This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
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 · 30 · 31 · 32 · 33 · 34 · 35 |
Why did you delete it for a hoax? It's a real thing. Yellowstring ( talk) 20:53, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Hey, you can move Cynwyd (disambiguation) to the base name now. I believe all the incoming links are corrected.-- Cúchullain t/ c 13:51, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi, regarding Talk:Infiniti Q70#Requested move 24 August 2016, you closed this with the remark "Moved. No objections". There actually was prior objections back in May in the section right above it ( Talk:Infiniti Q70#Name Change). I do think it should be taken into consideration that the new name only applies to one generation of the car. The old name "Infiniti M" was used by all four generations. OSX ( talk • contributions) 12:57, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | |
Thanks for your help! Mc twizzle ( talk) 20:42, 3 September 2016 (UTC) |
Hi, you've messed up the Xu (surname) page. Now only half of the information is there and it is misleading. I am unable to change it back. Please, either keep it the way before OR wait until a full consensus is reached. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.120.180 ( talk) 10:04, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Please, please do not only put one Xu surname under the main Xu surname page!! Opacitatic ( talk) 10:09, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
There wasn't a move in the first place? Anyway, the information on the page now is misleading. 10:26, 4 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Opacitatic ( talk • contribs)
Regarding your merger of subheading (Other nations). I do not think involvement of religious groups should be classified as nation, It is confusing. Mail2nith ( talk) 07:51, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
@ Amakuru Ok Mail2nith ( talk) 20:54, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi, while closing the RM and moving the page on Lisbon Airport, you seem to have forgotten to move the talk page along with it. It's no biggie, I've done it now, but just letting you know :) . Cheers, MikeLynch ( talk) 13:46, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi, any chance you can complete this page move per the outcome of the discussion? Thanks! PC78 ( talk) 18:56, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Suggest you sign it rather than me tagging it. TIA Andrewa ( talk) 11:30, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:19, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Amakuru. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.
Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.
In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:
Please review
the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators'
mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi, where were these moves discussed? They go against established convention. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 17:46, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru. Considering your comments here about redirecting Iron Lady to Margaret Thatcher, I would just like to inform you that this matter is presently under discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iron Lady. Your vote or comment would be very much appreciated. Many thanks.-- Nevé – selbert 00:05, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru! Could you take a look at Talk:Samuel Clark (U.S. politician)#Requested move 27 July 2016 and assess the apparent consensus after several relistings? I would close it myself but I'm WP:INVOLVED. Thanks in advance for your assistance! — JFG talk 15:23, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a Move review of Battle of Polog. 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. Ktrimi991 ( talk) 16:51, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Dear Saraiki is a language. So the page Saraiki dialect be moved to Saraiki language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.186.30.105 ( talk) 08:57, 6 October 2016 (UTC) 182.186.30.105 ( talk) 08:58, 6 October 2016 (UTC) kindly move the page to Saraiki language. as Saraiki has many dialects also. All dialects including Jhangvi dialect and Shahpuri dialect be shwn its dialects. 39.37.28.177 ( talk) 10:58, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru, I saw you weighed in after the move of OS X to macOS and I'd like to ask, can you please now also take a look at Talk:Mac OS#Requested move 1 October 2016 and close that discussion / perform the move if there is consensus? Thank you! – Samvscat ( talk) 18:38, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
He Amakuru, just to let you know, the RM at ENS Gamal Abdel Nasser is still open, and Yamada Line is redirecting to Yamada Line (JR East).-- Cúchullain t/ c 14:11, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello Amakuru, could you also move Egyptian ship Anwar El Sadat to ENS Anwar El Sadat as you did for ENS Gamal Abdel Nasser per talk ?, the moving of both ship article titles was discussed during the talk. - AHMED XIV ( talk) 17:35, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
are you seeing consensus for that move request? I'm not. I have proposed a review. 2A02:C7D:2E54:3F00:CD3A:BE58:71EA:4683 ( talk) 20:08, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
move review is now open if you care to comment. Pandroid ( talk) 13:15, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Please can you add an image to an article I have created - Laurence L'Estrange. It is 'LaurenceLE.jpeg' and I have uploaded it to Wikimedia Commons but do not have access to posting it yet as I am not an autoconfirmed user.
Many thanks HistoryAlight ( talk) 17:10, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello. Seven days passed despite the technical reopening. We will not discuss another seven days then there is consensus and that the seven-day rule is clear. So, to whom does it apply to have someone to close the request ? -- Panam2014 ( talk) 11:21, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
By coincidence, I was thinking of you yesterday when I came across this list. I'm not sure it's here to stay but Paul Kagame should be added now, don't you think? As for RickinBaltimore, I'm still investigating as there seems to be more to say. Those comments will tend to be on the RfA's talk page now... Andrew D. ( talk) 12:32, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
first of all, are you an atheist? I noticed that a lot of wikipedia admins are, which I find very annoying because they keep disrespecting my beliefs then saying that they don't believe in God as their excuse. Anyways, I need help to fix a certain article that probably can only be fixed by an admin, but I doubt you would want to help me if you're an atheist, because it is religion related. So please respond, thank you. Obeyel ( talk) 05:26, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello,
Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru.
A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.
It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.
If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins). MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:46, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Amakuru. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:The Same Old Blood Rush With a New Touch Limited.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 09:39, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Miloš Marković (Serbian water polo). Since you had some involvement with the Miloš Marković (Serbian water polo) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Fram ( talk) 13:30, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I moved Frexit to French withdrawal form the European Union and you reversed that move. Frexit can't be related to Brexit; Brexit is a common term that all European countries have now adopted into their own languages and it has become the common name. Frexit is not the common name for the French withdrawal and it is not in everyday usage; the newspapers talk about French withdrawal, not about Frexit. I propose that the page be moved until such a time where Frexit becomes the common name for French withdrawal, as I doubt it will be. st170e talk 13:31, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I was trying to change the page of iXIT Corporation talk page from Talk:IXIT Corporation to Talk:iXIT Corporation. The reason for this is that, the company's name is stylised as iXIT Corporation with a lowercase i (which is present in the article itself), however, the talk page is with a capital i. I've tried making the change myself but it doesn't seem to let me so would you be able to do it for me? cheers. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 20:15, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Should the unilateral, undiscussed move of this title back to Siobhán be reversed and challenged? What do you think? -- Mike Cline ( talk) 14:28, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Amakuru, I don't understand your position on the commas. Are you saying it's better to leave the unbalanced-comma error than to fix it? Or just saying that there are better fixes than another comma? Dicklyon ( talk) 03:56, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, state your emnail address too ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:24, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Resend your email with address and I'll send it :-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:45, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the moves and picking up after my mistakes. Next I can change Earth to Earths. Randy Kryn 13:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of Hawaii Five-0 episodes. Since you had some involvement with the List of Hawaii Five-0 episodes redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. George Ho ( talk) 03:42, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi! Because of this edit, I wanted to update you on the differences between dab pages and set-index articles. The Anthroponymy Project has been taking over the pages that list surnames, given names, or both. Those pages are being changed into set-index articles and, though they can often look very similar to disambiguation pages, they are not the same. The way to tell at a glance is to check the bottom of the page; there will usually be a template there that identifies which kind of page it is.
Redirects that have "(disambiguation)" in the title have been created for the sole purpose of making deliberate links to dab pages, and are supposed to target disambiguation pages only. As more dab pages get transferred to set-index articles, there will be more and more of this type of redirect left over. They need to be deleted (as soon as any links to them are resolved, of course). I've been working on these for the Disambiguation Project, and gradually weeding them out. You've previously declined some of my CSD G6s for these, but I hope you'll help with the housekeeping now. :-) Thanks. — Gorthian ( talk) 17:13, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
members of the set have some characteristic in common, in addition to their similarity of name. The example given is Dodge Charger, which is a broad article linking all the specific models that have had that name. Looking at Cordas, this is clearly not a set index. The people listed on the page have nothing in common except their name, and furthermore there is no "article" material on there at all. It is a straight list of people with that name, and therefore a WP:HNDIS disambiguation page, and the redirect from (disambiguation) should stay. Of course, we could also write a separate article about the surname itself, but even that would not be a set index, and most likely we would then require a separate dab page. Thanks — Amakuru ( talk) 19:01, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
multiple people of the same name(my emphasis). This means people with the same first name and the same last name, such as John Gordon. The template {{ hndis}} should only be used on those pages; they are considered disambiguation pages.
You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob13 Talk 15:50, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, you're welcome to comment in the move discussion at Talk:Saraiki dialect. Thanks! – Uanfala (talk) 02:59, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
You'll be welcome to also comment in the Move review currently under way at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2017 January#Saraiki dialect. Thanks! – Uanfala (talk) 13:05, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello Amakuru. Please feel free to comment on the move discussion at Talk:D'Israeli#Requested move 15 December 2016. Thanks.-- Nevé – selbert 21:34, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Amakuru,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Donner60 (
talk)
09:32, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Are you a real and impartial honest editor ? Defiantly yes therefore I Could know which "reliable sources" tell you that Saraiki is a Language ? If you have any paste them here . I will provide you two times more sources that it is a dialect of Lahnda (Western Punjabi).
You said "the WP:COMMONNAME argument isn't conclusively proven". I agree there's no consensus - little participation and unclear data (NGRAM has serious problems BTW). Andrew said "[CONCISE] doesn't negate WP:COMMONNAME" .. here is right also. CONCISE correctly says that COMMONNAME is required, it's built-in to the essay. Since there is no consensus on COMMONANE, it's contradictory to say there is consensus with CONCISE (which requires COMMONAME). It's putting the cart before the horse. -- Green C 15:42, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Question : Is not it fooling and trashing linguistics science on Wikipedia ? My friend Amakuru please be honest when you reply.
Question 2 : What if I start saying that I have not typed English. I have typed Mogo language. Will you create a new article on mogo language spoken by me bcoz If you will write it English I may get offended ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.188.109.81 ( talk) 15:03, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
What the hell do you think you are doing? You are edit warring to keep the article at your preferred title. As an administrator I'm sure you already know that the [{WP:BRD]] principle calls for you to open a discussion when you are reverted. It doesn't mean revert back and then open a discussion. That is a real behaviour problem you have there.
The title you are trying to obliterate is the title chosen at the recent AFD of this article. It has already been discussed and a consensus reached. You claim I should make a RM, but the reality is that should be for you to do. Please return the title to the status quo ante. Spinning Spark 15:40, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a Move review of Booker Prize. 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. Green C 01:07, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Though I have no objection to this move, it's worth keeping in mind that about 121 stations (including Winterthur) were moved back to German names in 2013 after Talk:Kaiserslautern Hauptbahnhof#Requested move; I was the admin who did most of them. There were intense discussions about the name in the period 2011-2013 at Talk:Berlin Hauptbahnhof. It seems OK to have the Swiss stations at English names if there is a convention to do so. But if any stations in Germany proper are going to start moving to English then probably a new move discussion should be held. Leaving a ping for User:ZH8000 since he requested the Winterthur move. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 15:40, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Please do not ping me again, as I had nothing to do with the flawed rationales on both sides that you are trying to highlight by re-opening the discussion. I simply stated what the consensus was, and had no involvement whatsoever in forming it. Never in history has it been more likely that something unexpected will happen at an inauguration, and entrenching people's views makes it less likely that this will be posted should today be particularly memorable, not more. StillWaitingForConnection ( talk) 11:33, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
By all means continue to edit war your comments into a closed discussion at ITN if that's what floats your boat, but perhaps continuing the discussion here might be less likely to earn you a block?
No-one disputes that this is news, or that it meets the definition of newsworthy. What you have forgotten is that the criteria for ITN is not that something is published repeatedly or that it would be published by a news organisation. ITN has two criteria. The first is (fairly) objective: Is the article in a fit state for the front page? There are various fairly well accepted rules of thumb to assess this (are there unresolved tags? has a sufficient update reflecting the event been made? etc). The second is largely subjective: Is the event significant enough for inclusion at ITN? This is determined by a consensus of editors voicing their opinion on the candidate. In this case, consensus is clearly against. GoldenRing ( talk) 11:35, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for trying, Amakuru. For myself, I find the entire discussion and outcome mind-boggling, and am considering whether to take it to ANI and try to have it reversed. Newyorkbrad ( talk) 11:47, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Fix my mistakes. CMD ( talk) 01:39, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello Amakuru. You seem to have closed this discussion out of process and against the emerging consensus. I would like you to undo your action and allow the discussion to reach a natural conclusion. 28bytes ( talk) 01:53, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
I see you deleted my request at [4] to move Gamlingay Cinques Common to Gamlingay Cinques with the comment "discuss 1". Does this mean that I need to follow the instructions for creating a requested move on the article talk page? Dudley Miles ( talk) 18:23, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.
13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Not sure why you're going against WP:MOS ( MOS:DATEFORMAT, MOS:COMMA) on the basis of an old move discussion. A more recent discussion from last month showed agreement that we should have the second comma. However, I would also request you avoid making mass-moves in a debate you're involved in (ex: you were the only commenter in opposition to the two-comma titles) before concrete consensus is established. ~ Cyclonebiskit ( chat) 16:36, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Please stop moving tornado outbreak pages until this discussion reaches a conclusion. You seem to hold the minority opinion that the second comma is not necessary, so citing an old discussion (which itself had only marginal consensus) is inappropriate. – Juliancolton | Talk 16:37, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Barbara Pierce Bush. Since you had some involvement with the Barbara Pierce Bush redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ( talk) ( contributions) ( logs) 04:56, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Howdy Amakuru, hope you're faring well in all your life circumstances! Would you perhaps volunteer to close this elapsed RM, which may need some wisdom and in which I'm too involved to adjudicate? Let me know… — JFG talk 08:46, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
I can do the post-move cleanups on those if you like. Thanks for the close and moves. Dicklyon ( talk) 16:08, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I wonder whether you can add the rationale for the move. It doesn't have to be long. I did raise an argument, but I wonder whether it helped. -- George Ho ( talk) 02:20, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
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 · 30 · 31 · 32 · 33 · 34 · 35 |
Why did you delete it for a hoax? It's a real thing. Yellowstring ( talk) 20:53, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Hey, you can move Cynwyd (disambiguation) to the base name now. I believe all the incoming links are corrected.-- Cúchullain t/ c 13:51, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi, regarding Talk:Infiniti Q70#Requested move 24 August 2016, you closed this with the remark "Moved. No objections". There actually was prior objections back in May in the section right above it ( Talk:Infiniti Q70#Name Change). I do think it should be taken into consideration that the new name only applies to one generation of the car. The old name "Infiniti M" was used by all four generations. OSX ( talk • contributions) 12:57, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | |
Thanks for your help! Mc twizzle ( talk) 20:42, 3 September 2016 (UTC) |
Hi, you've messed up the Xu (surname) page. Now only half of the information is there and it is misleading. I am unable to change it back. Please, either keep it the way before OR wait until a full consensus is reached. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.120.180 ( talk) 10:04, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Please, please do not only put one Xu surname under the main Xu surname page!! Opacitatic ( talk) 10:09, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
There wasn't a move in the first place? Anyway, the information on the page now is misleading. 10:26, 4 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Opacitatic ( talk • contribs)
Regarding your merger of subheading (Other nations). I do not think involvement of religious groups should be classified as nation, It is confusing. Mail2nith ( talk) 07:51, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
@ Amakuru Ok Mail2nith ( talk) 20:54, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi, while closing the RM and moving the page on Lisbon Airport, you seem to have forgotten to move the talk page along with it. It's no biggie, I've done it now, but just letting you know :) . Cheers, MikeLynch ( talk) 13:46, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi, any chance you can complete this page move per the outcome of the discussion? Thanks! PC78 ( talk) 18:56, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Suggest you sign it rather than me tagging it. TIA Andrewa ( talk) 11:30, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:19, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Amakuru. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.
Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.
In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:
Please review
the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators'
mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi, where were these moves discussed? They go against established convention. -- Redrose64 ( talk) 17:46, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru. Considering your comments here about redirecting Iron Lady to Margaret Thatcher, I would just like to inform you that this matter is presently under discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iron Lady. Your vote or comment would be very much appreciated. Many thanks.-- Nevé – selbert 00:05, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru! Could you take a look at Talk:Samuel Clark (U.S. politician)#Requested move 27 July 2016 and assess the apparent consensus after several relistings? I would close it myself but I'm WP:INVOLVED. Thanks in advance for your assistance! — JFG talk 15:23, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a Move review of Battle of Polog. 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. Ktrimi991 ( talk) 16:51, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Dear Saraiki is a language. So the page Saraiki dialect be moved to Saraiki language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.186.30.105 ( talk) 08:57, 6 October 2016 (UTC) 182.186.30.105 ( talk) 08:58, 6 October 2016 (UTC) kindly move the page to Saraiki language. as Saraiki has many dialects also. All dialects including Jhangvi dialect and Shahpuri dialect be shwn its dialects. 39.37.28.177 ( talk) 10:58, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru, I saw you weighed in after the move of OS X to macOS and I'd like to ask, can you please now also take a look at Talk:Mac OS#Requested move 1 October 2016 and close that discussion / perform the move if there is consensus? Thank you! – Samvscat ( talk) 18:38, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
He Amakuru, just to let you know, the RM at ENS Gamal Abdel Nasser is still open, and Yamada Line is redirecting to Yamada Line (JR East).-- Cúchullain t/ c 14:11, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello Amakuru, could you also move Egyptian ship Anwar El Sadat to ENS Anwar El Sadat as you did for ENS Gamal Abdel Nasser per talk ?, the moving of both ship article titles was discussed during the talk. - AHMED XIV ( talk) 17:35, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
are you seeing consensus for that move request? I'm not. I have proposed a review. 2A02:C7D:2E54:3F00:CD3A:BE58:71EA:4683 ( talk) 20:08, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
move review is now open if you care to comment. Pandroid ( talk) 13:15, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Please can you add an image to an article I have created - Laurence L'Estrange. It is 'LaurenceLE.jpeg' and I have uploaded it to Wikimedia Commons but do not have access to posting it yet as I am not an autoconfirmed user.
Many thanks HistoryAlight ( talk) 17:10, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello. Seven days passed despite the technical reopening. We will not discuss another seven days then there is consensus and that the seven-day rule is clear. So, to whom does it apply to have someone to close the request ? -- Panam2014 ( talk) 11:21, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
By coincidence, I was thinking of you yesterday when I came across this list. I'm not sure it's here to stay but Paul Kagame should be added now, don't you think? As for RickinBaltimore, I'm still investigating as there seems to be more to say. Those comments will tend to be on the RfA's talk page now... Andrew D. ( talk) 12:32, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
first of all, are you an atheist? I noticed that a lot of wikipedia admins are, which I find very annoying because they keep disrespecting my beliefs then saying that they don't believe in God as their excuse. Anyways, I need help to fix a certain article that probably can only be fixed by an admin, but I doubt you would want to help me if you're an atheist, because it is religion related. So please respond, thank you. Obeyel ( talk) 05:26, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello,
Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru.
A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.
It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.
If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins). MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:46, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Amakuru. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:The Same Old Blood Rush With a New Touch Limited.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 09:39, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Miloš Marković (Serbian water polo). Since you had some involvement with the Miloš Marković (Serbian water polo) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Fram ( talk) 13:30, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I moved Frexit to French withdrawal form the European Union and you reversed that move. Frexit can't be related to Brexit; Brexit is a common term that all European countries have now adopted into their own languages and it has become the common name. Frexit is not the common name for the French withdrawal and it is not in everyday usage; the newspapers talk about French withdrawal, not about Frexit. I propose that the page be moved until such a time where Frexit becomes the common name for French withdrawal, as I doubt it will be. st170e talk 13:31, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I was trying to change the page of iXIT Corporation talk page from Talk:IXIT Corporation to Talk:iXIT Corporation. The reason for this is that, the company's name is stylised as iXIT Corporation with a lowercase i (which is present in the article itself), however, the talk page is with a capital i. I've tried making the change myself but it doesn't seem to let me so would you be able to do it for me? cheers. Iftekharahmed96 ( talk) 20:15, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Should the unilateral, undiscussed move of this title back to Siobhán be reversed and challenged? What do you think? -- Mike Cline ( talk) 14:28, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Amakuru, I don't understand your position on the commas. Are you saying it's better to leave the unbalanced-comma error than to fix it? Or just saying that there are better fixes than another comma? Dicklyon ( talk) 03:56, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, state your emnail address too ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:24, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Resend your email with address and I'll send it :-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:45, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the moves and picking up after my mistakes. Next I can change Earth to Earths. Randy Kryn 13:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of Hawaii Five-0 episodes. Since you had some involvement with the List of Hawaii Five-0 episodes redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. George Ho ( talk) 03:42, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi! Because of this edit, I wanted to update you on the differences between dab pages and set-index articles. The Anthroponymy Project has been taking over the pages that list surnames, given names, or both. Those pages are being changed into set-index articles and, though they can often look very similar to disambiguation pages, they are not the same. The way to tell at a glance is to check the bottom of the page; there will usually be a template there that identifies which kind of page it is.
Redirects that have "(disambiguation)" in the title have been created for the sole purpose of making deliberate links to dab pages, and are supposed to target disambiguation pages only. As more dab pages get transferred to set-index articles, there will be more and more of this type of redirect left over. They need to be deleted (as soon as any links to them are resolved, of course). I've been working on these for the Disambiguation Project, and gradually weeding them out. You've previously declined some of my CSD G6s for these, but I hope you'll help with the housekeeping now. :-) Thanks. — Gorthian ( talk) 17:13, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
members of the set have some characteristic in common, in addition to their similarity of name. The example given is Dodge Charger, which is a broad article linking all the specific models that have had that name. Looking at Cordas, this is clearly not a set index. The people listed on the page have nothing in common except their name, and furthermore there is no "article" material on there at all. It is a straight list of people with that name, and therefore a WP:HNDIS disambiguation page, and the redirect from (disambiguation) should stay. Of course, we could also write a separate article about the surname itself, but even that would not be a set index, and most likely we would then require a separate dab page. Thanks — Amakuru ( talk) 19:01, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
multiple people of the same name(my emphasis). This means people with the same first name and the same last name, such as John Gordon. The template {{ hndis}} should only be used on those pages; they are considered disambiguation pages.
You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob13 Talk 15:50, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, you're welcome to comment in the move discussion at Talk:Saraiki dialect. Thanks! – Uanfala (talk) 02:59, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
You'll be welcome to also comment in the Move review currently under way at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2017 January#Saraiki dialect. Thanks! – Uanfala (talk) 13:05, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello Amakuru. Please feel free to comment on the move discussion at Talk:D'Israeli#Requested move 15 December 2016. Thanks.-- Nevé – selbert 21:34, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Amakuru,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Donner60 (
talk)
09:32, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Are you a real and impartial honest editor ? Defiantly yes therefore I Could know which "reliable sources" tell you that Saraiki is a Language ? If you have any paste them here . I will provide you two times more sources that it is a dialect of Lahnda (Western Punjabi).
You said "the WP:COMMONNAME argument isn't conclusively proven". I agree there's no consensus - little participation and unclear data (NGRAM has serious problems BTW). Andrew said "[CONCISE] doesn't negate WP:COMMONNAME" .. here is right also. CONCISE correctly says that COMMONNAME is required, it's built-in to the essay. Since there is no consensus on COMMONANE, it's contradictory to say there is consensus with CONCISE (which requires COMMONAME). It's putting the cart before the horse. -- Green C 15:42, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Question : Is not it fooling and trashing linguistics science on Wikipedia ? My friend Amakuru please be honest when you reply.
Question 2 : What if I start saying that I have not typed English. I have typed Mogo language. Will you create a new article on mogo language spoken by me bcoz If you will write it English I may get offended ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.188.109.81 ( talk) 15:03, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
What the hell do you think you are doing? You are edit warring to keep the article at your preferred title. As an administrator I'm sure you already know that the [{WP:BRD]] principle calls for you to open a discussion when you are reverted. It doesn't mean revert back and then open a discussion. That is a real behaviour problem you have there.
The title you are trying to obliterate is the title chosen at the recent AFD of this article. It has already been discussed and a consensus reached. You claim I should make a RM, but the reality is that should be for you to do. Please return the title to the status quo ante. Spinning Spark 15:40, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a Move review of Booker Prize. 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. Green C 01:07, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Though I have no objection to this move, it's worth keeping in mind that about 121 stations (including Winterthur) were moved back to German names in 2013 after Talk:Kaiserslautern Hauptbahnhof#Requested move; I was the admin who did most of them. There were intense discussions about the name in the period 2011-2013 at Talk:Berlin Hauptbahnhof. It seems OK to have the Swiss stations at English names if there is a convention to do so. But if any stations in Germany proper are going to start moving to English then probably a new move discussion should be held. Leaving a ping for User:ZH8000 since he requested the Winterthur move. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 15:40, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Please do not ping me again, as I had nothing to do with the flawed rationales on both sides that you are trying to highlight by re-opening the discussion. I simply stated what the consensus was, and had no involvement whatsoever in forming it. Never in history has it been more likely that something unexpected will happen at an inauguration, and entrenching people's views makes it less likely that this will be posted should today be particularly memorable, not more. StillWaitingForConnection ( talk) 11:33, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
By all means continue to edit war your comments into a closed discussion at ITN if that's what floats your boat, but perhaps continuing the discussion here might be less likely to earn you a block?
No-one disputes that this is news, or that it meets the definition of newsworthy. What you have forgotten is that the criteria for ITN is not that something is published repeatedly or that it would be published by a news organisation. ITN has two criteria. The first is (fairly) objective: Is the article in a fit state for the front page? There are various fairly well accepted rules of thumb to assess this (are there unresolved tags? has a sufficient update reflecting the event been made? etc). The second is largely subjective: Is the event significant enough for inclusion at ITN? This is determined by a consensus of editors voicing their opinion on the candidate. In this case, consensus is clearly against. GoldenRing ( talk) 11:35, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for trying, Amakuru. For myself, I find the entire discussion and outcome mind-boggling, and am considering whether to take it to ANI and try to have it reversed. Newyorkbrad ( talk) 11:47, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Fix my mistakes. CMD ( talk) 01:39, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello Amakuru. You seem to have closed this discussion out of process and against the emerging consensus. I would like you to undo your action and allow the discussion to reach a natural conclusion. 28bytes ( talk) 01:53, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
I see you deleted my request at [4] to move Gamlingay Cinques Common to Gamlingay Cinques with the comment "discuss 1". Does this mean that I need to follow the instructions for creating a requested move on the article talk page? Dudley Miles ( talk) 18:23, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.
13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Not sure why you're going against WP:MOS ( MOS:DATEFORMAT, MOS:COMMA) on the basis of an old move discussion. A more recent discussion from last month showed agreement that we should have the second comma. However, I would also request you avoid making mass-moves in a debate you're involved in (ex: you were the only commenter in opposition to the two-comma titles) before concrete consensus is established. ~ Cyclonebiskit ( chat) 16:36, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Please stop moving tornado outbreak pages until this discussion reaches a conclusion. You seem to hold the minority opinion that the second comma is not necessary, so citing an old discussion (which itself had only marginal consensus) is inappropriate. – Juliancolton | Talk 16:37, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Barbara Pierce Bush. Since you had some involvement with the Barbara Pierce Bush redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ( talk) ( contributions) ( logs) 04:56, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Howdy Amakuru, hope you're faring well in all your life circumstances! Would you perhaps volunteer to close this elapsed RM, which may need some wisdom and in which I'm too involved to adjudicate? Let me know… — JFG talk 08:46, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
I can do the post-move cleanups on those if you like. Thanks for the close and moves. Dicklyon ( talk) 16:08, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I wonder whether you can add the rationale for the move. It doesn't have to be long. I did raise an argument, but I wonder whether it helped. -- George Ho ( talk) 02:20, 21 February 2017 (UTC)