Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous): Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 14:10, 10 June 2022

Table of contents
First discussion
End of page
New post

Shortcuts

The miscellaneous section of the village pump is used to post messages that do not fit into any other category. Please post on the policy, technical, or proposals sections when appropriate, or at the help desk for assistance. For general knowledge questions, please use the reference desk.

Discussions are automatically archived after remaining inactive for a week.

« Archives, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78

Plural of 'Userbox'

Hey folks. I didn't know where to put this, so I decided that the village pump would be the best idea. I have seen some userpages referring to the plural of userbox as 'Userboxes'. However, I have also seen some userpages referring to the plural as 'Userboxen'. Which one is correct? Are both correct? Cheers! Fake scientist 8000 13:56, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The official plural is "userboxes", modelled on "boxes". "Userboxen" is a whimsical analogy to irregular plurals such as "oxen"; it's technically wrong but widely accepted and can raise a smile. Certes (talk) 14:06, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For a singular userbox used by more than one person (as most are), I assume it is thus usersbox? Nosebagbear (talk) 14:33, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxen is correct because a Germanic suffix is cool: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Userboxes/Archive_2006#A_plea_for_the_Germanic_plural. Some people are just not cool. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 14:35, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

we're not German, so shouldn't be using German pluralisation. "Userboxes" is correct English. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:45, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But the English language is a West Germanic language. The roots of English are Germanic. There is a heavy French/Romance influence due to the Norman Conquest, but there is still that Germanic root. So, whenever we do anything linguistically weird for Germanic languages, blame the French. Whenever we do anything linguistically weird for Romance languages, blame the Germanic influence. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:14, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And it it's weird for both, you can probably blame Greek. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 13:30, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxen is correct because it is whimsical and it upsets people who can't take a joke, which is a noble enough cause to override all other concerns. --Jayron 32 13:51, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jayron32, you caused me a very big smile.
Steue (talk) 11:51, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

“Boxen” is not German… it appears in several English dictionaries as a non-standard (archaic) variant for “box”… which has been revived and adopted by computer programmers (I suppose you could call it computer jargon). I would say that (in this context) BOTH are correct. Blueboar (talk) 15:17, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If, as seems to me but I'm open to being proved [proven?] wrong, the singular "Userbox" was made up for use by Mediawiki, then that project can also make up the plural. Here on the English Wikipedia I have seen both the standard "Userboxes" and the non-standard "Userboxen" used extensively, so it seems that both are probably correct. But, whatever is decided here, and my preference would be for nothing to be decided, let's accept that this project uses English, not German. Phil Bridger (talk) 15:30, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Again, it’s not German… it’s “programming jargon”. I found this out with a simple google search for “boxen”. Now, if you want to argue that we shouldn’t use programming jargon… fine. I just think we should be accurate in our arguments. Blueboar (talk) 16:02, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I know it's not German. That's why I said "both are probably correct" and "my preference would be for nothing to be decided". Phil Bridger (talk) 16:53, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You should use the proper collective noun, in this case "a nuisance of userboxes", just like cats. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:43, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
dab: in the early days of email, "user box" was sometimes used to distinguish personal mailboxes from others, such as the "system [mail]box" etc. The term is still used in printer interfaces of multiuser printers with built-in physical or virtual storage. The "user box" is space for individual users to store print jobs and other documents. This printer user box may also be associated with an email user box. Because complexity is the geeks' favorite hallucinogenic. Afaik the plural in these non-Wikipedia cases was always "boxes". It is also possible this section will attract comments in inverse proportion to the topic's importance. Guilty as charged. 50.75.226.250 (talk) 16:02, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've always used userboxen, regardless, it's not particularly an important matter. Legislating that one is more correct than the other is a waste of everyone's time. casualdejekyll 16:19, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hang on, have we decided how to spell WP:LEAD or WP:LEDE yet? Johnuniq (talk) 03:49, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I’m holding out for “LEED”. Blueboar (talk) 11:31, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer Ǚzerbǿxen, but am willing to concede that it might be like deer, and the plural of Userbox is Userbox. On the other hand, perhaps it is like goose, and the plural is Userbeex. BD2412 T 04:29, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Geese have beex; userboxes don't. Surely it's Userböx. Certes (talk) 09:23, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think there's clearly a lack of guidance in this area and we should have an RfC on creating a guideline on this. Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:21, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't we first have an RFC on whether to have an RFC? Phil Bridger (talk) 08:19, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Several, I would think… And let’s not forget to have a side-debate on whether the RFCs are neutrally worded or not… and some accusations of canvassing and forum shopping. We have traditions to uphold after all. Blueboar (talk) 11:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That process doesn't have significant support currently, you can follow up by following the proper Wikipedia:Requests for process to get it going. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:03, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And thus began the Great Userboxen War of 2022. WaltCip-(talk) 15:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No. It's the Great Userboxes War. Phil Bridger (talk) 16:22, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pardon me while I go run off to file an WP:RFARB.^[FBDB] WaltCip-(talk) 17:48, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxen, by analogy with Vaxen. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:19, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, upon further consideration, I've come to the conclusion that this is all wrong. Userbox is plural. The singular being userbok. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You've got to cite your sources, Roy. Kids these days probably don't know what a VAX was: "[very common; by analogy with VAXen] Fanciful plural of box often encountered in the phrase ‘Unix boxen’, used to describe commodity Unix hardware. The connotation is that any two Unix boxen are interchangeable." WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:37, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These days, spelled "Docker" :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 22:43, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Eyesore". —Cryptic 15:37, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Userboges. Or is this way of forming the plural reserved for words ending in -nx? —Kusma (talk) 15:48, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Userboxes". Period. In an encyclopedia we should use the gramatically correct variant, not some random slang. — SummerKrut 21:00, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But is there a "correct" variant? Is "userbox" a word? If so who made it up? Shouldn't the same people be able to make up the plural(s)? Phil Bridger (talk) 21:34, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We clearly need a suite of small, colourful rectangles to help editors express their views on this contentious issue. Certes (talk) 21:36, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I LOVE how this "discussion" turned out. Speaking of opinions... how many of you will be fine with me making a template for this? Like "This user thinks that the plural of userbox is {{{1}}}" or something. ARandomPage, the named space (Update them!) (Stuff they do) 14:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ARandomPage I'd love that, personally. Would you mind linking to here in it? Thanks, and Cheers! Fake scientist 8000 21:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well... I don't know what image to use. Any ideas? ARandomPage, the named space (Update them!) (Stuff they do) 02:44, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ARandomPage
This user thinks that the plural of userbox is userboxen!

This user thinks the plural of userbox is userboxes!

Those are some ideas for userboxen/s/g/:o. Cheers! Fake scientist 8000 13:13, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to suggest that, if you haven't got anything better to do , you might want to create a userbox with the text, "This user doesn't give a fuck what the plural of userbox is". But then it occurred to me that the editors that could use it don't display those things on their user page anyway. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:12, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Phil Bridger:: Would there not be a group of userbox-using Wikipedians who truly don't give a flip about the plural of userbox? Given the size of this place, it is a certainty, so I've made this. @Fakescientist8000:: Thanks for the examples. Since I'm too lazy to modify them, I've copied them into a template. ARandomPage, the named space (Update them!) (Stuff they do) 10:16, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose you are right. There is no limit to human ~~silliness~~ ingenuity. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since this topic seems to have more legs than a centipede, a portal may be apt. 64.18.11.68 (talk) 17:31, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

box: translated into German: Kiste
boxes: Kisten.

The plural "boxen" is not mentioned in the "World Book Dictionary" (edition of 1979) from Thorndike-Barnhart. And this comprises two large size volumes.

To: Phil Bridger: According to above mentioned dictionary, both are correct; and mentioned (in this dict.) in exactly this sequence, which, I suppose, shall give a hint to preference.

Thanks to most of you, now I've found where to get my daily dose of big smiles from.

Just out of curiosity of how it is done, I tried this one:

This user doesn't give a fuck what the plural of userbox is.

Steue (talk) 12:47, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

as long as we are exchanging userboxes, I thought I might offer this one. you're welcome.

This user understands nothing to be absolute in the realm of quantum fluctuations.

--Sm8900 (talk) 18:55, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The correct plural is Userboxii. MarioGom (talk) 07:44, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming WMF fundraising campaign in Austria, Belgium, France, and Luxembourg

Dear community members,

I am reaching out to you all today to inform you on the upcoming Wikimedia Foundation fundraising campaign in Austria, Belgium, France, and Luxembourg.

We will be showing banners on Wikipedia in Austria, Belgium, France, and Luxembourg in July (we are currently still working out the dates and I will inform you of the precise dates as soon as I can). Prior to this, we are planning to run some tests in June, so you might see banners, if you are logged out of your Wikipedia account, before the campaign starts. This will ensure that our technical infrastructure works. We are currently working on the messages for the banners and I will share examples with you later.

Generally, before and during the campaign, you can contact us:

On the talk page of the fundraising team
If you need to report a bug or technical issue, please create a phabricator ticket
If you see a donor on a talk page, VRT or social media having difficulties in donating, please refer them to donatewikimedia.org

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks you and regards,

JBrungs (WMF) (talk) 11:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can now confirm that the banner campaign will start on the 11th of July. Best, JBrungs (WMF) (talk) 10:51, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a bot to auto add archives to references?

Trying to cut my workload down on archiving 400 references if possible. Thanks Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 13:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://iabot.toolforge.org/index.php?page=runbotsingle should do what you want. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 13:43, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 13:59, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Add images to articles using a bot.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/upload/Флаттершай&offset=&limit=500&subtype=upload&type=upload&user=Флаттершай At the moment there are 1400 images, there will be the same number more. --Fluttershy — talk 04:52, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Flag template shorthands has an RFC

Category:Flag template shorthands has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Fernando Trebien (talk) 20:17, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Expand language has an RFC

Template:Expand language has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. --N8_wilson 20:53, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How to edit category characters?

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T310051

Hi, when we see a category (i. e. Category:Wikipedia maintenance), we can see letters and symbols in bold. So, my question is how can I edit those characters/symbols? on translatewiki.net or another place? Thanks! ⇒ Aram Talk 19:57, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aram: Each bold character is a heading matching the initial of its entries. In Cities in Florida, Miami is under the bold M, etc. That initial comes from the article title, unless there's a sort key. Most people have a sort key with the surname first, so Irish folk singers lists Mary Black under B rather than M. You can't edit those headings, but you can move a page to a different heading to by changing its sort key (or moving the page to another title). In a small category with no other entries sharing the initial, that might even cause the old heading to disappear and the new one to appear. Certes (talk) 20:32, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Certes: Thanks for your reply and explanation, but that wasn't my intention. Let me explain further. For example, see ckb:پۆل:ئەورووپا, and ckb:ئەوراسیا member, for example, is under ء instead of ئ. I want to know where those letters are defined. ⇒ Aram Talk 20:54, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, no idea: I don't know that language and it has an unfamiliar editor rather than showing me the wikitext. Perhaps the article has a defaultsort starting with ء. Certes (talk) 20:59, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Certes: It's okay. I think those characters have to be defined somewhere because that character (ء) is not in my language. Anyway, thanks for your answers. I hope another user can help me. ⇒ Aram Talk 21:09, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aram: In category pages, there are three ways that the heading is chosen, and all of them are driven by the individual pages that are in the category. In the normal course of things, pages are shown under a heading that is the first character of the page name (for right-to-left scripts, as in this case, this will be the rightmost character), ignoring any namespace prefix. But under certain circumstances, this can be modified. If the page has code like [[Category:Fooians|*]] the page will appear under the "*" heading; similarly, if the page has {{DEFAULTSORT:*}} the page will again appear under the "*" heading. I'm using English examples because this silly browser can't handle Sorani text, but I notice that the article ckb:ئەوراسیا uses the second of these for the first of the four categories. There is more at WP:SORTKEY. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:24, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64: Thanks for your reply, but it's still not clear to me why ء appears instead of ئ. Both have their own Unicode and should not be confused with each other. I think either there has to be a configuration page to recognize those characters (such as MediaWiki:Cite references link many format backlink labels), or there's a bug in the system. ⇒ Aram Talk 23:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aram suggest you open a bug report on that. Those labels are the "category-group" labels, but I don't think they are defined on-wiki. — xaosflux ^Talk 23:46, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This may (or may not) have something to do with Unicode equivalence. ء is ARABIC LETTER HAMZA; ئ is ARABIC LETTER YEH WITH HAMZA ABOVE. Something may be decomposing "Yeh with Hamza" into its two component characters, then sorting under the first of those components (Hamza). You'd need someone familiar with Unicode and Arabic characters (i.e. not me) to confirm that. Certes (talk) 10:28, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Certes: I don't think what you said about Hamza has any effect. See ar:تصنيف:بلدان أوروبية غربية, it's members are correctly classified under their own letters and Hamza had no effect on the classification. @Xaosflux: I created a bug report (T310051), but I don't know if they can treat it there. Thanks! ⇒ Aram Talk 11:08, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It will at least get more eyes on it - the English Wikipedia editors here are not going to be as familiar with some parts of the Arabic alphabets. — xaosflux ^Talk 12:50, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Half a million were uploaded as part of the "library back up project". Welcome to participate to upload all public domain books in the world!

In 213 BCE, Qin Shi Huang destroyed all privately-held unorthodox books in by fire. In 206 BCE, Xiang Yu set a fire on the governmental library containing unique copies of the books, sounding the death of ancient Chinese thoughts and history. Yongle Encyclopedia was finished in 1408. It comprised 22,937 chapters in 11,095 volumes and 917,480 pages. Only one copy after that original copy was made. Most of them are lost in history and only about 800 chapters survive today. In 1932, 463 thousand Han Fen Lou rare books were burned in war.

To prevent such regrettable things that destroy the memory of mankind ever happen again, let's systematically back up the world's all surviving books in public domain to Wikimedia Commons.

“

Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge.

”

— Jimmy Wales

Half a million book files were uploaded as part of the project. Currently only Chinese and Japanese books were uploaded, but the ultimate goal is ALL books in ALL languages from ALL countries as long as in public domain. Welcome to participate to accomplish the grand goal! --The Master (talk) 05:43, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Poorly sourced lists of people by nationality/ethnicity

Why is there such a plague of unsourced people lists by nationality/ethnicity? I ask because not only are unsourced lists in general not a great thing, but with BLPs we go out of our way to avoid pigeon-holing people in terms of nationality or ethnicity unless it is central to their notability. And yet, on many lists, there is willy nilly pigeon-holing of people as certain nationalities or ethnicities with little more than a page link, and often when their national/ethnic self-identification is not even mentioned in their biographies themselves. In some ways this seems like backdoor unsourced BLP violation on mass. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:42, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Iskandar323: Could you show us a couple of examples? Thanks. PamD 13:15, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PamD: Ok, well I noticed it because of articles like this: List of Israeli Mizrahi and Sephardi Jews, because, notably, "Mizrahi Jews" (Quote: Many Jews originated from Arab and Muslim countries today reject "Mizrahi") and "Sephardi Jews" are actually quite political terms with ethnic connotations, so that's already a bit dodgy. The lack of sourcing you can see for yourself, but then if you drill down into the articles, few make any sort of statement about this, and often it is just in the categories. For some profiles, however, it is uncited and not even in the categories on the linked pages. Avigdor Kahalani for example. Then I looked up another example (chose another Middle Eastern ethnic identity): List of Druze - also with examples without any cited or linked references, e.g.: Nahida Nakad. Ok. How far does the problem spread? Lists of Americans. Drill Down: Hakka Americans. Choose a random option: Randy Chin. No citation and no mention of anything to do with 'Hakka' anywhere on the profile. Seems widespread. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:36, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Iskandar323 I'm guessing you're talking about some of the lists in Category:Lists of people by nationality and Category:Lists of people by ethnicity? Selecting List of Croatian Americans and List of Chinese actresses as two random examples, I see List of Croatian Americans does cite sources for some of the people on the list, but is mostly unsourced while List of Chinese actresses is totally unsourced. However, selecting (again at random) Ann Cindric (an unsourced entry from List of Croatian Americans), I see her ethnicity is sourced in her article.

I would think nationality would be less controversial than ethnicity. I also think the vast majority of these are intended to serve mostly a navagational purpose, and thus the sourcing is the articles to which they link. That said, controversial things should be sourced wherever they appear - and ethnicity (and even nationality on occasion) can be controversial. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 13:39, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

question re board elections

is the election for WMF board still active? what's the status of that? I just happened on a discussion of that topic. I am chagrined that I commented there, as it was an archived discussion, and I did not realize it at the time. any updates on that? I am sorry to ask this basic question here. by the way, I am not suggesting myself as a candidate for this election, just to be clear. thanks.--Sm8900 (talk) 18:30, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone. okay, I want to repost the highly-important notice below, which I found at this archive page. I'm a little perturbed that this announcement could simply be archived, instead of kept visible on a long-term basis.

if no one objects, I plan to post the notice below at Community Portal, to make sure this gets at least some genuine visibility. I hope that's ok? thanks.

This section in a nutshell: The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees oversees the Wikimedia Foundation's operations. Community-and-affiliate selected trustees and Board-appointed trustees make up the Board of Trustees. Each trustee serves a three year term. The Wikimedia community has the opportunity to vote for community-and-affiliate selected trustees. The Wikimedia community will vote to fill two seats on the Board in 2022. This is an opportunity to improve the representation, diversity, and expertise of the Board as a team. Please consider submitting your candidacy to join the Board of Trustees.
–Movement Strategy and Governance on behalf of the Elections Committee and the Board of Trustees (full announcement)

Hello everyone! There is an open Call for Candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election. Find out more on the Apply to be a Candidate page. Xeno (WMF) (talk) 01:05, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

The seats to be filled this year were previously selected by affiliates in the m:Affiliate-selected Board seats/2019 process. This year, a different method will be used:
Candidates submit their applications (by May 9; this deadline may be slightly extended);
Any community member can become a candidate if they meet the general and special conditions outlined here.

Affiliates vote to short list six (6) names from the candidates' pool.
Each affiliate carries one vote. The affiliate vote is scheduled to take place in early July.

The Community votes to elect two of the six shortlisted candidates.
Community Voting is scheduled to begin on August 15 and end on August 29.

The Board will appoint the two newly-elected candidates as the new Trustees.
This final step, which will conclude the election process, is expected to take place in early October 2022.

@Election Volunteers: ( "{{@EVs}}" ) <-- The Movement Strategy and Governance team is inviting local users to help publicize the different stages of the election . Feel free to add your name here. Thanks in advance, and to those who have already registered.
If you have any questions, please post them here, on Meta-wiki, or reach out to me directly.
Kindly cross-post and advertise widely.
Best regards,
Xeno (WMF) (talk) 01:05, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 19:09, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sm8900: It's an old notice, and shouldn't have been revived. It concerns a "Call for Candidates", a phase that is now over (see m:Wikimedia Foundation elections/2022#Timeline) - as shown above, it closed on 9 May - a month ago. As certain later stages are approached, further announcements will be made. Xeno (WMF), do you have anything else to add? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 06:51, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the interest and ping Sm8900 & Redrose64. The current stage involves affiliate representatives asking questions to candidates and then voting to shortlist six candidates for a community vote in the later half of August. I'll post more details about that below. Xeno (WMF) (talk) 10:40, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2022 Board of Trustees Call for Candidates closed

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

More languages • Please help translate to other languages.

The 2022 Board of Trustees election Call for Candidates has now closed. This Call led 12 candidates from ther community to submit their applications. Learn more about the 2022 Board of Trustees candidates.

The Analysis Committee will now consider the candidates’ applications with the skills and criteria provided by the Board. The trustees seek certain skills and competencies to improve the capacity of the Board. After the Analysis Committee completes their review, the ratings of each candidate will be published. These ratings are for informational purposes only.

For more information about the 2022 Board election, you may find the timeline, voting information and other ways to get involved on Meta-wiki.

Thank you for your support,

Movement Strategy and Governance on behalf of the Elections Committee and the Board of Trustees

Xeno (WMF) (talk) 10:40, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

this is very helpful. thanks for the post. as far as the relevance and timeliness of past posts, that's entirely true... but maybe we also should have a page here in the project namespace, simply to document the entire process? would that be ok? should I create Wikipedia: WMF Board elections 2022, simply to provide one logical place which editors can refer to later, and where we will have some record and some data about the entire length of the process, to create some record that we can refer to later?

I think that might be rather helpful and relevant to the editing community. please feel free to share any comments. thanks!!! Sm8900 (talk) 14:08, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note bundles

Hi, I've tried reading the notes on the EFN template but when I try to separate notes by type it doesn't seem to do anything. I'm interested in separating the ref bundles on The Dark Knight (film) from the actual notes, so creating two separate groups that are displayed independently. Is that something that is possible? Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 08:44, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Expert" in something

If the media consider a person as an expert in something should I add this into the article or should I refrain from it and instead list reasons why one might think this person is an expert? --Igor Yalovecky (talk) 14:10, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 238: / Line 238: @@
 ==Note bundles==
 Hi, I've tried reading the notes on the EFN template but when I try to separate notes by type it doesn't seem to do anything. I'm interested in separating the ref bundles on [[The Dark Knight (film)]] from the actual notes, so creating two separate groups that are displayed independently. Is that something that is possible? [[User: Darkwarriorblake|Darkwarriorblake]] / [[User talk:Darkwarriorblake|SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!]] 08:44, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
+== "Expert" in something ==
+If the media consider a person as an expert in something should I add this into the article or should I refrain from it and instead list reasons why one might think this person is an expert? --[[User:Igor Yalovecky|Igor Yalovecky]] ([[User talk:Igor Yalovecky|talk]]) 14:10, 10 June 2022 (UTC)