User talk: Paine Ellsworth

Wikipedia – not just an encyclopedia, it's a phenomenon... a Wikinomenon!

Best of everything to you and yours! and...
Spread the Good!

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia – its articles, redirects, templates – all your improvements, and have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable life – both on and off Jimbo's amazing reference work!

Gentle reminder... this is my talk page, where you and I may get to know each other better. Thank you for coming here, and thanks beyond words for your interest in and your contributions to this encyclopedia project! Offline and other online interests sometimes keep me very busy, and that's when I'm slow to respond to echo noties, my talk page and emails. Please forgive my occasional slowness, and again, thank you for being here! Paine Ellsworth

'Wikipedia is a community effort of staggering proportions!'

The Closer:

non-admin reveal

Disclosure: I am not an administrator on Wikipedia. I very much respect admins and have been helped by them many, many times over the years. I also respect the community vettings at RfA that often show the ultimate community respect and trust of an editor.

I shall likely remain a non-admin and continue to enjoy discussions with other WP editors. I sometimes participate, sometimes help with disagreements and sometimes close discussions when needed. I am no stranger to closing contentious discussions about controversial subjects. I sometimes close the easy talks, too, because if it's in the backlog, then it's fair game!

Remember that WP is not a democracy, so discussions are not just a vote. The key factors in all good discussion closures are the arguments written by concerned editors, policy-based rationales, which count most toward an acceptable decision and closure.

Anyway, if you have come to ask about one of my RfC, RM, MRV or other discussion closures, you are very welcome here! I am usually inclined to reopen a discussion if the outcome was "no consensus" and when I am specifically and intentionally asked to do so! (Not so much if I found a consensus – that doesn't mean I cannot be persuaded with a good, sound argument.) Please be very clear about your intentions and do not beat around the bush. That just means please don't expect me to read your mind; I have enough trouble reading my own mind sometimes. Thank you beyond words for your deeply respected concerns! – Paine

Editing WP helps me to continue learning, so one vital, very important role for Wikipedia and some other websites on the Internet is...

'to help us keep our minds sharp!'

'Think outside it !'

* my archives *

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29

The Signpost
/years
Visual Editor

1 · 2

'PHILOSOPHIE!'

Recently registered?

Learn quickly how editors journey thru this awe-inspiring reference work! (and about other people who help build it!)

Older discussions and notifications... → click the section title in the Table of Contents (ToC) above, or click [show] to see all the discussions →

The following are closed discussions. Please do not modify them. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. ⸎

"T:R from" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect T:R from has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 29 § T:R from until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 18:11, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the notie, editor Utopes! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 11:00, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2025).

Administrator changes

CheckUser changes

Oversight changes

Guideline and policy news

Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, G15, has been enacted. It applies to pages generated by a large language model (LLM) without human review.
Following a request for comment, there is a new policy outlining the granting of permissions to view the IP addresses of temporary accounts. Temporary account deployment on the English Wikipedia is currently scheduled for September 2025, and editors can request access to the permission ahead of time. Admins are encouraged to keep an eye on the request page; there will likely be a flood of editors requesting the permission when they realize they can no longer see IP addresses.

Technical news

Administrators can now restrict the "Add a Link" feature to newcomers. The "Add a Link" Structured Task helps new account holders get started with editing. Administrators can configure this setting in the Community Configuration page.

Arbitration

The arbitration case Indian military history has been closed.
- South Asia (WP:CT/SA) is designated a contentious topic. The topic area is specifically defined as All pages related to the region of South Asia (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), broadly construed, including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups.
- The contentious topic designations for Sri Lanka (SL) and India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan (IPA) are folded into this new contentious topic.
- The community-authorized general sanctions regarding South Asian social groups (GS/CASTE) are rescinded and folded into this new contentious topic.
The arbitration case Article titles and capitalisation 2 has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case closed on 31 July.
The arbitration case Transgender healthcare and people has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 11 August.

Miscellaneous

Wikimania 2025 is happening in Nairobi, Kenya, and online from August 6 to August 9. This year marks 20 years of Wikimania. Interested users can join the online event. Registration for the virtual event is free and will remain open throughout Wikimania. You can register here now.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:56, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 August 2025

News and notes: Court order snips out part of Wikipedia article, editors debate whether to frame shreds or pulp them
Plus a mysterious CheckUser incident, and the news with Wikinews.

Discussion report: News from ANI, AN, RSN, BLPN, ELN, FTN, and NPOVN
A review of June, July and August.

Disinformation report: The article in the most languages
Who is this guy?

Community view: News from the Villages Pump
Threads since June.

In the media: Disgrace, dive bars, deceased despots, and diverse dispatches
And slop.

Crossword: Accidental typography
It's not a conlang, it's a crossword puzzle.

Comix: best-laid schemes o' wikis an' men
gang aft agley, an' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain, for promis'd joy!

Traffic report: I'm not the antichrist or the Superman
Everybody's Somebody's Fool.

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:24, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol September 2025 Backlog drive

September 2025 Backlog Drive \| New pages patrol
On 1 September 2025, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:32, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - malformed RMs

Thanks for fixing the RM here in regards to the malformed nomination of a redirect. I hope you don't mind that I shamelessly stole your note's wording at two other RMs here and here. I also noticed that you did a similar note back in 2023, so thanks for keeping an eye on this for so long! Fork99 (talk) 11:32, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help! Paine 13:05, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2025).

Administrator changes

Euryalus

Interface administrator changes

Ragesoss

CheckUser changes

AmandaNP

SQL

Oversight changes

AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

An RfC is open on whether use of emojis with no encyclopedic value in mainspace and draftspace (e.g., at the start of paragraphs or in place of bullet points) should be added as a criterion under G15.

Technical news

Administrators can now access the Special:BlockedExternalDomains page from the Special:CommunityConfiguration list page. This makes it easier to find. T393240

Arbitration

The arbitration case Article titles and capitalisation 2 has been closed.
An RfC is in progress to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:16, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IP post

@Paine Ellsworth 2402:800:629E:36F:6E69:240D:4927:AF0F (talk) 18:33, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can I help you? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 18:47, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 September 2025

News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation loses a round in court
UK Online Safety Act remains undefeated.

In the media: Congress probes, mayor whitewashed, AI stinks
Plus Wiki rules, Wiki Spin, and physicists get street cred!

Disinformation report: A guide for Congress
The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance.

Recent research: Minority-language Wikipedias, and Wikidata for botanists
And other new research findings.

Technology report: A new way to read Wikisource
Tis true: there's magic in the web of it.

Traffic report: Check out some new Weapons, weapon of choice
With the usual mix of war, death, super heroes, a belt, and Wednesday.

Essay: The one question
It's an easy one.

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:06, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Anti-Palestinianism#Requested_move_9_August_2025

Hello. There was actually consensus for moving this article into "Anti-Palestinian racism" in the linked RM. Do we need a new RM? Thanks! Bogazicili (talk) 17:02, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi editor Bogazicili and thank you very much for coming to my talk page! There was indeed a growing consensus for "Anti-Palestinian racism" in the closed move request; however, 1) there was also strong pushback, and 2) that title had been only informally proposed. So I thought it best to test the amount of growth with the second RM. I figured that if "Anti-Palestinian racism" is the highest and best title for that article, then it would gain an even stronger agreement and acceptance when proposed on its own in a formal request. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 17:56, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! We don't need to wait before doing another request right? Bogazicili (talk) 18:02, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Or should this be asked at WP:AN? Bogazicili (talk) 18:05, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the correct venue for reviewing the closes of requested moves is WP:MRV. While there was a growing consensus for "...racism", I did not see consensus for or against the current title of "Anti-Palestinianism", which was another good reason to grant editor Lumbering in thought's request at WP:CR to reopen the second request. I will clarify my closing statement as follows:

Not moved per consensus in the survey below. Closure requested at WP:CR (permalink). There is no agreement seen below as to whether or not to keep the current title, so the request to reopen the move proposal in the next talk-page section is granted in order to see if consensus can be garnered for the proposed title, "Anti-Palestinian racism".

That should satisfy the needs shown in the previous move request. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 18:23, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Bogazicili (talk) 16:23, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Oceania topic

Hello, Payne Ellsworth.

In Template:Oceania topic, can you remove East Timor (also called Timor Leste)? Unlike neighboring Indonesia, which has territory in Oceania (Western New Guinea), East Timor is entirely located in Asia (in Southeast Asia to be precise).

See also the Oceania and Southeast Asia articles.

Yours sincerely, Oratas (talk) 12:41, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi editor Oratas, and thank you for coming to my talk page! After reading Oceania and other articles, it appears that while Timor-Leste is a part of Southeast Asia, there are parts of Southeast Asia that are also in the huge area of Oceania. To remove Timor-Leste from the Oceania topic navbar would seem to be at least a bit controversial. I see that it has not been discussed at Template talk:Oceania topic, and that would be the better venue to garner consensus in regard to whether or not Timor-Leste should be a link in that navbar. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 16:01, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

I appreciate the tip! Sorry I didn't notice, I think it was my first close. -Darouet (talk) 17:07, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help, editor Darouet! and thank you for your help closing discussions! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 18:15, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Irrational fear (unknown)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Irrational fear (unknown) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 19 § Irrational fear (unknown) until a consensus is reached. consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 19:35, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors – September 2025 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors – September 2025 Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the September newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since June.

Election news: Project coordinators play an important role in our WikiProject. Following the mid-year Election of Coordinators, we welcomed GoldRomean to the coordinator team. Dhtwiki remains as lead coordinator, and Miniapolis and Mox Eden return as coordinators. If you'd like to help out behind the scenes, please consider taking part in our December election – watchlist our ombox for updates. Information about the role of coordinators can be found here.

June 2025 blitz: 10 of the 12 editors who signed up for the June 2025 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited a total of 26,652 words comprising 13 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

July 2025 drive: 30 of the 54 editors who signed up for the July 2025 Backlog Elimination Drive copy edited a total of 379,557 words comprising 151 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

August 2025 Blitz: 11 of the 17 editors who signed up for the August 2025 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited a total of 65,601 words comprising 25 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

September 2025 Drive: Sign up here to earn barnstars in our month-long, in-progress September Backlog Elimination Drive.

Progress report: As of 06:43, 20 September 2025 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 222 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,010 articles.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we do without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators.

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:46, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sinopsis

Skeleton 2806:2F0:90A0:80EA:3D1A:9813:483E:220B (talk) 06:39, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How can I help you? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 08:26, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 2 October 2025

News and notes: Larry Sanger returns with "Nine Theses on Wikipedia"; WMF publishes transparency report
This time "not merely negative".

In the media: Extraordinary eruption of "EVIL" explained
Wickedpedia wrangles post-truth politics.

Disinformation report: Emails from a paid editing client
Unexpected news!

Discussion report: Sourcing, conduct, policy and LLMs: another 1,339 threads analyzed
Fifty hot topics from fourteen noticeboards.

Community view: The pressing questions of the modern WWW, as seen from the Village Pump
Policy, politics, icons, captchas, and LLMs.

Recent research: Is Wikipedia a merchant of (non-)doubt for glyphosate?; eight projects awarded Wikimedia Research Fund grants
And other recent publications.

Opinion: Some disputes aren't worth it
When to walk away.

Obituary: Michael Q. Schmidt
Rest in peace.

Traffic report: Death, hear me call your name
Celebrities, deaths and software.

Comix: A grand spectacle
All invited!

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:51, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Jean-Yves Thériault#Requested move 27 September 2025

Hi, the above move wasn't done quite right, the redirect Jean-Yves Thériault (kickboxer) now has the article history and talk page of the musician and Jean-Yves Thériault (musician) has no history and no talk page since it was created from scratch. The history and talk page from Jean-Yves Thériault (kickboxer) should be merged to Jean-Yves Thériault (musician). Mika1h (talk) 22:49, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, editor Mika1h, for coming to my talk page! And thank you, too, editor 162 etc. for the ping at WT:RM! Yes, that is the typical outcome when the ROUNDROBIN page move method is used to preserve the page histories. If the page history for the musician is now at the kickboxer title, then it will take an admin to fix it, so I'll see if editor Martin can fix it? I've already taken care of the talk page. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 17:37, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How does that look now? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:23, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you nailed it. Thank you so much! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 18:32, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2025).

Administrator changes

CheckUser changes

Vanamonde93

Arbitration

After a motion, arbitration enforcement page protections no longer need to be logged in the AELOG. A bot now automatically posts protections at WP:AELOG/P. To facilitate this bot, protection summaries must include a link to the relevant CT page (e.g. [[WP:CT/BLP]]), and you will receive talk page reminders if you forget to specify the contentious topic but otherwise indicate it is an AE action.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:57, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pending move

Just a friendly reminder that you may have forgotten to move the article to the most stable title, as noted in your closing comment here. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 20:55, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for coming to my talk page, editor Sheriff! The article is fully move protected, so I had to use WP:RMTR to ask an admin to help us out. Please be patient. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 20:58, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Palestinian genocide accusation#Requested move 26 September 2025

@Paine Ellsworth Clearly more people support the move than who oppose it. You just closed it - saying " the oppose rationales are much stronger and policy-based" - you need to explain why. This closure is not appropriate. Please explain your reasoning - or revert the closure. If not, I will challenge it. Cinaroot (talk) 23:40, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested topic - and such vague closure is not appropriate. Also it can run for 30 days. You can only close it - if outcome is clear and unlikely to change.

cc @CommunityNotesContributor Cinaroot (talk) 23:43, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, editor Cinaroot, for coming to my talk page! Given a choice between explaining and reverting, I would choose explaining. I did not go into detail in my closing statement, because almost every time I do so, I am accused of casting a "supervote". And the stark reality is that the stronger oppose arguments pretty much explain themselves. I read the survey three times, and each time I came to the same conclusion. A gentle reminder that when you close a discussion, it is not a numbers game, it is the weight of the rationales that determines consensus. The self-explanatory arguments in the survey, when one reads them through the lenses of uninvolved impartiality and policy, lead to the conclusion that there is no true agreement in that move request.

And the reason I closed it rather than just relist it is because I saw other suggested titles that were also proposed and thought that editors might want to pursue a move request for one or the other of those potential titles. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 02:24, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know it’s not a numbers game again. But you still haven’t explained your reasoning. Why opposing arguments are stronger? You are saying there is no true agreement. I don't understand. There is lot of people who agreed to it. You need a strong reasoning to close this as no consensus,

please see a good closing Talk:Gaza genocide/Archive 12#RfC on first sentence

This is how it should be. Cinaroot (talk) 03:35, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Saw the closure on CR, and its fairly strange to me.
I understand you are a much more experienced editor than me, but it would be helpful if you did a summary describing why the opposes are more policy-minded.
The opposes are outnumbered by at least 3 to 1. its hard not to see this as a supervote, and especially hard without explaining the reasoning. User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 03:45, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And the stark reality is that the stronger oppose arguments pretty much explain themselves. I think reading through the oppose args (specifically how the other genocide accusations are more contested than this latest Gaz one), I can start to see where you are coming from, and could see a no consensus being valid for the move argument.
but as there were many folks who voted support, it would be helpful to spell it out. User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 03:49, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I already requested a move review. This close and how they closed was not appropriate. Cinaroot (talk) 03:52, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments, editor Bluethricecreamman! Since a move review has been opened, I probably should stay quiet to see what reviewers think, but since your review seems to hinge on further explanation, I will do my best: I thought that oppose args were much stronger because several cited NPOV, PRECISE and even a previous name change that made the title more CONCISE, as well. This was I believe an unusual case where both supports and opposes were strong; however, I thought the opposes were quite a bit stronger, strong enough to offset the supports and result in no agreement overall among participants. And frankly, I would have been glad to revert and relist had editor Cinaroot asked specifically for that. I suppose that is no longer an option, though. We'll see what reviewers at MR think of this contentious situation. I do think that editors who like "...question" and "...allegations" should be allowed to open a new RM to test one or both of those titles. That can only happen soon if my closure is endorsed at move review. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 04:10, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m sorry - but your reasoning still doesn’t inspire confidence in your close. You may post in the move review that you are okay to revert and relist it. Cinaroot (talk) 06:08, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary as the reviewers will read this discussion and realize that I would have done that had you specifically asked me to. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 06:18, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"I would have been glad to revert and relist had editor Cinaroot asked specifically for that." The opening comment was "Please explain your reasoning - or revert the closure"? I'm struggling to understand how we ended up with a move review here if you were willing to revert? CNC (talk) 10:51, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Please explain your reasoning - or revert the closure." Editor Cinaroot gave me a choice. As I said above, "Given a choice between explaining and reverting, I would choose explaining." So there was no explicit "Revert the closure" on Cinaroot's part above. I was given a choice, and I made a choice. Please do not struggle. There is no need for you to struggle; editor Cinaroot made a choice to take it to Move Review, and what's done is done. If I was wrong, then the reviewers will have my closure overturned. We're all volunteer editors here, so there are no hard feelings, truly. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 11:12, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so the issue was your lack of willingness to elaborate initially (as you did later, above), thus this move review being opened? "I did not go into detail in my closing statement, because almost every time I do so, I am accused of casting a "supervote". It shouldn't matter that editors accuse you of a supervote, that's part of the 'fun and games' of closing controversial RMs, especially when changing the weight of such !votes considerably, and that's OK when done accurately. If you're not comfortable with that, then it's best not to close them absent of such rationales. I don't understand why your first reply wasn't explaining properly as initially requested, this would of avoided a move review here. As would being more patient prior to opening one, granted. Anyway, are you still willing to revert so the review can be procedurally closed? CNC (talk) 11:30, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you for your words above! When a closer is wrongly accused of casting a supervote at Move Review, it usually muddies the waters and distracts reviewers from the task at hand, which is to analyze the closure, not the closer. I'm not sure what the procedure is as far as making a procedural close for such as this at Move Review. I've done it many times at move requests, but it is an infrequent issue at review. I think it's best to see what reviewers say about the closure. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 11:50, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you were to revert the close, the move review would be null and void. There is nothing stopping the closer reverting during such a process, it's effectively a way to back out of it. No closer should have to go through the often gruelling process unless it's because they stand by their close, so the option remains a voluntary choice for now, so you do you as they say. Personally I otherwise don't see accusations of a supervote muddying the waters at all, unless it's a supervote; often it is thrown around as an empty accusation and as confirmation that there isn't a lot wrong with the close. Sometimes it's also just about use of language to try and avoid these accusations also, for example "I thought that oppose args were much stronger because " would be better written as "The oppose args were much stronger because", as it's already assumed that it is only your interpretation as the closer, and that's fine, so to reiterate opinion can be misleading, even if shouldn't be. I'm personally not in need of such authoritative use of langugage to understand a close, but for many others it can be helpful or provide better confidence and trust in the close. Anyway, no hard feelings either, to me this is just a bit of a mess. CNC (talk) 12:12, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have closed the move review. I have no problems with the original close, but I have re-listed. Giant Snowman 11:15, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move review for Palestinian genocide accusation

An editor has asked for a Move review of Palestinian genocide accusation. Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. Cinaroot (talk) 03:47, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 October 2025

News and notes: Board shuffles, LLM blocks increase, IPs are going away
And the "Global Resource Distribution Committee" emerges.

Special report: The election that isn't
Two shortlisted WMF Board candidates removed from the ballot.

Interview: The BoT bump
Who was bumped and why?

In the media: An incident at WikiConference North America; WMF reports AI-related traffic drop and explains Wikipedia to US conservatives
...while Musk prepares to launch "Grokipedia".

Traffic report: One click after another
Serial-killer miniseries, deceased scientist, government shutdowns and Sandalwood hit "Kantara" crowd the tubes.

Humour: Wikipedia pay rates
Don't get too excited before you read this.

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:42, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2025).

Administrator changes

Toadspike

CheckUser changes

asilvering

Guideline and policy news

The speedy deletion criteria U5 has been repealed, with U6 and U7 replacing it. See the FAQ for more clarifications.
Community-designated contentious topics may now be enforced and appealed at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard (AE) as a result of an RfC.

Technical news

You can enable a handy user info card next to usernames, which when clicked displays edit count, blocks, thanks, and other information. To enable this feature, visit Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card

Arbitration

The arbitration case Transgender healthcare and people has been closed
- Uninvolved administrators may impose an AE participation restriction on any thread at the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard.

Miscellaneous

An unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in November 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for merger of multiple redirect comics templates

Template:R comics with possibilities, Template:R comics from alternative name, Template:R comics to list entry, Template:R comics from merge, Template:R comics from related word and Template:R comics to section have been nominated for merging with Template:R with possibilities, Template:R from alternative name, Template:R to list entry, Template:R from merge, Template:R from related word and Template:R to section. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entries on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. PK2 (talk; contributions) 00:48, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 November 2025

News and notes: Temporary accounts go live and WMF board member self-suspends
ArbCom elections draw close, and Wikimania '27 in Santiago.

Community view: Six Wikipedians' thoughts on Grokipedia, and the humanity of it all
It ain't a five course meal, according to one of our interviewees.

Wikicup report: BeanieFan11, WikiCup victor of 2025, covers the results
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

In the media: Jimbo's book, an argument about genocide, and a train of shame
Wikipedia's new rival, political controversy in Italy and other Wiki-reports.

Recent research: Taking stock of the 2024–2025 research grants
$400,000 USD in total funding: what did we get?

Opinion: With Grokipedia, top-down control of knowledge is new again
Does it shed any light on particular topics that are better suited to LLM-generation than others?

Obituary: Struway
Rest in peace.

Traffic report: The documentaried, the disowned, the deceased, Diwali and the Dodgers
You know your man is working hard, he's worth a deuce.

Comix: Head of steam
'Sblood!

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:54, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Always precious

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:14, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so very much, and you friend GA are as precious as all the rest of us put together! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 20:29, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request on flag changes

Hi, I'm sorry to bother you. I had a request on changes to be made of flags in this page Template talk:Country data Albania#Flag Variants. Since a number of erroneous flags listed in the template are linked to numerous articles, I found it expedient that they be replaced with accurate historical flags which are found in the List of Albanian flags article. Kj1595 (talk) 19:19, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for coming to my talk page, editor Kj1595, and I'll be glad to look at Cd Albania for you! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 23:11, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawing an RfC

hello @Paine, I hope you’ve been well. I’m curious on your thoughts on withdrawing an RfC.

When it’s clear that an RfC should be modified to gain consensus should the editor who opened it withdraw the question?

See my recent comment at: Wikipedia:Closure requests. I’ll grab a link. Dw31415 (talk) 00:23, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here: Wikipedia:Closure requests#WT:NOT#RfC on consensus of WP:DESTNOT: Broad or specific. Dw31415 (talk) 00:27, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded at Wikipedia:Closure requests. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 01:29, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It seems pretty common that RfC’s start and then it pretty quickly emerges that the options given were not good options. In Roberts Rules groups there are easy methods to amend the proposal to increase the chance of passage. In RfC’s here, it seems like the community is stuck for 30 days to wait out the RfC. Are there any tools here for moving things along more quickly? Dw31415 (talk) 01:47, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dw31415, I wasn't aware that you posted here. @Paine Ellsworth seems to have confirmed what I've been thinking since you first posted on the RfC regarding withdrawing the closure request. It would be unfair to the participants who spent time summarising their viewpoints to not have a formal close. It would also leave WP:DESTNOT in limbo. I will confirm here that I do not plan to withdraw my closure request or the RfC itself, despite the minority of editors who have expressed frustration with it. Thank you. 11WB (talk) 03:25, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Thanks for posting Paine’s thoughts here.~~ (I was confused what page I was on). I look forward to seeing how the closer handles it. Dw31415 (talk) 03:32, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 December 2025

News and notes: Election cycles come and go, and Wikimedia Foundation achieves record revenue in 2024–2025!
Admin and ArbCom elections upcoming, BoT elects two new members, task force advises to close Wikinews and keep Wikispore, and other news from the Wikimedia world.

In the media: Wales walk-off, antisemitism, supernatural powers, feminism turmoil, saints, and sex
Plus mammoth mummy sex-change operation completed!

Recent research: At least 80 million inconsistent facts on Wikipedia – can AI help find them?
And other recent publications about contradictions and retractions.

Disinformation report: Epstein email exchanges planned strategy, edits and reported progress
At work on Wikipedia whitewashing. How much should they be paid?

Traffic report: It's a family affair
Even in these times there is something to be thankful for!

Book review: The Seven Rules of Trust
Jimmy Wales and Dan Gardner write a book inspired by Wikipedia. What's in it?

From the archives: "I have been asked by Jeffrey Epstein ..."
The twists and turns of Epstein’s portrayal on Wikipedia.

Humour: An interview with Wikipe-tan
A conversation about being the mascot of Wikipedia.

Opinion: AI finds errors in 90% of Wikipedia's best articles
Using ChatGPT to fact-check a month's worth of Today's featured articles.

Serendipity: Highlights from the itWikiCon 2025
A recap of the latest convention of the Italian Wiki-community, held in Catania from 7–9 November.

Comix: Madness
It could happen to anyone.

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors – December 2025 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors December 2025 Newsletter

Hello, and welcome to the December newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since September. If you'd like to be notified of upcoming drives and blitzes, and other GOCE activities, the best method is to add our announcements box to your watchlist.

Election news: The Guild's coordinators play an important role in the WikiProject, making sure ~~nearly~~ everything runs smoothly and on time. Editors experienced in drives or blitzes and in good standing (unblocked and without sanctions) are invited to nominate themselves or another editor (with their permission, of course) to be a Guild coordinator until 23:59 on 15 December (UTC). The voting phase begins at 00:01 on 16 December and runs until 23:59 on 31 December. Questions may be asked of candidates at any stage in the process. Elected coordinators will serve a six-month term from 1 January through 30 June 2026.

September Drive: 43 of the 63 editors who signed up for the September Backlog Elimination Drive edited 693,541 words in 265 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

October Blitz: 14 of the 15 editors who signed up for the October Copy Editing Blitz edited 75,108 words in 31 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

November Drive: 38 of the 65 editors who signed up for the November Backlog Elimination Drive edited 590,816 words in 240 articles. Barnstars awarded are posted here.

December Blitz: The December Blitz will begin at 00:00 on 14 December (UTC) and will end on 20 December at 23:59. Sign up here. Barnstars awarded will be posted here.

Progress report: As of 01:49, 8 December 2025 (UTC), GOCE copy editors have completed 293 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 1,730 articles.

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

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

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:26, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rcat question

Hi Paine Ellsworth! Hope you are doing well. I was wondering if you could give me some help with the rcats at 1700s in Scotland1700s in Scotland? It is a redirect to category space, and thus should be tagged with {{R unprintworthy}}. But it is also a plausible article title, and therefore I tagged it as {{R with possibilities}}, which automatically adds the printworthy tag, categorizing the redirect as both printworthy and unprintworthy. Is there a way to remove the printworthy designation other than using {{suppress categories}}? Thanks, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 03:02, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi editor HouseBlaster, and thank you for coming to my talk page! One thing I noticed is that {{R with Wikidata item}} should be applied to inform editors that it's associated with an item on Wikidata. I'm confused by the retargeting to the category. I think the original merge target, 1700 in Scotland, is better because then the Printworthy redirects category, which is always used with Category:Redirects with possibilities, can be applied. The "1700 in Scotland" article has links to other years in the decade, so I think it would help readers more to be redirected to that article instead of being sent to a category. I'm sorry, but I don't understand why a redirect with possibilities would not be considered helpful in a printed or CD/DVD version of Wikipedia. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 17:39, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your insight :) House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:20, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2025).

Administrator changes

Valereee

CheckUser changes

Spicy

Technical news

Starting on November 4, the IP addresses of logged-out editors are no longer being publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account associated with their edits.
Administrators will now find that Special:MergeHistory is now significantly more flexible about what it can merge. It can now merge sections taken from the middle of the history of the source (rather than only the start) and insert revisions anywhere in the history of the destination page (rather than only the start). T382958

Miscellaneous

The December 2025 administrator elections are scheduled from Nov 25 – Dec 15.
An Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in December 2025, with over 1,000 drafts awaiting review from the past two months. In addition to AfC participants, all administrators and new page patrollers can help review using the Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!

Sent byMediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for discussion of Template:Use Sri Lankan English

Template:Use Sri Lankan English has been nominated for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Dgp4004 (talk) 18:01, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]