couold you close my coffea egg issue please? thnaks JarrahTree 14:59, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
It may be helpful to add a closing statement in this discussion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 10:29, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi BHG,
I think there are some good ideas in there already. However, I think there is one fundamental problem with the current portal discussion, and that is that there is no consensus what portals are there for. Who is the audience? How should the audience be reached? I think that more clarity on the purpose(s) of portals should inform the criteria for portals. Here is my not completely neutral contribution if you are interested. The Wikihistory of portals at the end should be edited mercilessly and improved and not be used as such.
So, what are portals for?
During Wikipedia's growth phase (when the editorship was growing), many wikiprojects and portals were created, usually for broad topic areas. Those were often of the more ambitious type that only works with a dedicated team of maintainers and project organisers and cheerleaders. I myself played that role for Portal:Germany and the associated Wikiproject back in 2006/7. In the following years, portal creation focussed more on the navigational aspects, and many fairly static navigation portals were made. Portal activity died down, and the Featured Portal process died in its sleep in 2017. When the shutdown of the portal namespace was suggested in 2018, many of the old "manual maintenance" portals were in terrible condition, transcluding nonexistent monthly selected articles not updated for years. Some people think full automation is the answer. I disagree, because I still want portals aspire to the ideal of being everything: being there for readers and editors and potential contributors and to show off what you have recently written. That kind of things only works with dedicated maintainers. (At Portal:Germany, Gerda Arendt does a great job with the DYKs, I update everything else once a year, and a handful of other people write a new news item every couple of months).
None of the types of portals we currently have seems to be working particularly well in terms of readership, though. The dewiki portals don't have all that many readers either. If we can't attract outside readers, we can either give up portals completely or go back to the approach where a portal is the local main page of a WikiProject, mostly there for announcing and praising our work to each other.
Sorry for the wall of text, hope there is something useful for your RfC drafting activity in there somewhere, — Kusma ( t· c) 20:49, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Portal Issues and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.
Thanks, Robert McClenon ( talk) 22:53, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Please keep in mind that there's no such thing as an "invite-only page" on Wikipedia. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 15:06, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
If a user asks you not to edit their user pages, it is sensible to respect their requestat WP:NOBAN. Pam D 15:35, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
This is to inform you that I have complied to your request to open a RfC on the subject of the disputed image in Jewish religious clothing. Hopefully, we'll receive greater participation there and, eventually, resolve this issue to the satisfaction of all concerned. Thanks. Davidbena ( talk) 20:19, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi BHG. I thinking how to title this post and the cat walked across the keyboard. I had been considering portals and their O
2 so I'm leaving it :) The main page of this document once had featured portals, no longer I see, but still has them linked from the top right after "anyone can edit". Has anyone proposed changing that, the apparent elevation of a namespace detached from the foundations of wikipedia and attached by the will of their creators.
cygnis insignis
08:37, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
you are brave, most eds in this area do not have english as their native language, and worse.... JarrahTree 10:31, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
I fail to see a valid critique of /info/en/?search=Category:1916_murders_by_continent of narrow cat - when oldfactory was playing with the death categories close to 10 years ago - sometimes it took ages for populating - and they were similar to this - a valid sequence well worth keeping and not touching, unless I am missing something - JarrahTree 10:58, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
April 2019, Volume 5, Issue 4, Numbers 107, 108, 114, 115, 116, 117
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 18:12, 27 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
You keep reverting many of my category edits saying "Better to use a category which actually exists" but the categories do exist. At first I just assumed I must have had a typo in the category name (although I usually copy and paste the names, so that's not that likely) but when the number of reverts kept growing, I started checking the previous version of the reverted article, where I am finding that the category does exists and there is nothing wrong. If you are seeing these as redlinks, then I think you have some problem with your computer/browser etc. Thanks Kerry ( talk) 21:04, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi BrownHairedGirl, thanks for updating the category names for free and open-source software articles. I was unsure of how to do this efficiently, and you saved me a lot of work while showing the best way to handle this.
I do have a question: since the project page move turned the WikiProject into a task force, would it still be appropriate to continue using the {{ WikiProject Free and open-source software}} template (which refers to it as a WikiProject) on talk pages? Or would it be better to fold the template into {{ WikiProject Computing}}, which indicates that the project is a task force? — Newslinger talk 06:55, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello! Do you think it's a good idea to have the old article name as his name in the article's text?! That's what I tried to address. Please stop just edit-warring & fix it in a way that's acceptable to you! -- SergeWoodzing ( talk) 15:38, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi BrownHairedGirl, I'm Cameron11598 and I am one of the Arbitration Committee's clerks. Your statement at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Portal_Issues has exceeded the 500 word limit. Unfortunately you will need to collapse excess portions of your statement or myself or one of the other clerks may do so to enforce the word limit. Thank you for your time in this matter. -- Cameron11598 (Talk) 15:59, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
If you would like to offer a detailed repsonse on wiki or off wiki why I think your nomination is/was totally out of order - you are most welcome to your choice of venue. Or if you dont wish to discuss the subject - thats fine as well, I leave it up to you, and in the end it doesnt bother me - but as I was the individual who first asked transhumanist to help create them - I figure you could actually have a rationale from the origins of that set of portals - rather than what has happened so far JarrahTree 14:47, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
the entire tree of Category:Jambi+subcats contains only 18 non-stub, non-biographical articles, so it does not even meet the risibly low bare minimum of 20 set by the fans of mass-created auto-portals at WP:WPPORT.
totally out of order" without providing any reasoning in policy, procedure or evidence. Like all consensus-forming discussions on Wikipedia, MfD relies on reasoned debate. Unsupported comments like "
totally out of order" add no value to the discussion, and are part of the sad but widespread personalisation of debate by those who advocate portalspam. If arbcom case does open a case, I will cite this one small (and relatively mild) example of the attitudinal and conduct problems of those who advocate portalpsam.
My unreserved apology for my over-reaction, I honestly couldnt be bothered wasting your time or mine any more - I was more concerned Monk (TV series) wise for the completeness of the set, and I can see your interest in the background to it - the set of articles that go to make the background. If you wish to tar me as a portalspam enthusiast simply because I felt that the smaller scope portals from under-edited areas of the Indonesia should be kept that is your call. I have not interest in the tfd arguments from either side. I had had on my talk page an instruction how to make more portals,(which I never followed up) and have converses the th - hopefully that does not constitute an issue. I regularly leave welcome messages for editors who are found to be socks, or who get blocked - and I dont have a message on my talk - I am not responsible for the actions of those whom I interact with (maybe we all should for a range of reasons) I simply wanted to be stridently defensive of the Indonesian content which I have dealt with for ten years plus, and find under considerable erosion of integrity from a wide range of sources. I do hope we have further visits in the Indonesian project where you can help the admin process as we have so few eds or admins left actually doing positive things, thanks for what you have done so far.
for the three men in the boat explanation - it all seemed a bit weird JarrahTree 00:05, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi - We have categories for example for Category:Harvard Law School faculty and Category:Deans of Harvard Law School. I tried to set up a Deans category for Brooklyn Law School a couple of days ago - but that hasn't been acted on ( https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Redirects&action=edit§ion=38), and you deleted the categories from deans themselves. Was I too quick? -- 2604:2000:E010:1100:BC9D:F3C9:280C:5387 ( talk) 19:33, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello,
Do you have any clue why Category:Ambassadors of the European Union to the Republic of Macedonia does not seem to have been moved to Category:Ambassadors of the European Union to North Macedonia, unlike all other categories in the Macedonia and international organisations CfD? Place Clichy ( talk) 03:40, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Discussion moved to User talk:Lester R. Brown#COI_editing
Hi,
I got your message about editing Lester R. Brown's page and see that all my changes have been undone! A bit disturbing. I am his assistant and he asked me to make changes to this. What do I need to do to be able to edit this?
Thanks for any help you can provide...
Lester R. Brown ( talk) 16:23, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Got your message, dayam! So harsh! Talk about abuse! You have many glaring mistakes on his page, including a misspelling of his name, but if this is how you do business, so be it. We won't try to edit (correct) it anymore. What's the point of having the edit function if you can't do it? Just saying...
17:38, 3 April 2019 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Lester R. Brown (
talk •
contribs)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Nyttend backup ( talk) 18:08, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
This is a courtesy notice that the portal issues RFArb has been declined by the Arbitration Committee. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 22:31, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
How do you persuade AWB to fill in the correct target (for the rename) in edits like this one? I've looked for clues in the documentation but find nothing. Oculi ( talk) 18:21, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Al-Feiha FC requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Colonies Chris ( talk) 12:19, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
This category has been superseded by Category:Al-Fayha FC, so it's no longer needed. Colonies Chris ( talk) 12:19, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi. You seem to know a lot about AWB modules. I know that there is an option to restrict adding "orphan" tags to pages with exactly 0 incoming links - is there a way for a module to access the number of incoming links? Eg, from the category of orphaned articles, skip all those with 2 or fewer links, but if it has at least 3 then remove the tag. Thanks, -- DannyS712 ( talk) 23:32, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
{{#ifexist: List of {{{1}}}s|something|something else}}
, and I'd add a call to subst it with a parameter derived from the page text), but that isn't always viable.I do not block IP indef. But why you did? Hhkohh ( talk) 00:17, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Okay, so I ran into this issue the other day when I closed a topic on AN/I - When you closed the section you didn't {{abottom}} the bottom of the convo which caused the template to continue to the end of the page. Is that the right thing to do? Or am I forgetting something? Just curious since I literally just did the same thing myself. Dusti *Let's talk!* 08:32, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Well done for launching Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RFC:_spelling_of_"organisation"/"organization"_in_descriptive_category_names with such a clear explanation.
I was going to say "Congratulations...", but that could be premature. – Fayenatic London 07:48, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
Goodday, I am a relatively minor contributor to Wikipedia and do not usually really bother with this kind of stuff. In short, I do not really know what to do, and you are the first administrator I came across, so I assume you can help me. There is this page Gwadar that is been getting a lot of editing in wich the spellings Gwadar, Gowadar and Gawadar are used interchangeably. From what I read up on Gwadar is the correct English spelling, but I don;t want to devolve into edit wars. What should I do if these edits keep occuring? Zombles ( talk) 09:34, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Category:Child actors by medium, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bearcat ( talk) 17:03, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi BrownHairedGirl, are the above portals only those created by The Transhumanist? I created 4 during the same time but they appear not to be included as they're not tagged. However, although I created them using the automated facility, I'm willing to maintain them manually; in fact, I am already doing that for Portal:Card games and can do so for the 3 Austrian states. To be honest, the main hurdle is working out how the auto-features work and how, in some cases, to override or supplement them. Bermicourt ( talk) 16:05, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi BHG, is there any update you can give to "the public" concerning the effort to craft a portal RfC? Anything editors can do to help move this portal issue forward? Thanks! Leviv ich 14:52, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
A couple points. The Neelix cleanup did get X1 speedy but we had to analyze and tag each one. Most were not run through RfD, though the edge cases were, and clearly good ones were checked and deleted from the cleanup lists. It was a long painfully slow time wasting process that saw maybe 70% deleted and a whole lot of useless but harmless left alone. The alternative was to nuke the lot with no prejudice to recreation of useful redirects.
[7] is really enlightening. The "no consensus" close, made by the Admin that forced an extension to a month for the whole thing when many editors were expecting a one week discussion, looks like a !supervote. Support 22 Oppose 14 I'd not counted votes yet. I assumed User:GoldenRing did that correctly, because I have much respect for them. We were so sure that X3 was going to happen after a week that there was an implementation discussion at CSD talk gearing up for the inevitable. What would be the process to overturn GoldenRing's close on X3? Legacypac ( talk) 21:24, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
That is an even better count Levivich. We should try to overturn the close. MFD has now been broken by portal spam nominations. Legacypac ( talk) 21:32, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't think I ever had anything deleted enmass Levivich without my consent. German politicians were the only ones I think because some were BLPs. I agree that mass creations aren't a good idea but in the early days on here I felt like I was doing a much needed thing getting us to branch in different areas worldwide. A lot of my stubs were expanded and are now half decent, a lot weren't, the project is still a working development. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:17, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
God give us a few weeks to expand a few of them.", and then looking, ten years later, at Claus Peter Poppe. Leviv ich 00:36, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
The Brilliant Idea Barnstar | |
For an effective way to propose the deletion of more than one thousand portals that were recklessly created, saving months of work. Robert McClenon ( talk) 21:19, 7 April 2019 (UTC) |
[8] really? You gonna do a second MfD? I've stopped nominating TTH creations because you are picking them up. Legacypac ( talk) 14:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
How do I recognize a portal that is based on a single navbox? Robert McClenon ( talk) 00:54, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Who is Taratill123456? Robert McClenon ( talk) 00:54, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
They have found a hole in WP:ACPERM.
Category:WikiProject Mount Juliet, Tennessee, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. UnitedStatesian ( talk) 17:50, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Category:Redirected portals with existing subpages thanks. Legacypac ( talk) 18:49, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
juvenile trolling collapsed
|
---|
|
I noticed
Category:2016 in Texas is listing
Category:2016 disestablishments in Texas and
Category:2016 establishments in Texas under a slash. It's caused by the sortkey /Disestablishments
in {{
DisestcatUSstate/core}} and /Establishments
in {{
EstcatUSstate/core}}. Why a slash?
PrimeHunter (
talk)
14:37, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:User armn-5 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DannyS712 ( talk) 01:04, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia meetups in Dayton requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DannyS712 ( talk) 01:05, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Do you happen to have a list of all the currently open discussions about portals (excluding individual MfDs)? I'm thinking of the ones in places like AN, VPP, etc. Thryduulf ( talk) 17:12, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
I created this thread 3 days ago and nobody has responded to it. Are you available to close the discussion? Mstrojny ( talk) 13:44, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi BHG. Hope you're well. You might be interested in this discussion. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 14:59, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi–I'm going through the second batch and drafting my !vote and noticed that Portal:Sandwiches is also part of the Portal:Bread pending bundle Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Bread. I don't know if that is a problem or requires any action or not, but thought I'd bring it to your attention. Leviv ich 21:41, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
They were listing new portals in each newsletter. It is really easy to see what was created with the automated system and approximately when to pick up the straggler pages. [10] All the portal team was getting the newsletter on their talkpage so they can't say they did not know the plan or goings on. Legacypac ( talk) 00:03, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Happy Monday! Thanks for the ping. Minor question: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Two overlooked automated portals mentions "The 4th portal in this set..." in the last paragraph, but there are two portals in the set? Drafting artefact? Leviv ich 15:20, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
my list-making process produced false negatives in what I have now found to be 4 cases out of the 3336 pages scanned.
The 4th portal in this set of overlooked spam portals is Portal:California State University, which I have not re-nominated.
Hello Brown Haired Girl. I do not usually edit Wikipedia but I just learned that Georgia Engel died and when I went to look at her Wikipedia page I noticed the date of her death was wrong. I edited it to the correct date but noticed that the date of her death has been edited several times during the past day by users who are likely confusing the date her death was announced (April 15) with the date she actually died (April 12th). I do not know if it would be possible to lock that part of the page or the entire page for now, but I just wanted to recommend it to an admin. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.31.160.51 ( talk) 12:45, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
I must object to a mis-characterization: "AFAICS, they are all exact copies of the deleted pages." I was responding to a newsletter posting and selected these portals. Per Transhumanist, they were deleted by process against a sock, and simply needed creation. So I did so in good faith as part of the project. I have viewed portals as a navigation aid and have had an interest in their purpose for a decade, even before there were portals; that is how I conceived the purpose of the individual category page. There needs to be a review of the project, I agree and my work was not in behalf of a sock, but is independently conceived. Please use caution when broadcasting these thoughts. -- Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 17:24, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
deleted by process against a sock. It may be that some pages which were so deleted should be re-created, but that should be based on your own assessment, rather than merely on the fact they were deleted or because a spammer had asked you to do so. WP:MEATPUPPET applies.
my work was not in behalf of a sock, but is independently conceived.
independently conceived" the same misrepresentation, which is why I invited you to explain this at the MFD. I still hope that you will do so. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 17:56, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
we view portals as navigation aids rather than articles. Excatly. There are navigation aids which readers do not use, and have not used for years.
we need to clearly expose the function being performed. That's why when I exposed the uselessness of the function being performed, at WP:Miscellany for deletion/Mass-created portals based on a single navbox, editors piled to delete the whole pile of garbage.
Thank you, – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 03:29, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I have six portals which will almost certainly be deleted at some point (they are all automated portals I created, and my track record for this is, as you know, awful). I think it would just be easier for everyone to delete them before they get to MFD. The six are Portal:Hiroshima, Portal:Canberra, Portal:Curitiba, Portal:Atoms, Portal:Mexico City and Portal:Niue. Is it possible to speedily delete them (per G7) before they have been nominated?
Yours, Gazamp ( talk) 10:02, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
You have identified a large number of pseudo-portals. At least one of them is not only a pseudo-portal, but a zombie portal. A zombie portal is a portal that should have been killed but is still walking. Robert McClenon ( talk) 21:13, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
You are an uncivil bore. [13] who continues to harass me over every perceived mistake - then when I fix your close you mess up my name and act snarky. Legacypac ( talk) 02:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
this approach will not end well for you. If even those who broadly share your objectives have no confidence in your desire for honesty and accuracy, then when your conduct returns to ANI (as it almost certainly will if you don't change tack), you may find yourself with no defenders. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Portal:Battlestar Galactica seems we both were right about to nominate that one. The table I am constructing for a bundled nomination. Can't wait to see what you come up with! :) – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 19:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
So I propose that this portal and its subpagesis misleading since the portal has no active subpages at the moment. – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 20:05, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
@ BrownHairedGirl: Someone should connect Template:Banana cultivars to Portal:Bananas, this will greatly improve this portal. Catfurball ( talk) 21:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Hey BHG: thanks for the incredible work on the portals; I have a question: can you determine how TTH one-page portals like Portal:Chinese gardens and Portal:Windmills ave not tripped any of the filters you have used so far to create your MfD noms? UnitedStatesian ( talk) 02:23, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
I'm not up on the history of the portal pitched battles, but observing I'm prompted to remember seiches. The water sloshes back-n-forth, back-n-forth with the slightest impetus.
Not sure what preceded "delete all portals", but perhaps the reaction to that was TTH's to vow "10,000 and beyond!"? Then the reaction to that (remember I agreed "delete all") Then reactions to that. Anyway, now the ripples are lower, but continue.
I'm wondering if maybe I'm all wet, or are people throwing rocks just to hear splashes? Shenme ( talk) 06:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
BrownHairedGirl, since Legobot updates the GAN page, having it blocked will have other effects.
I took a look at the timestamp that was in your miscellany for deletion nomination, and it was incorrectly formatted, doubtless why Legobot choked on it. (My assumption is that a valid timestamp is required for these pages; you can always generate one with five tildes.) I have, I hope, fixed it, though the only way to test it by letting Legobot try again. There's been a new reply with a likely looking timestamp; I think this should be safe. If not, then by all means reblock Legobot. Thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 06:16, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
SITH (talk) 13:22, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
Portal:Guernsey, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Guernsey and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Guernsey during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Hut 8.5 21:24, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
I have had to notify two editors that they disrupted the MFD process. User:Legacypac disrupted it by including the MFD for Portal:Saddam Hussein in a bundle with Portal:Ruhollah Khomeini (I can't spell his name and don't want to learn how, because I still hate him) after I had already !voted. This was not a matter of an accuracy issue so much as failing to look where one is going when driving. I know that you have already warned Legacypac. The other editor who messed things up was User:Northamerica1000, who managed to completely confuse the table of contents of the MFD main line by including the name of the template for WikiProject:Nintendo. This transcluded the table of contents of Nintendo into MFD, at the second level. I had to un-transclude it by nowiki-ing it. I think that they both meant well and had no idea what they were doing, but Legacypac is trying to drive the MFD process at a speed of 140 km/hr, which is too fast for either a car, or a train that isn't high-speed rail. Northamerica1000 probably had no idea that it would do that. Robert McClenon ( talk) 22:59, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm hoping you might be able to advise when members of the Royal Society of Arts started using the post nominal FRSA and whether it's the right form to apply FRSA to members before the post nominal was used? I found this letter [17] from Charles Allom to the Society that may offer a clue? Regards 81.149.141.199 ( talk) 11:47, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello!
I notice that you created Category:Canada–The Gambia relations and Category:France–The Gambia relations, duplicating the existing Canada–the Gambia relations and France–the Gambia relations, which had been renamed to the small-case format after this CfD. Would you care to suggest a uniform format among Bilateral relations of the Gambia subcategories? Place Clichy ( talk) 10:12, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Atheistic/humanistic "scientific" preachers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
CFD closed as delete Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 October 23 (G6), no longer needed as a redirect since its empty (C1)
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DannyS712 ( talk) 00:29, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedians on Mars requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
CFD closed as delete Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 May 19 and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 January 16 (G4/6), no longer needed as a redirect since its empty (C1)
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DannyS712 ( talk) 00:32, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedians who get all POV on others, 'cause it's funny requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
CFD closed as delete Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 October 20 (G6), no longer needed as a redirect since its empty (C1)
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DannyS712 ( talk) 00:32, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi again. I have seeking opinions of a set of nav boxes, most recently at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mammals#Article_templates, and the view that we are better off without them seems to be emerging. This is a large set of interdependent and nested templates, so I want to get the process right. Can you provide any guidance on smoothing the process of discussion when there is an elaborate set of templates, my concern would be that keep !votes on part of the set would require the rest be maintained to accommodate the group of animals that is updated to agree with the articles. cygnis insignis 03:54, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi, your 10 March CFD closure here has not been reflected, perhaps because it was undated. Johnbod ( talk) 23:32, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
here? That's not a discussion page. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 23:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
click here to leave a new message for BrownHairedGirl | ||
BrownHairedGirl's archives | ||
---|---|---|
|
couold you close my coffea egg issue please? thnaks JarrahTree 14:59, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
It may be helpful to add a closing statement in this discussion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 10:29, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi BHG,
I think there are some good ideas in there already. However, I think there is one fundamental problem with the current portal discussion, and that is that there is no consensus what portals are there for. Who is the audience? How should the audience be reached? I think that more clarity on the purpose(s) of portals should inform the criteria for portals. Here is my not completely neutral contribution if you are interested. The Wikihistory of portals at the end should be edited mercilessly and improved and not be used as such.
So, what are portals for?
During Wikipedia's growth phase (when the editorship was growing), many wikiprojects and portals were created, usually for broad topic areas. Those were often of the more ambitious type that only works with a dedicated team of maintainers and project organisers and cheerleaders. I myself played that role for Portal:Germany and the associated Wikiproject back in 2006/7. In the following years, portal creation focussed more on the navigational aspects, and many fairly static navigation portals were made. Portal activity died down, and the Featured Portal process died in its sleep in 2017. When the shutdown of the portal namespace was suggested in 2018, many of the old "manual maintenance" portals were in terrible condition, transcluding nonexistent monthly selected articles not updated for years. Some people think full automation is the answer. I disagree, because I still want portals aspire to the ideal of being everything: being there for readers and editors and potential contributors and to show off what you have recently written. That kind of things only works with dedicated maintainers. (At Portal:Germany, Gerda Arendt does a great job with the DYKs, I update everything else once a year, and a handful of other people write a new news item every couple of months).
None of the types of portals we currently have seems to be working particularly well in terms of readership, though. The dewiki portals don't have all that many readers either. If we can't attract outside readers, we can either give up portals completely or go back to the approach where a portal is the local main page of a WikiProject, mostly there for announcing and praising our work to each other.
Sorry for the wall of text, hope there is something useful for your RfC drafting activity in there somewhere, — Kusma ( t· c) 20:49, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Portal Issues and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.
Thanks, Robert McClenon ( talk) 22:53, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Please keep in mind that there's no such thing as an "invite-only page" on Wikipedia. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 15:06, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
If a user asks you not to edit their user pages, it is sensible to respect their requestat WP:NOBAN. Pam D 15:35, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
This is to inform you that I have complied to your request to open a RfC on the subject of the disputed image in Jewish religious clothing. Hopefully, we'll receive greater participation there and, eventually, resolve this issue to the satisfaction of all concerned. Thanks. Davidbena ( talk) 20:19, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi BHG. I thinking how to title this post and the cat walked across the keyboard. I had been considering portals and their O
2 so I'm leaving it :) The main page of this document once had featured portals, no longer I see, but still has them linked from the top right after "anyone can edit". Has anyone proposed changing that, the apparent elevation of a namespace detached from the foundations of wikipedia and attached by the will of their creators.
cygnis insignis
08:37, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
you are brave, most eds in this area do not have english as their native language, and worse.... JarrahTree 10:31, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
I fail to see a valid critique of /info/en/?search=Category:1916_murders_by_continent of narrow cat - when oldfactory was playing with the death categories close to 10 years ago - sometimes it took ages for populating - and they were similar to this - a valid sequence well worth keeping and not touching, unless I am missing something - JarrahTree 10:58, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
April 2019, Volume 5, Issue 4, Numbers 107, 108, 114, 115, 116, 117
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 18:12, 27 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
You keep reverting many of my category edits saying "Better to use a category which actually exists" but the categories do exist. At first I just assumed I must have had a typo in the category name (although I usually copy and paste the names, so that's not that likely) but when the number of reverts kept growing, I started checking the previous version of the reverted article, where I am finding that the category does exists and there is nothing wrong. If you are seeing these as redlinks, then I think you have some problem with your computer/browser etc. Thanks Kerry ( talk) 21:04, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi BrownHairedGirl, thanks for updating the category names for free and open-source software articles. I was unsure of how to do this efficiently, and you saved me a lot of work while showing the best way to handle this.
I do have a question: since the project page move turned the WikiProject into a task force, would it still be appropriate to continue using the {{ WikiProject Free and open-source software}} template (which refers to it as a WikiProject) on talk pages? Or would it be better to fold the template into {{ WikiProject Computing}}, which indicates that the project is a task force? — Newslinger talk 06:55, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello! Do you think it's a good idea to have the old article name as his name in the article's text?! That's what I tried to address. Please stop just edit-warring & fix it in a way that's acceptable to you! -- SergeWoodzing ( talk) 15:38, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi BrownHairedGirl, I'm Cameron11598 and I am one of the Arbitration Committee's clerks. Your statement at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Portal_Issues has exceeded the 500 word limit. Unfortunately you will need to collapse excess portions of your statement or myself or one of the other clerks may do so to enforce the word limit. Thank you for your time in this matter. -- Cameron11598 (Talk) 15:59, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
If you would like to offer a detailed repsonse on wiki or off wiki why I think your nomination is/was totally out of order - you are most welcome to your choice of venue. Or if you dont wish to discuss the subject - thats fine as well, I leave it up to you, and in the end it doesnt bother me - but as I was the individual who first asked transhumanist to help create them - I figure you could actually have a rationale from the origins of that set of portals - rather than what has happened so far JarrahTree 14:47, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
the entire tree of Category:Jambi+subcats contains only 18 non-stub, non-biographical articles, so it does not even meet the risibly low bare minimum of 20 set by the fans of mass-created auto-portals at WP:WPPORT.
totally out of order" without providing any reasoning in policy, procedure or evidence. Like all consensus-forming discussions on Wikipedia, MfD relies on reasoned debate. Unsupported comments like "
totally out of order" add no value to the discussion, and are part of the sad but widespread personalisation of debate by those who advocate portalspam. If arbcom case does open a case, I will cite this one small (and relatively mild) example of the attitudinal and conduct problems of those who advocate portalpsam.
My unreserved apology for my over-reaction, I honestly couldnt be bothered wasting your time or mine any more - I was more concerned Monk (TV series) wise for the completeness of the set, and I can see your interest in the background to it - the set of articles that go to make the background. If you wish to tar me as a portalspam enthusiast simply because I felt that the smaller scope portals from under-edited areas of the Indonesia should be kept that is your call. I have not interest in the tfd arguments from either side. I had had on my talk page an instruction how to make more portals,(which I never followed up) and have converses the th - hopefully that does not constitute an issue. I regularly leave welcome messages for editors who are found to be socks, or who get blocked - and I dont have a message on my talk - I am not responsible for the actions of those whom I interact with (maybe we all should for a range of reasons) I simply wanted to be stridently defensive of the Indonesian content which I have dealt with for ten years plus, and find under considerable erosion of integrity from a wide range of sources. I do hope we have further visits in the Indonesian project where you can help the admin process as we have so few eds or admins left actually doing positive things, thanks for what you have done so far.
for the three men in the boat explanation - it all seemed a bit weird JarrahTree 00:05, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi - We have categories for example for Category:Harvard Law School faculty and Category:Deans of Harvard Law School. I tried to set up a Deans category for Brooklyn Law School a couple of days ago - but that hasn't been acted on ( https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Redirects&action=edit§ion=38), and you deleted the categories from deans themselves. Was I too quick? -- 2604:2000:E010:1100:BC9D:F3C9:280C:5387 ( talk) 19:33, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello,
Do you have any clue why Category:Ambassadors of the European Union to the Republic of Macedonia does not seem to have been moved to Category:Ambassadors of the European Union to North Macedonia, unlike all other categories in the Macedonia and international organisations CfD? Place Clichy ( talk) 03:40, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Discussion moved to User talk:Lester R. Brown#COI_editing
Hi,
I got your message about editing Lester R. Brown's page and see that all my changes have been undone! A bit disturbing. I am his assistant and he asked me to make changes to this. What do I need to do to be able to edit this?
Thanks for any help you can provide...
Lester R. Brown ( talk) 16:23, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Got your message, dayam! So harsh! Talk about abuse! You have many glaring mistakes on his page, including a misspelling of his name, but if this is how you do business, so be it. We won't try to edit (correct) it anymore. What's the point of having the edit function if you can't do it? Just saying...
17:38, 3 April 2019 (UTC) — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Lester R. Brown (
talk •
contribs)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Nyttend backup ( talk) 18:08, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
This is a courtesy notice that the portal issues RFArb has been declined by the Arbitration Committee. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 22:31, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
How do you persuade AWB to fill in the correct target (for the rename) in edits like this one? I've looked for clues in the documentation but find nothing. Oculi ( talk) 18:21, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Al-Feiha FC requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Colonies Chris ( talk) 12:19, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
This category has been superseded by Category:Al-Fayha FC, so it's no longer needed. Colonies Chris ( talk) 12:19, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi. You seem to know a lot about AWB modules. I know that there is an option to restrict adding "orphan" tags to pages with exactly 0 incoming links - is there a way for a module to access the number of incoming links? Eg, from the category of orphaned articles, skip all those with 2 or fewer links, but if it has at least 3 then remove the tag. Thanks, -- DannyS712 ( talk) 23:32, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
{{#ifexist: List of {{{1}}}s|something|something else}}
, and I'd add a call to subst it with a parameter derived from the page text), but that isn't always viable.I do not block IP indef. But why you did? Hhkohh ( talk) 00:17, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Okay, so I ran into this issue the other day when I closed a topic on AN/I - When you closed the section you didn't {{abottom}} the bottom of the convo which caused the template to continue to the end of the page. Is that the right thing to do? Or am I forgetting something? Just curious since I literally just did the same thing myself. Dusti *Let's talk!* 08:32, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Well done for launching Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RFC:_spelling_of_"organisation"/"organization"_in_descriptive_category_names with such a clear explanation.
I was going to say "Congratulations...", but that could be premature. – Fayenatic London 07:48, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
Goodday, I am a relatively minor contributor to Wikipedia and do not usually really bother with this kind of stuff. In short, I do not really know what to do, and you are the first administrator I came across, so I assume you can help me. There is this page Gwadar that is been getting a lot of editing in wich the spellings Gwadar, Gowadar and Gawadar are used interchangeably. From what I read up on Gwadar is the correct English spelling, but I don;t want to devolve into edit wars. What should I do if these edits keep occuring? Zombles ( talk) 09:34, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Category:Child actors by medium, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bearcat ( talk) 17:03, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi BrownHairedGirl, are the above portals only those created by The Transhumanist? I created 4 during the same time but they appear not to be included as they're not tagged. However, although I created them using the automated facility, I'm willing to maintain them manually; in fact, I am already doing that for Portal:Card games and can do so for the 3 Austrian states. To be honest, the main hurdle is working out how the auto-features work and how, in some cases, to override or supplement them. Bermicourt ( talk) 16:05, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi BHG, is there any update you can give to "the public" concerning the effort to craft a portal RfC? Anything editors can do to help move this portal issue forward? Thanks! Leviv ich 14:52, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
A couple points. The Neelix cleanup did get X1 speedy but we had to analyze and tag each one. Most were not run through RfD, though the edge cases were, and clearly good ones were checked and deleted from the cleanup lists. It was a long painfully slow time wasting process that saw maybe 70% deleted and a whole lot of useless but harmless left alone. The alternative was to nuke the lot with no prejudice to recreation of useful redirects.
[7] is really enlightening. The "no consensus" close, made by the Admin that forced an extension to a month for the whole thing when many editors were expecting a one week discussion, looks like a !supervote. Support 22 Oppose 14 I'd not counted votes yet. I assumed User:GoldenRing did that correctly, because I have much respect for them. We were so sure that X3 was going to happen after a week that there was an implementation discussion at CSD talk gearing up for the inevitable. What would be the process to overturn GoldenRing's close on X3? Legacypac ( talk) 21:24, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
That is an even better count Levivich. We should try to overturn the close. MFD has now been broken by portal spam nominations. Legacypac ( talk) 21:32, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't think I ever had anything deleted enmass Levivich without my consent. German politicians were the only ones I think because some were BLPs. I agree that mass creations aren't a good idea but in the early days on here I felt like I was doing a much needed thing getting us to branch in different areas worldwide. A lot of my stubs were expanded and are now half decent, a lot weren't, the project is still a working development. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:17, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
God give us a few weeks to expand a few of them.", and then looking, ten years later, at Claus Peter Poppe. Leviv ich 00:36, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
The Brilliant Idea Barnstar | |
For an effective way to propose the deletion of more than one thousand portals that were recklessly created, saving months of work. Robert McClenon ( talk) 21:19, 7 April 2019 (UTC) |
[8] really? You gonna do a second MfD? I've stopped nominating TTH creations because you are picking them up. Legacypac ( talk) 14:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
How do I recognize a portal that is based on a single navbox? Robert McClenon ( talk) 00:54, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Who is Taratill123456? Robert McClenon ( talk) 00:54, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
They have found a hole in WP:ACPERM.
Category:WikiProject Mount Juliet, Tennessee, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. UnitedStatesian ( talk) 17:50, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Category:Redirected portals with existing subpages thanks. Legacypac ( talk) 18:49, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
juvenile trolling collapsed
|
---|
|
I noticed
Category:2016 in Texas is listing
Category:2016 disestablishments in Texas and
Category:2016 establishments in Texas under a slash. It's caused by the sortkey /Disestablishments
in {{
DisestcatUSstate/core}} and /Establishments
in {{
EstcatUSstate/core}}. Why a slash?
PrimeHunter (
talk)
14:37, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:User armn-5 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DannyS712 ( talk) 01:04, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia meetups in Dayton requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DannyS712 ( talk) 01:05, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Do you happen to have a list of all the currently open discussions about portals (excluding individual MfDs)? I'm thinking of the ones in places like AN, VPP, etc. Thryduulf ( talk) 17:12, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
I created this thread 3 days ago and nobody has responded to it. Are you available to close the discussion? Mstrojny ( talk) 13:44, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi BHG. Hope you're well. You might be interested in this discussion. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 14:59, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi–I'm going through the second batch and drafting my !vote and noticed that Portal:Sandwiches is also part of the Portal:Bread pending bundle Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Bread. I don't know if that is a problem or requires any action or not, but thought I'd bring it to your attention. Leviv ich 21:41, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
They were listing new portals in each newsletter. It is really easy to see what was created with the automated system and approximately when to pick up the straggler pages. [10] All the portal team was getting the newsletter on their talkpage so they can't say they did not know the plan or goings on. Legacypac ( talk) 00:03, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Happy Monday! Thanks for the ping. Minor question: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Two overlooked automated portals mentions "The 4th portal in this set..." in the last paragraph, but there are two portals in the set? Drafting artefact? Leviv ich 15:20, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
my list-making process produced false negatives in what I have now found to be 4 cases out of the 3336 pages scanned.
The 4th portal in this set of overlooked spam portals is Portal:California State University, which I have not re-nominated.
Hello Brown Haired Girl. I do not usually edit Wikipedia but I just learned that Georgia Engel died and when I went to look at her Wikipedia page I noticed the date of her death was wrong. I edited it to the correct date but noticed that the date of her death has been edited several times during the past day by users who are likely confusing the date her death was announced (April 15) with the date she actually died (April 12th). I do not know if it would be possible to lock that part of the page or the entire page for now, but I just wanted to recommend it to an admin. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.31.160.51 ( talk) 12:45, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
I must object to a mis-characterization: "AFAICS, they are all exact copies of the deleted pages." I was responding to a newsletter posting and selected these portals. Per Transhumanist, they were deleted by process against a sock, and simply needed creation. So I did so in good faith as part of the project. I have viewed portals as a navigation aid and have had an interest in their purpose for a decade, even before there were portals; that is how I conceived the purpose of the individual category page. There needs to be a review of the project, I agree and my work was not in behalf of a sock, but is independently conceived. Please use caution when broadcasting these thoughts. -- Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 17:24, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
deleted by process against a sock. It may be that some pages which were so deleted should be re-created, but that should be based on your own assessment, rather than merely on the fact they were deleted or because a spammer had asked you to do so. WP:MEATPUPPET applies.
my work was not in behalf of a sock, but is independently conceived.
independently conceived" the same misrepresentation, which is why I invited you to explain this at the MFD. I still hope that you will do so. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 17:56, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
we view portals as navigation aids rather than articles. Excatly. There are navigation aids which readers do not use, and have not used for years.
we need to clearly expose the function being performed. That's why when I exposed the uselessness of the function being performed, at WP:Miscellany for deletion/Mass-created portals based on a single navbox, editors piled to delete the whole pile of garbage.
Thank you, – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 03:29, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I have six portals which will almost certainly be deleted at some point (they are all automated portals I created, and my track record for this is, as you know, awful). I think it would just be easier for everyone to delete them before they get to MFD. The six are Portal:Hiroshima, Portal:Canberra, Portal:Curitiba, Portal:Atoms, Portal:Mexico City and Portal:Niue. Is it possible to speedily delete them (per G7) before they have been nominated?
Yours, Gazamp ( talk) 10:02, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
You have identified a large number of pseudo-portals. At least one of them is not only a pseudo-portal, but a zombie portal. A zombie portal is a portal that should have been killed but is still walking. Robert McClenon ( talk) 21:13, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
You are an uncivil bore. [13] who continues to harass me over every perceived mistake - then when I fix your close you mess up my name and act snarky. Legacypac ( talk) 02:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
this approach will not end well for you. If even those who broadly share your objectives have no confidence in your desire for honesty and accuracy, then when your conduct returns to ANI (as it almost certainly will if you don't change tack), you may find yourself with no defenders. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Portal:Battlestar Galactica seems we both were right about to nominate that one. The table I am constructing for a bundled nomination. Can't wait to see what you come up with! :) – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 19:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
So I propose that this portal and its subpagesis misleading since the portal has no active subpages at the moment. – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 20:05, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
@ BrownHairedGirl: Someone should connect Template:Banana cultivars to Portal:Bananas, this will greatly improve this portal. Catfurball ( talk) 21:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Hey BHG: thanks for the incredible work on the portals; I have a question: can you determine how TTH one-page portals like Portal:Chinese gardens and Portal:Windmills ave not tripped any of the filters you have used so far to create your MfD noms? UnitedStatesian ( talk) 02:23, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
I'm not up on the history of the portal pitched battles, but observing I'm prompted to remember seiches. The water sloshes back-n-forth, back-n-forth with the slightest impetus.
Not sure what preceded "delete all portals", but perhaps the reaction to that was TTH's to vow "10,000 and beyond!"? Then the reaction to that (remember I agreed "delete all") Then reactions to that. Anyway, now the ripples are lower, but continue.
I'm wondering if maybe I'm all wet, or are people throwing rocks just to hear splashes? Shenme ( talk) 06:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
BrownHairedGirl, since Legobot updates the GAN page, having it blocked will have other effects.
I took a look at the timestamp that was in your miscellany for deletion nomination, and it was incorrectly formatted, doubtless why Legobot choked on it. (My assumption is that a valid timestamp is required for these pages; you can always generate one with five tildes.) I have, I hope, fixed it, though the only way to test it by letting Legobot try again. There's been a new reply with a likely looking timestamp; I think this should be safe. If not, then by all means reblock Legobot. Thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 06:16, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
SITH (talk) 13:22, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
Portal:Guernsey, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Guernsey and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Guernsey during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Hut 8.5 21:24, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
I have had to notify two editors that they disrupted the MFD process. User:Legacypac disrupted it by including the MFD for Portal:Saddam Hussein in a bundle with Portal:Ruhollah Khomeini (I can't spell his name and don't want to learn how, because I still hate him) after I had already !voted. This was not a matter of an accuracy issue so much as failing to look where one is going when driving. I know that you have already warned Legacypac. The other editor who messed things up was User:Northamerica1000, who managed to completely confuse the table of contents of the MFD main line by including the name of the template for WikiProject:Nintendo. This transcluded the table of contents of Nintendo into MFD, at the second level. I had to un-transclude it by nowiki-ing it. I think that they both meant well and had no idea what they were doing, but Legacypac is trying to drive the MFD process at a speed of 140 km/hr, which is too fast for either a car, or a train that isn't high-speed rail. Northamerica1000 probably had no idea that it would do that. Robert McClenon ( talk) 22:59, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm hoping you might be able to advise when members of the Royal Society of Arts started using the post nominal FRSA and whether it's the right form to apply FRSA to members before the post nominal was used? I found this letter [17] from Charles Allom to the Society that may offer a clue? Regards 81.149.141.199 ( talk) 11:47, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello!
I notice that you created Category:Canada–The Gambia relations and Category:France–The Gambia relations, duplicating the existing Canada–the Gambia relations and France–the Gambia relations, which had been renamed to the small-case format after this CfD. Would you care to suggest a uniform format among Bilateral relations of the Gambia subcategories? Place Clichy ( talk) 10:12, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Atheistic/humanistic "scientific" preachers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
CFD closed as delete Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 October 23 (G6), no longer needed as a redirect since its empty (C1)
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DannyS712 ( talk) 00:29, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedians on Mars requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
CFD closed as delete Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 May 19 and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 January 16 (G4/6), no longer needed as a redirect since its empty (C1)
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DannyS712 ( talk) 00:32, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedians who get all POV on others, 'cause it's funny requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
CFD closed as delete Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 October 20 (G6), no longer needed as a redirect since its empty (C1)
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DannyS712 ( talk) 00:32, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi again. I have seeking opinions of a set of nav boxes, most recently at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mammals#Article_templates, and the view that we are better off without them seems to be emerging. This is a large set of interdependent and nested templates, so I want to get the process right. Can you provide any guidance on smoothing the process of discussion when there is an elaborate set of templates, my concern would be that keep !votes on part of the set would require the rest be maintained to accommodate the group of animals that is updated to agree with the articles. cygnis insignis 03:54, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi, your 10 March CFD closure here has not been reflected, perhaps because it was undated. Johnbod ( talk) 23:32, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
here? That's not a discussion page. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 23:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)