User talk: Liz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Newjerseyliz)
Jump to: navigation, search
WildflowerCtr lupine close.jpg

It's spring!

This page was last edited or modified by MediaWiki message delivery (talk).

Wise words given to a blocked editor: This absolute adherence to the idea that your interpretation of the rules is paramount
and everyone else's input is merely an obstacle to overcome is an accurate summary of how you ended up in this position.

Basalisk inspect damageberate 4 August 2013
Well said!Liz Read! Talk!
The Signpost
14 October 2016
Centralized discussion
Proposals: policy other Discussions Ideas

For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.
No matter how cute you are, expect no quarter in the cruel world of Wikipedia.

While Wikipedia's written policies and guidelines should be taken seriously, they can be misused.
Do not follow an overly strict interpretation of the letter of policy without consideration for the principles of policies.
If the rules truly prevent you from improving the encyclopedia, ignore them.
Disagreements are resolved through consensus-based discussion, not by tightly sticking to rules and procedures.
Furthermore, policies and guidelines themselves may be changed to reflect evolving consensus. (WP:NOT)

Tips for the angry new user - Gamaliel



Hello, Newjerseyliz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Hmm never seen this template before, but in my opinion its abusive and a personal attack and its should be discontinued.-- KeithbobTalk 16:21, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

I thought it was funny, Keithbob, and placed it on my Talk Page myself. The "epiphets" are so ludicrous and silly, I can't believe anyone would take them personally. Liz Read! Talk! 17:11, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
OK, I thought it was placed here by someone else. Glad you find it fun. Peace! -- KeithbobTalk 19:10, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 March newsletter[edit]

One of Adam Cuerden’s several quality restorations during round 1

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. Forty-seven competitors move into this round (a bit shy of the expected 64), and we are roughly broken into eight groups of six. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups.

Twenty-two Good Articles were submitted, including three by Connecticut Cyclonebiskit (submissions), and two each by Denmark MPJ-DK (submissions), Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions), Florida 12george1 (submissions), and New South Wales Cas Liber (submissions). Twenty-one Featured Pictures were claimed, including 17 by There's always time for skeletons Adam Cuerden (submissions) (the Round 1 high scorer). Thirty-one contestants saw their DYKs appear on the main page, with a commanding lead (28) by Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions). Twenty-nine participants conducted GA reviews with Lancashire J Milburn (submissions) completing nine.

If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Thanks to everyone for participating, and good luck to those moving into round 2. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:38, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank You[edit]

Thank you for correcting my mistake on the ArbCom case page, i mislabeled the title of my comment by accident.XavierGreen (talk) 21:54, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

No problem. I saw another editor asking if it was an official statement and when I looked over your user page, it was clear that it was your personal statement. Liz Read! Talk! 22:19, 1 March 2016 (UTC)


Thanks for undoing my derp. I'm not sure how that managed to happen. Weird. Anyways, I appreciate you for doing that! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:25, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

I tried using AWB and Stiki when I first started editing but I found I was reverting edits that ended up being perfectly okay. Sometimes, I was reverting a revert of vandalism so I was restoring vandalism. People got pretty mad at me. I'm not talking about you but I know there are some editors who use these tools to basically revert any IP edit they come across. This edit was no problem to fix but I would not have even known about it if the editor hadn't complained. These automatic tools are powerful and, for me, Twinkle is as much as I will utilize. Liz Read! Talk! 22:42, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Miriam Gallagher question[edit]

I just created this page. It had been deleted back in 2009 for CSD G12 I believed. Then when it was created the talk page popped up with this note: "This page was nominated for deletion on July 14 2009. The result of the discussion was speedy deleted." and the connected deletion discussion was that "Unsourced article - does not assert notability" and basically that it was a bad article. I don't know if it was about the same woman though I assume it was. However - my question - do I need to leave the tag about it once having been deleted on the talk page? Or do I remove it since a) it was eons ago and b) I have fully sourced the page and while it is NOT great yet it is certainly not a copy paste job. (actually it was hard to write because a copy paste would have made life SO EASY and re wording it hard when that's all you know about someone...) Or does an admin swing by and remove the tag and check for repeat offences? Thoughts? 🍺 Antiqueight chat 22:44, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

My gut feeling is that it is better to leave the tag, Antiqueight. If the AfD had been in the last two years, an editor could make the case that the article was deleted according to a previous deletion discussion and should be deleted but this was almost 7 years ago and it shouldn't affect your version of the article.
Since the edit history of the article is visible to interested readers, I think it's important to have a link to a previous deletion discussion. Think of it this way, editors will be able to see how improved the article is now! However, you never want to do a copy and paste job because those are usually copyright violations which would ensure that the article is quickly deleted. It has to be all original writing. Liz Read! Talk! 22:49, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Oh I wouldn't copy and paste but it was so tempting! I'll leave the tag in place so. Thanks. Hadn't seen such before even when I've created articles which have previously been deleted so...I wasn't sure :-) 🍺 Antiqueight chat 23:33, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Date formatting[edit]

Hi Liz, could you redo this edit without date formatting? Those edits shouldn't be made in talkspaces. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:35, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't know how that happened, I just added a comment to the talk page. But I undid the edit and then reposted my comment. I hope that fixed things. Liz Read! Talk! 00:56, 2 March 2016 (UTC)


Do you have admin-ship? You seem like a good candidate for an admin, that is, if you want to be. BTW Thanks for the info on my talk page. I just am not very social in real life, so I like to talk to people here, but I'll keep your advice in mind. Thanks. (Nice Kittehmaster haha)Meow!! 03:06, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Administrator Barnstar Hires.png The Admin's Barnstar
You are a great administrator. Here is a barnstar. Winterysteppe (talk) 03:11, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Administrator Barnstar Hires.png The Admin's Barnstar
You are a great administrator. Here is a barnstar. Winterysteppe (talk) 03:11, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Well, i didn't mean to send this twice, but cheers! Winterysteppe (talk) 03:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016 March newsletter (update)[edit]

Along with getting the year wrong in the newsletter that went out earlier this week, we did not mention (as the bot did not report) that New South Wales Cas Liber (submissions) claimed the first Featured Article Persoonia terminalis of the 2016 Wikicup. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email).--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:05, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the protection[edit]

It's the Denver Dummy™ who's miffed because of the escalating range blocks on Best, Favonian (talk) 17:31, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Well, I usually would put protection on an editor's talk page who didn't request it but he seemed particularly persistent. Hopefully, he will get bored and find something else to do with his time. Liz Read! Talk! 17:33, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Saturday, March 5: Art+Feminism Edit-a-thon @ MoMA[edit]

Saturday March 5, 10am-5pm: Art+Feminism Edit-a-thon @ MoMA
AF Mark 2.svg
2015 Art+Feminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon at The Museum of Modern Art, New York.JPG

You are invited to join us for the MoMA Art+Feminism edit-a-thon on Saturday, to support the expansion of Wikipedia's coverage of women in the arts.

We encourage both people new to Wikipedia, and people who have experience editing online, or have joined us for past edit-a-thon events.

This is by far our biggest event of the year (over 200 participants in the last edition), and every extra hand counts, so please join and volunteer to help us engage new communities!

10:00am - 5:00pm (drop-in anytime!) at The Dorothy and Lewis B. Cullman Education and Research Building at the Museum of Modern Art, 4 West 54 Street - between 5th/6th, New York, NY 10019
Please note that this entrance is one block north of the main 53rd Street entrance, closer to 5th Avenue.

And bring your interested friends and colleagues!

For those outside of the city, or unable to join on Saturday, check out Art+Feminism regional and global events as well. --Pharos (talk) 21:48, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Please respond or stop bothering me![edit]

Would you please be so polite and respond to my answer on my talk page this time. Otherwise I'm politely asking you to refrain from using my talk page unless absolutely unavoidable. We should normally be the last two people not to get along with each other, but it's in your hands. Regards, PanchoS (talk) 23:07, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

I've replied on your talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 23:22, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Weird Arbcom request[edit]

Just curious what was up with this edit. There is nothing on the Requests for Arbitration page and only the most minor of issues on the page which is supposedly in dispute. IronGargoyle (talk) 23:39, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

L235 removed the case request here. It was only on the case request page for a day or two before it was withdrawn. I'll remove it from the Open Task list. Liz Read! Talk! 23:54, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Zoominfo Crawler[edit]

Aren't internet bots software? Adam9007 (talk) 01:10, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

The article was deleted because there wasn't a credible claim of significance. If you would like, I can "userfy" the article, that is, restore the article and move it into your user space so you can continue to work on it. Generally, editors work on articles as Drafts or in their Sandbox rather than putting them directly into Wikipedia main space. Every new article is evaluated while writings in Draft or User space are assumed to be works-in-progress. Liz Read! Talk! 01:14, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
I was under the impression that A7 does not cover computer software, or indeed anything that is not a real person, animal, group, organisation, organised event, or web content (which this is not because it runs over the web (like a web browser), not on it)? Adam9007 (talk) 01:18, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Correct again, Adam9007. I still think Zoominfo Crawler is a good candidate for deletion but you are right that A7 was mistakenly applied. Liz Read! Talk! 21:59, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Maybe so, but I can't think of any valid speedy criterion. Not that that matters to some people though (I'm not talking about you; I'm referring to other editors). As I understand it, some things are simply matters for slow deletion, and not speedy, because there's no consensus. Adam9007 (talk) 02:57, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Yellow (Eiko Shimamiya song)[edit]

I believe this was an invalid A9 because the artist has an article. Adam9007 (talk) 01:36, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Adam9007, I've restored Yellow (Eiko Shimamiya song) but it still has a PROD so if you could improve the article, that would help prevent a future deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 21:56, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Is there any point though? The let's-just-ignore-policy (I don't mean you, and it's not quite the same as WP:IAR I don't think) brigade have been out in force today and in my experience, their attitude and behaviour assures them victory each and every time. Heck, someone almost threw a tantrum when I mentioned you'd overturned Zoominfo Crawler! Adam9007 (talk) 02:49, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
I don't know why but the deletionists are more zealous and persistent than the inclusionists. The burden is often on those who want to keep an article to prove why it shouldn't be deleted. Since I've become an admin, much of my work has been clearing the CSD and PRODs backlog and I usually find 1 out of 8 or 9 articles have been mistagged and so I remove the tags. But I obviously have to become even more thorough in checking the deletion rationale. Thanks for the reality check. Liz Read! Talk! 11:59, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

IP has a question[edit]

I've reverted this post, and informed the IP at their page. I thought it was worth mentioning to you since it appears to be a valid question. I am now dropping a note on your talk. Kind Regards, — Ched :  ?  16:27, 3 March 2016 (UTC) Hi, Ched. My page was protected for two days when I was reverting a roving IP troll who was targeting Favonian who then started targeting me. It will expire tomorrow. Liz Read! Talk! 21:52, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

OK. I wasn't asking for myself - but thank you for the reply. :-) Best, — Ched :  ?  22:45, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

User talk:CaseyMcCreedy[edit]

Hello Liz. I'm not sure if you've forgotten to actually unblock. Courtesy ping for JzG. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:40, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

I thought by accepting the unblock request, that would lead to an unblock. Can you tell it's my first unblock? It's taken care of now. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, zzuuzz. This is how I become a better administrator. Liz Read! Talk! 22:25, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

CaseyMcCreedy unblock request[edit]

Just to drop you a note that while you accepted CaseyMcCreedy's unblock, you forgot to unblock the account. —Farix (t | c) 11:59, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

If you see the message above this, you'll see I unblocked this account yesterday afternoon. Liz Read! Talk! 13:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

PROD of Neuroprotexeon[edit]

Hi. Once it registered that it was a PROD tag, and not a CSD tag, on Neuroprotexeon, might you not have reversed your removal of the tag? I'm assuming you know that failure to meet WP:N is as valid a reason for PROD as any other reason for which articles are subject to deletion. —Largo Plazo (talk) 14:07, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

I made a minor edit to indicate I removed a PROD tag, not a CSD tag. And I see that you have nominated the article for deletion so its fate can be decided there. Liz Read! Talk! 14:14, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
I wasn't asking you to do anything, but suggesting what I felt you ought to have done previously: At the time you removed the PROD tag and then realized it was a (valid) PROD tag and not an (invalid) speedy deletion tag, you ought to have restored the PROD tag since you removed it by mistake, not because you were disagreeing with the deletion rationale I'd given. Yes, now I've nominated it for Afd because I didn't want to get into a wiki-legal to-do over restoring the PROD tag myself on the grounds that its removal was an error, but I'd have preferred not to take up people's time with a full discussion if unnecessary. —Largo Plazo (talk) 14:22, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #199[edit]

The Signpost: 02 March 2016[edit]


Hello, please note that you are WP:INVOLVED with respect to me, as explained here. There is still no indication that you understand that your past actions were deplorable, which is the word Bishonen used in your RFA. Please retract your recent message on my talk page and any other interactions with me, and please follow WP:INVOLVED. Thank you. Manul ~ talk 04:55, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't stalk this page, but since I'm here (in order to post the note below), I'll just comment. Manul, that was a standard clerkly type of notice, which Liz gave to the other guy too; I don't think it's worth complaining about per se. However, Liz, since arbitration enforcement concerns sensitive matters, would you consider being a bit more diplomatic in your standard notice? "The instructions that are highlighted in the big pink box at the top of the page", as you put it does rather say "you're stupid" between the lines. Don't you think "the instructions in the pink box at the top of the page" would serve as well? Bishonen | talk 09:03, 8 March 2016 (UTC).
Manul, I posted a message about word limits on arbitration pages which I've posted to other editors who've exceeded the word limit. I also posted an identical message to Askahrc whose statement also exceeded 500 words. I won't retract a simple notification. If you don't reduce the length of your statement, I will shorten it or find another administrator or clerk to do it. Reducing the length of your statement and responses is not optional, it is required by the guidelines of the page. I'm sorry, Bishonen, I'm not sure of a more diplomatic way to point out that an editor did not follow the instructions of the page. I will not use "highlighted" again although considering that the information is bolded, it is an appropriate description. Liz Read! Talk! 11:04, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Liz, the reason I am posting here is the WP:INVOLVED issue, which you ignored. Would you please state that you understand that you are WP:INVOLVED with me. Thank you. Manul ~ talk 12:07, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Since you have been active on your talk page and elsewhere yet have not replied with a simple yes or no here, I will assume that you won't be responding to this message. If you plan to respond, but haven't decided how yet, then please say so. Manul ~ talk 09:05, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
I am not involved when it comes to clerk actions such as placing administrative notices on your talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 09:19, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Would you please state that you understand that you are WP:INVOLVED with me? Thank you. The notice was ham-handed since it ignored the context that the case was sent from Arbcom to AE and that I had asked for an extension on length (which was granted). Putting that issue aside, your past behavior with regard to me has been deplorable, and looking at your recent actions on unrelated issues I see the very same kind of incompetence that was so toxic two years ago. I would like you to not interact with me at all. Would you agree to that, please? Manul ~ talk 17:35, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
No, I won't state that, I think I can be neutral despite your persistently deplorable behavior towards me. Incidentally, I contacted the arbitration committee suggesting that you and Askahrc be allowed to have a 1,000 word limit which you were both then given that day. You're welcome. Liz Read! Talk! 22:56, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Reverting obvious vandalism[edit]

Liz, I think it's concerning that you'd warn a constructive editor for reverting obvious vandalism at WP:AIV, as you did here. Did you look at the edits in question? I'm glad to see Oshwah took it in stride; a newer or less confident editor might not have. Bishonen | talk 09:03, 8 March 2016 (UTC).

I saw an edit war occurring and notified both editors about this. Once I saw that other editor was blocked, I informed Oshwah that I was mistaken (diff) and that the reverts were warranted. Liz Read! Talk! 11:21, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Please consider looking at the circumstances next time you see an "edit war" occurring. Even if you were not aware that there's an admin called Juliancolton, the common-sense option would have been to indef the disruptive sock without further ado, just from their contributions and/or a look at their talkpage. (Did you even notice I was agreeing with you above, about notifying Manul?) Bishonen | talk 11:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC).
I've written two different responses to your message and deleted both of them before posting so at this point, I'll just acknowledge that I've read your message. Liz Read! Talk! 11:46, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

I dunno if you could call it "daring commentary"....[edit]

when I had a golden opportunity to talk about his penis, and didn't :-) Oh, this election. Still you guys are lucky. I'm a US citizen living in the UK and I've never even voted in a US election; at least your elections are fun. In a few months I will have to take part in a hair-trigger referendum that will determine whether Britain stays in the EU, and indirectly whether the EU, and possibly the entire Western alliance, stays intact. Serendipodous 13:12, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

How can you vote in UK elections if you're a US citizen? Sounds like an important referendum and I imagine penis sizes will not be mentioned. Liz Read! Talk! 13:14, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Because I am also a UK citizen. :-) It should be interesting to see; British politics are not as democratic as US politics, which makes them more staid and predictable, but we still have our Trump cards. Serendipodous 13:21, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Well, the campaign season in the UK is blissfully shorter, it doesn't last 18 months. I think some commentators started talking about the 2016 presidential election in 2013 or 2014. Liz Read! Talk! 20:59, 8 March 2016 (UTC)


Hi! I had G13'd it, for it seemed the best category for deletion, since Mool Chand Jain, which is a duplicate of this draft, already exists in mainspace. Should I have G6'd it (housekeeping)? Onel5969 TT me 13:21, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in responding, onel5969. After seeing your message and realizing the draft was a duplicate of an existing article, I deleted the page. Thanks for letting me know. Liz Read! Talk! 20:58, 8 March 2016 (UTC)


Trans=pass, Silva=forest. from latin Transilvania nation born land of Latin romania Sarmizecetusa the capital of vulgar Latin DACIA Dacians the brave from Thracians Herodot say the father of history Ovidiu say the language is similar with Roman language I understand Dacians mixed with Romans =Romanian Latin language old up to 2300 yers or more born in Transilvania

Flavius Aetius whas a Dacians Roman general and beat the Hungarian Attila Transilvania whas a independent territory ass well and like I don,t understand why this information you don,t left me to put on wiki. This is the true and I will make complainant this situation Because is make a fake Hungarian propaganda about Transilvania .and this is the true .and is simple .

Adrian focsa (talk) 02:08, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

March 16: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC[edit]

Wednesday March 16, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia NYC presentation - WikiPhotography at WikiWednesday July 2015 3 crop.jpg
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Babycastles gallery by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

We will include a look at the organization and planning for our chapter, and expanding volunteer roles for both regular Wikipedia editors and new participants.

We will also follow up on plans for recent (Art+Feminism!) and upcoming edit-a-thons, and other outreach activities.

We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from all educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.

We will also vote on nominations for the global Wikimedia Foundation board.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles gallery, 137 West 14th Street

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! (One likely talk this month will be on the Wikidata project.) Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 17:59, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

AN notice[edit]

Information icon This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Liz". Thank you. Manul ~ talk 05:25, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

WP:Pedophile activism[edit]

It did exist once, a decade ago. The case which led to the pedophiles being kicked off Wikipedia was one of the key events in shaping the subsequent development of Wikipedia's community and direction (along with the deletion of WP:Esperanza, which took place at about the same time). Things as disparate as "why do we revdelete potential libel without discussing it on-wiki?" to "why is Giano so distrustful of Wikipedia admins?"* to "why do we restrict what people can put on their userpage?" to "why can Jimbo no longer unilaterally desysop admins?" stem directly from the precedents set back then. Herostratus can talk you through the full grim story if you really care, or you can get a rough idea from this signpost story and the chronology at WP:PAW#Votes for deletion. ‑ Iridescent 12:00, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

*Giano was blocked for "hate speech" for this comment, and said block being in his block log was then subsequently taken as evidence by the self-appointed civility cops that he was a nonperson and they ought to jump straight to the hardest sanctions if they saw him make any comment they considered objectionable.

Thanks for the links, Iridescent, I know a little about the fight over the pedophilia userbox but hadn't read the arbitration case. I would think that this is an issue that Dingsuntil would drop but apparently he wants his contributions to be further examined and evaluated. Liz Read! Talk! 12:14, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Arb Com Clerk action request - add shortcuts[edit]

Hi Liz! I was wondering if you'd be willing to create some shortcuts to arb com decision pages for me similar to WP:ARBBLP, WP:ARBGMO, or WP:ARBPIA. Below are my requests:

Given that regular users are not supposed to edit decision pages and per the advice of Doug Weller on his talk page, I thought I should ask a clerk directly to add these shortcuts. I can take care of creating the shortcut pages if you'd be kind enough to add the {{shortcut}} to the pages. Cheers! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:22, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Given that there have been hundreds of cases (there used to be many, many more cases each year 10 years ago), I can see this setting a precedent. Can you tell me a) why you chose these two cases to have shortcuts and b) what Doug or any other arbitrators thought of your suggestion? It's simple matter to include it, it's just not clear if this act will necessitate creating links to every case that, for instance, has discretionary sanctions. Liz Read! Talk! 18:26, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
I wanted a second opinion so I posted your suggestion to the clerks email list. I'll let you know if there are strong yes or no opinions. Liz Read! Talk! 18:34, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
I chose these two cases because I find myself referring to them frequently enough given my areas of interest and editing. And I am by no means suggesting we add shortcuts to all cases, but I can see a use for adding them to cases with active discretionary sanctions. Makes them easier to refer to when discussing on talk pages. Pinging Doug Weller since I originally approached him about this. Thank you Liz for looking into it! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:43, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
@EvergreenFir: I'm of the (personal) opinion that all active DS should get a shortcut. I'll keep an eye out if there are any strong negative opinions, but redirects are cheap. Quick note, don't use {{shortcut}} on case pages. Instead, simply update the list at Template:Casenav/shortcut. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 19:29, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
(Rereading this, quick clarification: I'm of the opinion that redirects should be created to active DS upon request of an editor. No need to go through every active DS and create shortcuts for them.) Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 23:00, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
  • @EvergreenFir: Seeing no objections here or on the clerks-l thread, Yes check.svg Done. Thanks! Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 19:29, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, Kevin. Liz Read! Talk! 19:36, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
@L235 and Liz: Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 05:39, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Administrator Barnstar Hires.png The Admin's Barnstar
For putting up with assorted nonsense I award you the "Patient Admin" barnstar. HighInBC 05:21, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
I also want to say that contrary to what other people have suggested, I think you are correct not to capitulate to unreasonable demands. I could not imagine what the situation would be if admins accepted requests for recusal that lacked a reasonable basis. HighInBC 05:34, 12 March 2016 (UTC)


I removed this comment on my own. Sorry if I tread on your toes, but it was even crazier than some of the other procedural "errors" by the user. Feel free to tell me not to do this again. Also, your decision whether to move the removed comment. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:11, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Feel free to tell me not to do this again. Okay, don't do that again! I wouldn't have removed that comment because it was more inane than a personal attack and usually those are the only types of comments we remove (irrelevant remarks and rants we usually hat). Plus, the case request was declined and will be getting archived soon any way. But I'm not going to undo this removal because that would be pointy and bureaucratic and I do appreciate it that you told a clerk (me) about it. Thanks for that. Liz Read! Talk! 16:13, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Huh? The comment was in the Arb voting section. Thought that was an obvious removal. Dave Dial (talk) 16:48, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
You're right. I just looked at the edit and not the entire context of the page. In that case, I would have moved the comment to the editor's section but a removal was okay, too, as I had stated that editors were only to post comments in their own sections. Liz Read! Talk! 16:55, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Music For Headphones[edit]

Hi! Yesterday you deleted the page about Music For Headphones with the argumet that there was no article about the srtist. This is not true. There is indeed a page about the artist. May I recreate the page?

Regards, Ismael Escande Ismael Escande (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Who is the artist, Ismael Escande? Liz Read! Talk! 16:56, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi! The artist is Robert Qwarforth as it was told in the infobox. /Ismael Ismael Escande (talk) 17:31, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

I have restored the article. But in the future, please link to the pages you are talking about, like Music For Headphones and Robert Qwarforth so I can just click on the link rather than copying and pasting the names in the URL. It just makes addressing the issue easier for the admin which will generally get a more positive response to any requests you are making. Liz Read! Talk! 17:54, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you and thanks for the tip! Regards, Ismael Ismael Escande (talk) 17:56, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 March 2016[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #200[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #186

In Need of Your Advice for Tenex Software Solutions Wikipedia Page[edit]

Good Afternoon Liz-

We briefly spoke a few weeks ago about a Wikipedia page you had looked at titled Tenex Software Solutions. You offered to usefy the article and we would very much appreciate any advice/comments you have on a draft I have been working on with what I believe is more balanced content. Please see the changes below and let me know how best to get this updated content on the page. I value your opinion and I look forward to talking with you.

Sincerely, StevenJohnson14

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevenjohnson14 (talkcontribs) 16:00, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Incidentally, Stevenjohnson14, what do you mean by "we would very much appreciate any advice"? That implies you are editing on behalf of a group of individuals or an organization opposed to this company. Are you? If so, I strongly suggest you read the guidance at Wikipedia:Advocacy and Wikipedia:Role account. Voceditenore (talk) 18:21, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Voceditenore I use the word we as my friend and I are trying to navigate Wikipedia together as we are both new to this process.Stevenjohnson14 (talk) 18:41, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

As Voceditenore states, Stevenjohnson14, Tenex Software Solutions was restored and you can work on it now.
If you have questions about referencing, you can read Wikipedia:Citing sources or direct your questions to Wikipedia:Help desk or Wikipedia:Teahouse. Voceditenore has nominated the article for deletion so it would benefit you to click on the link to the discussion so you can see what problems editors are finding with your article so you can improve it. Deletion discussions usually last a week so you have a few days to improve your article but it's not an indefinite period of time. Good luck. Liz Read! Talk! 21:51, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Category:Surnames of Ashanti origin[edit]

Hi Liz, I saw you deleted the category Category:Surnames of Ashanti origin under the rationale of "Mass deletion of pages added by Boqino" because of apparent hoaxing. The category is still in use on 58 pages. Is the category itself erroneous/unrelated to Asante dialect? AusLondonder (talk) 20:41, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

I've restored the category, AusLondonder, thanks for letting me know. I don't know the relationship of Ashanti and Asante, Boquino just created a lot of needless categories that were either false, claiming there were geographic areas that did not exist, or duplicated existing categories. Liz Read! Talk! 21:54, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
No worries, thank you. AusLondonder (talk) 00:07, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity[edit]

what gender issues have made you wince? I mean I consider myself a feminist so if I have conveyed any antediluvian opinions on the topic I would like to know. Serendipodous 21:18, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Well, first, if I have REAL issues with the content, I post a note on the talk page. Sometimes the content is changed or altered, other times, it's not. I've learned that editing the page itself, unless there is a typo, will be reverted. It's your guys' page and I'm fine with it.
As for gender issues, one that recently made me wince was on Wikipedia:Top 25 Report/January 31 to February 6, 2016, for Roosh V, there was a statement, It seems women aren't the only ones who need to fear doxxing, threats of violence, and attacks on their families online. Not that it makes doing so any better, of course. While I don't condone any harassment that Roosh has faced, a backlash against "this odious "pick-up artist" was predictable given his actions, his books, his press conferences and public statements he has made. Meanwhile I was doxed, twice, during the Gamergate era for merely expressing my opinion about the the dispute on social media. I KNOW that men face harassment, I even wrote a newspaper op-ed about harassment men face online but it's clear from studies that women are disproportionately targeted. I know that you didn't say there was an equivalence between the number of women facing online harassment vs. one very vocal man receiving abuse but that is the impression that statement left with me.
But, as I said, I thought about leaving a note on the talk page but didn't. That's usually where I turn to suggest corrections. Liz Read! Talk! 21:41, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
All I can say is that that was intended as a sarcastic comment. I was pointing out that it was nice that he got a taste of his own medicine, is all.Serendipodous 21:55, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
I spent way, way too much time observing attack planning at 8chan for a few months in 2015, to try to understand what was going on. I saw how random much of it is but once a target is selected, individuals will go to great lengths to find out personal information and mess with a person's life, in small ways (ordering pizza to their house) to large ways (sending racy photos of them to their employers). I really wouldn't wish an online mob go after anyone, no matter how odious they might be. Liz Read! Talk! 22:02, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Believe me I'd love to live in a world where online mobs didn't exist, but the internet's basically made that impossible. So I'll take a bit of schadenfreude as consolation. Serendipodous 22:16, 16 March 2016 (UTC)


Excuse me, Liz, but perhaps you could re-word your comment somewhat? I didn't do anything wrong so don't lump me in with QG, just because I'm in your doghouse. I don't know why QG felt the need to post personal attacks against me on SMc's talk page, but I addressed it there, and brought it to the attention of an admin. I don't know why SMc felt the need to post at 3RR instead of his talk page... that is a closed 3RR report that has nothing to do with him. I don't know why you are posting to a closed 3RR report either, for that matter... it's closed. That's why I'm using a talk page. Yes, those posts were disruptive, but you should address the ones actually doing the disrupting. Surely it's obvious to you that I have no interest in interacting with QG? Please leave me out of it. Thank you - theWOLFchild 01:14, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Twowolfchild Liz took the words right out of my mouth. Both you and @QuackGuru: are bickering like children. I suggest you both start avoiding each other. Your back and forth is getting disruptive and Liz was right to warn you of that. HighInBC 01:17, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict)
Really, I'm not even interested in this, but you guys keep dragging me in. Me and QG are not "bickering like children", and I'll ask you to strike that comment. I participated in a 3RR, like everyone else. Following that, QG posted a comment about on another talk page. I addressed it and brought it to the attention of an admin. Then I moved on. (or, at least I tried to). Now I have a second admin, with whom I've recently had a run in with, coming at me with this nonsense. I'm not the problem here. Go deal with the problem, and leave me out of it. (seriously, just. stop. posting comments to me, and see what happens. Nothing, that's what.) Have a good night. - theWOLFchild 01:31, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
It was not obvious to me which is why I posted my comment. All I aimed to do was try to squelch this dispute before it gets out-of-control. I'm glad to leave you out of it completely as long as you are correct in saying that you have no interest in interacting with Quackguru. I hope if a situation like Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive916#QuackGuru ongoing disruptive behavior at Peyton Manning occurs again, you won't be tempted to participate. Liz Read! Talk! 01:23, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
I know you're not telling that I can't contribute to ANI, so I don't know why you'd say that. As for all this, I meant what I said. Have a good night. - theWOLFchild 01:38, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Three revisions[edit]

Hi there Liz, could you perhaps remove these three revisions? [1]-[2]-[3]. This (large amount of) bogus material is reinstated once in a while by anon IPs (even though it doesn't belong there at all), as well as by CU/Arbcom blocked puppets. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 17:46, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't think these edits meet the RevDel criteria at Wikipedia:Revision deletion#Criteria for redaction. Another admin might disagree but I don't see which criteria would fit this deletion request and I don't want to RevDel anything that isn't a clear cut case for one of the allowable criteria. Liz Read! Talk! 18:44, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Edit warring notice[edit]

Hi Liz, Just letting you know that the warning you removed here [4] from Nepolkanov's wall is actually for a new Edit war he just started today after your last warning to him and it is not related to the one you commented on. I thought it was a Wiki-etiquette to post that on his wall no? YuHuw (talk) 18:01, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Well, considering he received two warning notices yesterday and then another one, which had no signature or timestamp, you can see why I might assume it was all for the same edit-war. Even if an editor was in two separate edit wars on the same day, I don't think that three notices are called for. The purpose of a notice is to tell an editor that there is a problem and if the bad behavior continues, they might be facing a block. That's the information one is trying to get across and an editor doesn't need to be told this three times. Liz Read! Talk! 19:18, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi Liz,First of all please pay attention that the YuHuw from his appearance on Wikipedia is busy by intensive multiple disruptive edits on all pages he has edited ignoring opinion of other editors.His reverst count are much over 3 (sometimes even 6) but he does it out of 24 h interval. The themes and style is identical to blocked predecessor cause to at least 4 editors to support Sockpuppet_investigation against him
In the last edit I have reverted he used new IP for revertion of other user .While it clear case of sockpuppetry it fails under 3RR exemption. I also reported the issue on the investigation page
I will appreciate if you could help to move this investigation from the dead point and to stop his clearly his disruptive edits since other ways to do that meanwhile were unsuccessful. Неполканов (talk) 19:36, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
This dispute has already been going on on article talk pages, ANI, Dispute resolution, user talkpages and I don't want another skirmish here. As far as I can see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kaz is inconclusive since it was filed on February 7th and is still open. If there was obvious sockpuppetry going on, there would be blocks and a closed case within a week or ten days after filing it. So, apparently, the evidence isn't convincing to the admins and checkusers at SPI. Since the entire basis of the opposition to YuHuw is because he is viewed as a sockpuppet and the SPI is undecided, blocks are unwarranted unless there is disruption going on and the edit-warring I've seen has been on both sides. Please take your case to WP:ANEW or WP:ANI or, better yet, drop the entire matter and work on other articles where you don't run into each other. Liz Read! Talk! 20:31, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
I revised the edits history again :actually there are only 2 my reverts there and not 3,because this one is not revert but explained on the talk page remove of unreferenced claims. So Yuhuw 3RR warning is misleading. Неполканов (talk) 22:10, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 March 2016[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #201[edit]

Resubmitting an article that was moved to draft[edit]


Good morning. I have done some editing on an article that was pulled from Wikipedia and placed in Draft. Can you tell me how I go about resubmitting it for review? I'll admit I'm having a bit of trouble navigating the "hows" and "how nots" of Wikipedia. Thanks for your help.

Tim — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimH1846 (talkcontribs) 15:08, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, TimH1846,
If you want to submit a draft for review, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Basically, you need to post {{subst:submit}} at the top of the article and then it will go into the pool of articles that are to be reviewed by editors at AfC. I hope this helps. Let me know if you have further questions. Liz Read! Talk! 15:37, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Liz. That was very helpful.

Sincerely, Tim — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimH1846 (talkcontribs) 15:42, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Suspected in sockpupetry and warned by you editor continues the edit war by obvious sockpupetry until blocking[edit]

Please look at this, where disruptive edit warrior exposes his sockpuppetry, explaining it by unbelievable technical reasons. Неполканов (talk) 21:08, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

I'll check it out but as I stated above, take your complaints (with diffs) to WP:ANEW or WP:ANI. Also, always put new messages at the bottom of a talk page, not the middle. Liz Read! Talk! 21:16, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Miss Bikini Ireland[edit]

They don't take no for an answer. I declined the draft as promotional after it was tagged for speedy deletion. They resubmitted it and I declined it again. It appears that the only NO that they will take for answer is a block. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:13, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail[edit]

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Destiny Leo (talk) 12:59, 22 March 2016 (UTC)


You're an admin? I see you close reports lately. Debresser (talk) 21:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

I closed obvious cases on ANI before I became an admin, Debresser. My RfA, or as I remember it, My trial by blistering, white-hot fire was last August. It was very, very contentious. Right now, I'm focusing on clearing backlogs, doing routine tasks and other uncontroversial admin activities. Eventually, I'll move into other areas. But I'm content right now doing janitorial work, blocking obvious vandals and offering my opinion if I think it might be constructive.
I hope you are well. It seems like a long time ago that we were having debates about categories on Jewish identity and descent. I'm sure they are perennial questions that are likely to reappear again in the future. Liz Read! Talk! 21:52, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Well, nice to see you again in your new role. Debresser (talk) 01:13, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you![edit]

Cheeseburger.png Enjoy! MaranoFan (talk) 08:34, 23 March 2016 (UTC)


Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

valereee (talk) 18:39, 23 March 2016 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Liz. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol.
Message added 06:12, 26 March 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Signpost: 23 March 2016[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #202[edit]

Reporting vandal account?[edit]

Hey Liz, This account needs to be warned for vandalism or just blocked as NOTHERE. I'd put the template on them but I'm not sure I know how. HMS Werewolf (talk) 06:01, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Editor who said he would maintain distance, comes AGAIN![edit]

Calling your attention to this.--MaranoFan (talk) 13:02, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Overflow at your admintools page[edit]

Dear User:Liz. Your page User:Liz/Admin dashboard has appeared at Category:Pages_where_template_include_size_is_exceeded. You could help us to empty this maintenance category by replacing everything with {{admin dashboard/light}} that provides the same functionality, but is far less prone to overflow. Thanks in advance. Pldx1 (talk) 12:25, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Thanks, Pldx1, for both telling me that there was a problem and providing me with a solution. Liz Read! Talk! 23:05, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

This day's This Special Day's article for improvement (day 1, month 4, 2016)[edit]

Skvader - Tetrao lepus pseudo-hybridus rarissimus in the wild at Örnsköldsvik

The following is WikiProject This Special Day's articles for improvement's daily selection:


Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Snipe huntJenny Haniver

Get involved with the TSDAFI project. You can: Nominate an articleShare this message with other editors

Posted by: w.carter-Talk 00:20, 1 April 2016 (UTC) using New improved MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of WikiProject TSDAFI • [April Fools!]

The Signpost: 1 April 2016[edit]

Social work[edit]

I am, would you be kind to regulate the no. days of block mentioned in it. I dont understand why my revisions and talk lead to pp vandalism. I would like to discuss there and point something that is wrongly put. Though Softlavender has edited it to clear the issue, the edit itself is wrong when it removes the original definition and it looks distant with the source. If the request couldn't be done, can you review the issue I have mentioned. (talk) 13:56, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

You can make an edit suggestion for now on the article talk page Talk:Social work. Liz Read! Talk! 13:59, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
I tried that too seems blocked. (talk) 14:00, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
I'll look at the talk page and make sure it is unprotected. Since your IP number changes, it would help you if you created a registered account with a username. Then you could become auto-confirmed and could edit articles under semi-protection. Liz Read! Talk! 14:02, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank You61.1.147.137 (talk) 14:03, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk page access[edit]

I recommend revoking talk page access for user: 2602:306:3357:BA0:DD09:8C7C:68DF:D31A (talk) 15:19, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye on the editor's talk page but right now their comment is part of a unblock request that has been replied to so it is inappropriate to delete it. Liz Read! Talk! 15:24, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Request to review deleted wikipedia article[edit]

Good evening, I was hoping you would be able to assist me. I am aware that you deleted a page I had created. I wanted to gain temporary access to the deleted page to copy the code. I will be using it to design a page that correctly follows wikipedia guidelines. The page is the Society for Menstrual Cycle Research. Thanks! Gravitycollapse (talk) 01:13, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

In case you make future requests for undeleting pages, Gravitycollapse, it's best to provide a link to the deleted article. I'll check it out now. Liz Read! Talk! 01:46, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
I have restored the article as a draft at Draft:Society for Menstrual Cycle Research but had to remove much of the article because it was a complete copyright violation (cut and paste) of Wikipedia has to have originally worded content, it can't be borrowed from other publications or websites except for limited quotations. More information might have to be removed from the article and it would probably be wise to rewrite the entire piece. Liz Read! Talk! 01:55, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks so much for the help and advice! I greatly appreciate it. Gravitycollapse (talk) 02:14, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #203[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors April 2016 Newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors April 2016 Newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

March drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 28 people who signed up, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

April blitz: The one-week April blitz, again targeting our long requests list, will run from April 17–23. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the requests page. Sign up here!

May drive: The month-long May backlog-reduction drive, with extra credit for articles tagged in March, April, and May 2015, and all request articles, begins May 1. Sign up now!

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis, and Baffle gab1978.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

April 13: WikiWednesday Salon NYC and Mini-Video Opportunity[edit]

Wednesday April 13, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon NYC and Mini-Video Opportunity
Wikimedia NYC presentation - WikiPhotography at WikiWednesday July 2015 3 crop.jpg
Statue of Liberty 7.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Babycastles gallery by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

Special this month, a Mini-Video opportunity for individuals to share their Wikipedia experiences (during pre-meeting, 6-7pm, and in side-office during regular meetup). A videographer will be present to record 1-3 minute Mini-Videos of folks informally speaking, sharing anything about their Wikipedia-related projects, whether an edit-a-thon they joined, an article they edited, or a class project they were a part of, etc.

We will also follow up on plans for recent (Art+Feminism!) and upcoming edit-a-thons, and other outreach activities.

We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from all educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.

We will also place our chapter's votes for the global Wikimedia Foundation board.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

6:00pm - 7:00pm Mini-Video and social hour
7:00pm - 9:00pm Regular meeting: Introduction for new participants, Noshing, Chapter projects

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience!

Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 14:19, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

When you get a minute (or ten)...[edit]

Could you review and close this discussion at ANI? The only alternative that I can see is...

Dueling pistols.JPG

Thanks... -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:44, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Welllllll, I'll look it over but, frankly, I've mainly handled blocks of obvious vandals and page protection, not interaction bans. At first glance, I can not discern if there is even a consensus for an IBan. Euryalus just closed an equally, if not more, complicated case so you might ask him to take a look at it. With these unwieldy ANI cases, I think it helps to have more experienced admins determine consensus not only because they have done it before but because their decisions are less likely to be challenged. Liz Read! Talk! 00:10, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I added a tag to the title. Hopefully someone will deal with it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:46, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

A few questions about the ANI[edit]

Am in agreement to drop my cases and even if I believe there are other violations - we should leave it off and hope that we won't run into each other again. However there are a few things I want to clarify. Is the closed ANI still possible to edit?. It appears that the case is closed and that there was a repeat Shabazz's claim of WP:BOOMERANG (which I did not even bother to respond to the first time). I feel it is important to explain for the record that there was no BOOMERANG. Am I able to edit it? Or could we request the user who added it to remove it until/unless it is substantiated?

A separate question: - What is the correct way to handle another (unrelated) user which appears to be on Wikipedia for the one single agenda of whitewashing a certain minority group of people. Caseeart (talk) 08:50, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Talkback The Walking Dead (season 6)[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Liz. You have new messages at Talk:The Walking Dead (season 6)#"Negan beats one of the group members to death.".
Message added 12:50, 7 April 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Reidgreg (talk) 12:50, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Humor of the day![edit]

If two vegans have an argument, is it still beef? 16:47, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

683. Liz Read! Talk! 17:41, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

April 2016[edit]

Stop hand nuvola.svg This is your only warning. If you are a member of this wiki during the tax season again, you may be be given this Tax day card without any more warnings:

Form 1040, 2011.pdf
Happy Tax Day!!
Hello, I wish you and your family a Happy April and a very Happy Tax Day,

Thanks for all your help on the 'pedia! Face-smile.svg

   –DesertGrass^_^ Happy tax day / Happy April 04:48, 11 Aril 2016 (UTC)


This might be of interest. I forgot to include mention of your recent warning diff before saving that, so I wasn't able to ping you by including it in the revision, I just remembered. I wish they'd fix pings to work more sensibly.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  07:32, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Original Research[edit]

Hi, Liz. I was hoping to pick your brain on this whole "original research" thing. BTW, I'm not arguing an edit (which has been made irrelevant at this point) but am more interested in practices and procedures re: editing. So, purely as an example, I took Carl off of the list of characters who could have been killed in the TWD season 6 article's summary for "Last Day on Earth," noting in the edit summary how Negan specifically identified Carl as someone he wasn't beating. You reversed that as "no original research". I thought it was about as apparent as "the capital of France is Paris." But if that counts as original research, wouldn't it also be original research to claim that the low camera angle in the final shot is the POV of a character on their knees? At what point of minutia does one consider something to be original research? Or would issues like that have to be sorted out case-by-case amongst editors on the talk page?Reidgreg (talk) 12:39, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Reidgreg, to answer your specific question, all the viewer knows is that these 11 characters have been lined up and that Negan says that he will kill one of them. I don't recall Negan saying that he wouldn't kill Carl (I'd be interested in knowing the exact dialogue), but the viewer knows nothing about Negan and whether he is a truthful person. That is why the summary says that he apparently killed an Alexandrian because all the viewer saw was his bat coming down on the camera with the sight of blood and some crushing noises..but we didn't see a dead body and none of our main characters said a line like, "Oh, God, Abraham/Sasha/Maggie is dead, you've killed her." So, we assume someone died but the viewer won't be certain that one of the eleven has died (and who it might be) until the season 7 premiere. And it doesn't matter if producers say in the media that someone "beloved" was killed, a plot summary only contains what is seen by a viewer in that hour or hour and a half of TV time. Including in a plot summary for a TV episode what one might know from reading the comics or from an interview with an actor on the show or what one figures out from clues given over the series, is not considered appropriate. It's completely okay to discussion this on a message board, but not in a Wikipedia article.
More explanation can be found at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction#Plot summaries and, more specifically Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Television#Plot section. This is an important line: Do not make analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about information found in a primary source but you should read the entire section on TV plots if you think you'll be contributing to TV episode summaries.
Thanks for initiating a talk page discussion, that is usually where these differences of opinion get hashed out. Liz Read! Talk! 16:48, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the links. I'm looking more for your opinion and the benefit of your experience in dealing with such issues in the past. At what point of minutia does one consider something to be original research? I can see the benefits of going to the talk page (assuming the other parties are willing to discuss) but it seems like that could become exhaustive if the threshold between common sense and original research is set too low.
Since you asked, this dialog is at the beginning of the last shot (from the infamous POV), just after Negan picks his victim he says, "Anybody moves, anybody says anything, cut the boy's other eye out and feed it to his father." (I didn't have the complete quote the first time around.) It doesn't seem like much of a threat to me to have an eye cut out or be fed said eye if one's head is already being bashed in. Plus it sounds inconvenient and unrealistic for a Savior to accomplish this during a head-bashing. So, like a lot of other people, I tend to take both Rick and Carl off of the list of possible victims. I guess it's putting a clue together, but it seems a little much to call it research when it's in the same shot. It wouldn't make any sense for it to be Rick or Carl. Although I suppose at this point we don't know Negan very well and he could be a complete nonsensical lunatic. Logic might be too much to ask of the scene.
BTW, I didn't have a big problem with the list. I just feel that lists of characters can get a bit tiresome, you see some editors who want to note every character present in every scene, and was shortening it a little. Personally I feel that list is something that might better belong on the article for that episode rather than in the season's article. But, you know, bold-undo-discuss (or something along those lines, it could use improvement). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reidgreg (talkcontribs) 19:05, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Tfd closes[edit]

Mind clarifying what you saw that prompted you to ask Gimubrc to read the NAC essay? I've been answering some questions for him about TFD and looking over what he's done there every once and a while, and I'd like to know if there's an area I can help him with. ~ RobTalk 13:09, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Well, Rob, his account is only two months old with 122 edits. It is very unusual for someone with that limited experience to be closing deletion discussions. I mean, New Page Patrollers are required to have at least 200 mainspace edits before even tagging pages for deletions. Receiving rollback rights to remove vandalism also requires 200 mainspace edits and closing a deletion discussion carries more responsibility than reverting vandalism.
I understand that you need some help over at TfD and hopefully you'll be looking over his work. Reading NAC can help him avoid common problems. Non-admins can close certain discussions but the ones that are considered appropriate closures are relatively narrowly defined and he should be aware of them. Liz Read! Talk! 16:31, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Ah, I hadn't reviewed his account history, only the specific edits relevant to TfD. Although his user page does say he was an IP editor for years. Just so you're aware, the consensus at TfD on what non-administrators can close is fairly broad, mostly due to necessity. We'd have a 6 month backlog if this were not the case. An RfC was closed with consensus for a trial period where non-administrators could close TfDs as delete, largely because the immediate action that needs to occur is either a listing at WP:TFD/H or the grunt work of removing transclusions, neither of which require the mop. That RfC was way back in July 2015, I believe, and no-one has ever seen reason to reassess the trial, since it's been quite successful at keeping the backlog manageable. In practice, there's also been consensus for allowing non-administrators to close discussions that are not 100% clear so long as they're willing to discuss the closure (similar to RfC closures). Not sure if that was ever assessed at an RfC, as the practice pre-dates my contributions in this area. In short, the description of appropriate closures in that essay is very different from the prevailing criteria for appropriate closures at TfD. ~ RobTalk 16:43, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Request for Comment at ANI[edit]

Here is the link. I kindly ask for your wonderful opinion. Winterysteppe (talk) 03:39, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

It looks like this discussion has already been closed. Liz Read! Talk! 12:50, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Expired PROD[edit]

Hello Liz, could you please delete this expired PROD, when you have a moment, Daniel Cleary (footballer), Thank you, JMHamo (talk) 09:33, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Liz Read! Talk! 12:49, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #204[edit]

Karst Warning and Double account.[edit]

Hi Due to being considered a sock puppet in my second account, I have moved back to my first account, but kept the name Limehous-0. So, as you ask, I have discarded what is now Limehous-NotInAction. Thanks for helping with my report. Limehous-0 (talk) 16:39, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

No problem, Limehous-0. I started with one account 9 years ago, abandoned it, created a new account 3 years ago and then changed the name on my account to what it is now. Liz Read! Talk! 01:12, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Ok, Thanks for understanding! :) Limehous-0 (talk) 10:18, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Page deletions problem[edit]

Why you deleted my sandbox? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mainudin (talkcontribs) 01:02, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Mainudin, the answer was left for you on your talk page by Theroadislong. The page was tagged with a U5 speedy deletion tag (for more information see Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#U5) that states that pages in userspace should be used for communication between editors and for working on articles, not for hosting information that would be more suitable for a social media profile (like Facebook) or other writings that have nothing to do with Wikipedia. Userspace should be used for editing Wikipedia purposes or for article building. Liz Read! Talk! 01:10, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikimedia Highlights from March 2016[edit]

Here are the highlights from the Wikimedia blog in March 2016.
Wikimedia Foundation RGB logo with text.svg
About · Subscribe/unsubscribe, 19:25, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 April 2016[edit]

Books & Bytes - Issue 16[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library


Books & Bytes
Issue 16, February-March 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs)

  • New donations - science, humanities, and video resources
  • Using hashtags in edit summaries - a great way to track a project
  • A new cite archive template, a new coordinator, plus conference and Visiting Scholar updates
  • Metrics for the Wikipedia Library's last three months

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:17, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

RfC History of South America[edit]

Hi Liz, you may wish to comment. Kind regards -- Marek.69 talk 02:48, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Gamaliel and others arbitration case opened[edit]

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others. The scope of this case is Gamaliel's recent actions (both administrative and otherwise), especially related to the Signpost April Fools Joke. The case will also examine the conduct of other editors who are directly involved in disputes with Gamaliel. The case is strictly intended to examine user conduct and alleged policy violations and will not examine broader topic areas. The clerks have been instructed to remove evidence which does not meet these requirements. The drafters will add additional parties as required during the case. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others/Evidence.

Please add your evidence by May 2, 2016, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. This notification is being sent to those listed on the case notification list. If you do not wish to recieve further notifications, you are welcome to opt-out on that page. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #205[edit]

Protection once again for Vitamin C[edit]

Hi Liz, can you protect once again the Vitamin C article? Maybe longer this time? That never ending IP hopper will never stop vandalizing it. Caden cool 21:02, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Having to revert an edit once in a while doesn't warrant long-term page protection. If vandalism becomes more frequent, request review at WP:RPP. Liz Read! Talk! 12:23, 21 April 2016 (UTC)


What is the right way to quietly as ArbCom clerks to do something? Is there a clerk mailbox? Email an individual clerk? I emailed ArbCom itself in this instance, but surely that's not the best way to work. Or, is it? MarkBernstein (talk) 18:47, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)@MarkBernstein: I believe this is what you're looking for. The clerks have their own mailing list if needed. — Strongjam (talk) 18:55, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Strongjam is correct, the best way to bring a matter to attention of the clerks team is to email them at <>. Depending on the question or concern raised, we might have to inquire with the arbitration committee to determine if or what action needs to be taken. I've been away for a week so I'm behind on reading my piled-up clerks email messages. Liz Read! Talk! 12:21, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 8[edit]

WikiProject X icon.svg
Newsletter • March / April 2016

This month:

Transclude article requests anywhere on Wikipedia

In the last issue of the WikiProject X Newsletter, I discussed the upcoming Wikipedia Requests system: a central database for outstanding work on Wikipedia. I am pleased to announce Wikipedia Requests is live! Its purpose is to supplement automatically generated lists, such as those from SuggestBot, Reports bot, or Wikidata. It is currently being demonstrated on WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health (which I work on as part of my NIOSH duties) and WikiProject Women scientists.

Adding a request is as simple as filling out a form. Just go to the Add form to add your request. Adding sources will help ensure that your request is fulfilled more quickly. And when a request is fulfilled, simply click "mark as complete" and it will be removed from all the lists it's on. All at the click of a button! (If anyone is concerned, all actions are logged.)

With this new service is a template to transclude these requests: {{Wikipedia Requests}}. It's simple to use: add the template to a page, specifying article=, category=, or wikiproject=, and the list will be transcluded. For example, for requests having to do with all living people, just do {{Wikipedia Requests|category=Living people}}. Use these lists on WikiProjects but also for edit-a-thons where you want a convenient list of things to do on hand. Give it a shot!

Help us build our list!

The value of Wikipedia Requests comes from being a centralized database. The long work to migrating individual lists into this combined list is slowly underway. As of writing, we have 883 open tasks logged in Wikipedia Requests. We need your help building this list.

If you know of a list of missing articles, or of outstanding tasks for existing articles, that you would like to migrate to this new system, head on over to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Requests#Transition project and help out. Doing this will help put your list in front of more eyes—more than just your own WikiProject.

An open database means new tools

WikiProject X maintains a database that associates article talk pages (and draft talk pages) with WikiProjects. This database powers many of the reports that Reports bot generates. However, until very recently, this database was not made available to others who might find its data useful. It's only common sense to open up the database and let others build tools with it.

And indeed: Citation Hunt, the game to add citations to Wikipedia, now lets you filter by WikiProject, using the data from our database.

Are you a tool developer interested in using this? Here are some details: the database resides on Tool Labs with the name s52475__wpx_p. The table that associates WikiProjects with articles and drafts is called projectindex. Pages are stored by talk page title but in the future this should change. Have fun!

On the horizon
  • The work on the CollaborationKit extension continues. The extension will initially focus on reducing template and Lua bloat on WikiProjects (especially our WPX UI demonstration projects), and will from there create custom interfaces for creating and maintaining WikiProjects.
  • The WikiCite meeting will be in Berlin in May. The goal of the meeting is to figure out how to build a bibliographic database for use on the Wikimedia projects. This fits in quite nicely with WikiProject X's work: we want to make it easier for people to find things to work on, and with a powerful, open bibliographic database, we can build recommendations for sources. This feature was requested by the Wikipedia Library back in September, and this meeting is a major next step. We look forward to seeing what comes out of this meeting.

Until next time,

Harej (talk) 01:29, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Editor of the Week : nominations needed![edit]

The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.

The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?

Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!

Sent on behalf of Buster Seven Talk for the Editor of the Week initiative by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)


Please restore this page. WP:G8 excludes user talk pages. Thanks, SSTflyer 16:27, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done The page still only consists of a redirect to a deleted page so it could well be deleted again or tagged by another editor. Liz Read! Talk! 16:58, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
@SSTflyer: I've tagged it as {{G8-exempt}} to try to get it off the bot report. Another option that will work for sure is to convert it to a {{soft redirect}}. If you could explain why you need this subpage, I would appreciate it. — Diannaa (talk) 13:59, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Liz. You have new messages at Chesnaught555's talk page.
Message added 09:14, 23 April 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ches (talk) (contribs) 09:14, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't suppose you could briefly explain the email to me, if you are unable to find a copy of it? I have a feeling I know what it's about, but if you would rather keep the content of it confidential, I understand. Thanks in advance --Ches (talk) (contribs) 12:10, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
I've resent the message, Ches. Let me know if it doesn't arrive in your Inbox or Spam folder. Liz Read! Talk! 12:16, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Received and responded. Thanks, --Ches (talk) (contribs) 14:27, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

re [an offensive username][edit]

The username in question is User:Andrewgarfieldstightass. Moved out of the headline. Opabinia regalis (talk) 01:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

We've both reported him to the username list, but the bot removes names as soon as they are blocked, so your short vandalism block on the account is preventing anyone from seeing the username reports. Meters (talk) 20:45, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Damn. I didn't foresee this happening. I will unblock him although I fear there might be more vandalism. Thanks for letting me know. Can you report him after I have unblocked him? Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 20:47, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
OK Meters (talk) 20:48, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Done. Meters (talk) 20:51, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
This actually seems like a bug (or at least an opportunity for improvement) in the Bot. I'll see if I can figure out where to report it. Meters (talk) 20:53, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Okay, thanks, Meters. Liz Read! Talk! 21:04, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Let's see if anyone is actually watching that talk page. [5] It certainly does not see much traffic. Meters (talk) 21:09, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @Meters: from the bot’s user page I gather a better place to post might be User:HBC AIV helperbot/Feature requests. You might also get a quicker response by pinging HighInBC.—Odysseus1479 21:31, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Yup, already figured that out and moved it. Thanks. Meters (talk) 21:52, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Indeffed. Liz, I have trouble understanding why you don't block such usernames indefinitely yourself. It's an attack on a named individual. Reminds me I noticed a while back that you reported this character at WP:UAA.[6] Do you sometimes forget you're an admin yourself? Bishonen | talk 21:23, 23 April 2016 (UTC).
I don't understand your hostility to me, Bishonen. I do not regularly patrol WP:UAA and when I do visit, I frequently see usernames that seem obvious to me should result in a block, are often not blocked.
I have only been using my admin abilities sparingly because there was a substantial number of participants at my RfA who were worried that I would misuse the bit or act rashly. So, I might have erred in the opposite direction by only taking action in unquestionable cases. And if I tag a page for deletion, I do not do the deletion myself as I think the page deserves to be reviewed by two people. Probably after I have been working as an admin for as many years as you, I will act differently but as I wasn't elected almost unanimously, caution has been my watchword. Liz Read! Talk! 21:35, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I understand about your RfA. But I just don't see how abusive usernames could be much more "unquestionable" than those two cases. If I had hostility towards you, I guess I might have taken you up about the fuck and cock name when I saw your report of it in March. I only came here today because I take attacks on named individuals seriously — more seriously than four-letter words. But I'm done. Bishonen | talk 22:08, 23 April 2016 (UTC).
Ah, this sounds exciting. I patrol UAA regularly and I think that DQBot is a bit uptight. But that user name, yes, it deserved to be blocked right away. ON a general note, I don't understand why admins don't make that extra step. Typically, a promotional user page accompanies a promotional user name--block them and save us all some time. Frequently, a pure hoax/vandalism/attack page comes from a UH-BLOCK ready name--block them and save us all some time. Liz, I didn't read your RfA that way, that you were too rash. I will tell you all, and everyone who listens, that more admins need to patrol UAA. Frequently I walk by there and see 50 or more names. Drmies (talk) 01:35, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't really care who blocks this guy, but Liz, your talk page is on my watchlist and I keep seeing asses go by. Hope no one minds if I move the username out of the headline so it stops popping up in all the edit summaries. Opabinia regalis (talk) 01:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
You're just jealous cause my ass is parked solid on Liz's talk page. And you're an arthropod. Whatever that is. Drmies (talk) 02:02, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Well, I don't really even have an ass. So there ;) Opabinia regalis (talk) 19:39, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

A question concerning deletion[edit]

Why did you delete my article? It was only a test, because it was my first time... now I have to re-create my page. I protest about your undoing and I will report you to Wikipedia.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Lolwen (talkcontribs) 07:08, April 24, 2016 UTC

My protest against ur behaviour D-8<[edit]

PissedOff.gif You are a Bully! Terribly done!
Why did you delete my two articles? They were only tests for trying out Wikipedia! Lolwen (talk) 07:22, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
OMG, it's ANI in a smiley. Opabinia regalis (talk) 19:40, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 April 2016[edit]

Saturday April 30: Contemporary Art of the Middle East and North Africa @ Guggenheim[edit]

Saturday April 30, 1-6pm: Contemporary Art of the Middle East and North Africa @ Guggenheim
NYC - Guggenheim Museum.jpg
Monir Portrait-exh ph021.jpg

On Saturday April 30, 2016, in conjunction with a global campaign, the Guggenheim will host its fourth Wikipedia edit-a-thon — or, #guggathon — to enhance Wikipedia's coverage of modern and contemporary artists from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, and to counter geocultural systemic bias on Wikipedia.

The Guggenheim aims to further the goals of the Guggenheim UBS MAP Global Art Initiative, and build on the model of campaigns like the Wikipedia Edit-a-thon at the Guggenheim: Women in Architecture, Wikipedia Asian Month, and Art+Feminism.

New and experienced editors are welcome. The event will include a training session for participants who are new to Wikipedia and Wikipedia specialists will be on hand to provide basic instruction and editing support.

Can’t join us in New York? Visit our global MENA Artists Month partnership page to coordinate international and online events as well.

Time: Presentation: 1:00 pm - 2:30 pm, Edit-a-thon: 2:30pm - 6:00pm
Location: Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1071 Fifth Avenue (88th Street), New York City, New York 10128
Guests should enter using the 88th Street entrance via the ramp at 88th Street and Fifth Avenue

Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) ~~~~~

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Wikidata weekly summary #206[edit]

Contested deletion[edit]

Hi, I noticed you deleted Hestia (Is It Wrong to Try to Pick Up Girls in a Dungeon?) as per CSD R3. However, the original disambiguator was the anime/manga series in which the character appears in. The majority of such fictional characters are disambiguated by their primary series, and Hestia's was only moved because complaints were raised over its length. So I feel it's definitely a plausible search term here being an exception and not the norm.

I know this isn't really controversial but as the original creator of the redirect I'm technically not allowed to restore it, and I don't want any trouble. Thanks, Satellizer el Bridget (Talk) 06:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks[edit]

Thanks for the thanks, I came here to say so cos obviously you do a lot of work in the background but couldn't find an article or anything in a hurry to tip a wink on that. Never been to your page before but like the pics. (You're very cute by the way, but fortunate for one or both or neither of us even my flirting talents don't stretch across an ocean.) I like doing stuff in the garden too, I bunged a load of bulbs of tulips in an old iron bathtub last October and the daffs are no had and gone but the tulips are doing well, they always do better the next year, it was their first year. Si Trew (talk) 11:47, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Social Work[edit]

Hi Liz. I see you recently protected Social Work to protect against vandalism, however, when I looked I didn't see any. I don't suppose you could point me to the vandalism, or the discussion that lead to protection? WormTT(talk) 12:12, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Hey, Worm! The ANI discussion was right here and a previous discussion in February on ANI is here. I thought two weeks of semi-protection might break up the edit wars happening at Social Work but I see that it has continued. Liz Read! Talk! 12:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Chinnu Kuruvila[edit]

Looks like Chinnu Kuruvila was recreated right after you deleted it-it even has the prod on it still! Wgolf (talk) 23:42, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, Wgolf. I try to check the deletion log to see if articles are recreated soon after they are deleted but we can always use more eyes. Liz Read! Talk! 23:45, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Genetics for ethnic groups RfC[edit]

Hi, Liz! In case you're interested, there's an RfC currently being held: Should sections on genetics be removed from pages on ethnic groups?. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:48, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


I'm going to be honest, my methods of editing here are like anyone else's, I use multiple tabs and, with NPP, I open several tabs, go through then one by one, close then after I successfully reviewed them and continue again with the next, and I also will use a laptop to get it faster. I also use these methods for anything else, AfD, AfC, MfD. I assure you I pay attention to each one of them, and I can go fast, because I'm a fast reader. As I've made clear, NPP is not a game to me. SwisterTwister talk 02:37, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

deleted article[edit]

Hi Liz, I'm not angry (just want to get that out there first). My draft was apparently deleted because someone thought I copied the bio from another source (and other fixable reasons). I am the author of the bio on the GNC website. If someone had looked closer, they would have seen that my wiki links were all included. I was asked by Carla Lewis, who is George Nicholas personal assistant, if they could use what I had written on his website. She simply copied and pasted and didn't remove the links. You can see that here: I do not copyright anything that I write and never will-- I give it to Mr. Nicholas to do with what he wants. Now, I do understand that my wiki article that I had in the draft stage needed a lot of work, but I don't have time right now. I do want to continue it at some time (of course I have all my original work)! So, I'm thinking that my best option is to start over when I have time to do so... but how do I overcome this copyright business? It IS my material. Thanks for any input. It is much appreciated. Sincerely. WebspinnerLlewellyn (talk) 04:52, 30 April 2016 (UTC)WebspinnerLlwellyn

WebspinnerLlewellyn, I think you should read over Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials if you are interested in donating your content to Wikipedia. It can seem complicated but it's important you know that once you donate copyrighted images and words, any editor or reader can reuse the content for any purpose. I hope this helps. If you have more questions, please visit Wikipedia:Copyright assistance for help. Liz Read! Talk! 08:16, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Liz. There is a lot I need to read before I start again. Thanks for your suggestion. (talk) 09:40, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Jbask486/Sandbox[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that User:Jbask486/Sandbox, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

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. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Lakun.patra (talk) 07:01, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


Hello, Liz. I am writing to you about the "stalker/troll" section in the "Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents" page since you were the first one who answered, I am the accused part. I do not know whether you have read my reply to Mai-Sachme's accusations or not, but after 3 days I have done nothing of what he foresaw. That because it is not me the problematic user but him, as demonstrated by his Italian talk page where several sysops have reproved him for causing problems in articles about South Tyrol. In fact I have reverted his edits once only, unlike his friend Bartleby08 from South Tyrol too who did the same to an Italian user I was accused to be but 3 times. Here you see Mai-Sachme's hypocrisy, supporting him when he was removing Italian IPAs only but immediately reporting me for stalking and trolling when I did the same for German IPAs only and pretending to be the good guy interested in the good of this encyclopedy instead than in personal quarrels related to his geographical origins. Also Bartleby08 is well known in the Italian project for his tendentious intentions about South Tyrol, having been blocked for a month because of source falsification which is a very severe behaviour here. Having said that, now I have added the Italian IPAs where they missed giving a positive contribution instead of insisting on removing the German IPAs like Bartleby08 did with the Italian IPAs. Mai-Sachme has found nothing more to accuse me of being the stalker troll he thinks I am or pretends to think I am and now the problem seems to be solved, unless he or Bartleby08 start again removing Italian IPAs. Everyone is free to control that German IPAs will not be removed a second time, I just would like the discussion and this whole story to be closed. Maybe it was not really useless, because of the links I have brought about these 2 "Südtiroler Volkspartei" supporters which showed off what kind of persons and users they really are. Thank you for reading, I hope this is really the end. (talk) 10:06, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm not going to close the complaint because it is far from clear to me what is going on. Also, ANI only deals with matters concerning the English Wikipedia. Maybe another editor/admin will see the situation differently and draw some conclusions.
The whole process would be simpler if you would create an editor account instead of switching between different IPs. To many editors and admins, that is suspicious behavior and while it isn't prohibited, there is less trust given to an editor who keeps changing their identity because it is difficult to look at their editing behavior. Also, jumping from IP to IP is common with trolls so you are fighting against that assumption made by many that you are trolling. Liz Read! Talk! 10:42, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I understand your point of view. Actually I am not caring so much about how this process would end, if you think you should block me or protect all the voices I will not protest since I have no reason to edit them any more. In that case, please just keep an eye on those pages edits to avoid the true vandalisms from Mai-Sachme and Bartleby08. About the creation of an account, you should already know why I did not. Because it would end exactly like the account I had created, Onegyrol08. Bartleby08 who was vandalising as now I am accused to be doing, managed to have that account blocked after I undid his IPA deletions accusing me to be the other Italian user I spoke about above. Now Mai-Sachme is starting from me being him again and would obviously report my account as a fake if I dare creating one, he is just waiting for me to do that in order to have the satisfaction of having me blocked again and to defame me some more. I just want you to understand that I am being sincere while I am saying the following statement, please try. Unlike those 2 proven vandals say, the last thing I want is to waste my time for them. I am not going to stalk them because frankly I do not like virtual quarrels, in truth it is them stalking me since most of their last edits concern me and my edits. Last and most important, my one and only interest is they do not remove the Italian IPAs which are positive contributions to the encyclopedy. When I say that I do not want to waste my time after them I mean exactly this, I have no intention of spending my free time patrolling the articles about cities from South Tyrol to check whether the IPAs were removed. I just want this to end and them not to restart it, to sum it up. I wish you understood I am telling the truth, Liz. (talk) 11:52, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Hey there[edit]

I was wondering why you are not deleting pages on sight but instead placing C1 tags on clearly deletable-under-C1 categories. --QEDK (T C) 13:55, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, QEDK. Categories are treated differently from articles. After they are tagged C1, they are moved into a holding category, Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion, where they sit for four days before they are then transferred to Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as empty categories when they can be deleted by an administrator.
It is not unusual for a category to be emptied "out of process" by an editor who wants the category to have a different name and bypasses the CFD process and these actions need to be undone. Also, categories can be temporarily empty while pages are being recategorized but later be filled and no longer be empty. So, it's important that they aren't immediately deleted plus there is no rush to delete an empty category. If you look at my CSD log, the categories that are blue links are categories that were empty when I tagged them but later were no longer empty and so the tag was removed.
I hope this answers your questions. Liz Read! Talk! 14:10, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Ah yes, I did read the tag (I have a bit of experience with CSD, I think ;) but I failed to connect the two. Thanks a lot. --QEDK (T C) 14:49, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Anuja Kapur[edit]

hello Liz, I'm really not able to understand the problem in the page... where is promotional attempt please tell me specifically so that I can edit that. I have already edited some facts please now review & tell me specifically where is the problem...Anuja Kapur 14:33, 30 April 2016 (UTC)Anuja Kapur 14:28, 30 April 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anuja kapur001 (talkcontribs)

Anuja kapur001, please see the advice I gave you on your user talk page. In general, Wikipedia discourages editors from writing articles about themselves because it is almost impossible to be neutral and objective. Liz Read! Talk! 20:00, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
then please tell me how has this page been created ? ----this is also a biography page ... I want to create like this one ... please help me... Anuja Kapur 20:14, 30 April 2016 (UTC)Anuja_kapur001
Anuja kapur001, Ram Jethmalani has 30 references, most to reliable sources. Please click on that link and read Wikipedia's policy and expectations about sourcing.
You are being given advice which you are not paying attention to. Please continue to improve your article in your Sandbox. If you move your draft article into Wikipedia main space again, or try to recreate it today, in the state that it is in now, it will be deleted and, most likely, the page will be protected which means you will not be able to have an article with that title. Please slow down and learn about Wikipedia guidelines. If you have questions, bring them to the Teahouse where experienced editors can answer them. Liz Read! Talk! 20:36, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) (edit conflict) @Anuja kapur001: As you can see in Sigma’s report, that biography has been built up gradually over twelve years, with contributions from over 350 editors—although only a handful of these could be considered principal authors. Of course it’s possible that some of the edits were made by people with an undisclosed connection to the subject, and some of the phrasing may be closer to WP:PEACOCK than it should, but I think it’s safe to assume that most of the content has been distilled from the cited sources by independent editors.—Odysseus1479 20:45, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Actually this is my first article in Wikipedia , please help me ... I'm very much nervous...I'm sharing the Sandbox URL .Have a look on it & i'm also sharing my Skype ID here please connect with me via Skype & help me out. (Redacted) Anuja Kapur 21:19, 30 April 2016 (UTC)Anuja_kapur001 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anuja kapur001 (talkcontribs)
Please do not post personal information on Wikipedia talk pages. It is very unwise. I am not going to Skype you to help you with your article! Different editors have given you advice which you seem not to be paying attention to. I directed you to go to the Teahouse where you can ask specific questions about editing Wikipedia but you haven't visited that page. You need to read up on Wikipedia policies and not depend on other people to write your article for you. In fact, you've been told, several times, that writing articles about yourself is discouraged but you seem to not pay attention to that advice either
An article is not created overnight, it takes time. You received a Welcome message on your talk page, look at the links that were included, go to those pages and read them. There are tutorials for new editors and guides to writing articles on Wikipedia, use those tools. There is no reason to be nervous but no one has much incentive to help you when you don't follow advice that has been given to you. We are all volunteers here and our time is limited. Liz Read! Talk! 21:32, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
I am not able to ask question TEAHOUSE . Please help me regarding this how can I ask question in TEAHOUSE... Anuja Kapur 22:03, 30 April 2016 (UTC)Anuja_kapur001 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anuja kapur001 (talkcontribs)

Thank you![edit]

...for your deletion of the Gangiguana article and its talk page! And btw, Great page notice (love kittenfaces)!  Stick to sources! Paine  19:53, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Well, Paine Ellsworth, I'm glad that the kitten didn't intimidate you.
As for deletions, expired PRODs and BLPPRODs are about the lowest risk deletions there are because if an editor objects to the deletion, we can restore the page if they say they want to improve the article. Not too controversial and they are an effective deletion tool for old articles that were created, never improved and forgotten about. I hope you are having a good weekend. Liz Read! Talk! 19:59, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Yes, thank you, a good weekend! You also!  Paine  20:05, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Nathaniel Dotse Sodzi[edit]

Help!!! My article on Nathaniel Dotse Sodzi has been deleted by Liz. Nathaniel who passed away on the 12th of March was a church and community leader and an academic and I believe the article should be on Wikipedia. Liz, please advise on what's missing as I am a first time Wikipedia contributor and wish to do this correctly. I believe all the required references are available and I would like this page to be restored with your suggestions/recommendations on what's missing. I'm open to suggestions please. Kedzi64 (talk) 23:16, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Kedzi64, I have restored the article and moved it to draft space where you can continue to work on it. You can find it at Draft:Nathaniel Dotse Sodzi. I don't think that you have demonstrated notability for this individual through reliable, independent sources. This is not a judgment of the value of an individual, there are many, many wonderful people who are not notable by Wikipedia's standards.
As for suggestions, I'd look over Wikipedia:Your first article and when you think you have improved the article to an acceptable state, submit it to Articles for Creation where an experienced editor will look over your article, review it and offer their suggestions. Please know that there is no rush to create is better to search for adequate, strong references that will strengthen the article than than to rush to submit it. Wikipedia takes the long-term view and what it really seeks are the strongest, well-written articles, not ones that are written quickly. As we say, on Wikipedia, "there is no deadline". Good luck. Liz Read! Talk! 23:35, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Mangalsutra (TV series)[edit]

Hello, I noticed that you deleted Mangalsutra (TV series) page. Somebody inserted the PROD tag in the article without informing me on my talk page. The series was initially titled as Mangalsutra (TV series) and I was the first to create the article. The show was then renamed as Kavach...Kaali Shaktiyon Se. You should had moved Mangalsutra (TV series) page history to Kavach...Kaali Shaktiyon Se. So I'm kindly requesting you to restore Mangalsutra (TV series) page and to be redirected to Kavach...Kaali Shaktiyon Se. Let the article be redirected to Kavach...Kaali Shaktiyon Se. Mr. Smart ℒION☎️⋡ 13:21, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Liz Read! Talk! 13:34, 1 May 2016 (UTC)


You have been kind and honest! MassiveLizard (talk) 20:08, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Well, I try to be fair and give people the benefit of the doubt. Assume good faith is the phrase of the day. Liz Read! Talk! 20:23, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Night of the Father[edit]

Hello, I saw a red link. I then saw that you deleted Night of the Father in February 2016. I would like to see this to evaluate the article because I also read mention of it in a tourist brochure about Munich. Therefore, it may be rubbish but may be more than meets the eye. If I see the deleted article, it may help. Did you document your deletion and keep a copy somewhere? Could you email or fax it to me? Thank you. User: Askaquestion Askaquestion (talk) 21:39, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Well, Askaquestion, there wasn't much content at all on the deleted page. But I have moved it into your Sandbox if you'd like to take a look at it. You can find it at User talk:Askaquestion/Sandbox. I'll check back in a week and if you aren't working on turning the material into a decent article, I'll delete the page. Liz Read! Talk! 21:45, 1 May 2016 (UTC)


hi! FYI, you just restored a raft of copyvio on Nora Maccoby. See [7] for comparison. I had removed the copyvio, per policy, and once that was removed the rest of the text was unsupported by refs. I believe also that there is a WP:COI issue. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 20:32, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Also, just to explain why the page was gutted: I was looking at it in terms of COI when I notice that the bio sounded fishy. I searched a phrase and found that much of the article matched [8]. That material had to be removed per policy. Once that was done, I removed any unreferenced material. Given the bio reproduction from the above link, the similarity of the creator username to the article subject and the peacock language, I think it's likely to assume some COI. As to gutting it down to only referenced material, this is usually my position as I believe it is better to have only verified material on wiki, per WP:V, rahter than leave masses of unverified informaton in the hopes that one day it will be verified. I realize the arguments go both ways, btu that's the way I see it. I hope that explains my revert of your edit. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 20:43, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
I don't know how you can be sure User:Altenergy has a COI (they haven't edited Michael Maccoby, for instance) but I didn't intend to reinstate any content borrowed from the subject's website. Thank you for removing that, twice, HappyValleyEditor. I was just surprised to see so much content removed from a biography including most of the citations that it contained. Original material that is adequately sourced shouldn't be removed. Liz Read! Talk! 20:47, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
My attitude is that unsourced material can exist unless it is challenged so we clearly come from different points of view. I greatly appreciate your thoughtful explanation. Liz Read! Talk! 20:48, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
I agree about removing good material! To my knowledge I did not remove any properly sourced material, unless the phrase that was being sourced came from from the copyvio. I also agree with tending to leave unsourced material that is non-controversial, unless it occurs in a what might be an autobiography or clear self-promotion. The problem with leaving unsourced material is that it sometimes gets left for years! In any case, thanks for your understanding. Happy editing! HappyValleyEditor (talk) 20:54, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

supposed "hoax"[edit]

I am the one in the page

It’s not a “hoax” as you strangely assume of a page with so much linked content, including three books. I would much appreciate it if you could restore it. In the case that you refuse, can you please send me a copy of the content, or show me how to access it. As I don’t have it. --Astimulation — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astimulation (talkcontribs) 01:44, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

FYI: WP:REFUND#Astimulation/sandbox. JohnCD (talk) 09:57, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know, JohnCD...I don't know how I missed seeing this message. Liz Read! Talk! 11:04, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Please remove[edit]

Hi, Liz. Please remove your comments about me from Winkelvi's talk page. It has nothing to do with the discussion. That discussion is not about me. Winkelvi is not my friend. With that being said, a one month block under the conditions I have highlighted is unacceptable for me to endorse. If you have anything to say about me, please put it on my talk page. As it stands, your comments directed at me do not advance the discussion. I will not reply there, as I see it as a distraction. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:05, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

I don't agree with you but I'll oblige and honor your request. Liz Read! Talk! 22:22, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Evidently from your comments you have not been on the receiving end of that editor's attacks yet. I bet many of his targets think a month block is about 10 years short what is needed. Admins don't need your endorsement. Legacypac (talk) 00:41, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Legacypac, I think, but I'm not sure, that you are telling me that you don't approve of me removing my comments. I'm really trying to stay 10 feet away from this mess which is a swirling vortex, engulfing more editors, day by day. I see future blocks being given out and I was just trying to give a head's up. Liz Read! Talk! 00:50, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
By the way, I have more than my share of editors who insult me so I don't think I'm deficient in the editor attack area. We just have different people who despise us. Liz Read! Talk! 00:51, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
No my poorly worded comment was directed at Checkingfax. I want to stay far away from that mess too - even though I was named on that page recently :( Nothing good can come from it. 01:00, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
I wish you luck, Legacypac. From what I've seen on Wikipedia, one of the hardest things for editors to do is to ignore those they have been feuding with. Some have succeeded but it takes a lot of willpower to get to a state where you just don't care what they do and say! The alternative is a block so I think it is worth the effort. Liz Read! Talk! 01:09, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Amen to that. I'm thinking of just ignoring the trolls and such regardless of what they say. Hard when they drag you to ANi though. Legacypac (talk) 23:07, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 May 2016[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #207[edit]

Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight)[edit]

I was looking for a discussion which took place in 2015, I believe there was a debate as to whether or not to named the accused and his POV, if I recalled Guy closed it in favor of including the accused per NPOV, but he hasn't been activate for sometime. Valoem talk contrib 20:58, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Well, Valoem, there are 9 pages of archives at Talk:Mattress Performance (Carry That Weight) you could go through. Then there were discussions on ANI 1, 2 BLP 3, 4. 5, 6 and RSN 7. There might have been more discussions but those are the ones I found. The article was also the subject of some complaints at 3RR but those discussions were about reverts, not the content. Liz Read! Talk! 21:23, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
I think this article violates NPOV, from my understanding initial response was positive however after evidence was released by the accused the response has been overwhelmingly negative. I don't feel this has been reflected in the article. Valoem talk contrib 21:54, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Well, I suggest you start a discussion on this argument on the article talk page or at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard where you can state your case. Liz Read! Talk! 22:05, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

G13 notice[edit]

Sorry about that. It's an automatic thing. Apparently you submitted it on behalf of another editor back in October. On the reviewer's tools, it doesn't give you a preview of who will be notified. My apologies for the template posting. Onel5969 TT me 13:10, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

It's no problem, onel5969. I really should have just deleted the message rather than undoing it. Thanks for handling these G13s. Liz Read! Talk! 13:12, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

OTRS help[edit]

Hi Liz. I received a message on OTRS this afternoon which dealt with the edit history of the page Eric Leva. The correspondence purported to be from Leva, but that's beside the point. If you look at the edit history, someone made a change, and then self reverted. However, in the edit summary it says, "I'm his bf...he was born in MA :)" . The correspondent was upset that that comment could still be seen. Anyway we can get that comment removed? I can't, not being an admin, but I think there's a way you can do it. Thanks. Onel5969 TT me 20:55, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi, onel5969. I've rev-deleted the edit summary for that edit. Is that sufficient?
My only question is what on earth is a "Visual Social Media Consultant"? It sounds like a made-up job title. Liz Read! Talk! 21:41, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes, that's what I was looking for... couldn't think of the term, revdel. And lol... didn't even notice the job title. Looking at the article, I'm tagging it for notability, really weak references. When I can research more, might even AfD it. Onel5969 TT me 22:31, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, AfD'd it. Nothing out there on this person. Onel5969 TT me 22:39, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
onel5969, I've always wondered, what is the work like with OTRS? I'm guessing you deal with a lot of people who are upset or angry. I'm sure it is a challenge to translate Wikipedia policies into language that makes sense to people who don't work on the project. Liz Read! Talk! 22:42, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
I'll have to get back to you on that. I'm just starting to help out there. Was looking for ways to help out more, and they were looking for volunteers. I began helping out a few months ago on ACC, so this seemed a natural progression. But I've looked at some responses, and yes, sometimes people get a little hot under the collar. But I don't think it's going to be that much of a challenge, just have to remember what venue I'm discussing Wikipedia in. When I talk about what I do on Wikipedia to colleagues in the real world, that's given me a lot of practice. After a month or so I may change my tune, but I'll circle back and let you know. Face-smile.svg. Onel5969 TT me 22:53, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
That sounds like a plan. Thanks for sharing your experience. Liz Read! Talk! 23:00, 4 May 2016 (UTC)


Greetings! I see you undid a blanking of User:JaberEl-Hour. Could you explain why you felt the content (particularly the comments addressed toward the West) should be restored to a user page of a blocked editor? —C.Fred (talk) 22:44, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

I just felt like the blanking was unnecessary. The editor who blanked the user page is a very new, very young editor who had confronted JaberEl-Hour on his talk page and I just thought the blanking was probably an emotional reaction to that conflict. If you feel differently, you can revert my edit.
In general though, I don't like blanking user pages or talk pages, even for blocked editors. I often have to go into the page edit history to see the nature of the block and who this editor was because all information has been wiped from the page. It's simpler if the pages are left as they were at the time of the block, even if it is indefinite. The only exceptions I see are when the editor is a sockpuppet and it is helpful to identify and connect the account with the master account.
But this was an editorial decision, not an admin decision and I can understand that others might have a different opinion than my own. Liz Read! Talk! 22:58, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Good point. I had overlooked the relative youth of the other account. And if the user page had been that extreme, the blocking admin probably would've blanked it while she was at it. And it does provide an easier-to-access lens into the positions of the user. I see your point, and my first reaction was to blank the page, I see where there's more value than harm in leaving it in place. Thank you for the explanation! —C.Fred (talk) 23:21, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016 May newsletter[edit]

FP of Christ Church Cathedral, Falkland Islands by Godot13

Round 2 is over and 35 competitors have moved on to Round 3.

Round 2 saw three FAs (two by New South Wales Cas Liber (submissions) and one by Montana Montanabw (submissions)), four Featured Lists (with three by England Calvin999 (submissions)), and 53 Good Articles (six by Lancashire Worm That Turned (submissions) and five each by Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions), Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions), and Denmark MPJ-DK (submissions)). Eleven Featured Pictures were promoted (six by There's always time for skeletons Adam Cuerden (submissions) and five by Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions)). One Featured Portal, Featured Topic and Good Topic were also promoted. The DYK base point total was 1,135. Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) scored 265 base points, while British Empire The C of E (submissions) and Denmark MPJ-DK (submissions) each scored 150 base points. Eleven ITN were promoted and 131 Good Article Reviews were conducted with Denmark MPJ-DK (submissions) completing a staggering 61 reviews. Two contestants, Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) and New South Wales Cas Liber (submissions), broke the 700 point mark for Round 2.

If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Thanks to everyone for participating, and good luck to those moving into round 2. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:59, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

New section on BAPS article[edit]

Hello User:Liz,

You had recently commented on my talk page and clearly explained that my post on ANI was too long and needed to be summarized. I really appreciated the kind tone you used and I am really trying to do the right thing here but I am so frustrated and feel like my back is against the wall and then I get really defensive. I wanted to know if my next edit is appropriate and if you can assist me in making sure that it is okay. I will post my edit here if you have time to look at it.

Thank you Swamiblue (talk) 06:06, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Given the length of your talk page comments, please do not post any remarks here. I appreciate you keeping this comment short and to the point and messages like this one are welcome. Liz Read! Talk! 19:22, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @Swamiblue: if you’d like a review of your report before ‘going live’, I suggest you write it up in a sandbox or other user sub-page, to which you can link discreetly instead of copying it all. Once you’ve posted a finished version at ANI (or if you decide not to proceed) you can request that the page be deleted.—Odysseus1479 20:17, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes, what @Odysseus1479: said. That's a good idea. Liz Read! Talk! 20:21, 5 May 2016 (UTC)


Ἀνάλυσις should be restored. First of all, your speedy deletion rationale is absolutely incorrect as WP:A3 doesn't apply to redirects (the A prefix stands for articles and redirects aren't articles.) Secondly, several people have opined at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 May 5#Ἀνάλυσις that the redirect should be kept, so at the very least, let the discussion run its course. Please be more careful in the future. -- Tavix (talk) 18:01, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

First, I didn't tag Ἀνάλυσις, Newrunner769 did, so we both made a mistake here. I also didn't notice that the page was part of a deletion discussion. I have restored it pending the results of the RFD discussion. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Liz Read! Talk! 19:21, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

Request for comment Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:No religion here thanks :) Olowe2011 Talk 23:19, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Enforcement on ARBN[edit]

You said, If editors have issues with MarkBernstein's posts, can you move them to his talk page or to the AE board? But isn't enforcement on arb pages generally reserved to the committee (and perhaps clerks)? It's a bit worrying to see clear-cut, textbook tban violations stream past on Wikipedia_Talk:ARBN with no-one taking the slightest notice. GoldenRing (talk) 07:28, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

GoldenRing, I meant editors moving the discussion to a complaint involving MarkBernstein filed at AE. Lord knows it's been done a lot of times including one time right now, a complaint that you've participated in. Liz Read! Talk! 20:44, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Edit requrest[edit]

First of all thank you for your protection to the article Mayor of London.

Can I please request a fairly urgent edit, that is the Sadiq Khan be removed from the list of London mayors. This is pre-emptive information. Many thanks for all of your help. Sport and politics (talk) 20:36, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

It looks like Ymblanter has already taken care of this edit request. Liz Read! Talk! 20:46, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

He should have played football, how sad is that?[edit]

Hi Liz. (cc: @Jimbo Wales:@MichaelQSchmidt:) Nice to meet you, and thank you for your comments (on @Doug Weller: talk page) regarding the Gary Cziko article. I've added many notes in the AfD regarding this articles subject and would appreciate someone/anyone (you?) listing it where others more experienced can join in too. Like you, I fail to see the WP logic behind making it so hard to make/create/save articles about academic researchers and authors, after all, (and as I believe you know) there is ALWAYS going to be more reliable third party independent sources for sports people than even the most accomplished professor will ever have, for example: Ezekiel Elliott is a 20-year-old American football player whose WP article contains 20 reliable third party references, and who as a rookie has yet to have any consequence in his profession sport. Yet, and sadly, this accomplished scientists article is in danger of being deleted, despite his decades of research, his two critically acclaimed books, his pioneering work in the field of PCT, and I could go on, and on. It's just sad. Thanks. Picomtn (talk) 19:16, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

I'll see how I can help. Luckily, it is only the second day into the AfD and it is far from a snow close. Liz Read! Talk! 19:22, 7 May 2016 (UTC)


I pinged you here, but perhaps the ping did not work.Anythingyouwant (talk) 19:52, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Well, first, I've been off-line. Second, you need a space between {{Ping|User:Liz}} and ~~~~. Third, I haven't been involved at Donald Trump, I just wanted to link your deletion of content at Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 to the discussion at Talk:Donald Trump. Truthfully, I don't know which article should contain this content, I just think it is very interesting, it reveals relevant details about the person and his campaign, it also impacts how he runs his campaign along with the media's reaction to him. Liz Read! Talk! 20:31, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
Okay, but I still think it's strange that I would need consensus to shorten the huge bloated section on alleged mob ties, but someone can come along and entirely remove the section on fringe theories without any consensus at all. Anyway, take care. Cheers.Anythingyouwant (talk) 22:36, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

RfD Hestia[edit]

Welcome to RfD! Because of the navigational nature of redirects, the rules for keeping or deleting them are a bit counter-intuitive. Going through the few points that you made:

  • "Lengthy search phrase" and "paucity of page views" - These only matter if the redirect title itself is of dubious accuracy. If a redirect title is correct and unambiguous, there's generally an overwhelming consensus to keep even if the title.
  • Searching: Actually I agree with you that titles that don't show up in the search bar are practically useless. The technical detail is that, when multiple redirects lead to the same destination, only one of them will show in the autocomplete. However, the protracted discussion Talk:Plowback retained earnings shows that RfD and DRV are divided on the issue, and this is for a redirect title that is incorrect.
  • Page move: We generally try to keep {{R from move}}s unless the old title was a mistake or the author didn't want to leave a redirect behind but wasn't an admin. Both cases would fall under WP:G7. Redirects left behind from page moves are explicitly excluded from WP:R3. (One rainbow trout for you.)

I hope this is useful background info, and thanks for engaging in the discussion! Deryck C. 22:10, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Well, thank you for the unusually lengthy explanation, Der. I disagree with the closure, as I nominated this inept phrase as a redirect but the decision wasn't up to me. I will nominate it again in the future as I don't think "Is It Wrong to Try to Pick Up Girls in a Dungeon?" is a likely or appropriate search phrase. Liz Read! Talk! 22:40, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Nima Mirzazad[edit]

Hi Liz,

I had written an article named Nima Mirzazad(a footballer) and you deleted it because he had not played in a fully pro league.I think the problem is solved as he just played in Iran's pro league.There are sourses to prove it but they are in persian.An Iranian user can read them if you want to.So do I have to write the whole thing again or you can help me have the last one? Yasamin77 (talk) 06:33, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Yasamin77, I've restored the article at Draft:Nima Mirzazad. As long as it is a draft and you are working on it, it is safe from deletion as long as you abide by Wikipedia guidelines about copyright and BLP. When you believe it is ready, you can either submit it to Article for Creation or move it yourself into main space. If you are unsure whether it is ready, you ask for help at the WikiProject Football talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 12:12, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Liz, Thanks for your help. I created it again and of course updated it. Thanks again.Yasamin77 (talk) 06:12, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #208[edit]

A cupcake for you![edit]

Choco-Nut Bake with Meringue Top cropped.jpg To thank you for your help. Yasamin77 (talk) 06:13, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

System glitch[edit]

Hi, Liz. Nice catch. I did not delete anybody's comments. I only touched the top portion to add the |listas= now that the article is a BLP again, to demote it to class=Start because it has been trimmed by 80%, etc.

All my edits were done in the header portion.

It would be very difficult for me to accidentally delete those blocks of text as they are not contiguous, nor did I have a reason to.

OK, asked, and answered. I will make a Village Pump report and if that does not resolve it, I will take it to Phabricator.

Why are you watching my edits 718smiley.svg AGF! Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 00:54, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Checkingfax,
I assumed it was an accident as it looked like you were just trying to edit the archiving information. I'm not sure how the comments were included in the deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 11:48, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Liz. It was not an accident. I did not make the edit. It is a system glitch. Your edit summary asked why I was deleting other editors comments, so I replied to that. Maybe next time, if you think it is a mistake, note that. Somebody is going to pull this Diff out as evidence of me nuking other editors comments. LOL. The funny part is I nuked my own too, if it was my edit, which it was not. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 18:25, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail![edit]

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 10:37, 13 May 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Sam Sailor Talk! 10:37, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

I've replied to you. Thanks for letting me know. Liz Read! Talk! 11:49, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Andreas Lubitz[edit]

Can you unprotect this page I am going to split it. Valoem talk contrib 22:38, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Since there was a decision last year to merge this article with Germanwings Flight 9525 (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andreas Lubitz (3rd nomination)), I'd like to see a talk page discussion where there was a consensus for this split before I unprotect this page. Another admin might feel differently but before undoing the results of an AfD closure, I'd like to know there is support for this move. Liz Read! Talk! 23:52, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
I was hoping to do a bold split and then start discussion, I've generally found better success with this method. Given the unique nature of the crime plus additional sources such as this and this giving his life extensive coverage, I was hoping you could defer judgment to me. Valoem talk contrib 00:07, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
I'd feel more comfortable removing the protection if you'd at least mention your intentions at Talk:Germanwings Flight 9525 and hear what people think. It clearly was a contentious issue as it went through 3 AfD discussions over a short period of time. Liz Read! Talk! 00:11, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Okay, I started a discussion also just to note the first two AfDs were closed as keep and the third AfD was not given the allotted time as I stated before I've found greater success if the article is already split during discussion. People have a tendency to maintain status quo. Valoem talk contrib 00:29, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Can you please unprotect it now, I do not see any reason for a full protection especially since there was no disruptive editing. It is difficult to expand an article when it is locked. Also Spartaz has retired. Valoem talk contrib 01:03, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
You just started the talk page discussion! Liz Read! Talk! 01:23, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
How am I going to work on it if it is fully protected? Do you find full protection reasonable? The best opinion would be to restore this version right here and then nominate it as a procedural 4th AfD. I tend to not like to work on something until I know it will stay. Valoem talk contrib 01:31, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Meh, I am going to use DRV actually, probably best method. Valoem talk contrib 02:12, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

NAC Closure on AfD[edit]

Hello! I saw your comment on another editor's talk page. I'm writing about this deletion discussion which was (in my opinion) prematurely closed by the user in question. In my opinion, there was no consensus on the deletion and I thought I'd come to you and ask if it's worth re-opening the discussion: there was only one real constructive comment on the discussion and I still don't believe that the article is notable for Wikipedia, considering it was written the day before the album's release. st170etalk 00:45, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Well, it was opened on April 28 and closed on May 6, it was placed on several deletion lists, I don't think it was closed prematurely. I saw two Keep votes, and only your opposition so I probably would have closed it as No consensus. If you feel strongly that the closure was improper, I'd post your complaint at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Liz Read! Talk! 00:55, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #209[edit]

The Signpost: 17 May 2016[edit]


Maybe this[9] came across the wrong way based on your comment? Thank you for changing it -- obviously it can be read more than one way and I didn't want to offend anyone. I meant it as a minor aside regarding wikipedia's male comic book readership and what articles tend to rise in the rankings when such movies come out.--Milowenthasspoken 12:15, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

It just sounded like the only reason that this character would be popular was because she was a woman. It might be because her character is interesting or she has amazing skills. But mainly, I've never seen a male character's popularity attributed to the fact that they were male, as if the reason he is popular is simply because he is a man. Usually a character's popularity is attributed to aspects of their personality, physicality, intelligence, talent or skills. Liz Read! Talk! 12:40, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
I am much more pessimistic about those of my gender, sadly. But I see how my comment could be seen as reinforcing a bad stereotype, so I thank you again for your insight.--Milowenthasspoken 16:33, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Surreal Barnstar Hires.png The Surreal Barnstar
The Surreal Barnstar is awarded to any user who adds "special flavor" to the community by acting as a sort of wildcard. Yes, you do had special flavor to the community. Thank you very much for dealing with a sunburn user like myself ;) Cheers! CookieMonster755 📞 00:20, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, CookieMonster755. That's a unique barnstar I haven't seen before. It's been a while since I received one, thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 22:22, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

How come why not[edit]

How come why not (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) Has been indeffed for vandalism. I find many of Hcwn's edits questionable. Especially the moving of categories. I noticed you db-catempty Category:Columbiformes stubs which Hcwn moved to Category:Pigeon stubs. The pigeon article is Columbiformes and I feel that it should be Columbiformes stubs and not Pigeon stubs. So, I did a db-moved request. It seems that many of Ncwn's moves are similarly questionable. Should all of them be unmoved? Thanks Jim1138 (talk) 22:06, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Jim1138, you've been here over 7 years and have over 150,000 don't need my okay to put categories back to where they belong! I'm short on time right now so I can't scrutinize their edit history but please make any corrections you think are necessary.
As for me tagging a category, I regularly tag empty categories that appear on a database list. Often in the four days that they sit in a holding category before being deleted, pages/articles are assigned to a category and they are no longer empty so the tag is removed. It's the only speedy deletion that is delayed and isn't speedy at all (and for good reason!). Liz Read! Talk! 22:27, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

VoiceBox Technologies Page Deleted[edit]

Hi Liz - I represent VoiceBox Technologies and we are curious as to why our Wikipedia page has been deleted ( The page contained correct information about the company and was maintained by an internal company source.

We look forward to hearing back. Thank you.

AgonzalezWE (talk) 22:55, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

I have responded to you on your talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 23:16, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Not all of us have jobs[edit]

You were correctly pointing out on The Teahouse that we all have lives outside Wikipedia. Not all of us have jobs, though. If I did, I doubt I'd have the time to contribute. This may be true for a lot of people. It amazes me that so many people who contribute do have jobs.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:30, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Good point, Vchimpanzee. I wasn't trying to describe all editors, just indicating that most people have busy lives outside of Wikipedia. But you make a valid statement. Liz Read! Talk! 22:25, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
By the way, I don't have a family either. I'd like to see my relatives more, but they get busy. I spend more time with Wikipedia than I do with them.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:55, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Regards, and request[edit]

I have held you, always in highest regard, before and since your elevation to Admin, including, though we are on different sides of the issue, the ongoing matter of what constitutes tagging practice in accord with policy and guidelines, versus not. But I have to ask, next time you take the initiative to offer invites to an ANI on this issue (or, I guess, in general), ping the party in focus—in this case me—when you are doing the invites. One note left at a Talk page was noteworthy in its not doing so, and had I received notice via a ping, I could have called attention to two Talk sections appearing at that page that had been given no response (sections entitled "Thank you" and "You misunderstand"). (I'm not mentioning or pinging that editor here, because this request is not in any way about about them; it is about what I perceive to be respectful consideration in an ANI type setting, where I have to admit, I have often wondered how people converge.)

Had I received a ping, I both would have been aware of the ANI earlier—as I discovered, the notice that the initially aggrieved party placed at my Talk page was vague (you might be interested), not clear that the ANI was directed at me, and of the briefest sort, and it was not given a Section of its own, but tucked into another Talk section—and I might have been able to re-address the already addressed fellow editor, calling attention to the earlier unanswered Talk content. Whether that would ave changed things, I cannot say. But it would certainly left me feeling as if the Ownership-cum-Incivility-cum-Tagbombing discussion was actually one being conducted fully respectfully, and by the guidelines. Again, regards, and simply ping me when I am the subject of a conversation, please. Otherwise, hope all is well, and that if you wish, you engage the continuing tag-focused discussion at my Talk. (When we are both not working!). Cheers. Le Prof (talk) 03:40, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

May 25: WikiWednesday Salon NYC / Enterprise MediaWiki Conference[edit]

Wednesday May 25, 6pm: WikiWednesday Salon NYC / Enterprise MediaWiki Conference
NYC - Washington Square Park - Arch.jpg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon.

This month's WikiWednesday Salon, we'll meet and share with the MediaWiki software development community, through a community learning night at NYU on May 25.

6:00 pm: Introduction, pizza
7:00 pm: MediaWiki tutorial, community involvement and extension ideas, novel uses of wiki technology
8:00 pm: State of the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikipedia / Wikimedia community
9:00 pm: Monthly WikiSalon in San Francisco video-link, casual bicoastal chat

Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 13:49, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Wikidata weekly summary #210[edit]

Could you look in on[edit]

…my edits at Conditioner (farming). Another editor who stalks me followed me to that edit, even after it had been checked by Ninja and was found to be OK (see the ANI discussion at User:Leprof_7272 talk page). The issue is an Expert tag, which this editor does not like in general. I have modified the Expert tag content twice, to make clear that the Expert is called for because of inexpert material in the article (it is unsourced, but all culled from sales literature on this farm implement). He continues to revert me, claiming the tags are redundant, and that he has the right to revert me, without creating a consensus on this edit (because of the recently finished ANI). If this editor has his way, he will always follow me and war, knowing that he is willing to be persistent in reversions, and that others are generally unwilling to enter the fray.

Again, the issue is, two tags placed, both relevant, tag content and extensive Talk written to make clear the tags are distinct and relevant, and an editor reverting despite a second editor saying "all OK". As well, as I have stated at this editor's Talk page, he is not an expert at agriculture. My interests and reasons for editing are stated at the article and his Talk. Please pass by this article? Le Prof (talk) 19:20, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

There was widespread complaints (see discussion) concerning user:Leprof 7272 over use of attention banners that very nearly resulted in a block. Now Leprof 7272 is resuming adding redundant attention banners to articles. I suggested an alternative option here which was simply deleted without discussion. Boghog (talk) 19:37, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
As has been clearly stated—at the article Talk page, in my edit summaries, and at Boghog's Talk page—first, the issue is in fact whether the two tags are redundant (he says yes, but I say, with repeatedly submissive clarifications, no). And second, he was told at his Talk page, that his "deleted" suggestion to post at Wikiproject Agriculture was in fact a suggestion taken. His postings to my Talk page are summarily deleted because he is a stalker that has been told that he is not welcome to post there. Issues need to appear, first, in the edit summaries and article Talk pages (which, this editor acts as if generally too busy to substantially populate). After that, if there is a need, I will go to his Talk page. But he is simply not welcome at mine, ever, for his disingenuous attempts to impose his will at articles of mutual interest, and to otherwise stalk and disrupt my editing, even when others find it useful. Le Prof (talk) 20:11, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Liz, I trust you to look in on the article and draw your own conclusions. As I said, this editor is not an expert at Ag, though I have nevertheless submitted twice to him, to alter the content of the tag to make clear the issue is not just sourcing (and so the tags are not redundant), has failed to reply at article Talk, failed to reply in substance in edit summaries, etc. You know about the ANI discussion over my tagging. This matter is one of this editor's stalking, who has never edited this article (nor has he any interest or expertise in the subject). I spent an hour editing, adding two potential sources (via Further reading and external links), read those sources, and stated I believe (as a trained academic) that the article needs an expert at Ag to decide what its future content should say. NinjaRobot read the edit, and said fine (see my Talk page). This warring editor persists, in wanting his way, in ignoring the seeming obvious distinction, that sourcing what is already there, versus deciding what needs to be deleted or added are two separate issues. I will not fight it more here Liz. Please do as you see fit. But the broader issue is this following (stalking) editor's obfuscation, and trying to game the system through selective reporting of information regarding conflicts. This is a unique, new editing situation. I am yielding significantly to feedback. This editor needs to examine himself and his motives, for following me about. Le Prof (talk) 20:07, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Well, Le Prof, you should not count on me for the next two weeks. I'm in the process of moving cross-country and won't be on Wikipedia much at all until mid-June. I suggest you contact another administrator if this situation can't be resolved. Sorry I can't help you at the moment. Liz Read! Talk! 22:21, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

While to you it may seem that you're an authority on Greek ,I should know better because I am actually greek. If you can't read greek and know nothing about names please refrain from ' editing ' anything just because it doesn't fit into your world view. Now whatever that may be it's of no consequence to me because I bear the name you so politely edited. My name is Νικόλαος with the tone on the o. If you don't know what it's for I suggest you make some greek friends. It is read nik-O-laos...When the O is emphasized it means something totally different from when it isn't. Two different meanings. In Greek there is no such name as Nikolaos without emphasizing the O . It's always spelled with the emphasized O. So to cut a short story can not call an individual a people. YOU MAKE NO SENSE. You say you want proofs nikolaos..try that one. Oh and by the way your name is rooted in Elizabeth which means your word is your oath. So to end off Niko - I conquer Laos- nation or people. Just like your name can't mean our word is our oath. This would mean you're schizophrenic , so can I not be a people. I am not victorious people , person maybe but not people. Am I making any sense ? Leondari — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leondari (talkcontribs) 22:06, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Dear Liz. I noticed that there was a lot of new text on Repton School's pages which was very negative, defamatory, personal to some members of staff and not written neutrally. Looking at the history it has all been added by one user, Optimus Ma, who hasn't edited any other pages. This appears to be an attack against the school and not written independently. Wateringcan5 (talk) 15:38, 25 May 2016 (UTC)wateringcan5Wateringcan5 (talk) 15:38, 25 May 2016 (UTC) Liz

Copyright infringement[edit]

I cocked up. I meant to take it as G6 under the WP:G6 Neelix concession. I must have missed. Thanks for pointing it out. Total cock up on my part. Si Trew (talk) 20:12, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

No problem, Si Trew. I regularly find the wrong CSD tag applied to pages. Some times, I just put the right one on but I've been trying to stay away from these redirects. Thanks for not taking my revert personally. Liz Read! Talk! 20:36, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Well we collaborate to make the encylopaedia better. Nope, I cocked up, you pointed it out, I fixed it. No problem. I am going through these redirects on the infamous User:Anomie/Neelix list (in fact I seem to be the only editor diligently trogging through them, and I get about three or four whacks a day for people thinking I have something personal against Neelix when I would happily shake his hand but the WP:G6 concession says we should mark deletions as "Neelix") and after a while your eyes glaze over and I missed, sorry about that. I do believe genuinely Neelix was in good faith with creating them and have said so in many places, but some are just not helpful now the search engine has got a bit better. Si Trew (talk) 20:39, 25 May 2016 (UTC)


Hi you restore Rush (video gamer) as an article please. There are sources for the articles here If not can you restore it to draftspace. Thanks.--Prisencolin (talk) 23:08, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Prisencolin, I can't restore it as an article because a biography of a living person (see Wikipedia:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people) requires at least one reference to the person in an independent, reliable source...that means books, newspapers, magazines, news services and not social media or blogs.
You also need to make some claim of significance...why is this person important? Why should Wikipedia include an article about them? You don't need to convince me, you need to include the claim, backed up by sources, in the article itself. You can find it at Draft:Rush (video gamer). Good luck. Liz Read! Talk! 13:11, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Alright that fair enough, thanks.--Prisencolin (talk) 18:29, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Account deleted[edit]

Hi, why having deleted my account? Have you the right to do it?

Can't I have my own explanation/(contribution try) like User:DVdm and lot of others?

21:00, 30 April 2016 Liz (talk | contribs) deleted page User:N738139 (U5: Blatant misuse of Wikipedia as a web host)

--N738139 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:24, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

N738139, your account has not been deleted or you could not have posted this message. It was your user page that was deleted under CSD U5 (see Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#U5) which disallows "Pages in userspace consisting of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals".
If you look at WP:USERPAGE, you'll find that "User pages are mainly for interpersonal discussion, notices, testing and drafts (see: Sandboxes), and, if desired, limited autobiographical and personal content." Please look at WP:UP for more information and guidelines on what is considered appropriate content for editors' user pages. Liz Read! Talk! 13:21, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Dear Liz, Let me give you an advice for the future: DO NOT ERASE WHAT YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND. There was more interesting sentences (was it necessary to delete it?) on my little wiki page than on your whole talk page. Sincerely.

--N738139 (talk) —Preceding undated —Preceding undated comment added 23:03, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 May 2016[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #211[edit]

CSD for Category:Unreferenced Green Bay Packers articles[edit]

Hi @Liz! I wanted to bring to your attention your tagging of Category:Unreferenced Green Bay Packers articles as CSD (Diff). I removed your tag as it does not meet the CSD guidelines (specifically that is a project category that by its nature becomes empty on occasion). This category is populated by tagging the Wikipedia:WikiProject Green Bay Packers banner ({{WikiProject Green Bay Packers}} with |unref=yes. Incidentally, I just updated the Project's Banner allowing these tags to be added, which forced me to create this category. Ideally, this category should be empty and will only be used to categorize pages that need references. I have added {{Empty category}} to the category page to clarify this farther. In the future, if you can contact the relevant WikiProject to ensure the category is not being used before tagging CSD, it would be appreciated. Happy editing! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:52, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the information. Liz Read! Talk! 16:35, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Sunday June 5: Women in Jewish History Edit-a-thon[edit]

Sunday June 5, 12-5pm: Women in Jewish History Edit-a-thon
Women in Jewish History 2016 Wiki Logo.png
1 CJH Women in Jewish History Editathon May 4 2012.JPG

Join us for a full Sunday of social Wikipedia editing at the Center for Jewish History (drop-in any time!), during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles pertaining to Women in Jewish History.

All are invited, with no specialized knowledge of the subject or Wikipedia editing experience required.

Expanding coverage of Jewish women on Wikipedia makes these women and their creations discoverable, addresses the gender bias on Wikipedia in a positive way, and works to correct imbalances archival collecting practice and institutional projects that have historically silenced women's narratives.

A training session on editing Wikipedia will be held at 12:30 pm. Experienced Wikipedians will be on-hand to assist throughout the day. Please bring your laptop and power cord; we will have library resources, WiFi, and a list of suggested topics on hand.

Light refreshments will be provided.

Make edits! Ask questions! Be bold!

Time: 12:00 pm – 5:00 pm
Location: Center for Jewish History, 15 West 16th Street (between 5th and 6th Avenues), New York City, New York 10011

Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 15:01, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

P.S. Stay tuned / sign up early for our June 15 WikiWednesday and other upcoming events.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey[edit]

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

  • Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others closed[edit]

An arbitration case regarding Gamaliel and others has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

  1. Gamaliel is admonished for multiple breaches of Wikipedia policies and guidelines including for disrupting Wikipedia to make a point, removing a speedy deletion notice from a page he created, casting aspersions, and perpetuating what other editors believed to be a BLP violation.
  2. DHeyward and Gamaliel are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with or discussing each other anywhere on Wikipedia, subject to the usual exemptions.
  3. DHeyward (talk · contribs) is admonished for engaging in incivility and personal attacks on other editors. He is reminded that all editors are expected to engage respectfully and civilly with each other and to avoid making personal attacks.
  4. For conduct which was below the standard expected of an administrator — namely making an incivil and inflammatory close summary on ANI, in which he perpetuated the perceived BLP violation and failed to adequately summarise the discussion — JzG is admonished.
  5. Arkon is reminded that edit warring, even if exempt, is rarely an alternative to discussing the dispute with involved editors, as suggested at WP:CLOSECHALLENGE.
  6. The community is encouraged to hold an RfC to supplement the existing WP:BLPTALK policy by developing further guidance on managing disputes about material involving living persons when that material appears outside of article space and is not directly related to article-content decisions.

For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:38, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others closed

The Signpost: 05 June 2016[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #212[edit]

June 2016 Guild of Copy Editors Newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors June 2016 News
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Hello everyone, welcome to the June 2016 GOCE newsletter. It's been a few months since we sent one out; we hope y'all haven't forgotten about the Guild! Your coordinators have been busy behind the scenes as usual, though real life has a habit of reducing our personal wiki-time. The May backlog reduction drive, the usual coordinating tasks and preparations for the June election are keeping us on our toes!

May drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's record-setting backlog reduction drive. Of the 29 people who signed up, 16 copyedited at least one article, 197 copyedits were recorded on the drive page, and the copyedit backlog fell below 1,500 for the first time! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

June Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz will occur from 12 June through 18 June; the themes will be video games and Asian geography.

Coordinator elections: It's election time again; how quickly they seem to roll around! Nominations for the next tranche of Guild coordinators, who will serve a six-month term that begins at 00:01 UTC on 1 July and ends at 23:59 UTC on 31 December, opens at 00:01 UTC on 1 June and closes at 23:59 UTC on 15 June. Voting takes place between 00:01 UTC on 16 June and 23:59 UTC on 30 June. If you'd like to assist behind the scenes, please consider stepping forward; self-nominations are welcomed and encouraged. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible; remember it's your Guild, and it doesn't run itself!

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Baffle gab1978.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:02, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Your opinion is valued[edit]

Please see: Category talk:WikiProjects by area#Poor choice for this category’s name. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:28, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

June 15: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC[edit]

Wednesday June 15, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia NYC presentation - WikiPhotography at WikiWednesday July 2015 3 crop.jpg
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Babycastles gallery by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

Featuring special guest presentations on Wikipedia Asian Month and Wikipedia Club at Ohio State University.

We will include a look at the organization and planning for our chapter, and expanding volunteer roles for both regular Wikipedia editors and new participants.

We will also follow up on plans for recent (Art+Feminism! AfroCrowd!) and upcoming edit-a-thons, and other outreach activities.

We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from all educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles gallery, 137 West 14th Street

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 01:37, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

P.S. Stay tuned / sign up early for our AfroCrowd June calendar, June 29 Pride Edit-a-thon @ MoMA, and July 15 Wiknic @ Central Park, among other upcoming events.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Wikidata weekly summary #213[edit]

NPP / AfC[edit]

Hi. Just a reminder that in just over a week at Wikimania there's going to be a cross-Wiki discussion about the systems of control of new pages. This is a round-table rather than a presentation or a lecture. On the agenda are reforms to the new article reviewing systems and ways to help new users better understand our content policies. If you are going to Italy and would like to take part, please check out the conference schedule, and I look forward to seeing you there. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:54, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


Hey Liz, again someone managed to get something I wrote deleted via a PROD without notification. We should really enforce what the policy says, "The article's creator or other significant contributors should ideally be left a message at their talk page(s) informing them of the proposed article deletion, except for cases where contributors are no longer regarded as active editors on Wikipedia." "Ideally" is nice, but doesn't mitigate "should". I was not notified and could not object; as you know, objecting to a PROD is easy. (Who this IP was is anyone's guess; I've dealt with a number of trolls from the subcontinent.) Besides, I need to quibble with your deletion rationale-- "sourced content(first one) is taken from an unpublished article which the source itself cites", yeah, but by virtue of being cited in an eminently notable book by an eminently notable historian, the information should be deemed reliable enough--that's the essence of secondary sourcing. I'll bring this back to mainspace at some point, but I'm irritated that it's so easy for trolls to get rid of something without community discussion and notification. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 20:43, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

@Drmies: You’re irritated? Good! — There are many others who are also irritated for the same good reason: Pages are deleted every day by wiki-admins as result of wp:XfDs (not only wp:PRODs) without the knowledge of the page creator. And guess what? — Editors without Admin-powers cannot view what it was that was deleted, and unless they possess vivid memories, may not remember exactly what they used as references. Ottawahitech (talk) 21:13, 16 June 2016 (UTC)please ping me
You can use my irritation to vilify admins, but I don't think Tax Connections compares very well to this example. Drmies (talk) 21:42, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
It's foolish to quote policy to a fellow administrator and arbitrator but:
  • "An editor who believes a page obviously and uncontroversially doesn't belong in an encyclopedia can propose its deletion. Such a page can be deleted by any administrator if, after seven days, no one objects to the proposed deletion." (Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Proposed deletion) and
  • "A nominated article is marked for at least seven days; if nobody objects, it is considered by an uninvolved admin, who reviews the article and may delete it or may remove the PROD tag.....[BUT] Even after it has been deleted, a PRODed article can be restored by anybody through an automated request for undeletion." (Wikipedia:Proposed deletion)
Additionally, in Category:Expired proposed deletions, it states, "Articles in this category are eligible for deletion without further notice by an administrator."
I have removed PROD tags in the past but I don't regularly check to see if the article creator has been notified. Maybe I should. As "The article's creator or other significant contributors should ideally be left a message at their talk page(s) informing them of the proposed article deletion" seems to be the guideline, it was unfortunate that you were not informed, Drmies. On the other hand, I have restored 187 pages, most upon request by an editor. I would have been happy to restore this article for you or any editor upon request. In cases like this one, when the article has only been a sentence or two, I have copied the content to an editor's sandbox. Liz Read! Talk! 04:07, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Sorry, user:Drmies, I don't remember much about Tax Connections, but I have just had 2016 Ottawa sinkhole nominated for wp:AfD but have not received an alert on my talkpage from the nominator. As I said before, not reciving notification is a common occurance. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:40, 19 June 2016 (UTC){small|please ping me}}

The Signpost: 15 June 2016[edit]

Books & Bytes - Issue 17[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library


Books & Bytes
Issue 17, April-May 2016
by The Interior, Ocaasi, UY Scuti, Sadads, and Nikkimaria

  • New donations this month - a German-language legal resource
  • Wikipedia referals to academic citations - news from CrossRef and WikiCite2016
  • New library stats, WikiCon news, a bot to reveal Open Access versions of citations, and more!

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:36, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #214[edit]

Wednesday June 29: Wiki Loves Pride Edit-a-thon @ MoMA[edit]

Wednesday June 29, 6-8:30pm: Wiki Loves Pride Edit-a-thon @ MoMA
Wiki Loves Pride 2015 WikiNYC.png

Join us for an evening of social Wikipedia editing at the Museum of Modern Art Library's second annual Wiki Loves Pride Edit-a-thon, during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles pertaining to LGBT art, culture and history.

All are invited, with no specialized knowledge of the subject or Wikipedia editing experience required.

Also featuring a lightning talk by CUNY students at the La Guardia and Wagner Archives on a project to document local 1980s HIV/AIDS activism on Wikipedia.

Experienced Wikipedians will be on-hand to assist throughout the day. Please bring your laptop and power cord; we will have library resources, WiFi, and a list of suggested topics on hand.

Time: 6:00 pm – 8:30 pm
Location: Dorothy and Lewis B. Cullman Education and Research Building at MoMA, 4 West 54 Street - between 5th/6th Ave, New York, NY 10019
Please note that this entrance is one block north of the main 53rd Street entrance, closer to 5th Avenue.

Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 21:02, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

P.S. Stay tuned / sign up early for our Sunday July 10 Wiknic in Central Park and other upcoming events.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 9[edit]

WikiProject X icon.svg
Newsletter • May / June 2016

Check out this month's issue of the WikiProject X newsletter, featuring the first screenshot of our new CollaborationKit software!

Harej (talk) 00:23, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Jon O'Bir page[edit] Your reasons for removal (retired, lack of notability) are debatable. He was a notable dj. Please put the page back up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:36, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #215[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors July 2016 News[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors July 2016 News
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Hello everyone, and welcome to the July 2016 GOCE newsletter.

June Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 12 through 18 June; the themes were video games and Asian geography. Of the 18 editors who signed up, 11 removed 47 articles from the backlog. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all editors who took part.

Coordinator elections: The second tranche of Guild coordinators for 2016, who will serve a six-month term until 23:59 UTC on 31 December, have been elected. Jonesey95 remains as your drama-free Lead Coordinator, and Corinne and Tdslk are your new assistant coordinators. For her long service to the Guild, Miniapolis has been enrolled in the GOCE Hall of Fame. Thanks to everyone who voted in the election; our next scheduled one occurs in December 2016. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible; self-nominations are welcome and encouraged.

July Drive: Our month-long July Copy Editing Backlog Elimination Drive is now underway. Our aim is to remove articles tagged for copy-edit in April, May and June 2015, and to complete all requests on the GOCE Requests page from June 2016. The drive ends at 23:59 on 31 July 2016 (UTC).

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdlsk.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:54, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #216[edit]

The Signpost: 04 July 2016[edit]

Sunday July 10: WikNYC Picnic @ Central Park[edit]

Sunday July 10, 3-8pm: WikNYC Picnic
Wiknic logo.svg
Group finale Wiknic NYC 2015 jeh.jpg

You are invited to join us the "picnic anyone can edit" in Manhattan's Central Park, as part of the Great American Wiknic celebrations being held across the USA. Remember it's a wiki-picnic, which means potluck.

3–8pm - come by any time! The picnicking area is the southwest section of the Great Lawn, north of the Delacorte Theater, just inside the park at Central Park West between 81st & 82nd. Enter the park at West 81st St.
Look for us by the Wikipedia / Wikimedia NYC banner!
Subway: 81st Street – Museum of Natural History, C Line NYCS-bull-trans-C.svg

We hope to see you there! --Pharos (talk) 14:54, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Wikidata weekly summary #217[edit]

Category:Singing competition television shows has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Singing competition television shows, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides 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. PanchoS (talk) 20:43, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Arrow (season 1)[edit]

A tag has been placed on Draft:Arrow (season 1) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

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. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kailash29792 (talk) 15:02, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #218[edit]

Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Supreme Genghis Khan has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Supreme Genghis Khan, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides 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. Blake Gripling (talk) 09:51, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 July 2016[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #219[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #220[edit]

The Signpost: 04 August 2016[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #221[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #222[edit]

August 17: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC[edit]

Wednesday Auugust 17, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC
Wikimedia NYC presentation - WikiPhotography at WikiWednesday July 2015 3 crop.jpg
Wikimedia New York City logo.svg

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Babycastles gallery by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan.

Featuring special guest presentations on WikiVerse and Bringing Wikipedia to the Last Mile.

We will include a look at the organization and planning for our chapter, and expanding volunteer roles for both regular Wikipedia editors and new participants.

We will also follow up on plans for recent (UN Women!) and upcoming edit-a-thons, and other outreach activities.

We welcome the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from all educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects.

After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery!

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles gallery, 137 West 14th Street

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 23:20, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

P.S. Prep for our chapter elections next month in September (and add your candidacy!): Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Elections

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

The Signpost: 18 August 2016[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #223[edit]

Restored a bunch of prods[edit]

Hey, just wanted to give you a heads up as I restored a number of prods you deleted. Full story at WP:AN#Deceitful PRODs, but in short the restorations were based on the inappropriate actions of the nominator, and there was nothing wrong on your end. Monty845 03:07, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Proposal: New Page Reviewer user right[edit]

A discussion is taking place to request that New Page Patrollers be suitably experienced for patrolling new pages. Your comments at New pages patrol/RfC for patroller right are welcome. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:11, 28 August 2016 (UTC)


The NPP backlog now stands at 13,158 total unreviewed pages.

Just to recap:

  • 13 July 2016: 7,000
  • 1 August 2016: 9,000
  • 7 August 2016: 10,472
  • 16 August 2016: 11,500
  • 28 August 2016: 13,158

You naturally don't have to feel obliged, but if there's anything you can do it would be most appreciated. I've spent 40 hours on it this week but it's only a drop in the ocean.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:11, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #224[edit]

Books & Bytes - Issue 18[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library


Books & Bytes
Issue 18, June–July 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi, Samwalton9, UY Scuti, and Sadads

  • New donations - Edinburgh University Press, American Psychological Association, Nomos (a German-language database), and more!
  • Spotlight: GLAM and Wikidata
  • TWL attends and presents at International Federation of Library Associations conference, meets with Association of Research Libraries
  • OCLC wins grant to train librarians on Wikimedia contribution

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Biography feedback requested[edit]

Your input is requested about an RFC regarding Donald Trump. Here is a link directly to that RFC. The lead of that biography currently says, "Many of his statements in interviews, on Twitter, and at campaign rallies have been controversial." The RFC proposes to insert the words "or false" at the end of that sentence. Thank you in advance for participating. If you have the time, there is a second RFC at that talk page which proposes to instead add the words "or hyperbolic".Anythingyouwant (talk) 00:40, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #225[edit]

The Signpost: 06 September 2016[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors September 2016 News[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors September 2016 News
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Hello everyone, and welcome to the September 2016 GOCE newsletter.

>>> Sign up for the September Drive, already in progress! <<<

July Drive: The July drive was a roaring success. We set out to remove April, May, and June 2015 from our backlog (our 149 oldest articles), and by 23 July, we were done with those months. We added July 2015 (66 articles) and copy-edited 37 of those. We also handled all of the remaining Requests from June 2016. Well done! Overall, we recorded copy edits to 240 articles by 20 editors, reducing our total backlog to 13 months and 1,656 articles, the second-lowest month-end total ever.

August Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 21 through 27 August; the theme was sports-related articles in honor of the 2016 Summer Olympics. Of the eight editors who signed up, five editors removed 11 articles from the backlog. A quiet blitz – everyone must be on vacation. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all editors who took part.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdlsk.

MediaWiki message delivery (