple times. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:35, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Apologies if by "data mining", Barkeep49, I gave the impression of running Cambridge Analytica-style algorithms...simply raising the last 1,000 edits, and CtrlF for Notification: Your Articles for creation submission has been accepted/ declined (AFCH 0.9.1) respectively. They both bring up the original notifications rather than any subsequent edits to the same thread. There's probably a proper way of doing it, some sort of thing.* query run. Hope all is well! ——Serial # 11:48, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    *Lost my train of thought at that point, and can't remember what that "thing" is I'm thinking of...Now I can remember, now I can remember. ——Serial # 11:48, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    User Lugnuts

    [21] I don't need to spend my time on this...well, quite.

    The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    You might be able to help out here. Brief intro: I'm making good edits, like adding fine quality images to articles. That user is reverting those edits. I start a discussion (maybe that was just an honest mistake... that happens). Nop. Lugnuts keeps pushing for actions that go against WP guidelines. That goes around mainly this file, which has a duplicate in Commons. According to local policies, that file should be speedily deleted from en.wiki (criteria F8) and the image in Commons (that has substantially better quality) should be used instead. But my actions toward that are reverted. Ivo (talk) 11:16, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi SN. Ivo fails to mention this discussion on my talkpage, where I fully explained my edits, before they starting to make personal attacks against me. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 12:17, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Kruusamägi: To be honest, I don't get involved with image-related discussions because..because. But what caught my attention was not which of you had the right or wrong in that discussion (thanks for linking to it Lugnuts), but edits such as Do you have some problems with understanding ([22]) and you have provided me a very good reason...to feel...that you are insane ([23]) are wholly inappropriate, and are the personal attacks I was referring to.
    Just one more thing, Kruusamägi: please sort out your signature. Per WP:SIG#CustomSig, A customised signature should make it easy to identify your username, (yours does not), and it is common practice for a signature to resemble to some degree the username it represents. Yours is, in fact, completely different. All the best, ——Serial # 12:31, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    As for clarification: I also pointed out where user Lugnuts is wrong way before those comments. He didn't listen and made reverts nevertheless. So those comments are justified, as this user had already started edit war and he/she was intentionally blocking edits that should be made (again, in reference to speedy deletion criteria). And those comments should be looked in context and not taken out it.
    In addition: I constantly work with images and I'm also an OTRS agent. My action here complies with the general standard regarding images. That specific file should be deleted from en.wiki and the file in Commons should be used. Any reference to the template page is irrelevant. User Lugnuts has been blocking the actions that should be taken according to the general WP rules. Those actions have been taken repeatedly and even when the mistake has been pointed out several times. To me, those actions seem like bad faith activity and I have the full right to feel upset about that (or whatever I feel).
    As for signature... to me, it seems it makes it easy to both identify a username and the real name. So far that has never be questioned in any WP (and I've been around for 14 years). But then again, I don't edit en.wiki that much and hardly ever participate in discussions in here. So en.wiki practices with signatures aren't something I know well. I'll consider changing it, but I'll keep it as it is right now just for the sake of consistency. Other way it would look like there are two separate users in the ongoing discussions. Ivo (talk) 12:59, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Kruusamägi: You don't seem to be listening: I said I don't care, particularly, about the image. Let me clarify for you, one last time:
    So those comments are justified. No. Questioning editors' mental health is never justified; if you do it again, you will likely be reported to the relevant noticeboard and possibly blocked from the English Wikipedia.
    If you continue to edit war over the image, you will likely be reported to the relevant noticeboard and possibly blocked from the English Wikipedia.
    Your reasoning regarding your signature is unconvincing, but it is the other aspects of your behavior here which are of greater concern. Now, you should be discussing the issues on the relevant file/article talk page not here. Cheers, ——Serial # 13:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    No! I was listening. This "And those comments should be looked in context and not taken out it." applies to both the specific parts of the text and the general situation. And I explained the situation I'm in as this is very relevant. Like it or not. In principle: I'm being harassed by user Lugnuts. Just looking at some specific words somewhere in the text doesn't do justice to anyone. If that is how en.wiki approaches those issues, then this system is very broken indeed.
    In the Estonian Wikipedia we would never tolerate that kind of behavior. Never. No surprise 1/3 of editors there are females and we struggle to see on why is the gender stuff/general WP behavior/and such so often talked about internationally as from our side there seem to be no problem. No wonder the en.wiki is constantly being depicted as hostile. And forcing NPA that way only makes things worse.
    Whatever. I'm not touching this stuff anymore (and I only reverted the file page once). The file in question will eventually get deleted anyway. I don't need to spend my time on this. Ivo (talk) 13:59, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Tu quoque. If you are really justifying your personal attacks and edit-warring on account of WP:BIAS, then your views are seriously out of step with community norms; and if you behaviour is, in fact, acceptable on et.wp—which I doubt—then you're probably better off devoting your energies to that project. All the best, ——Serial # 14:39, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    NPP triage

    @Barkeep49: if you don't mind my asking, do we no longer mark blocked users' non-patrolled pages as reviewed anymore? ——Serial # 17:01, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    I never mind NPP questions but I'm not sure I entirely understand the circumstance you're talking about here. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:13, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Barkeep49: I just started my annual page reviewing, and as usual started from the back. I was about ten or so in (see log, can't precisely recall) when I realised that a lot of them had already been tagged for various things, and had been done so as part of the page triage. Yet they hadn't been marked as patrolled; it occurred to me that in most cases (although perhaps coincidentally, of course) the creator was blocked. So naturally, I wondered if that was deliberate, and—more to the point!—that I shouldn't be marking those pages as patrolled as I have. Thoughts? ——Serial # 17:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I think I understand now. Thanks for the clarification. If it's from a banned user creating in violation of that ban (e.g. G5 elgiible) marking as reviewed might not be appropriate. Otherwise if the page meets standards (e.g. no COPYVIO or SPAM and is notable) mark it revewed. Thanks for taking some time to do reviews. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:29, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I assure you that G5 always in mind, Barkeep49, but thanks very much for popping over and advising. ——Serial # 17:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    My pleasure. Should other questions come up please don't hesitate to send them my way. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Are you following this mess?

    It's a little disconcerting to think large blocks of text are being removed that way. Have you been watching the activity at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20110727? Was my case just a fluke? And then, after I reverted, came this. Atsme Talk 📧 19:56, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:Did you know nominations/Honora Jenkins' will

    Time to get this over please. Johnbod (talk) 21:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    DYK for Don't Stop...

    On 5 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Don't Stop..., which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Oasis frontman Noel Gallagher discovered a song to release while under lockdown, which his brother called "not worth a wank"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Don't Stop.... You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Don't Stop...), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

    —valereee (talk) 12:02, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Your GA nomination of Eric Easton

    Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Eric Easton you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SchroCat -- SchroCat (talk) 09:41, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    "Hey, I forgot all about that guy"  :) thanks, SchroCat, appreciated. How deep d you fancy digging? ——Serial # 15:44, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you

    Hey Serial, just wanted to drop by to say thank you for your reverts on my talk page. Appreciate your help. -- LuK3 (Talk) 19:03, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @LuK3: No worries, and thanks for your work with that guy—that was too much rice for one! Hope you're well. ——Serial # 10:11, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Why?

    Why did you change the sock notice, Special:Diff/962332704? You haven't made any case for it at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BiH. Cabayi (talk) 13:07, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry, I don't see that you'd dropped the notice an hour earlier. Perhaps I'm dense (many would say so, I'm sure), but when I click on "This is a sock of X" I kinda expect to be taken to X's page (the sockmaster's), not Z's (another sock). So in this particular case, I'd wonder why—if User:Runforlimit505 is a puppet of User:BiH who is a puppet for User:Bamanh27—User:Runforlimit505 isn't therefore a puppet User:Bamanh27 directly.
    Perhaps it's none of my business: all the best. ——Serial # 13:18, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    (Incidentally, Cabayi, if I've broken an SPI policy and/or other arcane process-wonkery, feel free to revert this like any other of my edits. It was purely a bold edit intended to simplify things for whoever next came across the page, rather than out of a deep commitment to the WP:READER, or anything...cheers! ——Serial # 13:22, 13 June 2020 (UTC))[reply]
    Yeah, you should definitely do your time on the naughty step, and I'd take the moral high ground if I hadn't missed that tag on BiH's userpage, so let's call it even?
    Yunshui tagged BiH's userpage on the basis of "off wiki evidence" but left both SPIs unaltered. I guess that's what the mop's for. *sigh* Cabayi (talk) 13:39, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Apologies for that; I don't think I even realised there was an SPI. Both accounts had been creating pages in response to jobs accepted by the same account on Upwork, so it's safe to assume that they are either the same person or the subcontractors hired by the Upwork freelancer. Yunshui 雲水 15:20, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Serial_Number_54129&oldid=962354879"