User talk:Fayenatic london/Archive29

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

The Signpost
25 April 2024
 


Restoring of article Ishfaq Manzoor that was deleted by liz[edit]

Happy new year to you too ,

as far as your reply is concerned, yes i am sure i modify the deleted article Ishfaq Manzoor, so plz restore the same I'll address all queries raised and will modify Mananbhat (talk) 10:15, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I replied at User talk:Mananbhat. – Fayenatic London 15:44, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Fayenatic london![edit]

Happy New Year!

Fayenatic london,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ⋠T⋡ 20:37, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ⋠T⋡ 20:37, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2023[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Voting for the Sound Logo has closed and the winner is expected to be announced February to April 2023.
  • Tech tip: You can view information about IP addresses in a centralised location using bullseye which won the Newcomer award in the recent Coolest Tool Awards.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:08, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Academics by foo closure[edit]

I just closed Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 3#Academics in Europe. Would you be willing to complete the work necessary needed? — Qwerfjkltalk 20:09, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwerfjkl: I have prepared the amended list of renames at Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 3.
@Marcocapelle and Oculi: please let me know if you have any suggestions for amendment before I process them. E.g. should the parents for UK & Ireland use "Academics" rather than "Academic staff" to be C2C with their contents rather than their siblings?
Also, I could quite easily reuse my spreadsheet workings to prepare a nomination for Alumni categories if that seems appropriate. For that matter, the workings also include UK & Ireland academics, in case anyone thinks they merit a further discussion. – Fayenatic London 22:06, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • For sure there should be consistency within the UK tree and within the Irish tree. Local variations are almost always respected in category names. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:10, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • OK, amended.[1] – Fayenatic London 22:21, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • This is the 3rd different outcome in 3 discussions and we haven't reached Australia yet. (Foo academic personnel, academics of foo, academic staff of foo.) I do agree that 'academic staff of foo' is a reasonable close of the latest one and that no-one (very surprisingly) seemed bothered about 'academic staff of foo' being longer than 'foo academic staff'. I would certainly hold off alumni until 'faculty' are all resolved. UK/Ireland were not included in the latest one so 'academics of' should be retained. I would certainly wait until the effects of actually recategorising all these thousands of European people have rippled through a myriad watchlists and comments from 'outraged of Bosnia' etc have been noted. Oculi (talk) 22:46, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • There are a few instances of 'Academic staff of Academic personnel' in the targets in your list of renames. Oculi (talk) 23:26, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • And a trailing 'faculty' in 'Category:Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg faculty to Category:Academic staff of Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg faculty'. Oculi (talk) 23:33, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have corrected the errors noted immediately above. Oculi (talk) 00:02, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The bot doesn't seem to process the large nominations page so it's best to put up batches at a time and also do the parent categories first to reduce confusion. I'll send those ones through now. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:04, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both. I will give attention to this tomorrow – meanwhile Timrollpickering please skip any counties with such errors. – Fayenatic London 23:30, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oculi, I see you are picking up more that were skipped, at [2] – good work!
Feel free to process these - Rathfelder had moved the Paris ones out of the tree (into 'Academics from Paris'). He had idiosyncratic ideas. Oculi (talk) 23:46, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Quite a few will need new sort keys, e.g. a quarter of Category:Academic staff by university or college in France. I fixed the sort keys for the "People" categories where words in names were reordered, e.g. |LGBT, |Blind and |Ice hockey, but I had not thought about this lot. Perhaps you, I and Marcocapelle could make a new year's resolution to pre-emptively insert sort keys when doing a mass nomination. – Fayenatic London 23:19, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it would probably be feasible to add a sort key with the cfd tag, assuming it's obvious what the sort is. University of Foo is presumably sorted under 'Foo' (which many were not). Congrats by the way on closing a few at cfd as speedies. Oculi (talk) 23:46, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As well as 'Foo university alumni'. we have 'foo university people', 'foo university rectors' etc; see eg Category:Heads of universities and colleges in Ukraine. The slope is slippery and exceedingly long. As Rathfelder said, the sortkey and hotcat work much more easily with 'Foo university xxx'; he was not invariably wrong. Oculi (talk) 00:59, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Oculi: do you have some advice when would be best to nominate African and Asian faculty categories? I.e. should I hold off for a while, or better carry on right away? (I suppose it is reasonable to combine Africa and Asia but without the Philippines). Marcocapelle (talk) 10:06, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, Israel seems to use US terminology: eg this. So more surprisingly do some in India: eg this. But 'Academic staff of' might work anyway (whereas 'Academics of' would not). I haven't noticed any objections at all to the change in Europe. I still think changing 'foo faculty' to 'foo academic staff' would be safer: who can be sure that changing 'foo alumni' to 'alumni of foo' will succeed? (Longer, minimal gain in clarity, not broken ...) My recollection is that Rathfelder made his usual random high-speed mess of the ones in Africa. Category:Faculty by university in South Africa, Category:Faculty by university in Kenya are a hodge-podge but none use 'of'. Perhaps do Asia first as there is overlap with Europe. Oculi (talk) 15:23, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • I am hoping I have found all the 'faculty' ones in Europe. Rathfelder (and imitators) had hidden quite a few by not adding parents which I could anticipate: eg this one. There may still be some with no parents at all. Alumni will be the same, as Rathfelder did most of them. Oculi (talk) 02:17, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Tomb of the Unknown Soldier (France)[edit]

On 12 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tomb of the Unknown Soldier (France), which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier under the Arc de Triomphe in Paris was desecrated during riots in 1927? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tomb of the Unknown Soldier (France). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Tomb of the Unknown Soldier (France)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

-- RoySmith (talk) 12:03, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hook update
Your hook reached 8,528 views (710.6 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of January 2023 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:28, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you CMD for picking that one! Just as well my choice of the shorter one was not used instead. – Fayenatic London 14:49, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
While I am pleased I was able to help get the nomination through, I only trimmed two hooks, credit for the final hook choice goes to Cielquiparle. If only my hooks could be so successful! CMD (talk) 14:54, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CFD closure list generator?[edit]

hi! what tool did you use to generate Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 3? thx! RZuo (talk) 08:02, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I use Microsoft Excel for that. First I pasted an old list into Microsoft Word and replaced " to " with ^t (tab character). Then I copied the result and pasted it into a spreadsheet, which produced two columns. Then in Excel I use find & replace, MID() function and text concatenation to assemble the required lines. On this occasion I also used IF() to insert "the" in the cases that needed it. – Fayenatic London 08:58, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
oh ok. i thought you had a better tool other than excel.😅 i often do the same thing.
how did you get the old list? AWB? RZuo (talk) 16:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
From Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 October 3... and that was from Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 September 17, which was generated by Marcocapelle.
Other times, I start from the parent category page. Or I might use the "generate" function in WP:JWB. – Fayenatic London 16:43, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@RZuo, I use regex instead, via the 2010 wikitext editor. — Qwerfjkltalk 18:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Erik Fosse[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Erik Fosse at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Mhhossein talk 12:52, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi, I think you've just missed this comment due to the wrong pinging. Just meant to let you know. Best. --Mhhossein talk 07:34, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2023[edit]

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Vector 2022 skin has become the default for desktop users of the English Wikipedia.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Voting in the 2023 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
  • Voting in the 2023 Community Wishlist Survey will begin on 10 February 2023 and end on 24 February 2023. You can submit, discuss and revise proposals until 6 February 2023.
  • Tech tip: Syntax highlighting is available in both the 2011 and 2017 Wikitext editors. It can help make editing paragraphs with many references or complicated templates easier.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:37, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

The Template Barnstar
Thank you for improving Wikipedia templates, in particular the fix you made to Template:YearInCountryPortalBox. Cheers! Jameboy (talk) 11:58, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this award. It turns out I was only just getting started! As you noticed, I found a way to chase all similar results and fix them. – Fayenatic London 19:32, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cork Gully[edit]

It has been over 20 years since PwC traded as Cork Gully. Shouldn't the present day firm take precedence at least in the introduction? The current summary causes confusion. Suggestion in line with other brands such as Houlihan Lokey would be as follows:-

"Cork Gully is an advisory and financial services firm specialising in business transformation, restructuring and special situations. Cork Gully was [originally] founded in 1906 and is headquartered in London, England. The firm advises public and closed companies as well as investment funds in financial distress." Greencity23 (talk) 17:43, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Greencity23: Houlihan Lokey is notable as a financial institution with revenue and equity over $1 billion. Why should a small professional services firm of 12 years' standing be compared with that?
New York Cosmos (2010) is another 2010 rebirth. It has achieved notability on its own, and has its own article. New York Cosmos is now a disambiguation page between the old and new topics.
Is the new firm yet of a standing to have its own article? If so, on what criteria? N.B. WP:ORG#No inherited notability. If not, then for the time being it rightly gets only a small mention for the sake of clarity in an article about the notable topic of the former firm. – Fayenatic London 18:12, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Closure[edit]

I just closed Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 January 29#Academic staff in Africa and Asia as rename. Can you take care of implementing this? I can format the categories as necessary for the bot if that would help. — Qwerfjkltalk 21:39, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've made a start with the Africa sub-list. I don't think there's a need to wait in case of WP:MRV, because there was a clear majority in favour. If you considered that the opposers' rationales were successfully rebutted by the replies to them, you might want to add that as a closing statement. – Fayenatic London 10:52, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For the love of goats![edit]

Thanks to your deletion of my erroneous rubbish, this goat has more space to skip about being adorable.

Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 15:22, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Fred! I went to your page to leave a message, then decided not to bother, as you appear to know what you are doing, and are busy enough, and would recognise what I was doing if you happened to see it. – Fayenatic London 17:48, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Yeah; I'm trying to analyse the usage of {{annotated link}} to fine tune the results of and behavior of the new modules invoked by it while also trying to keep the functionality modular, and the original cats were just being placed by the wrong module. Sorry for the clutter and work deleting it. I don't suppose you know a nice way to see if something is in multiple categories? I found an old unmaintained extension that would have done the job, but alas it appears to have no current implementation or alternative. Don't worry about responding if you're busy; just came to mind. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 18:18, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For category intersections? You want PetScan, e.g. https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=23833126 – Fayenatic London 19:14, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh; that's perfect! Thank you 😊 Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 19:22, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://petscan.wmflabs.org/ is very recently returning a 502 bad gateway and I have no idea who's responsible for its maintenance. Possibly related: I also noticed categories not updating as expected. Why am I tell you? Hey look! A squirrel! Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 21:29, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Fred Gandt, if you're trying category intersection, you could try searching incategory:"Foo" incategory:"Bar". — Qwerfjkltalk 21:33, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! That's very handy; thank you 😊 The other thing is still broken though Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 21:38, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Coincidentally I only noticed H:INCATEGORY for the first time this morning. See also H:DEEPCAT below it. – Fayenatic London 23:34, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Who knew help pages could be so helpful? 😉 Learning something new every day; that's the good stuff. I'm pretty sure the blurb for incategory is misleading if not flat out wrong; it doesn't appear that the category needs to be "in their wikitext"; transcluded cats seem to be understood just fine (as expected). I'll fix it after testing to be certain. Petscan came back to life BTW. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 02:00, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Faculty categories[edit]

Hello, Fayenatic london,

Thank you for restoring and reorienting a few of those faculty categories. I have just assumed that if User:JJMC89 bot III doesn't leave a redirect from a former category to a newly named category then a redirect to a redirect is no longer useful. By the way, I don't go seeking these categories out, they just show up on the Broken redirect list that updates a few times a day (you can look into the page history to see previously deleted broken redirects). Any way, I apologize if we are working at cross-purposes I just thought that if category redirects were important then JJMC89 bot III would leave one when it moves categories. But maybe that isn't an option with this bot, I don't know. Any way, thanks! Liz Read! Talk! 23:45, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Liz, the bot leaves a redirect on moves and merges if the instruction line at WP:CFDW starts * REDIRECT. So the choice is under admin control.
As part of the cleanup I or the other CFDW patrollers check "What links here" on each of the old names and (among other things) decide what to do with incoming redirects. If they are from former names of the University, I would update the redirect and then move it from "faculty" to "Academics of", as that's a name which someone might now try to use. (See WP:Category redirects that should be kept.)
There was one case where I took a different view on whether "the" was needed in the name, and relisted the category at CFDW for remedial renaming. I anticipated the bot's second move when updating the incoming redirects. You happened to catch those redirects before the bot moved the target for the second time. No big deal – I took the risk that that might happen. You would only have known if you checked the history or "what links here" on the new target.
But if you'd skip all faculty /academics redirects over the next week, that would be helpful. Thanks for your work with the mop too! – Fayenatic London 09:22, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Checking does take time… which was why I only posted them starting with a smaller batch. I was surprised to see that the rest had all been added for processing on the same day. Timrollpickering if you are able to help with cleanup of incoming links, that would be appreciated! – Fayenatic London 11:32, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • {@Liz: please also do not delete Habsburg monarchy categories, some of which are empty until parameter changes are made. – Fayenatic London 08:41, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Articles with WORLDCATID identifiers[edit]

Hello, Fayenatic london,

This category showed up on the Empty Categories list tonight but because Twinkle identifies the note on the category as being a CFD tag, it doesn't want to tag the category for speedy deletion as an empty category. If it was only for temporary use and you are done with it, perhaps you can delete it as a CSD G7. If not, I can put an Empty Category tag on the page. Thank you! Liz Read! Talk! 01:13, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz, looks like it can be deleted - it's listed at WP:CFDWM for emptying. — Qwerfjkltalk 07:20, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Right. It was a template-generated category, but as it had nearly a million members the change took some time to propagate. I set up {{cfd manual}} template at the old page to avoid its appearing in Special:WantedCategories. I initially redirected it too, but Tim removed that to avoid confusing another bot. – Fayenatic London 08:42, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it looks like it's been taken care of. I primarily work with empty content categories so I'm unsure what to do when project-related categories come up on the nightly list. This happened with some recent changes with Authority Control categories because they are doing some recategorization (or should I say decategorization?). I'd probably be less confused if I could figure out how to close CFD discussions and deal with the JJMC89 bot but right now ATD and, occasionally, RTD seems so much more straight-forward. Liz Read! Talk! 23:16, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Liz, It'd be great if there were closers at CfD. — Qwerfjkltalk 20:21, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:DisestcatCountryDecade/core[edit]

Template:DisestcatCountryDecade/core has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 13:44, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:DisestcatCountryDecade/old[edit]

Template:DisestcatCountryDecade/old has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 13:44, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pages using new version of Template DisestcatCountryDecade[edit]

Is Category:Pages using new version of Template DisestcatCountryDecade still needed? I don't see where in the code this is used. Gonnym (talk) 13:48, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See the TfD page, and August 2022 discussion at Category talk:Pages using old version of Template DisestcatCountryDecade. – Fayenatic London 21:39, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for...[edit]

...keeping the categories, what a tragedy it would be to let loose editors who want to purge to go ahead and purge. Shouldn't the James Joyce category nomination, which was very sparsely attended compared to the other nominations by the same nominator (that it was the same nominator seems important), be kept, as few if any of the participants of the vast nomination knew of the single nomination tucked away somewhere else. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:27, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For reference, this is about Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_February_11#Cultural_depictions.
Well, I participated in the Joyce discussion, and IMHO the instances that were removed from the hierarchy were worth including in a list but were not WP:DEFINING for categorisation. So if you care about these, please check completeness of lists, as further members may well be justifiably purged from categories. – Fayenatic London 11:24, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Private schools in England[edit]

Hi, thanks for moving Category:Private schools in England and the others. There are quite a few subcategories that would also need to be moved. Do I need to create a speedy request for each individually or is there some other way to move them? Thanks. Vpab15 (talk) 09:07, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it's tiresome, but yes you need to tag and list them. WP:TWINKLE may make it easier. Alternatively, you could ask user:Qwerfjkl to run a mass nomination. – Fayenatic London 09:34, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, thanks for the suggestion. I went with AWB in the end to add the tag, which made it a little easier. I added 211 categories in total. Does it look ok to you? Since I used find and replace to add the tag, AWB also changed the existing categories. For example, Category:Roman Catholic independent schools in the Diocese of Shrewsbury was changed to belong to the non-existing Category:Roman Catholic private schools in England. I only noticed after running AWB. Since those categories will be created later as part of the request, I think it should be ok. It would be quite pointless to correct that if it the category is going to be renamed later. What do you think? Vpab15 (talk) 16:41, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Vpab15, couldn't you use the prepend option in AWB? I would suggest fixing the categories because they'll show up on Special:WantedCategories, and because the nomination may not be successful. — Qwerfjkltalk 17:33, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've brought forward the processing of RC indep schools in England / Wales / UK under WP:IAR, since the target was already populated and the old pages were empty or nearly so.
Vpab15 if you're using TW and that's how it does it, fair enough, but if you could omit the repeated rationale and signature on most of the set, then that would save an admin from having to trim them when it's time to process them. – Fayenatic London 21:54, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for doing that. I have shortened the requests. Let me know if that looks ok. Thanks. Vpab15 (talk) 22:59, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Diff/1141495553[edit]

I've started listing these discussions as combine to make it clearer that these need to be listed separately. — Qwerfjkltalk 10:14, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. As I understood it, it was previously your intention to make the listings on the talk page fully ready for pasting into the Working page, so I read this as a change of plan.
In effect you are leaving it to the implementing admin to choose which one to rename and use as the merge target, because the bot just ignores both if they are listed under Merge with a target that does not exist.
If you were intending to apply for adminship, I'd suggest you demonstrate readiness by taking on the extra steps.
If not, your work on non-admin closure is still much appreciated! But there are dangers of overlooking knock-on tasks, e.g. reparenting after Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 15#Category:Gothic Architecture in Lagos, as admins may just copy your listings to the Working page without checking the parents or the discussion for other implications. If you spot these, please could you capture them e.g. by adding notes under your listings? – Fayenatic London 16:40, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think "combine" closures can be just copied to the working page, as they need to be listed sequentially.
I try to add a note where manual work is necessary, sorry I missed that one.
Sorry for the delay in closing discussions recently; I've taken on a few projects in Wikipedia lately, and I don't want to close discussions badly, so I related closing them for a few days. — Qwerfjkltalk 17:31, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, exactly. Timrollpickering copied a "combine" close to the Merge section of the Working page, but nothing happened. Tim, you have a great history in processing NACs – it was you who got me started – glad you are still here too! Well, if you see any more NACs listed by Qwerfjkl using the word "combine" as opposed to "merge", I've noted the steps required at the diff in this section heading.
@Qwerfjkl: no need to apologise for anything. We're all just volunteers. As you know, for a long time CFD limped along with a few months' backlog; it's going swimmingly these days. My suggestions here are just meant as fine-tuning, not any kind of put-down – forgive me if I hit a wrong note. – Fayenatic London 21:41, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Qwerfjkl: And another thing: user:Estopedist1 has just expanded some nominations at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 20, which is helpful. Those nominations should therefore be left for another 7 days after the date of tagging. But they are not all tagged yet. I suggest you don't bother to relist them, but just leave them on the original log page, and close them when appropriate next month. Unless you want to help Estopedist1 with tagging & relisting in combination? – Fayenatic London 11:12, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why wouldn't I relist them? — Qwerfjkltalk 17:06, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes it can be a hindrance, if there are links between discussions. And it would be more work to re-tag them all – but I suppose that doesn't weigh much as XFDcloser does the work and usually gets it right. – Fayenatic London 17:34, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Typically, I just add the plain {{subst:CfX|Section}} template when tagging pages for a discussion, which links to the current log page, and then I just relist the discussion. Good point about breaking links. — Qwerfjkltalk 20:42, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I forgot another downside, namely that the old page might have been on people's watchlists, so they may miss some posts unless and until they watch the relisted page.
One trick you might find useful is to relist related discussions next to each other on the same log page. This might have been particularly useful for the various "rulers" discussions. – Fayenatic London 20:57, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes; as I work through the log pages top down, but new discussions are added to the top, sometimes it confuses comments referring to the discussion above etc , as the order is reversed after relisting. — Qwerfjkltalk 21:48, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, well, when you realise *that* has happened, you can simply cut and paste whole sections within the page. – Fayenatic London 08:10, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1806 disestablishments in the Austrian Empire[edit]

A tag has been placed on Category:1806 disestablishments in the Austrian Empire indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 22:48, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Thanks. I don't know what was there originally, but I put Archduchy of Austria into the Austria subcat. Some time ago you mentioned a tool for tracing category changes – please can you let me have more info? – Fayenatic London 13:23, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Erik Fosse[edit]

On 28 February 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Erik Fosse, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that two Norwegians, Erik Fosse and Mads Gilbert, as the only Western doctors at the al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza, found themselves as leading witnesses of the 2008–2009 Gaza War? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Erik Fosse. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Erik Fosse), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:03, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! This was another case where I found an abandoned user draft while checking backlinks after CFD, and merged its good content to a live article. Credit shared with User:Iselilja. – Fayenatic London 11:53, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@BorgQueen: if you have seen Picard (season 2), I'd love to know what you thought of it… if that isn't a personal question. – Fayenatic London 14:13, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, not yet. I'm considering to purchase its Blu-ray release. I'm a physical media collector... I don't watch streaming. BorgQueen (talk) 14:18, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'd better say no more for now! – Fayenatic London 14:22, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category redirects[edit]

Hello, Fayenatic london,

I know that sometimes you like to correct for category redirects when User:JJMC89 bot III doesn't leave a redirect. So, please take a look at User:AnomieBOT III/Broken redirects. Feel free to fix any of these broken redirect category redirects if you so choose to do so! I often will correct them when there are a small number of category redirects to fix but, in this case, there are 43 category redirects so taking the time to do this is less likely. Liz Read! Talk! 02:35, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: by the time I looked, EmausBot had fixed them all. Those were on category talk pages. I wonder whether it was intentional that it does that on talk pages but leave category pages for manual intervention? Well, I don't disagree with that pattern. Some redirects should be deleted as obsolete, and some should be moved to correspond to the new target name, e.g. if they are spelling or diacritic variations.– Fayenatic London 08:24, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2023[edit]

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ROI[edit]

diff. The Baroque Revival was 19th century, when Ireland was an entity. I suppose one could argue that the architecture is now in ROI, which has the advantage of being more straightforward. Articles are in both present day and historical categories, eg Altunizade Mosque. Hmm. — Oculi (talk) 23:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for withdrawing the Speedy nom. As for the mosque, the Ottoman hierarchy is an outlier in Category:Architecture by country; I think the only other former countries there are Soviet, Czechoslovak and Yugoslav. Following Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_October_2#Architecture_by_country, perhaps those four should be reviewed. – Fayenatic London 21:44, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My seeing of the ryan trahan draft[edit]

hey man, i'm sorry to see that the ryan trahan article isn't on wiki yet. Hopefully all of us fans could get him on some day. :) Blitzfan51 (talk) 21:32, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Blitzfan51: Ah, you're referring to Draft:Ryan Trahan. Although I made the most recent edit to that page, I have no particular knowledge or interest in Trahan – I was just rescuing some content from an abandoned user draft. If you know any sources worth using, feel free to add to that draft directly. – Fayenatic London 21:37, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
oh, well thanks for editing and rescuing content. Blitzfan51 (talk) 01:07, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request to copy code for a userbox[edit]

May I copy the code of your This User Is A Christian userbox on to my user page? Blitzfan51 (talk) 19:04, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Blitzfan51: by all means! Feel free to use any userboxes that you find anywhere. Category:Userboxes is one place to look for more. – Fayenatic London 20:16, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thanks Blitzfan51 (talk) 21:10, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Afdnotice2[edit]

Template:Afdnotice2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:05, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Narutolovehinata5[edit]

Hello, Fayenatic london. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/The Embrace.
Message added 02:15, 8 March 2023 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:15, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 7 2023: Barning[edit]

The Categorisation Barnstar
To Fayenatic london due to their dedication to pruning, maintaining, and caring for our category structure. Cheers! Thinker78 (talk) 03:22, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
+1 — Qwerfjkltalk 17:10, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Disestablishments in the Austrian Netherlands by year[edit]

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:26, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted this with a link to the responsible CFD. See User_talk:Qwerfjkl#CFD_decision.– Fayenatic London 15:46, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hungary categories[edit]

Hello, Fayenatic london,

I noticed that all of those empty Year in Hungary categories that I tagged for CSD C1 you deleted because of a recent CFD decision. I just wondered if all of those years should be removed from List of years in Hungary and whether some category trees in Category:Centuries in Hungary and Category:Millennia in Hungary should be deleted or renamed if we are saying that "Hungary", as a country or place, didn't exist prior to 1848. I mean if there wasn't a "1672 in Hungary" because Hungary didn't exist, then how can there be a 17th century in Hungary? Why delete the early years and decades of Hungary but keep the centuries and millennia in Hungary? Maybe the CFD nominator, Marcocapelle, can explain this inconsistency. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 18:33, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Liz: I said there was no sovereign Hungarian country, since Hungary was part of the Ottoman Empire, Habsburg Empire and Austrian Empire. For sure there would have been substantial opposition if I would have said that Hungary did not exist at all. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:42, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks, both, for the suggestion and the reply. The rationale in that CFD was not that "Hungary" was anachronistic, but only that the year and decade categories were sparsely populated. So I would take no further action. – Fayenatic London 08:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Disestablishments in the Southern Netherlands by year[edit]

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 02:45, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking care of deleting all of these related categories, especially including the CFD discussion where it was decided to delete them. It makes for a much more informative deletion rationale than simply "Empty category". Liz Read! Talk! 22:37, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request[edit]

Hello, Fayenatic london,

I notice that you frequently take the time to correct category redirects when the bot moves categories around, which is just great. I don't think category redirects get much attention on the project. But when you do so, could you check the talk page as well? It doesn't happen a lot but they sometimes show up on the broken redirects list and depending on the admin who spots them, they are sometimes just deleted. If you are correcting the category page, then maybe you could also correct the category talk page at the same time. Just a suggestion. Thank you for your diligence! Liz Read! Talk! 22:37, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder, Liz. I think I always delete the talk page if I delete a category redirect, but you're right, I've been forgetting them if I update the redirect.
By the way, have you deleted any Faculty /Academics redirects lately? I have not had time to check backlinks from WP:CFDWL yet. I prefer to process and check large nominations in batches, but can't stop other admins posting the lot in one go. Some of the redirects are worth updating rather than deleting. – Fayenatic London 08:18, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Liz: apparently you didn't delete any more after those that I had already retrieved from 20 March – thank you.
Note for my reference: I'm interpreting the above request as referring to moves where the target was deleted/moved without leaving a redirect, and hence the talk page redirect is broken. I don't think I need to worry where the category was moved leaving a redirect, as another bot will fix the double-redirected talk page, e.g. Category talk:F.B. Brindisi 1912 players.
Do you know if there's a preference to also delete the talk page by default when manually deleting a page? If not, I'll ask for that in next year's wishlist survey. – Fayenatic London 16:01, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I use Twinkle to do all of my CSD and PROD deletions and it automatically deletes Talk pages. I don't remember seeing any more academic redirects since about a week ago. We did have an instance of a new editor insisting on using "faculty" to create a category rather than "academic staff" or whatever the preferred occupational title is now. Liz Read! Talk! 02:32, 13 April 2023 (UTC)C[reply]

SHORTDESC[edit]

Hello! I hope you are doing fine. I think that you have some template knowledge and wanted to ask about something. Template:Short description seems to work only on en.wiki. Why is it that case? Thank you. Some1 {talk} 13:10, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Punetor i Rregullt5: Hi, thanks for your message. That template has some features that I don't understand myself, but I can have a look for you. Do you want to give me an example of where it is not working on sq wiki? – Fayenatic London 13:27, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey. I have copied the exact same material from en.wiki to some of the other wikis and it seems to work only on en.wiki. Is it something special here? - Some1 {talk} 15:07, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean about it not working? What results/effects are you looking for? – Fayenatic London 15:46, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The result I want is the same as here in en.wiki. To add a short desc below the title. Some1 {talk} 14:57, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) @Some1, that is added by Wikipedia:Shortdesc helper rather than the template. — Qwerfjkltalk 21:20, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think he means that the short description is not displayed in search results, e.g. this search should show the short description "Lojë video 1999" for Final Fantasy VIII. – Fayenatic London 21:46, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's because {{Short description}} uses the {{SHORTDESC}} magic word, which is not used on other wikis; they use Wikidata descriptions instead. — Qwerfjkltalk 06:42, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If i take the time to learn the commands, can i implement them in my sq.wiki? Or is it en.wiki exclusive? Some1 {talk} 07:08, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Qwerfjkl: I have just added a sq description at Wikidata.[3] It is not yet showing in the above search results. Is it just delayed for a while? – Fayenatic London 07:58, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to work for me.
— Qwerfjkltalk 09:54, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can't see it at the moment even in enwiki, on any device or browser. What app are you using? And does it still show the same? I've changed Wikidata to a longer sq desc "lojë me role 1999". – Fayenatic London 20:08, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
┌──────────────────────────────┘
I just went to the page in sqwiki in my browser - it wouldn't show on enwiki. — Qwerfjkltalk 21:00, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks. I can see it now, when using Mobile view – in the dropdown list that appears when starting to search, and also under the article title when I visit the page. I confirm that it is displaying the description from Wikidata, not the one that I entered in the article using the SHORTDESC template.
So is that what Some1 needs to do – enter sq descriptions in Wikidata, and forget about using SHORTDESC? – Fayenatic London 21:17, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. — Qwerfjkltalk 06:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you guys. I was trying to make SHORTDESC work there too, but these are the cards we were dealt. Thank you again, to both. Some1 {talk} 06:32, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2023[edit]

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

Precious
Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:30, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and Happy Easter! – Fayenatic London 07:21, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, also to you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another Request[edit]

Hello, Fayenatic london,

I'm back with another request as you are one of the few admins who is familiar with Wikipedia's category system and CFDWorld. Is there any way you can close Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 March 27#Category:Sportspeople by ethnic or national origin in the next day? For some reason, the CFD nominator didn't place a CFD tag on all of the categories in the proposal, half are tagged for the CFD discusssion and half are tagged CSD C1. Then there was an edit war over whether or not the empty categories should be tagged CSD C1 even though they had never been tagged as being part of the CFD discussion. So, I removed those categories as being part of the CFD discussion but my edit was reverted and they are all still listed in the nomination. So, it's a bit of a mess. Tomorrow, the categories that were retagged CSD C1 are due to be deleted (it's been more than a week at this point) but the CFD is still open even though it doesn't seem like there is a lot of conflicting opinion.

If you, or a talk page stalker, could just close this CFD before these empty categories are due to be deleted, it would make things less problematic for those editors who are strict rule-followers. Thank you for considering this request. Liz Read! Talk! 02:29, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I see that these were taken to RFU once already. – Fayenatic London 07:31, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Women characters in animated films[edit]

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 04:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Emigrants[edit]

Your sagacious cfd decision to merge Category:Emigrants by country to Category:Emigrants by nationality leaves a few duplicates such as Category:Emigrants from the United Kingdom (a recent bold creation) and Category:British emigrants. Might the logic that produced the overall merge not apply equally to the subcats? — Oculi (talk) 00:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome, happy to help[edit]

Although →‎NAC requests April 2023: done. Welcome to the team, William Allen Simpson! had me laughing out loud. As apparently has been forgotten, I'd created Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working and am the second post on its Talk. Pretty sure I'd helped write the original instructions for non-administrative close, too. Of course, processes have been refined over time. Such pretty syntaxhighlights now.
—William Allen Simpson (talk) 04:50, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@William Allen Simpson: Thanks for the history, and thanks for still helping out! It's an honour to be following in your footsteps. Best wishes – Fayenatic London 06:09, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for sticking with it so long. Most earlier folks don't seem to be around anymore. I'd started as a volunteer developer/operator in 2003, so still feel a bit responsible. I'm an old Free Software Foundation member (since the late '80s), and there was a bit of a push to support this project. As a well known IETF Standards author (you use my work every day), I've mostly been building wikipedia itself rather than the articles. Back in the early days, we'd hoped that well defined policies and guidelines would keep things in check. (The terms "policy" and "guideline" come from administrative law.) Sadly, I only can help these days between cancer treatments. Also I get bored and irritated at the eternal wellspring of editors adding trivial ethnicity categories, and find something else more interesting to do.
William Allen Simpson (talk) 07:23, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm planning on returning to CfD closures sometime, just taking a break for now.
It's great to see so many people working on closures. — Qwerfjkltalk 21:25, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Television naming convention tag[edit]

I'm trying to understand this edit. The work in question is an original video animation which i think would fall under FILM naming conventions and not TV. Many articles use (OVA) as disambiguation so I don't think the name needs to be changed. I'm trying to understand why the article was tagged. Thank you. TarkusABtalk/contrib 19:14, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, good, then the template is working, drawing attention to the category that was previously placed there. You need to ask Gonnym about this edit. – Fayenatic London 06:24, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2023[edit]

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

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:22, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Links[edit]

Hi there, Fayenatic!

Per this category move, an edit is needed at Template:Infobox Australian place to change “Victoria (Australia)” to “Victoria (state)”. Would you be so kind to perform it? Thanks in advance! 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 22:21, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@IvanScrooge98: Bearcat (talk · contribs) had already done the necessary change before I woke up today, but I found a less important one and updated that too. – Fayenatic London 08:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:68 BC births[edit]

A tag has been placed on Category:68 BC births indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:16, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, that was for Gaius Maecenas. – Fayenatic London 07:33, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it always feels awkward sending these templates to editors and admins who are so well-versed in categories. If they ever are emptied out of process, I hope you can revert the edits that did so. Liz Read! Talk! 20:51, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. That's why I do appreciate receiving these notices. – Fayenatic London 07:32, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Query[edit]

Hello, Fayenatic london,

Some categories that were part of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 March 25#Category:Families of national leaders are being emptied and tagged for CSD G6 deletion but it's not clear to me that this is what your decision called for as it says that there was no consensus to delete the categories included in the nomination. Can you clarify your decision for me? Many thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 20:49, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: they should all be being split between corresponding categories for head of state and heads of government. I checked one, and it is Marcocapelle (talk · contribs) who had tagged it for deletion – I would trust him on this, and see that e.g. he has created Category:Daughters of heads of state. – Fayenatic London 21:08, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CFD/S question[edit]

Hey Fayenatic london. I have a question about WP:CFD/S, which I'm hoping you can help with. Regarding the C2B: Consistency with established Wikipedia naming conventions and practices criteria, does this apply to shortening names as well? I'm working on some categories related to Southeast Asian Games being shortened to SEA Games and, while the heading implies I could use this criteria for my requests, the explanation only lists disambiguation fixes and expanding abbreviated countries. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:16, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

C2B can apply to lenthening to use the full wording rather than an abbreviation, because that's a convention with category names; but not to shortening.
C2D might apply if the articles have been at abbreviated names for a long time, or if there was a consensus to move the articles after discussion or if WP:RM was used, but not if articles were recently moved without discussion ([4] ?). C2E could apply if the category was recently created and its creator supports a move. Hope this helps. – Fayenatic London 15:47, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, it does help to confirm that C2D does not apply to shortening. The relevant RM can be found here. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:49, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think you mean that C2D does apply to shortening in this case. Even though the discussion was far from unanimous, it was an RM closed as consensus; and though the closer was non-admin, they gave a rationale which looks valid to me and has not been challenged. Therefore the category names can be shortened speedily under C2D. – Fayenatic London 16:22, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I meant to say it helps to confirm that C2B does not apply to shortening. That's how I felt about the close as well, which is why I gave it several days before diving in and did a bit of probing by nominating a single category first and allowing that to go through. Thanks for looking and the feedback! Hey man im josh (talk) 16:26, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2023[edit]

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

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
  • As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.

Technical news

  • Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.

Arbitration

  • The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:32, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

Hello, I'm not perfect in English grammar, but I think the page Wikipedia:Text of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (Q119211641) is similar to the page Wikipedia:Text of Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (Q28534444). Should one of them be a redirect to the other? Or is the subject different? --Karim talk to me :)..! 21:15, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Karim. I have redirected it.
Courtesy pings to MJL and Geni. The new (now redirected) version with "the" in the page name was identical bar the word "Section" in the headings and omits a line in section 6, "The license granted in Section 3 above is expressly made subject to and limited by the following restrictions:". – Fayenatic London 21:31, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[Thank you for the ping] That line is not currently in the most recent availible copy of the license. The older one should honestly redirect to the newer one that I made since it lacks that inaccuracy. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 18:11, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
See also: MediaWiki talk:Wikimedia-copyright § Protected edit request on 8 June 2023 where other users agreed that mine should be the controlling one (so I ask you please reverse your redirecting of it). –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 18:13, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I have merged the page history, redirected the old name to the new name and reverted to MJL's version. Sorry about the intermediate move to Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Text of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. – Fayenatic London 19:15, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cfm2[edit]

You recently edited this template, adding {{#if:{{{target2|}}}| and [[:Category:{{{target2}}}]]}}
@LaundryPizza03 notified me that this causes some extra text. Can you modify this to 

{{safesubst:<noinclude />#if:{{{target2|}}}|&nbsp;and [[:Category:{{{target2}}}]]}}

so that it gets substituted? Thanks. — Qwerfjkltalk 09:14, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both. I had spotted this and raised it at Template talk:Cfd all, and confirm that with your help it's now resolved. – Fayenatic London 12:54, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cfd/w[edit]

First, thanks for the earlier assist.

For the recent one, I'm guessing that means the bot won't merge to a redlinked page?

I was trying to get the page history to move, per the discussion. But it looks like you have to rename then merge?

(There were so few category members, I almost did the whole thing manually, but I wanted to see how the bot would handle what I was trying to do. I guess I found out...)

Anyway, thank you again : ) - jc37 12:08, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, JJMC89 bot III will not process a merge until the target exists. CydeBot may have lacked that scruple! The new bot has other scruples too, e.g. if there are contradictory instructions on CFDW then it will process neither.
I probably would have processed that merge by moving the older page over the newer one and choosing "Yes, delete the page". – Fayenatic London 13:00, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose it's probably better this way - to help avoid accidents and such.
Thanks again : ) - jc37 13:07, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cfds[edit]

Could you close the 2 thoroughly BHG'ed nominations of mine, which have become deeply unedifying? (As withdrawn by nominator; I've detagged the first and am about to tackle the second.)
Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 9#Expatriates 2 and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 13#Expatriates A-G — Oculi (talk) 13:00, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, done. You missed a few, e.g. Finnish emigrants to South Africa and to Venezuela.
For the record, I would certainly have supported deletion of the single-member categories. The exceptions to WP:SMALLCAT are not clearly defined; e.g. I was surprised at a recent consensus to merge disestablishments in the Dutch Empire to decades, with no intention to merge year categories for establishments.
As for the ones that have been emptied, it might have been Johnpacklambert. Nearly 20% of his last thousand edits were tinkering with migrant categories. – Fayenatic London 21:29, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks. Coincidentally, in view of the thread with Jc37 immediately above, I first noticed BHG in a ferocious spat long ago with Jc37, which proceeded from cfd to ANI. It is odd that the many contributors who say in cfd after cfd that tiny categories are of no use did not chime in to the first one. It is JPL largely but quite a few people merely observe that an article is wrongly categorised and inadvertently delete the category. Eg Liz has deleted at least 2 recently (and then sent notices). I note your support for the nom, and hope that next time it will be expressed at cfd. (This happened before: Greenland organisations I think it was. Wooden Superman. Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2019_June_24#Organisations_based_in_Greenland.) Oculi (talk) 22:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Oculi: JPL and I had a side conversation on my talk page and he indicated intent was to better categorize articles not empty categories per se, and he indicates he repopulated most so as not disrupt the nomination. (I haven't gone through these cats myself though.) Closing the nominations was probably for the best as they were not moving toward consensus, to put it mildly. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:47, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:XFL (2001) venues has been nominated for deletion[edit]

Category:XFL (2001) venues has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:33, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the edit summary "split from Category:XFL venues as agreed at WP:CFDS" looks like you created it procedurally, but your input is always welcome! - RevelationDirect (talk) 01:33, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ayman El Wafi[edit]

Hello! Thanks for helping out with one of my userspace drafts! By the way, may I ask your opinion on how it looks like, please? Is it ready for the mainspace, or should I wait until I can add more information (for example, about his professional debut)? Oltrepier (talk) 09:45, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome. I work mainly with categories, and when these are renamed, I like to update user pages that link to them.
I am not familiar with the sources that you have cited in the draft. Some of them would not meet the criteria at WP:SPORTCRIT, so the notability of this player may not be established yet. – Fayenatic London 07:39, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Fayenatic london That's perfectly fine, although I think footballers fall under WP:GNG criteria now.
Thank you for taking the time to check in and reply. : ) Oltrepier (talk) 08:10, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Kingdom of Ireland[edit]

I'm afraid I don't understand what you're doing with this re-direct. Where's it coming from? Where's the mandate? Who says that the Kingdom of Ireland and Early Modern Ireland are synonymous? The Early Modern period is usually, in the west, taken to start with the Fall of Constantinople; at that time, Ireland was part of the Lordship of Ireland, not the Kingdom of Ireland. Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:38, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The mandate for merging is Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_September_1#Category:Kingdom_of_Ireland, which you could have found via WhatLinksHere. Although there were no project banners on the talk page and therefore no automated alerts, the nominator did post a notice of the CFD at WT:IE. My rationale for redirecting is that editors might try using that title and therefore a redirect would be more useful than deletion. It would also facilitate re-creation in the event that consensus might change. – Fayenatic London 07:26, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template[edit]

Hello. Could you restore Template:MiniWikiProject Basshunter welcome to my sandbox? Eurohunter (talk) 16:56, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Eurohunter: that page has never existed, and I can't find a similarly-named page among your deleted contributions.
I did find Template:WikiProject Basshunter which linked to the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians/MiniWikiProject Basshunter. The usual term for a mini WikiProject is a Task Force. – Fayenatic London 21:21, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fayenatic_london/Archive29&oldid=1162741113"